'New' bunker gear for Witless Bay Fire Department

By Mark Squibb/March 24, 2022

The Witless Bay Fire Department has been given the go-ahead from council to purchase 13 used sets of bunker gear.

Finance committee chairman Alex Troake made the motion that council approve the fire department’s request to buy the gear at a cost of $2,800 plus freight.

“This is a fantastic deal,” said Troake. “One new suit would generally cost that. So, even though they are used, to have 13 suits available, and I’m happy to say this too, the new recruits that the fire department has, I mean, it’s a fantastic deal.”

Councilor Ralph Carey agreed it was a great deal and added that some of the suits being used by active members date back to 2008.

Deputy Mayor Lorna Yard second the motion, which passed unanimously.

Mayor upset over agenda item

By Mark Squibb/March 24, 2022

An offer to sell a trailer to the Town of Bay Bulls got a cool reception at council last week.

The offer from a resident pertained to a six-foot by seven-foot 2009 CargoMax trailer, who thought the equipment might be useful to the Town.

“Is this a common practise, for people to call up and say we have items for sale?” asked Mayor Neil O’Brien. “Nothing against the individual, it’s just that to say, ‘I have something for sale, and I’m going to offer it to the town,’ I find it kind of unique.”

Town Manager Jennifer Aspell allowed it’s not a common practice, but noted the Town had purchased a substantial number of guardrails from the same individual in the past.

“So, he did approach the Town and indicated that he was going to be selling the trailer and wanted to know if the Town was interested in using it to transport the guiderails, so we did our due diligence and put together the information for council,” Aspell explained.

“Well, pardon me, but a lot of effort has gone into putting together this briefing, with pictures and all that, for an old trailer, and I just see this as a total waste of town staff resources,” said the mayor.

Bay Bulls axes controversial 'craft tax'

By Mark Squibb/March 17, 2022

An issue that councillor Jason Sullivan raised in 2020 as an election issue before his return to council appears to have been put to bed, by Sullivan.

During a special meeting February 28, council unanimously voted to remove a number of businesses from the tax roll that had not registered as businesses with the Town or the provincial Registry of Companies and Deeds. The move means the businesses can carry on operating without paying taxes to the Town.

The motion was made by councillor Sullivan.

As part of the motion, council will cancel all outstanding balances for 2020, 2021, and 2022 to those same businesses, which total seven.

In a second motion by Sullivan, council also voted unanimously to set criteria for adding businesses to the tax roll. Under the new rule, the Town will no longer add businesses to the tax roll unless they have been registered with the provincial Registry of Deeds.

Back in 2020, the former council increased the home-based business tax from $375 to $450, hitting a number of business owners who had previously not been taxed.

Among those affected were people selling crafts, baked goods, and other homemade items through social media platforms.

The ‘craft tax,’ as it became known, struck a nerve with crafters, some of whom showed up in the council chambers to argue with the former council face-to-face.

Despite the backlash, the tax remained.

In Budget 2022, the first budget to be passed by the new council, the Home-Based Business Tax as it is officially known, was broken down into three separate categories to appease critics.

The first category was light-industry home-based businesses and includes handmade articles such as clothing and crafts. Those folks are now taxed at $150 annually. Medium industry home-based businesses, which include studios, salons, spas, photographers, private day cares, and pet groomers who are operating from their homes will be taxed $300 annually. The final category targets larger operations that don’t fit in either of the first two categories. Those folks are taxed $450 annually.

Sullivan voted against the 2022 Budget as he had promised that he would not support the craft tax and would instead work to abolish it.

In a 2020 interview with the Irish Loop Post, Sullivan, who was not on council at the time, said the tax hit his family personally, as his wife Julie, who sells Mary Kay products online and continues to do so, was hit with the tax. At the time, Sullivan claimed the couple fought the tax, and never had to pay it. He urged other folks to do the same.

At a meeting this past February 16, Sullivan made a motion to abolish the tax. He argued the tax is unfair as some home-based crafters are being hit, while others are not. He said the Town’s manner of investigation into identifying home-based business operators boiled down to scrolling through social media to see who was advertising crafts for sale.

