Perth-Andover: Cause to Pause
In my letter to the editor which appeared in the Victoria Star on March 19, I gave a breakdown of the three public events which had been held by the Glenn Group thus far since February 2013. These three public events were held to invite the public to be part of the ‘visioning’ process in the repurposing of the flood-prone areas in the Village.
On April 1st, the Glenn Group came back for their fourth, and final, public event. What had been advertised as a public meeting turned out to be an open house, much to the surprise of most in attendance. For the approximately 30 people who showed up, they were told that the purpose of the Open House event was to allow people to view their plans and if people had questions, they could direct them, individually, to the two Glenn Group planners present. In other words, no open group discussion.
Tensions rose as people viewed the plans. Most people present had already seen these plans at the June 2013 unveiling. Nothing had changed since then, apart from two additional ‘rendered’ drawings for both the Andover and Perth sides of the river. These additional renderings merely showed the plans from a ground level perspective, instead from aerial view. For those who were seeing the plans for the first time, they were shocked to see a 9-hole golf course planned for the Andover side.
It wasn’t long before the Open House agenda had to be suspended temporarily. Councillors Dean McAllister and Tommy Dixon addressed the group and assured people that these plans were not set in stone, and that the Council was open to receive more input and ideas from the public.
Like I said in my previous letter to the editor, this process was flawed right from the get-go. I compared community engagement to knitting. If you don’t cast on properly, everything else that follows will be compromised. The Glenn Group, at the tune of $27,000 came up with a plan that not only has glaring fundamental horticultural problems – that anyone with a basic understanding of how plants grow understands – the overall concept of developing a golf course, never did resonate with the community. So why did they spend all this time and money to develop THAT idea?
I have done what I could, as Jane Citizen, starting last September, to make a plea to the Village Council, to reconsider the process that it was following. I tried to impress upon them that there was an urgent Cause to Pause – to rethink the course they were on before final decisions are made.
I knew that WITHOUT inclusive and intensive involvement of the PEOPLE of the community (the real stakeholders), the end result would look like what was presented at the April 1st meeting: A plan so full of holes that neither is it functional, nobody wants to wear it – like a disfigured sweater.
Francine St.Amand
California Settlement NB
