Part 1- Structure, Museum Strategy & Heritage Planning - 04/08/2026
- PECConnect
- Apr 8
- 4 min read
The Built and Cultural Heritage Advisory Committee met on April 8 with a full agenda focused on structure, strategy, and the future of heritage work in the County. Chaired by Sandy Latchford, the meeting brought together committee members, staff, and community voices to work through both immediate priorities and longer-term questions about how heritage is managed across the County.
From the outset, the meeting moved quickly through formalities, including approval of the agenda and amended minutes from the previous meeting. Early corrections to the March minutes highlighted a recurring theme that would carry through the rest of the discussion: the importance of clarity, process, and getting the details right when documenting heritage-related work.
View the entire PEC Council meeting, or continue to speaker comments and councillor votes>
A Closer Look at Committee Structure
One of the most significant moments came during a deputation from a representative of the PEC Heritage Conservancy. Drawing on years of experience, the speaker raised concerns about the current structure of the committee, arguing that its broad mandate may be limiting its effectiveness.
The key issue centered on focus. As a statutory body under the Ontario Heritage Act, the committee is expected to provide informed advice to Council on heritage matters. However, with responsibilities also covering museums and cemeteries, the scope may be too wide for members to fully engage in all areas.
Examples were shared to illustrate this challenge, including limited participation in heritage training, lack of submissions on major planning documents, and gaps in volunteer involvement. The recommendation was straightforward: narrow the mandate and refocus on core heritage responsibilities, while allowing other areas like museums and cemeteries to operate with more specialized attention.
This sparked a broader conversation among members, with Chair Latchford noting that the current structure was originally designed to bring different heritage groups together and encourage collaboration. Over time, however, it has become clear that balancing that collaboration with legislative responsibilities is not simple.
Museum Strategy Signals Growth
The committee also received an update from Chris Palmer, representing the County Museums team, on a new five-year museum strategy currently in development.
Palmer explained that the strategy will be rolled out in phases, beginning with a short-term plan required for provincial funding applications due in June. A more detailed and fully developed plan will follow later in the year, incorporating feedback from both residents and visitors.
The update showed strong progress since the last strategy period. Museums have expanded programming, increased funding through grants and partnerships, and significantly improved volunteer engagement. Public feedback has also been positive, with many indicating that the museums are on the right track.
One key gap identified is visitor data. Since most museum traffic happens between May and September, the team wants to gather more insights during peak season before finalizing long-term plans. To support this, the committee was asked to assign members to participate in the strategy process.
This request reflects a growing emphasis on collaboration between staff and advisory committees, especially in areas where technical expertise like building maintenance or heritage conservation can add value.
Cultural Heritage Planning Moves Forward
Another update focused on the Cultural Heritage Master Plan, a major initiative shaping how heritage will be managed in the coming years.
Committee members reported that they are currently reviewing the plan’s priority recommendations and preparing feedback for staff. The work is still in its early stages, but it is expected to influence both policy decisions and committee structure going forward.
There was also discussion about timing, with members recognizing the need to align their feedback with upcoming reports to Council. This added urgency to conversations about how the committee should operate and what role it should play in the future.
Preparing for a Bigger Conversation
As the meeting progressed, it became clear that many of these discussions were connected. Questions about mandate, structure, and responsibilities all pointed toward a need for a more focused and open conversation.
By the end of the meeting, members agreed to hold a dedicated working session in early May. This session will invite input from the broader heritage community and give space for more candid discussion about how the committee should function moving forward.
The goal is to develop clear recommendations that can be passed on to the next Council term, ensuring that future committees start with a stronger foundation.
Key Takeaways
The County is actively rethinking how heritage work is organized. This could lead to changes in how museums, cemeteries, and built heritage are managed and supported.
Local museums are growing and evolving, with a new strategy in development that aims to improve programming, funding, and visitor experience.
Residents and heritage groups will have an opportunity to shape the future of heritage in PEC through an upcoming public-facing working session.
Disclaimer: This article is based on a meeting with an approximate duration of 2:33:01. 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.
Comments