“I believe the fairest way is the way that it was always done for 30 years before this was implemented — if you have a sign on your property, or you’re registered with the province as a business, and registered with CRA as well, to me those are legitimate businesses,” said Sullivan. “But these little hobbies or side hustles, in the broad scheme of things, these are things that are nice to have in the community. It’s nice to not have to drive far down the road to pick up a birthday cake for your kid or a pair of socks for your grandmother for Christmas, or whatever the case may be.”

He added that Witless Bay doesn’t have such a tax.

Mayor Neil O’ Brien, who voted in favour of the new tax as presented in the budget, said he now disagreed with the tax.

“When this was passed in the budget, it was my view then that we were looking at people who were virtually advertising, we weren’t going after the small people,” said O’Brien. “What I failed to realize then, and what I realize now, is that we have no mechanism in place to support taxing someone or not taxing them. We don’t have any standards, so we can’t give clear direction to the people on who is going to be taxed and who is not going to be taxed. So, we have people calling and saying, ‘I’m selling this, but across the road, they’re not.’ And we can’t give them an explanation. All we can say is that in the past someone saw it on Facebook and it made it to council and then went to you in an envelope. If we don’t have a mechanism in place, I have to support what council Sullivan said and just abolish it. We can’t police it, and we have no way to enforce it.”

The discussion went on for a few more minutes, with members noting the tax was inherited from the previous council, discussing online versus traditional advertising, and arguing whether a business’s CRA status is relevant.

“The biggest problem, when we were trying to make our decision, was fairness to all other businesses,” said councillor Shannon O’ Driscoll. “Like, how do we decide, because we don’t know who a registered business was or not, who has to pay it and who does not? That was the biggest issue and trying to be fair across the board. So, that’s why we divided it and decreased the tax amount significantly. That was our main reason we didn’t abolish it, was to be fair.”

There was further discussion on how exactly to phrase the motion, and which taxes to reduce, and whether someone operating a home-based dog grooming business should be taxed while someone selling cupcakes through Facebook should not.

“Basically, take the sign off the side of your house if you don’t want to be taxed,” summarized Sullivan. “That was the way it was before. That’s why you’re paying taxes, because you have a big sign saying that you’re grooming dogs.”

The motion council finally landed on was to abolish taxes for unregistered business, including light industry businesses that are not registered with the Province.

Voting for the motion was councillor Sullivan and Mayor O’Brien. Against the motion were Deputy Mayor O’Brien and both O’Driscolls.

Sullivan then served notice that he intended to raise a motion at the next public meeting to review the tax. That set the stage for the February 28 vote that saw the seven businesses affected by the so-called ‘Craft Tax’ removed from the tax roll.

Subsequent to that, at a council meeting held Tuesday, March 14, council voted to remove another business from the tax roll and cancel its outstanding business taxes as well. That business was described as a Mary Kay Direct Seller business. Councillor Sullivan didn’t vote on that motion, declaring a conflict of interest, explaining the owner of the business is a direct family member.

Witless Bay rejects BBBAA funding hike

Troake says the group shows no appreciation for the money it is already getting

By Mark Squibb/March 17, 2022

Witless Bay council voted last week to deny the Bay Bulls Bauline Athletic Association’s (BBBAA) request for additional funds, though the decision wasn’t unanimous.

Nancy Burke, council’s BBBAA representative and chair of the recreation committee, moved that the Town accept the request. But councillor Alex Troake, who chairs the finance committee, amend the motion to include “subject to receipt of 2021 audited financial statements, as per the MOU.”

“I’d like to start by saying that there was a difference in the expectations of the Town and the Bay Bulls Bauline Athletic Association regarding the Memorandum of Understanding,” said Burke. “It was a signed MOU that extends the deal until the end of 2022. The BBAA was hoping, or expecting, that the amount of $50,000 would be a part of that extension. They were surprised to learn that we had returned to the original $37,000 dollars. To the Town of Witless Bay, the $50,000 contribution (last year) was a one-time thing, made possible by COVID funding provided by the government. The signed MOU that extends to the end of 2022 makes no mention of an amount— it states neither that the Town would contribute $50,000 again, nor that they would return to the $37,000. The Town of Witless Bay honoured the MOU, as it was written, through the contribution of $37,000.”

The BBBAA, said Burke, was asking the Town provide the full $50,000 once again.

