Part 2: Library Services, Agrivoltaics Oversight, Civic Recognition Changes, and Strong Mayor Governance - 06/26/2025
- PECConnect
- Jun 26, 2025
- 5 min read
Updated: Apr 28
The June 26, 2025 Committee of the Whole reconvened under the chairmanship of Councillor Brad Nieman (Bloomfield/Hallowell), with Mayor Steve Ferguson and councillors from across the County in attendance. The meeting proceeded, with motions framed as recommendations to be forwarded to Council for final approval at the July 22, 2025 Council meeting.
Library Services: Strong Praise Across Wards
Discussion following the 2024 Prince Edward County Public Library Annual Report reflected broad, cross-County support.
Roy Pennell (Ameliasburgh), spoke about new residents in his area who cited the library as one of the first services they asked about after moving in. He described feedback from residents who felt welcomed and supported by library staff, particularly at smaller branches serving rural communities.
Mayor Steve Ferguson questioned whether the scale of programming and amenities offered by the County library system was typical for rural municipalities. He pointed specifically to features such as the recording studio, newcomer programs, and flexible community spaces, asking whether these were unique within Ontario.
View the entire PEC Council Meeting; or view our recap.
Janice Maynard (Ameliasburgh) emphasized how libraries affect families and young residents, describing the Milford branch as a central community space. She also pointed to economic impacts, including shared equipment and meeting spaces that support local groups and small organizations.
Bill Roberts (Sophiasburgh) framed the library as a measurable economic investment, citing research that shows significant social and economic returns on public library funding.
The presentation was formally received without opposition, signaling consensus support for the library’s current direction and services across both urban and rural wards.
Questions of Land Use, Oversight, and Fairness
The Elmbrook Agrivoltaics Project prompted some of the most detailed questioning of the afternoon, with councillors focusing on land use, agricultural integrity, community benefits, and long-term responsibility.
Roberts raised concerns about whether agriculture would remain the primary land use throughout the project’s lifespan. He questioned the scale of the proposed community benefit payments, describing them as modest relative to infrastructure costs elsewhere in the County. Roberts also challenged the developer’s approach to Indigenous engagement, suggesting that outreach should be proactive rather than request-based.
Maynard focused on decommissioning risk. She asked when financial securities would be established, how decommissioning costs would be calculated, and what would happen if the company no longer existed decades into the future. Her questions reflected broader concerns about long-term accountability for infrastructure placed on rural land.
Pennell questioned the limited consultation radius used for community engagement and suggested that residents beyond 500 metres may still feel impacts. He also raised concerns about placing solar installations on land capable of agricultural production rather than marginal or rocky land elsewhere in the County.
Ferguson asked practical questions about the number of panels, the visual representation shown in the presentation, and adjacency to existing quarry operations.
Following discussion, Committee voted to receive the deputation and to refer the proposal to staff for a report at the earliest feasible meeting. No councillor voted against this referral, meaning the project will return with further analysis before Council considers any support resolution.
Organic Waste Management Proposal
The Bio Sustainer zero-waste organic waste management proposal generated interest but no immediate direction.
Maynard asked why the proposal was coming to Council at this stage and whether the proponents were seeking rezoning, land, or formal approval. The presenters clarified that the appearance was informational and intended to open dialogue with staff.
Chris Braney (Hillier) suggested that agricultural organizations should be consulted, given the proposed fertilizer production and potential use by local farmers.
Roberts asked how many sustainable local jobs would realistically be created and whether specialized positions would be filled by local residents or outside experts.
Albert Paschkowiak asked about next steps and timelines, while staff confirmed the County is already conducting an organics processing feasibility study.
Committee voted unanimously to receive the deputation, with no referral or follow-up motion. For residents, this means the idea is on record but remains exploratory, with no decisions made and no commitments of land, funding, or approvals.
How the County Recognizes Its Own
The proposed overhaul of the Civic Recognition Awards Program sparked a wide-ranging discussion about recognition versus celebration.
Pennell argued that recognition should happen closer to the moment of service and expressed concern that an annual ceremony could delay acknowledgment for up to a year.
David Harrison (North Marysburgh) cautioned that moving recognition away from Council chambers might reduce the personal impact for recipients who value being recognized in front of Council and the media.
In contrast, Ferguson, Phil St-Jean (Picton), Sam Branderhorst (Athol), and Roberts supported the idea of a dedicated annual celebration. They described current recognitions during Council meetings as brief and constrained, arguing that a standalone event would allow deeper engagement with recipients and their families.
Despite differing views, Committee voted to approve the updated administrative guidelines, allowing the new structure to move forward. Residents may see future civic recognition delivered through a more formal, event-based format rather than individual presentations during regular Council meetings.
Strong Mayor Powers: Recorded Vote Reveals Division
The most clearly divided vote of the meeting came during discussion of required updates related to Strong Mayor Powers.
While staff emphasized that the changes were mandatory administrative updates required by provincial legislation, Pennell requested a recorded vote, stating his opposition to the policy framework itself. The motion carried, with the majority voting in favour and Pennell and Harrison opposed.
What it Means for the Residents
For people who use local libraries or live near branch locations, councillors made it clear that library services are strongly supported across the County. Libraries are seen as essential community spaces, especially in smaller and rural communities, which suggests services are likely to remain stable.
For residents near Elmbrook Road, Highway 49, and nearby rural areas, the agrivoltaics project has not been approved. Instead, staff have been directed to review the proposal and report back. This means there will be more study and more opportunities for discussion before Council considers whether to support the project.
The organic waste proposal is still only an idea. No land, funding, or approvals have been committed, and the County continues to work separately on its own organic waste feasibility study. For volunteers and community groups, changes to the Civic Recognition Awards mean the County may move toward a dedicated annual event to recognize residents, rather than short presentations during Council meetings.
Finally, updates related to Strong Mayor Powers do not change how the County is governed today. They simply ensure local bylaws match provincial rules, should those powers ever be used in the future.
Final decisions on these matters will be made at upcoming Council meetings, with the July 22, 2025 Council meeting identified as the next key milestone .
Disclaimer: This article is based on a meeting with an approximate duration of 3:16:01 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