The Peterborough Butterfly Run is taking flight once again this spring to support families and individuals who have experienced a loss during pregnancy, the loss of an infant, or who are unable to conceive.

Registration is now open for the annual event, which takes place on Sunday, April 27 at Peterborough’s Millennium Park in downtown Peterborough and features a five-kilometre run or walk.

Presented by GPHSF Your Family Health Team Foundation, in partnership with Partners in Pregnancy Clinic along with the Peterborough Butterfly Run Executive Committee, there’s also a one-kilometre “memorial walk” and a one-kilometre fun run for kids, in addition to the traditional five-kilometre trek from downtown Peterborough into East City.

“Since 2022, GPHSF has taken the lead role in organizing the Peterborough Butterfly Run, which has been a great privilege,” said GPHSF executive director Vince Bierworth in a media release. “It is both humbling and gratifying to see the impact that it has made.”

Bierworth told kawarthaNOW it’s an important event for GPHSF.

“Part of the mission of this event, when it was first started in 2017, was to create a space for people who were grieving to come together and feel supported,” Bierworth said.

“As a founding partner of the run, along with the Peterborough Butterfly Run Executive Committee and Partners in Pregnancy Clinic, we’ve seen over the years how this event continues to be a place that family, friends, neighbours, co-workers, and many more come together to rally around people close to them that have experienced loss. This event is very community-driven, which, in a big way, is why its importance grows each year.”

Ashley Hickson and Kori Zwarych are the new co-chairs of the Peterborough Butterfly Run Executive Committee. Both Hickson and Zwarych have been involved in the event for a number of years, including in the capacity of cheering on the runners during the race.

“After years of involvement on the backend of things, curating and distributing bereavement kits in the community, we are excited to have a more prominent role on the executive committee for the run itself this year,” Hickson and Zwarych said in a statement.

“We are working on furthering initiatives with the money raised to help support families with their grief. We are looking forward to another successful event.”

The run route will remain the same as in previous years, with registration opening at 9 a.m. The one-kilometre kids’ fun run starts at 10 a.m., the one-kilometre memorial walk starts at 10:20 a.m., and the opening ceremonies kick off at 10:45 a.m. The five-kilometre chip timed run/walk will start by 11 a.m.

The memorial walk will remain free as in previous years. Registration for the kids’ run is $5 and the five-kilometre run/walk registration fee is $45 plus applicable fees. Registration includes a medal and customizable race bib. Five-kilometre run/walk participants who register before April 4 will also receive a race shirt and various other items in their race kits.

Dave Dame from Runner’s Life will be the race director for this year, using “his years of experience to make sure the event day runs as smoothly and seamlessly as possible,” the release noted.

Money raised through the Peterborough Butterfly Run has been used to provide ongoing specialized education in perinatal bereavement care to healthcare providers across Peterborough city and county, to establish more than 10 lending libraries for individuals and their families located across Peterborough city and county, and to develop bereavement kits for families and individuals who experience early and later pregnancy loss and infant loss.

Since 2018, 800 bereavement kits have been created for families and individuals to be distributed by health-care providers. Money raised through the Butterfly Run is also invested back into race day.

“Our hope this year, as every year, is to bring as many people together as we can in Millennium Park on April 27th to show their support for each other,” Bierworth said.

Those who are unable to attend the in-person event but would still like to support the Peterborough Butterfly Run can take part in a virtual run and receive a race shirt, medal, and race kit. Sponsorship opportunities are also available.

For more information about the Peterborough Butterfly Run, including how to register, donate, or sponsor the run, visit www.ptbobutterflyrun.ca. You can also register in person at Runner’s Life at 174 Charlotte Street in downtown Peterborough.

At 66 years old, Peggy Shaughnessy is well aware she should be spending her weekends at the cottage knitting or doing pottery, but she just can’t seem to stop doing the lifesaving work she does through her Peterborough-based organization Right to Heal.

“I’m not ready to let it go yet,” she says. “My job isn’t finished yet, and I don’t know if it ever will be.”

That’s because with a resume that includes being a nurse in Peterborough, working with Indigenous men coming out of incarceration, founding WhitePath Consulting, operating the Whistle Stop Café — a place she says was “a hub for people of all walks of life” — and developing the RedPath approach, she has dedicated her life to proving people have the right to heal in whatever capacity they need.