“The BBBAA has submitted a record of their annual operating costs, which total $99,270.49,” said Burke. “The $50,000 contribution made by the Town of Witless Bay and the Town of Bay Bulls go directly towards covering those costs. The agreement between the BBBAA and the towns of Witless Bay and Bay Bulls is contingent on both town councils being supportive. Since we have returned our contribution to $37,000, the Town of Bay Bulls is within their rights to make the same alteration to their contribution. If this were to happen, the operating costs budget of the BBBAA would be cut by over 25 per cent, which would financially cripple them.”

Burke said that could lead to fee increases or a reduction in programs. She pointed out that the pandemic has led to reduced revenues, while operating costs have stayed consistent. The BBBAA’s annual auction fundraiser, she added, has not been held since 2019, due to the pandemic, and will likely not go ahead this year.

An online auction, Burke argued,  would not generate the kind of revenue that the regular auction raises, and some corporate donors have also been forced to withdraw financial support because of the pandemic’s impact on their businesses.

Burke spoke to the importance of recreation, especially coming out of the pandemic, and reminded council that the BBBAA has made financial contributions to the Town’s swimming pool complex, the Kinsmen Club, and 50-plus Club.

“The main reason that I wanted to run for town council was to make more programs available to the youth in our town, and our region, and I know this council wants the same thing, as do some of our community groups,” said Burke.

Troake, however made clear he is no fan of the BBBAA.  

“You were talking about fees, and that’s one of my biggest concerns with the BBBAA,” said Troake. “Today they posted that students who are thinking about applying for a job with them this summer have to sign up for a $85 course, just to apply. And one of the events during the winter carnival was $15 or $20 resume writing. So, they’re ‘helping’ youth in the region by making them spend over a hundred dollars before they can even apply for a job with the BBBAA.”

He also questioned the notion that there are no fundraising opportunities during a pandemic.

“They’ve done no fundraising,” said Troake. “If they can’t earn the same amount that they’re accustomed to, show me the effort to earn any.”

Troake said the BBBAA submitted a letter in November requesting consideration to maintain an annual $50,000 to cover operating expenses. Council considered that request, and representatives from the BBBAA made a presentation to the finance committee in December. He noted the previous council approved a $37,000 a year contribution for three years, which is matched by Bay Bulls. That combined $74,000 helps cover operating costs such as salaries, phone bills, insurance plans, travel, training, and office expenses.

Troake said the current operating budget indicates an increase in payroll from $55,000 to $75,000, and an overall increase in operating costs (including payroll) from $74,000 to $100,000.

“At this point, it’s like looking at the last year of your car payments and deciding you’d like more money to pay for a more expensive car,” he said.

Troake contended the BBBAA is required to submit meeting minutes and report monthly activities, including the number of Witless Bay residents in attendance, and has not submitted those documents. He said the Town has yet to receive an audited financial statement for 2021, and that the BBBAA has said that the audit will not be available before February of 2023.

“I believe the last documents we have on file are from 2016, and they are unaudited,” said Troake.

He reminded council the increase of funding from $37,000 to $50,000 last year was intended to be a one-time offer, paid with one-time provincial government COVID funding.

Troake said while the current council fully supports recreation, it has limited financial resources.

“With a balanced budget, and no COVID-19 funding available, to approve additional funding for the BBBAA is financially irresponsible and would mean taking away from other areas, such as infrastructure upgrades, community services, and support for other community groups,” said Troake.

He again criticized the BBBAA for not holding fundraisers during the pandemic.

“While every other business organization in the world has pivoted, the BBBAA chose to sit on their hands,” said Troake.

“The committee is concerned by the Bay Bulls-centric behavior of the BBBAA, and has requested a greater presence in Witless Bay,” Troake added. “During the pandemic, summer camps were held at the Puffin Centre, but only due to capacity limitations at the Bay Bulls Regional Lifestyle Centre. It is our expectation that events, activities, and investments be split equally between the two funding municipalities.”

Deputy Mayor Lorna Yard said she too had questions and could not support providing additional funding, especially when community buildings such as the Town Hall and Fire Hall need upgrades. She added other recreational groups are doing good work in the community and require funding, such as the ATV committee, Come Home Year committee, Heritage committee, and a community events committee.

“I do have some questions about why this funding is needed and where it would be going,” said Yard. “I have questions, but I don’t have answers.

She also joked the BBBAA should get a shorter name.

Councilor Jacob Hayden, who chairs the Witless Bay ATV Association, said that group had just received provincial government funding and would likely not be requesting funds from the Town.

