A Peterborough neighbourhood association has discovered you really can’t fight city hall — unless you have very deep pockets.

Northcrest Neighbours for Fair Process (NNFP) announced on Wednesday (December 10) that it is dropping its legal challenge against the City of Peterborough’s use of strong mayor powers to expedite Brock Mission’s transitional housing project.

The decision to withdraw the challenge comes after an Ontario Superior Court judge ruled on November 20 that, before the case could proceed, the association must first post a $30,000 security deposit within 30 days to cover the legal costs of the city and Brock Mission.

In addition to requiring the $30,000 security deposit, Justice Susan Woodley also ruled the city and Brock Mission could seek additional security deposits from NNFP as the case proceeds and costs increase.

As a volunteer-run resident association without substantial financial backing, NNFP says the required $30,000 deposit makes continuing the case impossible.

“We’re devastated,” says NNFP chair Sarah McNeilly in a media release. “This ruling prevents our case from ever being heard on its merits. It’s a travesty, in my opinion, that a multi-million-dollar municipal corporation has used vast legal resources — funded by taxpayers — to force ordinary, rate-paying residents out of court.”

Back on February 3, Peterborough Mayor Jeff Leal issued a statement that he would, in deference to a request from Brock Mission, be using his strong mayor powers to expedite a proposed six-storey 52-unit transitional housing complex at 738 Chemong Road adjacent to Cameron House, a women’s shelter also operated by Brock Mission.

Under the strong mayor powers of the Municipal Act provided by the provincial government in 2023 to 45 municipalities, including Peterborough, heads of council can propose municipal by-laws under provincial legislation — including the Municipal Act and the Planning Act — if they believe the proposed by-laws could potentially advance the provincial priority of housing.

In his statement, Mayor Leal said he would use his strong mayor powers to amend the city’s zoning by-law to allow the project to proceed and would exempt the project from the existing site plan requirements, a process that ensures development projects comply with municipal policies and minimize negative impacts on the environment and surrounding community.

The mayor noted Peterborough’s “critical need for housing,” adding he will do “whatever is within my authority as mayor to support those (housing) projects moving forward for the benefit of our community.”

Fast forward to the February 24 meeting of city council where Mayor Leal made good on his vow. While seven of the 11 members of council voted against Mayor Leal’s motion, three councillors — Gary Baldwin, Kevin Duguay and Lesley Parnell — joined the mayor in supporting it. For a strong mayor powers motion to pass, only one third of a council (which can include the head of council) must support it.

During the heated and often confrontational five-hour public meeting under the Planning Act, both city councillors and the 15 public delegations, which included McNeilly, were forbidden from addressing the use of strong mayor powers — only the proposed zoning by-law amendment — and the normal rules of procedure for council meetings were suspended under the strong mayor powers legislation.

“I care about the homeless, but I have to ask a fundamental question: do we still care about democracy?” McNeilly said during the meeting. “Because that’s what at stake here, not transitional housing. This is about whether we, as a city, as a council, as a people, still believe in the bedrocks of democracy.”

In response to council’s decision, NNFP was formed in March as an unincorporated association to represent approximately 100 local residents of the Teacher’s College and Brookdale neighbourhoods in Peterborough’s Northcrest Ward. NNFP subsequently announced its intention to issue a legal challenge of the decision, providing a statement to kawarthaNOW in early April that the proposed project is being “rushed through without proper oversight, transparency, or consultation.”

NNFP’s argument is that Brock Mission’s proposed transitional housing build doesn’t qualify as “housing” within the definition of the provincial rules governing the use of strong mayor powers. The group argues that the building “more closely resembles an institutional facility (in terms of its planned use), therefore falling beyond the scope of strong mayor powers conferred by the Municipal Act.”

While NNFP says it supports transitional housing, neighbours have raised serious concerns about the proposed project’s close proximity to Cameron House, a long-established women’s homeless shelter and transitional housing facility serving some of the most vulnerable women in the city, noting that placing a large co-ed transitional facility immediately beside an existing women’s shelter posed obvious safety issue and trauma-informed-care concerns for the women sheltering there.

“Cameron House has been operating in our neighbourhood for decades,” says McNeilly. “Rather than address the risks, Brock Mission and the city floated the idea of relocating Cameron House entirely. That suggestion alone shows how little consideration was given to the women already living on the property.”