But when the time comes for her to take a much-deserved retirement, she can be assured she will have set the foundation for others to follow closely behind her, beginning with her daughter Liz Shaughnessy-Rowe.

“My mom’s gift is creating the RedPath program and helping see what’s within you and getting to the root of what you do, which I can also facilitate because I watched her create it,” says Liz. “But one of my gifts is creating community, and so when we came into this building (the former St. Andrew’s United Church), I was the one who ran the basement in the beginning.”

That community she is referring to is one dedicated to helping people find their path to wellness. With Peggy’s research-based RedPath approach, which has seen more than 20 years of success, the hub offers free outpatient addictions services, nourishing meals, and community events like moon circles.

VIDEO: Liz talks to Daisy at Right to Heal

“We got the money for addictions treatment, but we realized that wasn’t good enough,” Peggy says, referring to essential mental health and addictions funding from the Government of Ontario. “If we ran programs and sent Joe back out onto the street, Joe is just going to get some fentanyl or something. So we created the hub downstairs so people could come and build community.”

“People who come to Right to Heal want to change their life, and that isn’t just ‘We’re going to do this work and we’re going to be better’,” adds Liz. “We have to think about the mind, the body, and the spirit to heal all aspects of the person. I believe that what we do here is we build community and connection, and through that connection they find the different healing modalities or the different tools that help them. Each of us needs different things.”

Peggy is proud to say that in two years, Right to Heal hasn’t had a single overdose or a needle on-site and hasn’t been visited by the police, “other than for coffee.” And yet, she says, “the mayor (Jeff Leal) has never reached out and said, ‘How can we duplicate this across the city?'”

“In response to the local opioid crisis, Right to Heal was created to bring the RedPath Program to Peterborough,” Liz adds. “A program that was developed right here in her hometown wasn’t even being able to be used in her hometown. She’s recognized across the country and for some reason our city won’t look at her for the expert she is.”

Liz believes being seen as an expert is one reason her mother is pursuing the PhD she will soon be defending, something Peggy agrees was initially a motivation.

“At first it was just to say, ‘Well, if they call me Dr. Shaughnessy, maybe people will look at me a bit more seriously’,” says Peggy. “But I think for my own journey I needed to do it as well. I think you can learn an awful lot of your own self during that process, and it’s very humbling.”

As for other approaches to helping people with addictions, Peggy singles out harm reduction for criticism — not because of the original concept, but because of what it has become.

“It wasn’t brought forward originally (as) a solution — it was to get you to a place where you could then go to treatment,” Peggy explains. “As soon as harm reduction became the solution, then we’re telling addicts it’s okay to be an addict, and that isn’t a very good thing to be telling a high school student coming out of a pandemic that isn’t functioning. So now we’ve created this mess and we’ve lost control of our cities.”

“We have the solution to get back on our feet,” she says, referring to Right to Heal. “And so that is my fight.”

“The system isn’t set up for you to move out of it, and it creates a dependency,” adds Liz. “I think that’s the most frustrating thing that we face all the time: not being looked at, not being asked to help when we’re willing to.”

While it might be tempting to call Peggy and Liz “passionate” about their cause, that’s a word they are tired of hearing. Liz points out that’s usually how the letters they receive from the government begin.

“It’s always ‘Thank you for your passion’,” she says. “We look at passion almost as an insult. It is my passion, but as women our passion is our strength and we’re supposed to listen to it, but the way that we get treated in this patriarchal society is ‘Thank you for your passion. Now sit down. You’re showing your emotion’.”

As a Christmas gift from Liz to her mother, the women have begun a project of creating a documentary film that will share Peggy’s truth. It will include interviews with Peggy, Liz, and other community members who have found healing through Right to Heal.

“I want my (descendants) to hear her voice and know why she did what she did,” says Liz. “The documentary is finally the space for her to speak her truth — and maybe someone will listen to it.”

Whether or not a lot of people watch the documentary when it is completed, Liz is certain her mother has created a legacy that’s built to last.

“She has the seed and she’s the only one who can plant it. And in order for it to grow, it’s our jobs as the people who walk beside her and as the clients who are being put on our path right now — it’s our job to care for and nourish the seed. Even when she’s not here, it will continue.”