Troake returned to the debate by arguing it’s not fair for anyone to suggest the Town does not support recreation because it is refusing the BBBAA’s funding increase.

“At the end of the day, we’re still giving them $37,000, which is what the agreement was,” said Troake. “And I haven’t seen much appreciation, to be honest, from the BBBAA over the $37,000.

After a few more minutes of discussion, council was finally ready to cast a vote, which split firmly down the middle.

In favour of increasing this year’s funding to $50,000 from $37,000 were councillors Jacob Hayden, Nancy Burke, and Ralph Carey.

Against the motion were councillors Gerard Dunne, Alex Troake, Deputy Mayor Lorna Yard, and Mayor Trevor Croft.

The MOU between the BBBAA and the two towns is set to expire after this year.

What happens after that, Troake said, is yet to determined.

Bay Bulls councillors juggling schedules

By Mark Squibb/March 10, 2022

Folks who tune into the monthly Bay Bulls council meetings may have to adjust their calendars in the coming months, as council is debating changing its meeting day from Monday to another weeknight.

Mayor Neil O’Brien brought the issue forward during the February 16 council meeting, saying that staff requested the meeting day be changed to Wednesdays. Council was agreeable to the change, and briefly discussed whether to change the meeting date to Tuesday or Wednesday.

Currently, council meets on the second Monday of each month.

O’Brien noted that Monday was actually the preferred day for him, but he would make either day work. He said he typically travels home from out of province work on Wednesdays, so that day may be difficult for him. O’Brien landed on Tuesday as the preferred day for him, barring Monday. Tuesday night, however, did not work for councillors Shannon or Keith O’Driscoll.

Town CAO Jennifer Aspell clarified that staff hadn’t requested the change per se, but said that if the meeting date was pushed to Wednesday, if would give council members more time to discuss the agenda and scheduled privilege meetings before the public meeting. Currently, council receives their agendas on Friday.

She noted that changing the meeting day is simple enough, but that if council were to request that they receive their agenda earlier in the week prior to a meeting, the town would also have to move the deadline for submissions.

“It was easier to change the day of the week for the public schedule,” she summarized.

Council agreed to defer the motion until the next meeting — which, coincidentally, will be held on Wednesday, March 16, as the Monday of that week is a holiday.

The discussion was actually the second time this current council has put forward a motion to change the public meeting schedule.

Just prior to the Christmas break, council voted unanimously to move the meeting time from 8 p.m. to 7 p.m.

Irish Loop received over a million dollars in COVID stimulus in 2021

By Mark Squibb/March 10, 2022

Communities along the Southern Shore completed a number of recreation and community projects last years aided by about $1.097 million in provincial COVID-19 stimulus funding.

The COVID-19 Stimulus Program (CSP) provided communities with monies to repair and upgrade municipal buildings, fire halls, recreation centers and community properties.

Approved projects were cost shared on a 90/10 ratio, with project approval limits of $150,000.

Petty Harbour—Maddox Cove received $68,640 for the Cribbies Park Community Garden drainage and town office upgrades.

Witless Bay received $121,350 for enhancements to municipal buildings, while nearby Bay Bulls received $129,800 for upgrades to the trail route along Long Pond. Bauline received $135,000 for upgrades to the multipurpose recreation park. Cape Broyle received $125,710 for recreation and community centre upgrades, while Ferryland received $135,000 for the Heritage Museum restoration project. Mobile, meanwhile, received $91,580 for replacement of playground equipment and a playground extension, and a Railway Track Bridge restoration. Further down the shore, Trepassey received $135,000 for repairs to the Trepassey Social Centre.

Coming up along the other side of the shore, St. Shott's received $17,270 for cleaning and maintenance on ditches/shoulders and culverts, while St. Vincent's-St. Stephen's-Peter's River received $47,870 for municipal building renovations.

Along the Salmonier Line, St. Mary's received $90,150 to reconstruct and repair the boat launch and dock.

Through the CSP, the provincial government allocated $23.5 million for over 250 community projects across the province.

Seating, signage and celebrations in the works for Irish Loop

By Mark Squibb/March 3, 2022

A number of towns along the Southern Shore hope to party it up this summer— with a little help from the provincial government.

