Part 2: Debates on Tourism Spending, Beach Operations, and Patio Trade-Offs – 03/14/2024

The March 14, 2024 Committee of the Whole featured unusually detailed back-and-forth among councillors, staff, and presenters. Much of the discussion centered on how tourism-related tools are being used, who should benefit from them, and where council felt limits or safeguards were needed.

© PEC Council (YouTube)

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

Municipal Accommodation Tax: Support With Conditions

During the deputation by Andrew Siegwart, President and CEO of the Tourism Industry Association of Ontario, councillors pressed hard on clarity and accountability.

Councillor Brad Nieman questioned what specific changes TAIO intended to propose to the province and asked to see recommendations before any endorsement. Councillor Phil St-Jean supported the advocacy direction but emphasized the County’s short-term rental framework as a model and asked whether TAIO would lobby for clearer provincial rules to help reluctant municipalities.

Councillor Sam Grosso asked what the County was doing better than other regions. Siegwart pointed to early strategic planning, collaboration, and balancing growth with resident experience.

Concerns about cost effectiveness surfaced repeatedly. Councillor Roy Pennell asked whether the County had measured how much MAT revenue remains after staff time and administration. Siegwart responded that high-performing municipalities aim to keep administrative costs below 15 percent.

The exchange with Chair Kate MacNaughton sharpened the discussion. MacNaughton challenged how “visitor input” should factor into municipal spending, particularly when infrastructure costs fall on residents. Siegwart clarified that visitor sentiment is typically gathered indirectly through surveys and reviews, not formal participation.

Council formally received the deputation without amendment.

Visit The County: Scrutiny on Spending and Metrics

When Charles McKee, Vice-Chair of Visit The County, presented the organization’s first full-year report, councillors drilled into outcomes and spending.

Councillor Chris Braney questioned staffing costs, event counts, and the value of digital spending, citing an approximate cost per new social media follower. McKee explained that digital spend includes content creation, not just paid ads.

Councillor Bill Roberts raised concerns about Visit The County’s lack of paid advertising support for local media outlets, noting research linking strong local media to better governance and economic resilience. McKee said different media suit different purposes and agreed the topic warranted further discussion.

Affordability concerns came from multiple councillors. Councillor Pennell argued that the County risks pricing itself out of reach for younger families and repeat visitors. Councillor Maynard asked whether Visit The County could help attract more traditional, affordable accommodations such as motels.

Questions about return on investment were emphasized by Councillor John Hirsch, who asked whether Visit The County could calculate overall “bang for the buck.” McKee said campaign-level measurement exists, but full system-wide ROI is still developing.

Council received the Visit The County presentation, with Hirsch leaving the meeting shortly afterward.

Tourism Management Plan: Beach Fees, Boat Launches, and Staffing

The most consequential votes came during discussion of the 2024 Tourism Management Plan, presented by Julianne Snepsts, Programs Supervisor.

Councillor Nieman raised repeated concerns about boat launch parking fees, arguing that residents making short visits are unfairly charged. Staff confirmed the issue would be addressed in a forthcoming boat launch system review, not through this plan.

Wellington Rotary Beach drew sustained attention. Staff proposed eliminating the admission fee and instead funding a seasonal beach steward through MAT dollars. Councillor St-Jean strongly supported the steward model, citing frequent complaints about vehicles driving on the beach and the need for on-site presence beyond garbage collection.

Councillor Nieman moved a motion to eliminate the beach steward position and rely on existing staff instead. The motion was seconded but opposed by Councillor Maynard, Councillor St-Jean, and others who argued existing staff are already stretched, especially on weekends. The motion failed.

Council then approved the Tourism Management Plan, including removal of the Wellington Rotary Beach admission fee and creation of the beach steward role.

Sidewalk Patio Bylaw: Parking Versus Accessibility

© Prince Edward County

The final major debate involved updates to the Sidewalk Patio Program, presented by Director Emily Cowan.

Councillor Nieman opposed patios placed on the street, arguing they reduce parking and conflict with business requests for free parking. Cowan responded that the total loss amounts to about 3.75 percent of Picton parking and 2.5 percent in Wellington.

Councillors Braney, St-Jean, Grosso, and Roberts all spoke in favour, citing accessibility benefits, traffic calming, and support for struggling restaurants. Councillor Pennell raised safety concerns based on a personal fall caused by slippery patio materials and questioned enforcement. Cowan confirmed stronger inspection and enforcement powers are now built into the bylaw.

Councillor Harrison questioned liability exposure if a vehicle strikes a patio. Staff confirmed licensees must carry $2 million in liability insurance, with municipal insurance also in place.

The bylaw amendments were approved, advancing them to the March 26 council meeting.

What this means for the locals

Residents will see the end of the Rotary Beach admission fee and the presence of a beach steward during peak season, aimed at managing behaviour, cleanliness, and access.

Parking frustrations remain unresolved for now, but council acknowledged the issue repeatedly and committed to a full boat launch review later this year.

Sidewalk patios will continue under clearer rules, with greater emphasis on accessibility and enforcement, even as some on-street parking is temporarily lost.

---

Disclaimer: This article is based on a meeting with an approximate duration of 2:58:36. 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.