Wilmot Ward 1 and 2 candidates weigh in on 770-acre industrial site, property taxes at all-candidates meeting

By Galen Simmons

Candidates vying for seats in Wards 1 and 2 on Wilmot Township council had an opportunity to share their positions on some of the municipality's most pressing issues during an Oct. 1 all-candidates meeting at the Wilmot Rod and Gun Club.

Hosted by the Wilmot Civic Action Network, the meeting brought together Ward 1 candidates Stewart Cressman, Kiera Upward and Peter Varga, along with Ward 2 candidates Alan Dicknoether, Lucy Lantz and Michael Roth.

Candidates fielded questions developed by students and representatives of the organizations involved in hosting the meeting, covering issues ranging from farmland preservation and development pressures to infrastructure, municipal finances and government transparency.

Among the most revealing exchanges were those focused on the controversial 770-acre industrial development site along Bleams Road and the township's recent property tax increases.

The following are the candidates' responses to those two questions, edited for clarity and length.

Would you support a motion declaring Wilmot an unwilling host to the proposed 770-acre industrial development, and would you introduce that motion within your first 100 days on council?

Stewart Cressman (Ward 1): "There's a lot of misinformation on this one, a lot of narratives that have been floating around. And there's an NDA that existed before we were elected. ... There's specific communications to our council in closed (session) that I cannot go into. That's a challenge for me to speak to this.

"When the site was identified, I went to Chair Redman and said, 'Why don't you come forward and give the reasons why this site was chosen?' ... Everybody wants answers, but we can't provide any answers. ... I've been on council and haven't brought forward this motion ... because of the NDA primarily."

Kiera Upward (Ward 1): "I want to ask, unwilling host to what? We've been told it's for infrastructure or employment, but we haven't been told what it is. I don't think it's responsible of me to say that we're an unwilling host and we don't know what it is.

"It's not knowing what is the actual problem here. There's been no communication. ... This is 770 acres of farmland, land that once we develop on, we won't get back. ... Before we even consider putting forward a motion, I would want to know why specifically this land is being picked. I would want to know what the benefits would be for our economy ... and the impacts on our water and our infrastructure."

Peter Varga (Ward 1): "I would put a motion forward and would not be a willing host. I've actually stated that publicly on my website that I am not a willing host to this development opportunity.

"The reason's simple. It is not a reflection of what our community has overwhelmingly said. ... For me to say yes is saying yes to the 770. And I don't think I can because I think our agricultural land is just simply too precious to be consumed for development. ... Someone has to prove to me that this was the best option, not the easiest option. So, I would not be bullied."

Alan Dicknoether (Ward 2): "Of course, I would put that motion forward. We are not a willing host. People have said it. Delegates at council meetings have said it.

"Using the cloak of, 'Well, we don't know what's going on, so we shouldn't oppose it because we don't know.' Well, no. That's exactly why we should oppose it. We don't know what's going on. There are NDAs. ... Knowing that they can issue an instant MZO, well, that doesn't mean we should say, 'They're just going to issue an MZO, so don't bother.' No, we need to fight for it. We need to do what we can."

Lucy Lantz (Ward 2): "The 770 acres, it's a defining issue from the last four years and it's a tragedy, I think, for our community. ... But I do think that, as councillors going in, to say that I would put forward a motion to say that we are an unwilling host, I think there's a naivety there because you don't know everything that's being unsaid under these NDAs.

"I think the province really kneecapped our local government on this issue. ... To come in and say I would put forward this motion without knowing the information that current councillors are privy to ... feels irresponsible to me, and so no, I wouldn't put forward that motion."

Michael Roth (Ward 2): "I believe our council has worked very hard and diligently to try and look after this land deal as best that they possibly can. Our region has come in and taken land on us that we're not in favour of. ... I believe that our council has limited options with the region.

"I might put forward a motion as an unwilling host to a certain point in terms of what we can build on that site. ... That site does need to benefit the township because it's a huge space. It's a huge part of farmland that we're giving up. ... In terms of giving us something that will benefit the community, I'm in favour of that."

What maximum annual property tax increase would you support, where would you reduce spending by five per cent, and which municipal services would you refuse to cut?

Stewart Cressman (Ward 1): "I guess I'm the one that has to wear these tax increases. ... When we got into our finances the first year, I made the comment that, boy, this is a lot worse than we anticipated.

"We had some reserves that were in negative balance. ... We've kicked some things down the road like a can, trying to minimize what we had to do. In terms of where I would hope to be, inflation is where I'd like to land. ... We've had a staff review, but I think we have some things that come off the books this year and maybe even some deputy (director) position decisions that we just can't afford."

Kiera Upward (Ward 1): "I think keeping it as close to inflation is a fair amount. ... It wouldn't be fair for me to stand up here and say what I would and wouldn't (cut) without actually having the 2027 baseline in front of me.

"My background in natural science ... makes me very detail-oriented, and I look a lot at the future impacts of things and the risks that we're taking on right now if we're not increasing enough or if we're increasing too much. ... Cuts, the decision should fall to the public as much as it can. This is your money and you guys should decide how it's spent as much as you can."

Peter Varga (Ward 1): "My property tax target would be five per cent. ... That's a number that I'm balancing between what I think we should pay at inflation, but also to not ignore that we're trying to recover from a problem. ... Double digits is not sustainable for our community.

"When it comes to reducing spending by five per cent, I can absolutely assure you there is opportunity to find efficiencies within the administrative ... (structure) of our township. ... I wonder if we have ever completed a zero-sum-based budget. ... I would not cut any of the social services that are currently available to our seniors in our community. They are essential."

Alan Dicknoether (Ward 2): "We are striving for property tax increases that are around inflation, the rate of inflation.

"If I had to reduce spending by five per cent ... first I would look at administrative costs. ... We have a lot of community organizations ... (with) experts ... contributing. So that can reduce our costs if we don't have to hire outside experts.

"I'm a strong believer that a society can be judged on how it treats its most vulnerable. So, I do not advocate for cutting our social programs that we're running. We'd have to look elsewhere."

Lucy Lantz (Ward 2): "I think we would all want to stay as close to inflation as possible. ... No one wants to see taxes go up. It was a huge impetus for me wanting to run.

"We need to have councillors who are looking at a budget line by line and looking at places where we can't afford to spend what we're spending. ... We need to be looking at staffing. We need to be looking at services that are underused and making some hard decisions. We can't all say we want taxes cut and then say we don't want to lose anything. ... (I would refuse to cut) anything essential. I think major infrastructure projects that, if they don't get done, could have huge impacts on our community."

Michael Roth (Ward 2): "I would definitely take a look at some of our staffing ... budgets and why they've increased so much over the last five to six years and see if we can do something there.

"Not our roads ... our roads are terrible. That is definitely a place that I would not cut. ... As a brand-new person running for council, I'm not 100 per cent sure that I can say we're going to increase it by two per cent or we're going to increase it by 40 per cent. ... I'm going to work the best that I can for every person in Wilmot Township to keep the tax levels as low as I possibly can. ... I'm going to be available to tell you why I did it or why I voted for it."