Some 181 communities across the province are recipients of the Municipal Come Home Year Celebration Grant. Applicants could apply for $2,000 to put towards community projects such as promotional materials, beautification projects, Come Home Year celebrations, and minor community upgrades.

Ferryland has been approved for a new ‘Welcome to Ferryland’ sign. Gaskiers-Point La Haye has also been approved for new welcome signs and flowers. St. Mary’s has been approved for new signage for First Falls and the ballfield, where events will be taking place, and St. Shott’s has been approved to construct an outdoor platform for musical events. Folks in Cape Broyle, meanwhile, will put the money toward the construction of a new gazebo, while Aquaforte will use the money to build a number of benches throughout the community. Petty’s Harbour-Maddox Cove has been approved to install painting areas around town.

Admiral’s Beach, Bauline, and Witless Bay have all been approved to use the money toward celebration events.

For many communities, the Come Home Year celebrations may be the first big community events to be held since the COVID-19 pandemic began in 2020.

“It’s definitely exciting,” said Witless Bay Mayor Trevor Croft. “The entire council is definitely looking forward to the opportunity to get out and meet people. With the COVID regulations, hopefully everything is open for that. But it feels really great to finally be able to get

Team Gushue a winner in Dunne Academy's book

Team Gushue may have placed bronze in the 2022 Winter Olympics, but they’re golden in the eyes of Dunne Academy students. Students took some time to congratulate Team Gushue last week on their Olympic success.

Bay Bulls council carries on work with Long Pond trail improvements

by Mark Squibb/March 3, 2022

Members of Bay Bulls council approved two motions in last week’s meeting that they hope will improve the future of the Long Pond walking trail

The first was to ratify an e-mail vote to buy materials for benches and garbage boxes at a cost of $976 plus HST, which was approved unanimously. The Town has partnered with Her Majesty’s Penitentiary to have the items built through its carpentry program.

Later in the meeting, council approved a change order to the walking trail project.

“The initial design was two dead end sections of trail,” said councilor Jason Sullivan. “But we’re working with everyone to make a loop around the pond. So, for anyone that’s listening, we’re trying our best to fix it up so you can walk right around the pond.”

Technically, the initial design did include a full loop around the pond.

Construction of the Long Pond trail was expected to finish in the summer of 2021, but the bids received were substantially higher than expected, and so the project had to be retendered. The initial trail design changed when the project was retendered.

It was not mentioned whether there will be any cost associated with the new change order.

Work on the design began in 2020. The trail will be a combination of compacted granular and boardwalk with a focus on accessibility.

Phase I of the project was cost shared by the federal, provincial, and municipal governments under a Municipal Capital Works program, with each government paying a third of the cost, which works out to $143,702 each for a total of $475,444 (less HST). Phase II is valued at $144,229, and of that cost, the Town has to contribute $14,422, which is 10 per cent. The rest of the cost was covered by provincial COVID Stimulus Funding.

Messy Bay Bulls resident slow to collect his stuff

By Mark Squibb/March 3, 2022

Bay Bulls council is giving a resident another month to arrange collection of his personal property from the town garage.

The town removed a number of items from a property on Track Road Extension in September following complaints about the messy property. Requests to clean up the property went unheeded.

The items have been held in storage by the Town since then, despite numerous attempts to contact the owner.

Last month, council voted to have the town lawyer draft a letter formally requesting the property owner to pick up his belongings.

At last week’s meeting, Mayor Neil O’Brien confirmed the letter had been sent by registered mail and had been picked up by the tenant.

Councilor Jason Sullivan made a motion to defer the motion, as he claimed the resident had contacted him that day.

“We’ll give him another month, just to see what’s going on,” said Sullivan.

Councilor Keith O’Driscoll seconded the motion, and then inquired as to why council would move the date ahead by a month.

Sullivan said the resident had been planning on sending a formal reply to the Town regarding the issue.

Council voted unanimously to give him another month to collect his stuff.

Town says no to 100 lot development

By Mark Squibb/March 3, 2022

Two applications were denied by Bay Bulls council at last week’s meeting— and not for the first time either.

The first was an application for a new residential development along Track Road Extension.

“I know there used to be a policy where we wouldn’t continue to keep accepting the same applications,” said councilor Jason Sullivan. “We’ve seen this one twice. But in order for this application to go through, we need a proper survey… And the road needs to be upgraded to town standards in order to get to this piece of land. So, all that information has to accompany the application.”