NNFP created a separate incorporated entity, Northcrest Neighbours for Fair Process Ltd., for the sole purpose of filing the court application and retaining legal counsel. As NNFP chair, McNeilly volunteered to be the sole director and member of the incorporated entity named in the proceedings.

After NNFP moved forward with the legal challenge, the City of Peterborough responded by filing a notice of motion on May 27 for security of costs in the amount of $10,000.

“The Applicant is a shell corporation without operations and it does not have any assets in Ontario or elsewhere to pay the costs of the Respondent,” stated the motion from city solicitor Scott Seabrooke. “The Applicant was incorporated for the purpose of insulating Sarah McNeilly from being exposed to a cost award in her personal capacity and thus there is good reason to believe that the Applicant will try to avoid paying any order for costs.”

In addition, the city’s motion claimed that NNFP’s legal challenge “was brought for an ulterior motive, namely Sarah McNeilly’s personal opposition” to the section of the Municipal Act that defines strong mayor powers “which she views as undemocratic.”

As an alternative to $10,000 in security costs, the city requested an order “piercing the corporate veil” — a legal concept where a court disregards the separate legal entity of a corporation and holds its shareholders, directors, or officers personally liable for the corporation’s actions.

After the motion, NNFP launched a GoFundMe campaign appealing to the public for help with legal costs, which raised over $13,000.

During the summer, NNFP also filed a motion for injunctive relief in response to the removal of mature trees from the 738 Chemong Road property. The motion essentially asked the court to prevent construction from proceeding until a decision was made on whether the zoning by-law amendment made under strong mayor powers was valid.

Also during the summer, Brock Mission was added as a respondent to the legal application.

In the fall, the city filed a second motion for security of costs seeking $30,000 from NNFP — triple the amount originally requested.

“The city chose to play legal hardball with its own taxpayers — an approach more often seen in corporate litigation than in matters involving residents acting in the public interest,” McNeilly says.

NNFP, the City of Peterborough, and Brock Mission appeared before Ontario Superior Court Justice Susan Woodley on October 1 to argue their motions. It was decided that the city’s security for costs motion would be heard first and, following the release of the judge’s decision on that motion, either NNFP’s motion for injunctive relief or the entire case would proceed.

On November 20, Justice Woodley released her decision, which supported the city’s motion for $30,000 in security costs.

She found that NNFP met the criteria for a security for costs order because it is a nominal corporate applicant with no income, assets, or business interests, incorporated solely to bring the legal challenge forward, and that the group provided no evidence that it or its members could satisfy a future costs award.

She also found that NNFP failed to demonstrate impecuniosity (having a lack of funds), which would have required a disclosure of all income, assets, expenses, liabilities, and borrowing ability with supporting documentation.

Justice Woodley determined that, since NNFP has neither assets nor proof of impecuniosity for paying potential legal costs, it would be required to demonstrate a strong likelihood of success of its case based on the merits — a threshold she concluded NNFP could not meet.

“While I find the Applicant’s argument to be interesting, I do not find it to be compelling,” she wrote, noting that she was unconvinced by the group’s argument that the transitional housing project was “institutional” rather than “residential.”

She also stated that the Municipal Act contains an immunity cause for decisions made using strong mayor powers if a decision was made legally and in good faith, and observed that Mayor Leal exercised his legal authority and acted in good faith when invoking strong mayor powers.

Justice Woodley also found that access to justice as not compromised, as the members of NNFP could have brought the challenge personally but chose instead not to disclose any assets or assume financial risk.

The judge also rejected the notion that the case constituted public interest litigation, characterizing it instead as a local dispute driven by neighbouring property owners concerned about potential impacts on property values and lifestyle.

“Municipalities and charitable/not-for-profit organizations should not be unnecessarily exposed to litigation by nominal corporate applicants simply because the implementation of municipal powers is questioned,” Justice Woodley wrote. “Such litigation does not necessarily qualify as public interest litigation, and this is especially true in the present case where the merits are questionable and there is evidence that any costs and/or damages assessed will be unrecoverable.”

Because she found the merits of the case questionable and that any costs order would likely be unrecoverable, Justice Woodley ruled that the interests of justice would be served by requiring NNFP to post $30,000 in security within 30 days of the order, and also allowed the respondents to seek additional security costs from NNFP as the case proceeds and costs increase.