As for Peggy, she’s not sure she will ever be finished her work, because there will always be more people in need of healing.

“It’s about getting people to a space where they live to the fullest,” she says. “That’s what everybody should have the right to do, and one of the reasons everyone has the right to heal.”

Kawartha Youth Orchestra is one of 25 community organizations across Canada that are receiving a collective $400,000 worth of musical instruments, equipment, and resources through the SiriusXM Soundwaves MusiCounts Community Fund.

MusiCounts is Canada’s music education charity associated with the Canadian Academy of Recording Arts and Sciences (CARAS) and the Juno Awards. The SiriusXM Soundwaves MusiCounts Community Fund is a new partnership between MusiCounts and audio entertainment company SiriusXM Canada.

The fund awards grants up to $20,000 for musical instruments, equipment, and resources to community groups or not-for-profit organizations that deliver music programs to youth up to the age of 25.

“For young people, making music with peers in their communities is a powerful force for building a sense of belonging,” says MusiCounts president Kristy Fletcher in a media release. “Kids are facing unprecedented mental health challenges and connecting with each other through music can be a critical support. MusiCounts is so grateful to partner with SiriusXM Canada on this program to deliver the much-needed funds to organizations doing incredible work with music.”

Based in Peterborough, Kawartha Youth Orchestra is a community organization offering music and orchestra training to children and youth from elementary to post-secondary levels, including the Upbeat! Downtown after-school music program for children living in Peterborough who are interested in music and face barriers accessing music education.

Since 1997, MusiCounts has awarded over $18 million in support of music education in Canada supporting over 1,500 schools and communities as well as more than 290 post-secondary music program graduates, 18 music teachers, and seven philanthropists.

While watching the home team overcome a deficit and clinch a win was an exciting experience, seeing kids’ reactions to being included in the recent fundraising event for Five Counties Children’s Centre hosted by the Peterborough Petes made an even bigger impression on Bill Eekhof.

The Five Counties spokesperson joined young clients, families, and staff of the regional children’s treatment centre on Family Day (February 17) for the “Next Gen Game” with the Petes at the Peterborough Memorial Centre.

The highly anticipated annual event held in partnership with the Petes offered Five Counties’ kids and families the opportunity to enjoy and take part in different aspects of the Ontario Hockey League game experience.

The event was really a hat trick considering the fun had by attendees, the Petes’ 5-3 victory over the visiting Kitchener Rangers, and the $17,056 raised for Five Counties, which helps kids in the Kawarthas region who have physical, communication, and developmental needs.

“It was an electric game, and not just because of the Petes’ comeback win,” Eekhof told kawarthaNOW. “Seeing the smiles on kids’ faces was really something … whether those getting their faces painted, those building towers out of giant LEGO, those getting a high-five from the Petes’ mascot, Roger, or the centre’s clients who took on a role for the game.”

“For instance, Kelton — one of our Five Counties’ clients — was thrilled to see his design on hundreds of mini-sticks produced for the game. There was Bryor, one of our clients selected to be one of the Next Gen kids for the game. His grin was wider than the Peterborough Memorial Centre ice rink as he stood at the bench for the Petes’ pre-game warm-up.”

This year’s game, which was another sellout, saw funds raised through donations, sales, a raffle draw, and corporate sponsorships led by Waste Connections of Canada.

Scott Pepin, CEO of Five Counties, said it was “a total team effort” that will help reduce wait times for high-demand services like speech therapy and occupational therapy at the Peterborough-based children’s treatment centre.

“The Peterborough Petes are tremendous hosts and, once again, the team, their fans and our Five Counties supporters all provided a huge assist to ensure more children and families in our community get access to the care they need when they need it,” Pepin said in a media release.

“The Next Gen Game puts fun into fundraising, by creating a family-friendly event that not only raises money but also the spirits of attendees.”

And Pepin and Eekhof said that’s especially true for the Five Counties clients who got to enjoy a behind-the-scenes experience with the Petes. Each kid played a role as scout, coach, general manager, or play-by-play announcer and also signed a one-day contract with the Petes.

Nova, a client of Five Counties, and her family members took part in the ceremonial pre-game puck drop.

“The Petes are first-rate hosts in creating the Next Gen opportunity, and we heard many good comments and compliments from the kids and their families about their experiences behind the scenes,” Pepin said.