Sullivan made a motion to deny not only the application, but also to send a letter to the resident saying council will not accept anymore applications without the required information.

Council also denied a Crown Land application for a residential subdivision on Cemetery lane West.

“This is again, another recurring application that has come in,” said Deputy Mayor Jason O’Brien. “There’s a couple of big things here that have to be assessed. One is that this area is in a provincial watershed area. As well, putting this large of a development, of over 100-plus lots, in this area is going to be really cumbersome for traffic flow. So there’s more engineering and investigation to be done. As well, some of the future plans of this thing (means) there’s some pretty big costs involved.”

He concluded that more investigation and study is needed to assess the application properly.

Sullivan added further that he believed the town had a 50-lot maximum policy in place. Town CAO Jennifer Aspell said that she wasn’t aware of the policy, but that that didn’t mean it doesn’t exist. Aspell said she would look into the matter. She also added some clarifications to the motion.

“If this is the second time that this application has been received in a six-month period, we have to provide a response to Crown Lands as one of the referral agencies that received this,” said Aspell. “Do you want it noted that we are not going to consider another application with this current information?”

Aspell pointed out the concerns about the watershed and the size of the development were raised the last time the application was before council.

“What we didn’t do the last time was to advise Crown Lands that the Town will not consider any further applications in this particular area, the same application again, unless there was additional information provided and the number of lots was reduced,” said Aspell.

Council denied the application unanimously.

A third request, a Crown Land application for a single residential lot on Track Road, was approved.

Privacy Commissioner examining town's handling of ATIPPA request

By Mark Squibb/February 24, 2022

A complaint from Witless Bay resident Anita Dunn regarding an ATIPP request to the Town has been referred to a formal investigation process.

“Attempts to resolve this complaint by informal means have been unsuccessful,” reads a letter from Juliette Ryan, an Access and Privacy Analyst with the Office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner addressed to Dunn, dated February 7. “The file has now been referred to the formal investigation process in accordance with subsection 44(4) of ATIPPA, 2015.”

That section of the act reads, “Where the commissioner is unable to informally resolve the complaint within 30 business days of receipt of the complaint, the commissioner shall conduct a formal investigation of the subject matter of the complaint where he or she is satisfied that there are reasonable grounds to do so.”

In the fall, Dunn sent an ATIPPA request to the Town of Witless Bay requesting “all emails, phone records, texts, and any forms of communications, both on private forms of communication that were used for official town business and official forms of communication, prior to and after the swearing-in of officials, between all members of the Witless Bay town council, including the mayor and deputy mayor, and between all members of the Witless Bay council and any employee or former employee, and between the Witless Bay town council and any private citizen, regarding the motions that were rescinded in the first and second town meetings by the new council.”

Those motions, as previously reported by The Irish Loop Post, have to do with land off Mullowney’s Lane. The actions of the new council regarding those motions effectively blocked any further development in the area.

Not satisfied with the result of the ATIPPA request, which Dunn said did not contain the information requested, she filed a complaint with the Information and Privacy Commissioner.

That Office did follow up interviews with the Town, and reported its findings to Dunn.

“The Town has explained to me the steps that it took in responding to your ATIPP request,” said Ryan in an e-mail addressed to Dunn. “It explained how it conducted its search, including who was involved in the search. The Town confirmed that its council members and employees were asked to search their personal accounts and devices as well. Further, it was confirmed that the members of the Town Office use their “@townofwitlessbay.ca” emails to conduct Town business, and that it is not their practice to use personal accounts or devices to conduct Town business. I also received confirmation that the Town’s Acting ATIPP Coordinator has received training through the ATIPP Office.”
According to Ryan, the Town claimed that responses to the ATIPP request may have appeared limited because “the Town Office was closed from June 11, 2021 to October 11, 2021. The Town explains that, during this time, the Office was not staffed, and that Town councilors were not sending correspondence to or receiving correspondence from the Town. Further, the current Town council was not elected until the end of September of 2021. Specifically in relation to council’s rescinding motions, I am advised that this discussion arose during a gathering of a new council where general planning matters were being discussed. It was not a formal privileged meeting whereby official notes were taken. It seems as though the council members were first made aware of the rescinding matters when they received the agenda items for the first meeting.”

