To the Editor:
- Facts: Saugeen Shores Strategic Plan states that the beach is the number one tourist drawing card.
- Bruce County’s tourism study records a $300 million annual income because of tourism.
>23% of that total goes to Saugeen Shores. (almost $70 million annually.)
>A previous Chamber Report stated that 85% of every business is directly impacted by tourism.
>Our rapidly expanding community is already demanding more park space (beach)
In other words, the beach proper is a priceless piece of real estate.
The controversial CCV continues to make waves. A dated by-law, unchanged by the town to mirror the Municipal Act changes, has caused them to pass a new bylaw that declares the beach as ’SURPLUS’. This all revolves around the 50 year lease length. It is a ground numbing step with possibly huge ramifications for future land decisions, especially concerning our beaches. Pointedly, this is another fumbled move that begs a number of questions.
WHY would council declare the most valuable property the town owns ‘surplus’ for any reason?
WHY was this step not taken when the lease was signed three years ago?
Is the lease, without this signed by-law for the last three years, legal?
HOW is it possible that council/administration/lawyers apparently missed this important Municipal Act change?
The previous government standard did not need a ’SURPLUS’ stamp of approval if any lease was 21 years or less. Industry standards agree that a 20 year lease is excessive but a 50 year lease is bizarre decision making.
WHY did council agree that 50 years was appropriate thereby ignoring industry standards?
If …. council did know that signing a 50 lease entailed declaring the beach ’surplus’, why did they not insist that a 20 year lease, without the ’surplus’ requirement, be appropriate?
WHY did council rush this ’SURPLUS’ by-law days before the municipal election and thereby handcuff a new council with a 50 year lease?
These are troubling scenarios. The Waterfront Advisory Committee (WAC) recommended by the Waterfront Master Plan authors to act as the guiding arm of all beach development was disbanded just before the CCV was presented to council in 2019.
It is of great concern that incumbents believe that this standard is what the community will accept.
W. McGrath
Port Elgin