Even before the game, when the Petes held a news conference to officially introduce the Next Gen Game participants and have them sign one-day contracts with the team, clients were all there smiling and looking forward to the experience, Eekhof added.

“It’s a really big deal for the kids because the Petes make it a big deal, and as Pepin notes, this game is one of the highlights for us every year on the centre’s calendar. It certainly delivered that again this year — and we’re most grateful for the community support and to the Peterborough Petes for being such great hosts,” Eekhof added.

Five Counties provides speech, physio, and occupational therapies, as well as other treatment services for kids and youth in the counties of Haliburton, Northumberland, Peterborough, and the City of Kawartha Lakes. The centre is celebrating its 50th anniversary this year, having first opened its doors in Peterborough in 1975.

Democracy — or the lack of it — came up again and again during a heated and sometimes confrontational five-hour Peterborough city council meeting on Monday (February 24), when three councillors voted to support Mayor Jeff Leal’s strong mayor motion to expedite Brock Mission’s proposed transitional housing project by amending the city’s zoning by-law and exempting the project from the city’s site plan requirements.

Brock Mission is proposing a 52-unit, six-storey co-ed transitional housing apartment building to be constructed at 738 Chemong Road, where the organization already operates Cameron House, a 12-bed emergency shelter for women with drug addictions and mental health issues, along with eight transitional housing units for women transitioning from homelessness. Brock Mission has already received $250,000 in funding from the city to develop the proposal.

Three councillors — Gary Baldwin, Kevin Duguay, and Lesley Parnell — joined Mayor Leal to vote in favour of the motion and the two accompanying by-laws, despite community opposition to the proposed development, including its location and both the process and speed at which the proposed development is proceeding.

Because Mayor Leal had invoked his strong mayor powers for the motion, the support of only one third of council (four councillors) was needed for the motion to pass — such an exceptional case that votes had to be recorded outside of the city’s normal vote-tracking technology.

Council met as general committee at 4:30 p.m. on Monday afternoon, with the mayor attending remotely as he is recovering at home from surgery. Since the general committee meeting served as a public meeting under the Planning Act, it was chaired by councillor Lesley Parnell, who is the presiding officer for public matters related to the Planning Act.

The meeting was scheduled to take 90 minutes, with a regular city council meeting to follow at 6 p.m. However, it soon became apparent that the meeting was going to take much longer.

As soon as the public meeting began, councillor Joy Lachica raised a point of order to declare the meeting and the mayor’s motion as being out of order.

“We have just, minutes ago, received an amendment via the clerk to by-law 052,” Lachica said, referring to the proposed zoning by-law amendment for 738 Chemong Road. “So it is not the same by-law that was presented at the public meeting on Thursday night, nor is it the same by-law that councillors have reviewed in preparation for this meeting tonight.”

Last Thursday night (February 20), Brock Mission held an open house community meeting at St. Peter Catholic Secondary School, to present the proposed development to local residents, with representatives from engineering and land planning firm D.M. Wills Associates and Aside Architects Inc. also attending.

At that meeting, residents expressed concern about the impact of a six-storey building on surrounding homes in the residential neighbourhood and the safety and security of the women using Cameron House.

As for councillor Lachica’s point of order, chair Parnell declined to consider it.

“Thank you for your opinion, but we will be proceeding with the meeting because it’s actually under provincial legislation more than municipal legislation,” she told Lachica, who then made another point of order asking to challenge the chair.

“Sorry, you can’t,” Parnell said. “This is under provincial legislation and we will be proceeding … this supersedes municipal (procedures), so please stand down.”

As Lachica continued to speak, Parnell refused to recognize her and again asked her “to please stand down.”

On another point of order, Lachica then asked the clerk to declare the chair in breach of the city’s procedural by-law, as Parnell was not recognizing her point of order. Parnell again said the meeting would proceed under the strong mayor powers of the provincial government.

In 2023, the province provided strong mayor powers to 45 municipalities, including Peterborough, in which 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.

“This is new for all of us — this is the first time in Peterborough (that strong mayor powers have been used),” Parnell said. “This is under provincial legislation. If you have a concern about it, please contact your Premier. The meeting will proceed.”

As Lachica continued to object, Parnell twice told her to “be quiet.”

