Questions 19 and 20 of the twenty-three put to the four candidates for mayor of Collingwood on 30 August. Three answered.

Every answer below appears in full and unedited, in alphabetical order, with nothing added.

Mayor Yvonne Hamlin did not return a questionnaire. Where a candidate does not respond, that is reported plainly, without adjective. Her answers will be published in full if they arrive at any point before 26 October. She is not mentioned again in this post.

19. The waterfront, the Terminals and the Town’s major assets

The question asked: The Terminals Point definitive documents should be made public [now / when negotiations conclude / no]. Outline your platform for the waterfront and the Town’s major real property, including the municipal role in the hospital project. State your test for whether the Town should own something at all.

Jon Hillis

☒ When negotiations conclude

When the active negotiations and legal restrictions are over, the Terminals definitive documents should be public. In the meantime, the Town should report publicly on the commitments and milestones it is allowed to disclose. The municipal job is to protect public access, public-realm obligations, infrastructure commitments and long-term public value. On the hospital, the Town’s role is land, planning, servicing coordination, transportation and advocacy. The Province and the hospital corporation are responsible for building and delivering the hospital itself. My test for Town-owned land is straightforward: does owning it serve a clear public purpose or strategic need, and is that benefit worth the full long-term cost of owning it?

Kathy Jeffery

☒ When negotiations conclude

When Town legal advisors provide the clearance for same to be released.

Norm Sandberg

☒ When negotiations conclude

Information concerning the Terminals should be made public as soon as negotiations and legal or commercial considerations permit. Residents deserve maximum transparency, but Council should not compromise the Town’s negotiating position simply to release information prematurely.

The waterfront is one of Collingwood’s most important public assets. Decisions affecting it should consider long-term public access, community benefit and the interests of future generations.

The Town should continue enabling the new hospital through responsible land-use planning, servicing and transportation decisions and strong advocacy with Simcoe County and the Province.

Before selling any significant municipal property, I would ask: Does the property have an existing or foreseeable public purpose? Could it help meet a future infrastructure, housing, parking, recreation or community need? And is disposal demonstrably in Collingwood’s long-term interest?

Public land should be treated as a strategic asset, not simply surplus real estate.

20. The Arts and Culture Centre

The question asked: Do you support the Town of Collingwood providing financial support to the proposed Arts and Culture Centre [yes / yes, capped at a stated amount / only land or in-kind support, no cash / no / undecided]. Before any municipal commitment, a full public business case should be published [yes / no]. The Town should reach a decision on its role by [2027 / 2028 / 2029–2030 / not in this term]. Outline your position: what the Town’s role should be, what conditions you would attach, what share should come from private or senior-government sources, how long you expect the approval process to take and what governs that timeline, and at what point you would walk away.

Jon Hillis

☒ Undecided · Business case published first: ☒ Yes · Decision by: ☒ 2027

If you support a capped contribution, the maximum municipal contribution I would support is: N/A – I have selected Undecided on financial support.

I am undecided on Town financial support for an Arts and Culture Centre until we know the financial picture. The existing business case includes the roughly $67.4 million Ste. Marie Street concept and a projected 31 to 39 percent municipal operating subsidy under its 2025 assumptions. Before deciding on Town funding, I want the final site cost, Town contribution, ownership model, committed senior-government and private funding, and an updated operating plan. I would not support the Town being the only capital funder. Rentals, events and programming can reduce the subsidy, but we should not assume they eliminate it. I want Council to decide the Town’s role in 2027. If the final model does not fit the long-term financial plan, I would not support it.

Kathy Jeffery

☒ Undecided · Business case published first: ☒ Yes · Decision by: ☒ 2027

The original proposal to Council was $15M Provincial, $15M Federal and $5M Town of Collingwood with the Arts Groups raising $10 – $15M.

The proposed $90M project with a $21M parking fix was a non-starter for me. I am not convinced, nor is a significant number of our electorate, that the municipality requires a 600 seat facility even at the modified $60M proposal. I am supportive of the arts, but we have many major priorities looming. I do believe that our youth should enjoy access to the arts and performing arts but I am not convinced we must build a 600 seat facility to do that. I am quite willing to revisit the 350 seat option in the context of the long term financial strategic plan and a business plan showing the quality jobs created and economic benefits provided.

Norm Sandberg

☒ Only land or in-kind support, no cash · Business case published first: ☒ Yes · Decision by: ☒ 2027

I support the objective of a new Arts Centre, but I do not support writing a large municipal cheque to build and operate one.

My preferred model is a facility developed, owned and operated by the private or not-for-profit sector. The Town could consider appropriate in-kind participation, potentially including municipal land, planning assistance or fee relief, where there is a demonstrated public benefit to all taxpayers.

Before making any commitment, Council needs a complete business case identifying the capital cost, funding sources, ownership, operating model, projected revenues and expenses, fundraising and senior-government contributions, and the municipality’s long-term financial exposure.

I would aim to have that work completed and a decision before Council in 2027.

Collingwood needs a clear answer—not another prolonged debate. If a financially sustainable model can be demonstrated, let’s move forward. If it cannot, we should say so.

Two Towns, One Failure is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a paid subscriber.

To Subscribe, Click Here