As Dunn has indicated she is not satisfied with the follow up, the Office can now move forward with a formal investigation.

The issue, which the Office says has not been resolved, is “whether the Town of Witless Bay met its duty to assist the applicant under section 13 of ATIPPA, 2015, specifically whether the Town conducted a reasonable search.”

That section of the Act reads, “on an investigation of a complaint from a decision to refuse access to a record or part of a record, the burden is on the head of a public body to prove that the applicant has no right of access to the record or part of the record.”

Mayor Trevor Croft defended the Town’s handling of the ATIPPA request.

“We did everything we could to find any information that we needed,” said Croft. “The ATIPP office contacted us, and since we’re a new council, they went over exactly how to search through our e-mails using key words and stuff like that to make sure that everything could be found, and anything that we did find was provided.”

Croft doesn’t expect the process will cost the town any money.

“People are really set in their ways, especially in small towns like this,” said Croft “I’m never gong to say that people shouldn’t request an ATIPP or file an appeal if they feel like they’re being wronged, that’s definitely their right to do so, so I would definitely never say that they shouldn’t do that.”

Bay Bulls council opts to keep smaller chamber complement

By Mark Squibb/February 24, 2022

Bay Bulls council has narrowly voted down the idea of expanding its size to seven seats, which is the normal size of councils in the province.

The motion was actually to make a request to the Minister of Municipal Affairs to approve the expansion. That’s because the previous council had obtained special permission from the minister to reduce the size of council to five seats after several years of trying in vain to fill two openings in the chamber. During last fall’s election, more than enough candidates to fill seven seats came forward, but only five people were elected because of the reduction that had been made.

Councillor Shannon O’ Driscoll put forward the motion to go back to seven seats. Councillor Keith O’ Driscoll seconded it.

“Residents have been asking us to increase our seats, and sometimes we have conflict of interests, so I just think it’s a good idea to increase our seats,” said Shannon O’Driscoll.

Councillor Keith O’Driscoll agreed, adding that council does come up against conflict of interests quite frequently, and adding two seats might alleviate that problem.

Mayor Neil O’Brien, Deputy Mayor Jason O’Brien, and councilor Jason Sullivan voted against the motion, defeating it.

There was no further discussion.

In an interview afterwards, Mayor Brien said the biggest factor in his decision to vote against the motion was a financial one.

“By-elections cost money,” said O’Brien. “So, unless we’re having a general election, why now change it to seven and cost the taxpayers of Bay Bulls just for an extra two seats? Because the last council decided to change it. I just don’t see the rationale in spending the money for it. It’s not like things are not moving. Things are moving quite favorably in the town, with decisions and voting, so I just don’t see the need to spend the money on a by-election.”

When the previous council announced it was getting permission to go to five seats, O’Brien, who was then a resident and not a councillor, criticized the move.

“If the town is growing and we’re adding town staff positions such as town managers and (a) Director of Public Works, then why are we reducing council seats?” he asked in a social media post.

When asked about that post, O’Brien said the difference is that the town is not growing now.

“What would suggest that the town is growing?” he asked “How many business applications and home (building permits) have you seen since we’ve been elected? Very, very few to none.”

The mayor argued that choosing to reduce a compliment of seven to five and choosing to not increase a compliment of five to seven are very different things.

“I just don’t see the need to spend taxpayers money to increase it if it’s working,” he said. “If it wasn’t working, I would probably be on a different side of the fence. But right now, it’s working. I know that there’s probably a few that want it, but anyway, so be it, they can have it if they want, but I’m not voting in favor to increase it.”

As to the split between council on the issue, O’Brien said that’s to be expected sometimes.

“You’re going to have a split on council about issues, that’s what makes it a council,” said O’Brien. “If we all agreed we would never make progress. Right now, they feel there is a need for it, and we feel that there isn’t. So, right now the council seat stands at five, three makes the majority, and three made the majority vote the other night. That’s politics, that’s not changed.”

Whether the Town would have had to call a by-election to fill two more seats, or simply take the sixth and seventh runners from the field of 10 who ran in September, is unclear. Mayor O’Brien admitted he didn’t know the answer, pointing out it would be up to Municipal Affairs.

The sixth and seventh runners in the election were former Mayor Harold Mullowney and former councillor Joan Luby. Mullowney, who served on council for more than 30 years, missed getting re-elected by 21 votes.