“She needs to have some manners or will be removed,” Parnell threatened. “I am the chair, and we are proceeding with the meeting.”

Lachica again asked to challenge the chair as per the municipal procedure by-law, and Parnell again refused to allow it. She also refused to recognize a point of order subsequently raised by councillor Alex Bierk, but allowed him a point of information.

“So you’re saying that, because this is a strong mayor motion, that aspects of our procedural by-law are not in effect?” Bierk asked. “Can you just clarify how the meeting is going to be governed then?”

Parnell then deferred the question to legislative services commissioner David Potts, who confirmed that the provincial legislation for strong mayor powers supersedes the city’s procedural by-law.

Although Potts did not reference the specific regulation, the strong mayor powers provision under section 284.11.1 of the Municipal Act states that “despite any procedure by-law passed by the municipality,” a mayor can propose a by-law to council “and require the council to consider and vote on the proposed by-law at a meeting.”

“In any respect, the procedure by-law does not apply,” Potts said.

On a point of order, councillor Keith Riel then asked “What rules are we going to play by tonight, because I don’t have a set of rules in front of me that supersedes our procedural by-law for the city?”

Parnell refused to recognize Riel’s point of order and returned to the agenda for the meeting, at which time Lachica raised another point on order to defer the motion. She said there is no language in the provincial legislation that suspends the procedural by-law.

“A deferral is out of order for this,” Parnell said. “It’s under strong mayor powers. As has already been stated about five times now, the provincial legislation supersedes our municipal procedural by-law, so deferral is not in order.”

“I will accept no more interruptions,” added Parnell, who then asked Mayor Leal to make his remarks.

The mayor explained that he decided to use his strong mayor powers “at Brock Mission’s request” to expedite the Brock Mission development, saying it is consistent with the city’s “Housing First” strategy.

He explained his rationale for doing so by noting that Brock Mission owns the land on which the development would be built, that the organization has successfully operated Cameron House on the property for years “without incident,” that Brock Mission does not permit drug use and encourages treatment, and that the proposed site is on a high-capacity arterial road with access to public transit and within walking distance of shopping and services.

Mayor Leal added that the proposed Brock Mission development is “very similar” to the Peterborough Housing Corporation’s six-storey 53-unit affordable housing project at 681 Monaghan Road, which is expected to open in April.

The mayor described the proposed building, pointing out that two of the units would be reserved for palliative care for people experiencing homelessness “who are at the end of life.”

“I’ve been clear that when there are opportunities to address our critical need for housing, particularly supportive housing, I will do whatever is within my authority as mayor to support these projects moving forward for the benefit of our community,” said Mayor Leal said.

He noted that councillors Riel and Bierk, supported by councillor Lachica, had asked him to use strong mayor powers earlier this year to establish a temporary homelessness shelter — a request he denied because he believes the province intended strong mayor powers to only be used for the building of permanent housing.

The mayor then invited Brock Mission board member Alan Wilson to address council and answer questions.

Although a public meeting under the Planning Act would normally be restricted to a rezoning discussion, councillor Parnell indicated that she would allow “some leeway” to Wilson to address operational questions and site plan issues in recognition of community concerns about the proposed development.

After councillor Bierk attempted to raise a point of order about meeting procedure, Parnell told him there was no debate on strong mayor powers and asked the clerk to mute his microphone.

“I’m not debating — I have a question about things that you are shutting down that are part of our procedure, part of the democracy that we have around this table, and you are in one stroke saying that ‘No, this doesn’t apply in this case’,” said Bierk, adding that he believes strong mayor powers do not give a mayor the power to change a procedural by-law.

Parnell said the meeting would proceed, and Wilson addressed the councillors.

“Men, women, teenagers, children (are) freezing out there tonight, and it seems the only thing that matters is points of order,” Wilson said. “Can we please focus on what we need in the City of Peterborough? And that’s transitional housing.”

“I’ve worked (on this project) this for the last 14 months — it’s accelerated in recent months — and I personally asked Mayor Leal if he would consider using his strong mayor powers.”

After describing the existing “rules-based” Cameron House on the proposed site, Wilson noted that there would be no drug use or illegal behaviour allowed at the new transitional housing facility. He said that, while Cameron House would remain on the site, “its use might change.”

