07/05/2026
Our latest newsletter.
WHY ARE 2027 UTILITY RATES BEING DETERMINED IN JULY?
If you've not had a chance to look at Monday night's agenda, get ready for an eye-opener. Some items on this agenda are shocking.
Agenda items 3, 4 and 5 propose setting the District’s utility rates for 2027 and we are not even into mid-summer 2026. Frankly, this seems premature to the point of absurdity.
These are significant financial decisions impacting residents when we are all still reeling from our recent muncipal tax bills, yet they are being brought forward by an outgoing Council barely three months before a municipal election. Decisions of this magnitude should properly be left to the incoming Council, which will have a fresh mandate from the community.
Before Council considers these items, has the proposed rate structure been reviewed by the Finance and Revenue Advisory Committee? If so, what advice or recommendations did the Committee provide?
Given the timing, the scale of the decision and the upcoming election, Agenda Items 3, 4 and 5 should be deferred until there has been proper review and the incoming Council has had the opportunity to consider them.
ELECTION SIGNS CHANGES: The Timing Raises Eyebrows
With a municipal election only a few months away, Councillors Lambur and Thompson have chosen this moment to bring forward changes to the size and placement of election signs. One can only ask - why now?
It is hard to avoid the obvious question: what problem, exactly, are they trying to solve in the middle of an election cycle?
Incumbents already benefit from every structural advantage available. They have years of public visibility, name recognition, media coverage, and established political networks. New candidates, by contrast, are starting from scratch and rely heavily on basic visibility tools. Chief among them, election signs.
So when two sitting councillors propose restricting where those signs can go, including on municipal land, it inevitably raises concern. Not because election rules should never be reviewed, but because of when this is being done, and who it affects most.
Councillors Lambur and Thompson will no doubt have their reasons, which may well be valid, but it is reasonable to ask whether reducing visibility for challengers, just months before voters head to the polls, is actually fair to all.
If this is such a sensible and necessary change, why rush it through now? Why not leave it to the incoming Council after the election?
At best, this is poor timing. At worst, it looks like a move that benefits those already in office while making it harder for newcomers to be seen at all. Either way, it deserves far more scrutiny than sneaking it onto the agenda on a Friday morning before a Monday night council meeting.
We urge you to email Correspondence and contact Mayor & Council at the email addresses below regarding having all of these agenda items removed until after the municipal election.
Contact your council
[email protected]
Mayor Mark Sager [email protected];
Councillor Christine Cassidy [email protected];
Councillor Nora Gambioli [email protected];
Councillor Peter Lambur [email protected];
Councillor Scott Snider [email protected];
Councillor Sharon Thompson [email protected];
Councillor Linda Watt [email protected];
