Part 2: Planning Review, Rural Severances, and Tourism Funding - 03/27/2025

The March 27, 2025 Committee of the Whole meeting moved beyond information sharing into formal direction-setting as councillors debated rural planning requirements, municipal infrastructure priorities, and tourism funding frameworks. Chaired by Councillor John Hirsch (South Marysburgh), the meeting included multiple motions, all of which carried, shaping next steps that will affect residents across the County.

© PEC Council (YouTube)

View the entire PEC Council Meeting; or view our recap.

The most consequential discussion followed a deputation from Kurt Van Cleef, who raised concerns about hydrogeological study requirements tied to rural severance applications. Van Cleef argued that existing farm homes with long-established wells and septic systems were being subjected to costly and redundant studies before applications could even be submitted. Several councillors spoke directly to this issue.

Councillor David Harrison (North Marysburgh) stated that the issue was widespread and echoed concerns he had encountered personally in agricultural contexts.

Councillor Janice Maynard (Ameliasburgh) framed the issue around farmland preservation and housing realities, noting the importance of allowing surplus farm dwellings to remain viable without unnecessary barriers.

Councillor Kate MacNaughton (Picton) focused her questions on whether any actual change of use was being proposed, confirming through discussion that the applications described involved existing homes, existing services, and no new development pressure. She emphasized that while staff must apply adopted policy, Council retains authority when policies fail to reflect real conditions.

Councillor Phil St-Jean (Picton) questioned whether the issue stemmed from process or policy, pointing to the Official Plan as a document Council could amend. In response, Chief Administrative Officer Marcia Wallace clarified that reviewing internal process would not change mandatory submission requirements embedded in planning policy. She advised that if Council wanted different outcomes, it would need to direct changes to those requirements directly.

Motion to Review Rural Severance Requirements

Following this discussion, Councillor Chris Braney (Hillier), introduced a motion directing staff to review the requirements related to rural severance applications, including comparisons with neighbouring municipalities and an assessment of risks and opportunities to reduce barriers. The motion carried unanimously.

A subsequent motion to receive the deputation from Kurt Van Cleef also carried, formally closing that portion of the agenda.

Reinforce Cost and Delay Concerns

During comments from the audience, multiple residents described similar experiences. Gerald Pulver detailed a multi-year severance process involving escalating costs, peer reviews, and more than a dozen conditions remaining even after approval.

Keith Watson described being required to commission a hydrogeological study for a well he had used for decades simply to have an application accepted.

Linda Stather questioned the redundancy of being required to immediately verify a newly drilled well through an external agency. No motions arose directly from these comments, but Council carried a motion to receive the audience comments, formally placing the concerns on the public record.

Municipal Boat Launches Review

Council then considered a report on the Municipal Boat Launches Review, presented by Troy Gilmour, Director of Operational Services. The report assessed all 13 municipal launches and outlined maintenance plans, accessibility upgrades, and longer-term capital work.

Councillor St.-Jean noted clerical errors related to ward locations but expressed overall support. Councillor Maynard emphasized the role of boat launches as both resident infrastructure and tourism assets, raising parking and access issues that affect day-to-day users. Councillor Harrison referenced long-standing community interest in a public launch at Waupoos, asking staff to revisit earlier budget decisions.

The motion to receive the report and direct staff to explore long-term agreements and accessibility-focused improvements carried.

Tourism Management Plan and MAT Framework

The final major discussion centered on the 2025 Tourism Management Plan and proposed consultation on the Municipal Accommodations Tax (MAT). Julianne Snepsts, Programs Supervisor, explained that while MAT revenue has been used for years, there is no formal policy guiding how the County’s share should be allocated.

Councillors expressed differing perspectives.

Councillor Maynard repeatedly stressed that MAT revenue was originally intended to support infrastructure, particularly roads, and cautioned against diverting funds to what she described as softer program areas. Councillor Roy Pennell (Ameliasburgh) questioned whether long-term planning made sense given the County’s financial pressures and argued for flexibility year to year.

Councillor MacNaughton supported broadening consultation beyond tourism businesses, emphasizing that MAT exists to offset community impacts, not solely to support the tourism sector. Councillor Braney expressed support for the consultation framework while acknowledging residents’ infrastructure concerns, committing to further discussion outside the MAT process.

Despite differing views, the motion to approve the 2025 Tourism Management Plan, direct staff to consult the community on MAT spending priorities, and approve related by-law amendments carried.

The Committee of the Whole adjourned at 2:31 p.m. following a motion to adjourn, which carried. All motions passed at the meeting now proceed to Regular Council on April 8, 2025, where Council may approve, amend, or defer them. For residents, the meeting marked a shift from informal concern to formal review on rural planning rules, while advancing work on waterfront infrastructure and setting up a broader debate about how tourism revenue should serve the County as a whole.

What This Means for Local Residents

Rural severance rules were the main focus of the meeting. Concerns about hydrogeological study requirements for existing farm homes led Council to direct staff to review rural severance requirements and report back, formally putting potential changes to planning policy on the table.

Waterfront users and residents near municipal boat launches can expect continued maintenance and accessibility improvements, with specific site decisions to return to Council as staff bring forward options.

The approval of the Tourism Management Plan and the launch of a Municipal Accommodations Tax consultation means residents will have an opportunity to weigh in on how tourism related revenue is used, with any changes to spending priorities tied to the 2026 budget rather than the current year.

---

Disclaimer: This article is based on a meeting with an approximate duration of 1:32:29. Due to the length of the meeting, our team was not able to independently review the full recording in its entirety. As a result, we relied on software-generated transcription, automated summarization, and automated recognition of speakers and participants, which may not be entirely accurate. All transcriptions, summaries, and related content are prepared by our team in good faith and on a reasonable best-efforts basis. The content is provided for general informational purposes only and is intended to support public understanding of the topics discussed. While reasonable efforts have been made to present the information accurately, automated processes may result in errors, omissions, or unintended misinterpretations. This article does not constitute an official, certified, or verbatim record of the meeting, and it should not be relied upon as such. Readers are encouraged to consult original source materials, official minutes, or recordings where available for confirmation or clarification. Questions, requests for clarification, or suggested corrections may be submitted to hello@pecconnect.ca for review and consideration.