Councillor Andrew Beamer — who, as Northcrest Ward councillor, represents the neighbourhood around the proposed site — asked Wilson to assure council that the proposed development would be different from Trinity Community Centre and the Wolfe Street bridge housing project, where community safety concerns have been raised, and what the plan would be to deal with any issues that arise.

“We’re not another Trinity. At Trinity, you can use drugs, sell drugs, buy drugs. At Wolfe Street, you can do the same,” said Wilson, adding that he contacted Peterborough police chief Stuart Betts to confirm there have been no calls for services related to drug use or disorderly behaviour at Cameron House or in the surrounding area, although there were 30 calls related to mental health issues.

After councillor Riel questioned Wilson about the safety of the women using the Cameron House shelter if a new 52-unit building is built beside it, Wilson said Brock Mission is discussing moving the shelter portion of Cameron House to another site and using Cameron House only for transitional housing.

In response to a question from councillor Lachica, Wilson said Brock Mission’s original proposal for a 10-storey building at Murray Street did not proceed because of the lack of 11 parking spots for staff, and said the decision to change the proposed site from Murray Street to Chemong Road was made only by himself and Brock Mission executive director Bill McNabb. Wilson later said that three other potential sites had been considered, but they were taken off the list because the owners already had plans for private development.

After Lachica asked about capital funding for the $16-million building, Wilson said Brock Mission would be applying to the Canada Mortgage Housing Corporation (CMHC) for the funding after the two by-laws before council are approved. He added that, even if the decision to approve the by-laws was delayed even by a week, it would affect the timelines to get the building operational “by this time next year.”

After saying he was supportive of the project but not of the process, councillor Bierk asked Wilson about the operational budget for the project and where Brock Mission would get the operational funding.

“The operational plan for the budget has been costed at $2 million, and the MPP (Dave Smith) has said he will make sure we get that money,” said Wilson, adding in response to another question from Bierk that Brock Mission would not approach the city for funding if provincial funding was not supplied.

After Bierk asked Wilson whether Brock Mission would be integrating into the project the feedback it has received from the community, Wilson said he would give a “personal commitment” that he has been making notes on the feedback and “everything that we need to take action on, will be taken action on,” with regular updates to the community.

In response to a question from councillor Gary Baldwin about community safety, Wilson said the proposed development would have fencing around it, with the only access via the existing Chemong Road entrance, and lighting and security cameras would be installed on the building.

Councillor Bierk asked Wilson whether Brock Mission would provide on-site addictions treatment services. Wilson said that Brock Mission engages with professional services agencies to run in-house programs or at the agencies’ premises.

Following Wilson’s presentation, council heard from 15 delegations, with councillor Parnell prefacing the delegations by noting “the strong mayor power ruling is not up for debate” and that comments should be limited to the rezoning item.

For the first delegation, Sarah McNeilly raised concerns about the use of strong mayor powers.

“I care about the homeless, but I have to ask a fundamental question: do we still care about democracy? 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.”

Councillor Parnell then interrupted McNeilly, indicating that she was speaking to strong mayor powers.

“Madam chair, please, this is my right as a citizen in a democracy,” McNeilly said with her voice raised, before agreeing to limit her comments.

McNeilly noted the requirements of the Planning Act require an open house to be held seven days prior to a public meeting, and a public notice must be sent to neighbours 20 days before the public meeting. In response to a question from councillor Lachica, McNeilly shared her expertise with fundraising and noted that Brock Mission does not appear to be following best practices.

After a question from councillor Bierk about the community meeting held on February 20, McNeilly said there was an error in the shadow study and that it did not show the complete shadow of the building. McNeilly also said that, had stakeholders been consulted at the beginning of the project 14 months ago, “not only would there have been buy-in, I imagine there could even have been excitement.”

During the remaining delegations, other speakers expressed similar concerns about the lack of consultation about the project, the speed with which the project is moving forward, as well as the suitability of the location, the shadows cast by the building, negative impact on property values, and privacy, safety, and security concerns.

Larry Stinson, who lives on Aberdeen Avenue directly adjacent to the proposed development, noted the impact of the building on his property but said he was at council to speak to the process.

“I think that the process that has been undertaken to arrive at this proposal has lacked an appropriate and reasonable consultation process, and I think the proposal itself is flawed and does not serve the best interests of the overall community in the long term,” he said, adding that he recognized the pressure the city has towards meeting housing targets. “But the balance between urgency and good decision-making has been skewed too much toward urgency in this case.”