According to NNFP, the outcome “reflects a broader democratic failure: a tax-funded municipal corporation used its legal might to overwhelm citizens with limited means.”

“Justice is expensive, and the city knows it,” McNeilly says. “If everyday people cannot afford to challenge their local government — especially when democracy and public trust are at stake — then access to justice becomes a privilege reserved for the wealthy.”

NNFP says that, because it is unable to afford to proceed with the case, the mayor’s use of strong mayor powers will go untested “and legitimate questions about governance, transparency, and due process will never be reviewed by a judge.”

Despite being forced to discontinue its legal challenge, NNFP says it will continue advocating for fairness and accountability in municipal decision-making.

“Our goal has always been simple: to ensure that major decisions affecting our city are made lawfully, transparently, and democratically,” McNeilly says. “We remain committed to that mission.”

With files from Paul Rellinger.

For one person who stops at the Trinity Community Centre in Peterborough, home means “being welcomed, even on bad days.” For another person, the community and staff at the Reid Street centre are like family, and the centre feels more like home than it would being alone in an empty apartment.

People define home differently depending on their circumstances, and there are many ways One City Peterborough is striving to create a sense of belonging for its clients.

With its annual “Home for the Holidays” holiday fundraising drive in gear, sharing with the community what makes housing feel like home is one of the key goals in addition to raising money through the campaign.

“We want this Home for the Holidays campaign to show how One City creates the feeling of home in many different ways across our programs, and to help the public better understand why these services are essential to the well-being of so many people in our community,” Mackenzie Clark-Smith, One City’s fundraising and communications coordinator, told kawarthaNOW.

“We want the public to see how the idea of home is truly more than just four walls, and that it can be seen in the way our community members show up for one another and create a shared sense of community,” Clark-Smith added.

The Trinity Community Centre provides a minimum-barrier space for people who are marginalized and/or unsheltered in the City of Peterborough, through the provision of two programs: a daytime drop-in program and an overnight program.

The overnight program provides accommodations for up to 45 unhoused individuals who are unable to access the current shelter system. This includes people who have shelter service restrictions, do not meet eligibility criteria, or who do not feel safe or comfortable accessing those services.

Through the centre, members have access to nutritious meals, their basic needs met, and the chance for meaningful connection, the organization noted.

While residents are always incredibly grateful for housing, “it is not fair to assume that housing alone is enough,” One City noted in a recent email appeal to community members.

“Housing is just the foundation for autonomy, safety, community, and purpose. It is deep connection and lasting well-being that makes for a good home.”

Community members can ultimately help create the feeling of home by supporting the Home for the Holidays campaign, Clark-Smith said.

Money raised is also funnelled towards One City’s other programs that rely on donations and grants, including the community development program, the Circles of Support and Accountability (CoSA) program, and the daily meal program at the Trinity Community Centre.

“Because these programs depend primarily on community support, many would not be able to operate without this generosity we see at the holiday season and throughout the year,” Clark-Smith said.

One City’s Home for the Holidays campaign goal is $200,000. The recent Giving Tuesday initiative was fruitful for the campaign, with the organization surpassing the amount it set out to raise on December 2, and marking its best Giving Tuesday outcome to date.

VIDEO: “Building Home for the Holidays” with Michael VanDerHerberg

“We raised a total of nearly $18,000 plus the matching donor who is giving $10,000, for a total of nearly $28,000,” Clark-Smith said. “This means that we are more than 50 per cent of the way through our main holiday campaign. “We are so grateful for the generosity of those in our community who have already supported us this holiday season, especially for it being only the beginning of December.”

“Thanks to the trust and generosity of our supporters over the past few years, we have been able to accomplish some wonderful things, including building a tiny home in the backyard of one of our houses, serving over 90,000 meals in a single year, creating an on-site clinic space with doctors and healthcare professionals, and developing incredible partnerships that benefit so many of our community members.”

“It’s difficult to fully express the sincere gratitude I have as a fundraiser, and that we as an organization share. Our community continues to show up for those we support in our programs, and we’re extremely grateful for it.”

One City Peterborough believes that everyone belongs and that “together we flourish.” The organization focuses on supporting those who have experienced homelessness and/or criminalization towards their full inclusion into the community.