When approached last week, he couldn’t say whether the decision to keep a compliment of five is right or wrong.

“It might be the appropriate thing to do, because getting a full compliment of seven is a challenge,” said Mullowney. “The more you have, the easier it is to have quorum, obviously. But I know myself when I was there went to the people four or five times trying to get two councillors, and it just couldn’t be done. And I think you would see the same situation in many towns.”

Mullowney experienced firsthand the difficulty that can arise with only five seats around the table.

“The challenge when you only have five, is that there are going to be many situations where you’re going to have to excuse yourself because of a conflict, and then that necessitates going to the government to get ministerial approval to make decisions on things,” he said. “The last council, that happened a number of times.”

As to whether he would have run again had a by-election been called last week, Mullowney didn’t have to think too hard about his answer.

“I’m sure there’s other good people out there,” said Mullowney. “I did 31 years. I think that’s pretty well a record in many areas of the province. I was there as long as the people needed me, and I enjoyed my time there, but I don’t regret not being there.”

Regionalization report has some constituents worried, says Ferryland MHA

By Patrick Newhook/February 24, 2022

Ferryland MHA Loyola O’Driscoll says he is getting calls from people who fear they may be financially impacted if the province moves ahead with regionalization.

The province released a report on February 2 that looked at regionalization as a way for towns and Local Service Districts (LSDs) to better cope with increasing operating costs in the face of a declining population.

Some people living in unincorporated areas and LSDs fear the report could lead to their areas being swallowed into the boundaries of nearby towns meaning they would have to pay property taxes.

There is nothing in the report that actually calls for that, though the idea has been touted by academics, pundits and some mayors for years.

“We have people calling me that are not in favour (of regionalization),” said O’Driscoll. “Right now they’re not in favour, they just don’t see how it fits in there with their economic times right now… I don’t know how, without getting into some of the specifics of what they (the provincial government) are trying to do, how this is going to help some of these communities. What are the advantages for these communities?”

Ferryland district has LSDs in Mobile, Tors Cove and Calvert, and close on half a dozen other unincorporated communities.

The report found that across the province, “Approximately 6.5 per cent of the population live in one of the 172 LSD’s. LSDs are unincorporated entities, administered by elected committees. LSDs may, but are not required to, provide a limited number of services to residents. LSDs cannot levy taxes, and are limited to cost recovery on a fee for service basis.”

Municipal Affairs Minister Krista Lynn Howell said that the report’s authors “did give recommendations that LSDs are functional and have the ability to provide adequate services but have the potential to incorporate.”

O’Driscoll said he is unsure how regionalization would affect a largely rural region, such as much of Ferryland District.

“There’s a lot to look at and how, basically, is it going to affect all the areas?” said the PC member. “What is it going to mean to them? That’s what we’ve got to find out… Right now we don’t have any answers to any questions.”

The report also discussed the need for regionalization given the population trend in most of Newfoundland. According to Statistics Canada’s 2021 census, Newfoundland has experienced a population decline.

“Community viability, from a taxation and economic development basis, is at significant risk in the province due to several factors,” the report indicated. “Financial demands are increasing, particularly in rural regions, due to things like increasing infrastructure deficits, out-migration, reduced population density and aging populations. It is essential that the province have mechanisms in place to support changing demographics.”

The report also looks at the impact aging populations will have on a community’s ability to run and operate local government structures, pointing to regionalization and regional governments as a way to ensure representation. 

O’Driscoll wasn’t able to say if this could benefit the communities in his district. “That’s a question I can’t answer,” he admitted. “But if they’re going to try and implement something like this we need to know the details of what they’re trying to do. So can it help? It may help, but I think we don’t know the details and that’s what we need to get in order to answer the questions we are going to ask them. Where does this go, what’s changing for these people, what benefit is it to these people? That’s some of the basic questions.”  

O’Driscoll said the rising cost of living is already a big concern and he is wondering if regionalization will add further costs for some residents.

“How is it going to make it better for these residents? What is regionalization going to do for these residents to make it better?” said O’Driscoll. “That’s the questions that need to be asked. And what causes the problem? They’re the two most important things. What are they going to get that’s going to make their lives better to be regionalized? Those are the questions that need to be asked and they’re tough questions, but we need to have answers on them.”