He noted that, while the property has a Chemong Road address, it is located in a neighbourhood of single family homes. He pointed out that, while Cameron House has been integrated into the neighbourhood, this would not be the case for a dominating six-storey building. He said the decision to choose the site seems only to be based on the fact that Brock Mission owns the property.

Michelle Adams, speaking on behalf of her 88-year-old mother Jill who lives within two blocks of the proposed development, objected to the lack of consultation and said excluding the development from the site planning process “is both unsafe and undemocratic.”

“It does not make any sense to put 50 people, each with potentially multiple challenges, in the same building close to a women’s shelter in a residential neighbourhood,” Adams said, noting the increase in crime that accompanies the creation of a shelter and saying her responsibility was her mother and her safety.

Adams read a statement from her mother, wife of the late Peterborough-Kawartha MP and MPP Peter Adams, who objected to Mayor Leal’s use of strong mayor powers to move the project forward.

Referencing her late father, Adams said, “I believe he would be appalled at the lack of transparency, communication, and consultation associated with this project, and also the undemocratic use of the strong mayoral powers by Jeff Leal.”

Tanna Edwards, who lives on Bethune Street directly behind Cameron House, expressed her concerns about the impact of the new building on the women and staff at Cameron House, as well as the lack of consultation, noting that the community open house happened only four days ago for a project that began 14 months ago.

The final delegation was Diana Keay of D.M. Wills Associates, the firm contracted by Brock Mission for land planning, who spoke to some of the concerns raised during the meeting. She noted that the last-minute change to the proposed zoning by-law amendment was to include an inadvertently omitted item, which was the minimum size of a dwelling unit (28 square metres) in the existing plan.

After councillor Bierk asked Keay about the size of the units and whether they have kitchens, Aside Architects principal Neil Campbell addressed council.

He said the minimum size of the units is 28.6 square metres. He also described the common areas in the proposed building, including a rear courtyard and a front terraced area outside the building.

Inside the building, there are two common floors (ground floor and basement) that include two program rooms and a large west-to-east central stair between the floors, with a large dual-purpose common area for “some dining” served by a hospitality kitchen. A reception desk will be located behind a fully glazed entrance way, where staff can see anyone coming and going outside in the front or back and inside up or down the central stair. Campbell also said that each unit comes with kitchen facilities.

In terms of privacy for neighbours, Campbell said there were deliberate design decisions to not include any balconies for the units, and that the stairs are located in the north and south side of the building, so there are no unit windows that overlook neighbours.

Councillor Lachica, who is co-chair of the city’s infrastructure, planning and growth management portfolio, said she found it “mind boggling” that she saw documents such as the project’s shadow study for the first time at the February 20 community meeting. She asked Keay why the documents were not provided to city staff, councillors, and the public.

“This is not a typical process,” Keay replied. “We have not submitted an application. We have not gone through the zoning by-law process as prescribed under the Planning Act. We were not required to host an open house either; however, the Brock Mission deemed in necessary to do so.”

“It was through that open house that we made sure that we had as much available information as possible to share with the community, so city staff was provided with information about the project — not through an application because there is no application.” She later added that city staff were provided all the information that was presented at the open house.

“Any information to council through the city is the responsibility of the city, so I can’t speak to why you didn’t get it in your agenda package, but I can speak to the fact that we did not provide information to the city in a typical matter, because there’s no application. We provided it through our open house.”

Lachica asked Keay if this was a “best practice, best approach” for a project like this. Keay replied that the mayor was asked to use his strong powers, he accepted, and it is not for her to say whether that request was appropriate.

After Lachica attempted a follow-up question asking Keay to provide her professional opinion, councillor Parnell interrupted to indicate that the mayor’s decision to use strong mayor powers was not up for debate.

Later, councillor Kevin Duguay asked Keay whether, in her professional capacity as a planner, she believed the proposed development “represents good planning.”

“I do believe it represents good planning,” she said. “There’s a critical need in the community for this type of development. It is being put in a location that it can be supported. It meets the official plan policies. It meets the provincial policies.”

Councillor Lachica asked Wilson whether Brock Mission had any discussions about using 13.3 acres of city-owned property at Calvary Church on Lansdowne Street West.

