The current council keeps boasting of a surplus and increasing reserves. However, is there really a surplus or is this council only moving money around to make residents believe that there is a surplus when actually the Township is in a huge deficit.
If this current council wants to claim a surplus then the current council should first tell the residents how much is the total surplus. However, the council cannot tell the residents what is the surplus as the council just approved the 2026 budget without the 2025 actual income and expenses, so how do they know if there is a surplus or a deficit? If there is a surplus the current council should.
- Return all the money collected illegally from the Colgan residents for wastewater haulage until October 2024 as the developer has already paid it and put it in writing, the township CAO and treasurer have also put it in writing that the developer has paid for it. This is in the Holding tank link.
- Return the 5 million taken from tax payers on private wells to subsidize the water users on municipal water.
- Return the approximate $650,000 taken from tax payers on private septic systems to subsidize the wastewater users on municipal wastewater.
- Minus (deduct) the debt that this council has taken during this term.
- Account for the DC (development charges) of approximate $1.3 million lost when the past council approved the subdivision agreement to collect DC charges for 525 homes prior to the building permits being approved. ( as per schedule T.2 other date of signing the subdivision agreement). This is discussed in more detail under the link Colgan development discussion, then DC charges fiasco.
- Account for the lost revenue from the water hookup fees that were not collected from the developer, and we had no obligation to upgrade the system or pay for the standpipe and its associated infrastructure as there was no mention of the township being liable for any upgrades as per the Land Tribunal decision.
- Account for the any lost revenue from wastewater hookups fees that the township gave the developer for the 87 pre-existing homes to connect to the plant in future. This is only if the township was responsible for the financial contribution for approximate 87 pre-existing homes in Colgan and only if stated in the Land Tribunal decision. Any dollar amount that the Township would be responsible for the pre-existing homes was to be paid back to the developer in 20 years with interest. Why was this not done if we owed the developer any money for the pre-existing 87 homes?
- Any increase in costs to build the sewer plant should not have been put on the township by giving the developer a credit as the township did not create any delays in building the wastewater plant.
- How did the 4 councillors Scott Anderson, Deborah Hall Chancey aka Deborah Hall, Jonathan Pita and Annette Bays approve and give a credit to the developer for the wastewater plant with no costing for the construction of the plant. While the township staff report in 2025 on Colgan stated the cost was $35 million the DC charges collected amounted to only around $17 million as per the staff report DC charge rate. As the DC charges were to cover the cost of the wastewater plant why was only around $17 million collected when the actual cost was $35 million as per the staff report.
- How did the 4 councillors Scott Anderson, Deborah Hall Chancey aka Deborah Hall, Annette Bays and Jonathan Pita approve the standpipe and its associated infrastructure and put it on the residents to pay when there is no capital costing provided to council.
- As per the township treasurers email to me attached with the Colgan financials he states no credits were given, but the subdivision agreement approved by the above 4 councillors talks about credits in schedule T.2 and Scott Anderson also speaks of credits in his email to me attached to this website under Scott email link. So what is the truth were credits given or not. Where is all this money.
After accounting for all the above, it will then be interesting to see if the township has a surplus or a deficit?