Some of its programs strive to create stability and increase wellness, such as housing, employment, and support programs. Part of its work also addresses immediate needs, such as offering shelter and meal programs. In addition, One City focuses on advocating for systemic change such as challenging laws that criminalize individuals.

For more information about One City Peterborough, the Home for the Holidays campaign, and to make a donation, visit www.onecityptbo.ca.

Peterborough city council has endorsed Mayor Jeff Leal’s 2026 draft budget for the city, with the same changes councillors discussed and recommended during two days of budget deliberations on November 17 and 18 that resulted in an increase of 6.56 per cent to the all-inclusive rate.

However, council’s endorsement of the mayor’s budget during a meeting on Monday night (December 8) was not unanimous, with councillors Joy Lachica, Alex Bierk, and Keith Riel voting against it, largely because of their objections to a 9.22 per cent increase in the police service’s operating budget to $41.5 million, as well as the $91.9 million renovation and expansion of two police stations.

The all-inclusive rate consists of municipal property tax, education tax, and municipal sanitary sewer surcharge rates. The 6.56 per cent increase will result in an additional $130.66 in taxes over 2025 for each $100,000 of residential property assessment. For a property assessed at $260,000, the increase would result in an annual tax bill of $5,514.79, which is an increase of $339.75 over 2025.

During the budget deliberation process, the originally proposed increase to the tax levy requirement for the city’s 2026 operating budget of over $201 million (an increase of 7.84 per cent) was decreased to over $198.4 million (an increase of 6.56 per cent) through a combination of spending reductions and increased revenue offset by some increased spending.

Changes included a decrease of $667,071 in employee benefits, an additional $268,900 for the city’s Ontario Municipal Partnership Fund, a reduction of $90,137 in Peterborough County’s contribution to the city’s Community Development Program, and an increase of $25,000 to the individual artists grants program administered by the Electric City Culture Council.

The greatest single operating spending increase in 2026 was $1.12 million for One City Peterborough to operate a low-barrier shelter and related programs for people experiencing homelessness, and the greatest single revenue increase was the transfer of $3 million from the city’s legacy income fund, representing interest income earned on investments using the proceeds of the sale of assets of Peterborough Distribution Inc. to Hydro One.

The city’s capital budget was reduced by $1.27 million from $140.5 million to $139.3 million by deferring consideration of a $900,000 project for a public washroom at Jackson Park until 2027, deferring consideration of a $375,000 budget for the Coldsprings Growth Area Planning Studies until 2027, and deferring a $25,000 request to convert a washroom space at City Hall into a kitchenette. The total reduction was offset by an additional $32,000 for the Peterborough Public Library’s collections acquisition fund.

The budget reflects a 2.11 per cent increase in the city’s operating budget, a 2.16 per cent increase for infrastructure and capital needs, a 0.53 per cent increase in the sanitary sewer fee, and a 1.76 per cent increase for external agencies that are funded by the city.

The budget includes $434.2 million in spending on municipal services, funded by $198.4 million in municipal property taxes and $235.8 million in revenues including user fees, grants from other governments, recoveries, interest from investments, and service charges

It also includes $139.2 million for capital projects, including the renovation and expansion of two police stations, Lansdowne Street West improvements between Spillsbury Drive and Clonsilla Avenue, wastewater treatment plant revitalization, extending a taxiway at the Peterborough Regional Airport, road paving, purchasing transit buses, and water service distribution infrastructure.

During debate on the draft budget on Monday night, councillor Keith Riel said the police budget was “driving the entire tax increase.”

“When one line item dictates nearly the entire levy increase, it’s reasonable for council to step back and say ‘Is this sustainable?” Riel said, adding that the mayor has been the “prime architect and defender” of the police budget increase.

“Every department is expected to find efficiencies except the police. A budget that pushes core services aside to fund one department is not a balanced municipal plan.”

Councillor Alex Bierk also said he could not support the budget due to the increase to the police budget, noting that all city departments “are coming in with very lean increases” by contrast.

“We are facing a high budget increase ask from the police, as well as a huge capital ask from the police that has gone up by a lot of money from what we originally thought it was,” Bierk said. “One of the biggest drivers on this budget increase is the amount of money, cash money, from our taxpayers that we are having to put into a financing policy fund to be able to afford to do the build (of the new police station) at the Calvary site.”