“It has never been discussed with me,” he said.

After a brief recess at the end of the public delegations, council reconvened to debate Mayor Leal’s motion.

Councillor Dave Haacke asked Brad Appleby, the city’s director of infrastructure, planning and growth management, if the city had followed the proper notice provisions of the Planning Act.

Appleby confirmed the city met its obligations under the legislation by providing notice 20 days in advance of the public meeting, with a notice published in the Peterborough Examiner on February 4 and a mailing to property owners within 120 metres of the proposed development on February 4.

Councillor Joy Lachica asked Mayor Leal if, after having heard the discussion and comments at the meeting, he would be willing to defer his strong mayor motion until the end of the next council meeting cycle, which the clerk said would be March 10.

After initially replying that he would consider it, the mayor asked Wilson to comment on what Lachica was requesting. Wilson said that if a property had been offered six months ago, “I would have jumped at it.” He also said that, while the building could be built at another location, the $250,000 in city funding provided to Brock Mission has already been spent on the architects, engineers, and planners for the current proposed location.

“So I would need another $250,000 to transfer to another site,” he said. “I’m not asking the mayor to change his generous response to me a number of weeks ago.”

After Wilson’s remarks, Mayor Leal told council “We’re going to continue on the track we’re on this evening.”

Councillor Riel, who is co-chair of the city’s community services (homelessness) portfolio, said he objected to the process and was personally against the mayor using strong mayor powers. He added that capital funding would not be not available to Brock Mission as part of the $6.2 million Homelessness and Addiction Recovery Treatment (HART) Hub.

“I’m not going to vote for this,” Riel said.

“Fine,” councillor Parnell replied. “Well, as (you are) co-chair of homelessness, I can see that.”

Responding to Parnell’s comment, councillor Lachica called for a point of order.

“That is disparaging, and the chair should be removed,” Lachica said.

“I demand an apology right now from you,” Riel added

“No sir, you’re not getting one,” Parnell replied.

“I’ve been courteous to you, I will not accept that,” Riel said.

“No, I’m sorry sir, you’ve been nothing but rude,” Parnell replied, before ceding the floor to councillor Bierk.

“Can I just get three seconds to just contain my composure?” Bierk said to Parnell.

“I really don’t feel this meeting is being run in a way that follows our procedural by-law. You didn’t have the floor to make that little tidbit comment to the speaker. So now I’m having to gain my composure, worried if you’re going to cut in while I’m speaking and interrupt me and be out of order.”

Parnell interrupted Bierk and said that Riel’s comments were “going way beyond rezoning.”

“It sets us up for a really tough position when we have comments like that, and we’re being told that we can’t challenge the chair and we can’t call a point of order, so this is a very confusing meeting,” Bierk said, adding that he is supportive of the Brock Mission project but not the process.

Bierk said that it puts councillors in an “unfair position” to be told that, if they don’t support the mayor’s motion, the project cannot proceed.

After councillor Duguay noted he was a practising professional planner, he said he “was not convinced there would be a differing result” if the project were deferred to allow for additional public consultation, and that he would support the mayor’s motion.

Councillor Lachica asked Duguay, who is her co-chair of the city’s infrastructure, planning and growth management portfolio, whether he had been meeting with city planning staff to facilitate the project.

After Duguay replied he had not met with planning staff outside of the normal portfolio meetings, Lachica said she had been told he had done so, at which point Parnell said “You are crossing the line.”

Duguay reiterated he has not been having separate meetings with planning staff on the Brock Mission project, adding “I do take some exception to the inference” before confirming again “There have been no clandestine meetings, or separate meetings, with staff.”

Following some further discussion, councillors voted on the mayor’s motion. Mayor Leal and councillors Baldwin, Duguay, and Parnell voted in favour, and councillors Lachica, Riel, Bierk, Crowley, Haacke, Vassiliadis, and Beamer voted against. With only four votes required for a strong mayor motion to pass, the motion was carried.

After the general committee meeting adjourned and a brief recess, councillors returned to chambers to meet as city council. During the 20-minute meeting, Mayor Leal’s motion and by-laws were confirmed by city council by the same vote as in general committee.

Some minor edits have been made to the original version of this story to correct typos and for clarity.