“My fear is that this council’s legacy is that we’re going to be labouring the next councils to come with an extreme amount of debt for these things. We’re dipping into reserves, we’re going into debt for our capital projects, which to me will lead to the next one, two, three terms of council being absolutely handcuffed by the amount of debt we are putting on them to be able to do anything.”

Noting that the city’s own operating budget increase is only 2.1 per cent, with no new hires, councillor Andrew Beamer said the city could “rein in spending” by reducing funding for external agencies such as Lakelands Public Health, paramedics, and the police.

“These budgets are not sustainable,” he said. “Perhaps they’ve been underfunded for several years, and we have increased the funding over the past two or three years, but they’re not sustainable. And the police budget is not sustainable — it’s increased 50 per cent over three years, and can’t keep going (up). We need to rein in external agencies.”

Beamer said the homelessness budget has increased by almost 70 per cent during this term, with One City Peterborough’s $2 million annual budget as a “driver” of higher tax increases, and he also said the city should be cutting $5 million in discretionary funding in the future.

While councillor Lachica said she supports investments in the police, she noted that the police were not asked “to trim the edges” of the new police facility and that she couldn’t support the police operating budget increase.

“What we’re hearing from constituents everywhere is that this is unrealistic and unsupportable, and it’s off the charts in terms of spending on this line item,” she said.

Councillor Kevin Duguay expressed support for the “very detailed” police budget, and noted that the new police facility has the potential for future city use as well as for future development, which “is not yet factored in the budget” as a future revenue opportunity. He also expressed support for the entire city budget.

Councillor Dave Haacke suggested that a future council should look at eliminating the city’s climate action expenditures, saying it should be a federal and provincial responsibility. He also mentioned eliminating future funding for DEI (diversity, equity, and inclusion), and suggested the city should adopt mandatory treatment programs.

He said he “totally” supports the police budget, adding council could instead reduce spending on improving the environmental efficiency of municipal buildings. He also expressed support for the entire budget.

Mayor Jeff Leal defended the police budget, pointing out that one of the councillors who criticized the police budget (Keith Riel) was on council in 2022 when a five-year staffing plan was approved to hire 49 new officers.

The mayor, who sits on the police service board, then said the police have been “drastically underfunded” over the past decade, referring to the police having to acquire used, surplus, and obsolete tasers, rifles, office furniture, and bulletproof vests, and defended the new police facility by referring to past investments in fire stations. He also noted even higher police budget increases in other municipalities due to the impacts of new provincial legislation.

“My responsibility as mayor is to give the best resources possible to the men and women who wear the uniform of the Peterborough Police Service and to make sure our civilian force has the adequate resources to back them up each and every day,” Leal said.

Richard Freymond, the city’s finance and corporate support services commissioner, provided council with a presentation entitled “Mayor’s Budget 2026” that summarized the 2026 draft budget as well as the process for adopting a budget under the strong mayor powers of the Municipal Act.

The presentation resulted in some confusion about whether the 2026 budget was “the mayor’s budget” or a “council budget.”

Ontario regulation 530/22 under the Municipal Act states that the head of council of any municipality designated to have strong mayor powers is responsible for presenting a budget to council and the public by February 1. If a mayor does not present a budget by February 1, it becomes council’s responsibility to provide and adopt a budget.

If a mayor presents a budget before February 1, they can take different approaches to developing the budget. In some cases, such as in the Town of Cobourg, the mayor will direct staff to develop a proposed budget and then present the budget to council for consideration and possible amendments. In other cases, such as in Peterborough, the mayor will work with council throughout the process of developing the budget before presenting the final proposed budget to council.

In either case, after a budget is formally presented to council as the mayor’s budget, council has 30 days to propose any amendments to the budget. If there are no amendments within the 30-day period, the budget is considered adopted. If there are proposed amendments, the mayor can choose to accept them or veto them, with council having the ability to override a mayor’s veto with a two-thirds vote (with the mayor also voting). Through a majority vote, council can also choose to shorten or eliminate the 30-day amendment period after the mayor’s budget is presented.

In Freymond’s presentation to council on Monday evening, he noted that councillors were likely prepared to adopt the mayor’s budget that evening given the consultation process and deliberations already held with council on the budget.

Councillor Lachica asked Freymond whether he was confirming “this is a mayor’s budget and not a council’s budget.”

Freymond indicated that, legislatively, the budget is a mayor’s budget because it has been presented prior to February 1, but that the mayor chose to consult with councillors in developing the budget.

“Given the consultative process, he has, I believe, endorsed and accepted all the recommendations from council here this evening,” Freymond said.

Lachica then said there was never a formal statement that “this was indeed a mayor’s budget or whether the mayor has decided this would be a council’s budget.”

Freymond then clarified that a formal letter from Mayor Leal had been prepared to present the draft budget to council as the mayor’s budget, ready for his signature, but the mayor first “wanted to hear all the comments from his council colleagues here this evening before he declared it to be his budget.”

Once the mayor formally presents his budget to council, Freymond added, the 30-day amendment period would begin, and council would have the opportunity to shorten the amendment period by majority vote.

“Council could shorten it to this evening, and we could leave here tonight with an approved 2026 budget,” Freymond said.

After some further discussion, Mayor Leal read his letter to council formally presenting the mayor’s budget to council and to the public.

Immediately after the mayor read his letter, councillor Haacke put forward a motion referring to the relevant sections of the regulation under the Municipal Act proposing that council shorten the 30-day amendment period to December 8.

In response to councillor Haacke’s motion, councillor Lachica said “This is clearly something that’s been orchestrated and not shared with the rest of council.”

“We’re being denied 30 days to be able to review and to suggest and propose amendments to the strong mayor’s budget,” she said. “I find that it is again an orchestration of something that is taking away the democratic ability of councillors around this table if they wish, and the legislation allows it, to have 30 days … I find it undemocratic, and I find it orchestrated, and I find it unfair.”

Councillor Haacke disagreed, saying council had discussed the budget at length, but councillors could vote against his motion if they wished. He added he didn’t think anything was orchestrated, and that if councillors did not want to pass the budget that evening, they could vote against the motion.

For his part, councillor Riel called the motion “a complete affront to democracy.”

City CAO Jasbir Raina reminded council that the exact same process was followed in 2024.

Councillor Baldwin also objected to the “orchestrated” characterization, saying councillors understood they would be voting on the budget on December 8 for adoption.

“For any of us to suggest this was an orchestration behind closed doors is absolutely, irrevocably false,” he said.

For his part, councillor Duguay said “I do not feel under any circumstances that my role as a councillor has been diminished,” adding that the mayor has provided both councillors and the community the opportunity to discuss and provide feedback on the budget. He noted that there was only one public delegation that evening who addressed the budget.

Councillors voted on Haacke’s motion to shorten the 30-day amendment period to December 8, which carried 7-4, with councillors Lachica, Bierk, Crowley, and Riel voting against it.

Two votes were held on the budget, with one item (transit garage) separated out due to a pecuniary interest declared by councillor Duguay. The vote on the transit garage item carried 9-1, with Duguay abstaining and councillor Haacke voting against it.

Council then voted on the remainder of the budget, which carried 8-3, with councillors Lachica, Bierk, and Riel voting against it.

Camp Kawartha’s program focused on nurturing the next generation of environmental stewards has received recognition on an international stage.

Last Tuesday (December 2), Camp Kawartha and the Regional Centre of Expertise (RCE) Peterborough/Kawartha/Haliburton announced the Pathway to Stewardship and Kinship program has received an Outstanding Flagship Project Award from the United Nations University’s Institute for the Advanced Study of Sustainability.

The academic arm of the United Nations, the Tokyo-based United Nations University (UNU) is a global research and teaching institution that generates policy-relevant knowledge to address pressing international challenges such as peace, development, sustainability, and governance. In 2017, UNU designated Peterborough-Kawarthas-Haliburton as an Regional Centre of Expertise on Education for Sustainable Development.

Camp Kawartha said the UNU award recognizes the Pathway program as one of the world’s leading examples of education for sustainable development with its “community-grounded model” helping to raise environmentally aware, caring, and engaged young people.

The Pathway to Stewardship and Kinship program began in 2014 when staff from Camp Kawartha and other environmental educators held interviews with community leaders, gathering childhood memories and reflections on what had nurtured their bond with nature.

From these conversations — plus external research and Indigenous cultural wisdom — the organization developed 30 “landmark” experiences: simple, age-appropriate milestones designed to guide children and youth’s development in nature, community, and belonging as they grow from early childhood through the end of high school.

After pilot-testing the landmark activities with more than 1,500 children in early years centres and elementary schools in both urban and rural settings in the Peterborough area in 2018 and 2019, they began scaling up the project, expanding to 15 early learning centres and 21 elementary schools from 2020 to 2023 and logging almost 63,000 landmark experiences during that time.

“This honour affirms that our region has built something remarkable,” said Camp Kawartha executive director Jacob Rodenburg in a statement. “The Pathway program shows what is possible when a whole community works together to raise the next generation of earth stewards.”

The Pathway approach is further supported by the book The Wild Path Home: A Guide to Raising the Earth Stewards of Tomorrow, written by Rodenburg and Cathy Dueck, an environmental educator who served as lead writer, researcher, and coordinator for the Pathway program. Published in September by New Society Publishers, the book offers a deeper look at the philosophy and impact of the program.

The book’s publication followed an award-winning documentary by Anne-Marie Jackson with the same name, which screened at the 2025 ReFrame Film Festival.

VIDEO: “The Wild Path Home” trailer

Rodenburg shared with kawarthaNOW his thoughts about the impact of receiving the recognition and what it means for the future of the Pathway program.

“Our hope is that we can explore the possibility of creating a Centre for Earth Stewardship,” Rodenburg said.

“The centre could provide guidance to other jurisdictions in implementing and adapting the Pathway model, offer training for teachers, parents, and community leaders, and build out more age-appropriate resources that show what inspiring stewardship experiences look like at each age and stage of childhood.”

“Ultimately, our goal is to help communities everywhere nurture children who feel connected to, and responsible for, the earth we all share,” he added.

By elevating the Pathway program to the global stage, the UNU award creates possibilities for new partnerships, funding opportunities, and international knowledge exchange.

“By joining the UNU’s global repository of flagship projects, the Pathway becomes part of an international network of community-driven sustainability solutions,” a media release states. “Its success highlights what can be achieved when educators, school boards, Indigenous advisors, families, environmental organizations, and local governments work together toward a shared vision of stewardship and kinship with the land.”

For more information about the Pathway program, visit pathwayproject.ca to view videos, resources, and practical ideas for families, schools, and communities.

United Way Peterborough & District’s first-ever Ultimate Burger Battle has wrapped up with strong community participation, more than 1,000 burgers sold, just over $2,000 raised for local programs and services, and three local restaurants winning bragging rights for the year’s ultimate burger, most burgers sold, and the people’s choice award.

Held throughout November, the inaugural month-long fundraiser saw eight restaurants each create a one-of-a-kind “Ultimate Burger” while eight volunteer “Burger Ambassadors” encouraged residents across the city and county to purchase the burgers in support of the United Way’s 2025-26 community campaign.

By the end of the month, a total of 1,022 Ultimate Burgers had been sold, with $2 from every burger sold supporting the United Way’s work across its 20 partner agencies. The campaign raised $2,065 for initiatives that support individuals, families, and seniors with essential services.

“This campaign exceeded every expectation,” says United Way CEO Jim Russell in a media release.

“The Ultimate Burger Battle brought together local creativity, friendly competition, and real community spirit. Every burger sold represents not just a great meal, but a direct investment in the well-being of people across Peterborough and the county.”

The eight restaurants that participated in the fundraiser were Agave by Imperial (376 George St. N., Peterborough), Chemong Lodge (764 Hunter St., Bridgenorth), Dirty Burger (211 Hunter St. W., Peterborough), Double Dz’s Diner (2622 Maple Grove Rd., Peterborough), The Loon Lakefield (150 Queen St., Lakefield), Pizza Villa & Pasta House (846 Ward St., Bridgenorth), The Rink Tap & Grill (597 Monaghan Rd., Peterborough), and The Vine (165 Sherbrooke St., Peterborough).

Agave By Imperial won the Top Ultimate Burger of the Year award for its “Cien Fuegos” burger, a double house-made beef chuck patty topped with spicy queso fundido, jalapeño and bacon jam, caramelized onion, and chili oil aioli. The award was based on evaluations by the United Way’s Burger Ambassadors, who scored each entry on presentation, taste, originality, toppings, and overall execution.

Double Dz’s Diner won the Most Ultimate Burgers Sold award, with customers purchasing 207 of its “The Big D” burger, a six-ounce ground chuck smash burger with lettuce, peameal bacon, gouda, onion rings, double-smoked bacon, whisky sauce, and peppercorn ranch aioli on a homemade bun.

Finally, Pizza Villa & Pasta House was awarded the People’s Choice Ultimate Burger award for its “The United Way Burger,” featuring a six-ounce beef patty, melted mozzarella on both buns, bacon, mushrooms, onions, hot peppers, BBQ sauce, and melted cheddar. The award was determined through online voting on the United Way’s website.

At a wrap-up event on Monday morning (December 8), Agave by Imperial’s Chef Jennifer Gutierrez thanked the community for its enthusiasm, noting how meaningful it was to see residents support both local restaurants and the United Way through the friendly competition.

For its part, the United Way thanked its eight volunteer Burger Ambassadors — Laura Montague, Dan O’Toole, Neil Morton, Tiffany Arcari, Nour Mazloum, Pete Dalliday, Jason Wilkins, and Paul Rellinger — for dedicating their time throughout November to visit all eight participating restaurants and scoring each burger while promoting the fundraiser on social media and shining a spotlight on local businesses.

The event also benefited from significant media support, with kawarthaNOW and Corus Entertainment each providing $10,000 in in-kind coverage after a challenge issued by local media leader and campaign cabinet member Jeannine Taylor of kawarthaNOW.

In addition, thousands of residents engaged with participating restaurants throughout November, sharing recommendations and joining in the competition while learning more about United Way’s work.

To view this year’s participating restaurants and their burger creations, visit www.uwpeterborough.ca/get-involved/united-way-ultimate-burger-battle/ .

According to Russell, the community is already hungry to see the Ultimate Burger Battle return next year.

“We’re already hearing from restaurants and residents asking when round two begins,” he says. “Based on the excitement and community pride we witnessed this year, we’d say the appetite is definitely there.”

Funds raised through the Ultimate Burger Battle will support United Way Peterborough & District’s 2024-25 community campaign, which aims to raise $1.6 million to strengthen the local social safety net. In addition to supporting programs delivered by its 20 partner agencies, the organization says campaign dollars help advance research and community planning to address long-term challenges facing the region.

The annual “Loonies on the Street” fundraiser returns for its 25th year this Friday (December 12) from 7 to 10 a.m. just outside of Peterborough Square at the corner of George and Simcoe Streets in downtown Peterborough, aiming once again to raise $100,000 for Kawartha Food Share.

As FREQ 90.5 and OLDIES 96.7 broadcast the event live, a “bucket brigade” of volunteers will be collecting loose change up and down George Street, with volunteers from the Peterborough Lions Club doing the same on the Hunter Street Bridge.

Over the past 24 years, the event has brought in more than $2.2 million in monetary donations for Kawartha Food Share. As of the date of this story, $87,616 has already been raised for this year’s event.

Those unable to donate during the event can visit the Kawartha Food Share warehouse at 665 Neal Drive before December 12 (anytime between 9 and 4 p.m. Monday to Thursday) to make a monetary donation, or donate online at canadahelps.org/en/pages/3-loonies-on-the-street/.

The annual Hunger Report from Feed Ontario released last Monday (December 1) found that food bank use in the province has increased for the ninth year in a row, with more than one million Ontarians using a food bank between April 2024 and March 2025 — an increase of 87 per cent since 2019-2020 — and making a record-breaking 8.7 million visits (a 13 per increase over the previous year and a 165 per cent increase since 2019-2020).

According to the report, 35 per cent of food bank users were new or first-time visitors and 23 per cent were employed, which is an increase of 84 per cent since 2019-2020. A third of users were children under the age of 18 and twice as many seniors were using food banks compared to 2019-2020.

Kawartha Food Share is a central collection and distribution warehouse that partners with 37 member agency food banks, food cupboards, and other food action programs in the City and County of Peterborough.

More than 35 per cent of the 14,000 people Kawartha Food Share feeds every month are children, with the non-profit organization also providing nutritious snacks for 51 area school breakfast programs helping over 17,000 children get a healthy start to their school day.

Kawartha Food Share also provides outreach to those living with food insecurity by partnering with community meal programs, including those provided by Brock Mission, One City Peterborough, Salvation Army Peterborough, and more.