✅ TBM, Selecting The Next Mayor | The Art of the Kill | The Shulman Report
The Art of the Kill
The Shulman Report
Politics has become the art of the kill. The object is not to persuade you that someone should govern, but that someone else must not. It is a very old trade. A campaign handbook survives from Cicero’s run for consul of Rome in 64 BC, attributed to his brother Quintus, and most of it is advice any candidate would recognise — learn names, be seen, promise generously. Then you reach section 13: if possible, get a new scandal going against your competitors. Crime, corruption or sex, whichever is available. Not investigate one. Start one. Twenty-one centuries ago somebody wrote that instruction down, and it has never needed rewriting.
Quintus would be proud. His advice is being taken seriously, and this election has two of them running: that Marni Moreau is married to the president of Blue Mountain Resorts and would hand him the Town, and that Paul Reale destroyed the Campus of Care. Both are serious. Neither has been tested against the record. That is what follows.
Part One: The Marriage Argument
The first of this election’s two kills, examined.
The accusation is short enough to repeat at a dinner table, which is the point of it. Marni Moreau is married to Dan Skelton, President and Chief Operating Officer of Blue Mountain Resorts. Elect her and the ski hill runs the Town.
Taken seriously, the argument rests on three assumptions. That the interests of the resort and the interests of this town are opposed. That a mayor’s vote can be delivered by her husband. And that nothing in law stands in the way. Each one can be checked.
The town and the hill
Begin with the first, because it is the largest and the least examined.
This town is not situated near a ski resort. It was built by one. Craigleith, Snowbridge and Windfall exist because people wanted to be close to the hill. The ski shops, the restaurants in Collingwood, the markets, the shops along Thornbury’s main street and the entire visitor economy that pays for them run on the same traffic. By our analysis more than half the Town’s tax base sits in the community the hill created. In Windfall, where I live, we estimate at least half the houses are investment vehicles, bought to be rented to the people who come for the hill. Craigleith alone accounts for about 63 per cent of everything connected to Town sewers, and the Town’s own development charges study projects it will take 67 per cent of all growth between 2024 and 2033.
Blue Mountain Resorts publishes its own number: more than 1.5 million guests a year. Some arrive by coach, the ski clubs and tour groups and school charters that have been running up here for decades. Most come by car, and at three to a car that is on the order of half a million car trips a year before the coaches are counted. All of it lands on the same roads, past the same houses.
Remove the hill and what remains is a quiet agricultural township with a harbour at Thornbury. The proposition that this town’s interests and the resort’s interests are opposed does not survive the first question you ask about where the money comes from.
What the resort has actually asked for
The second thing worth doing is reading the record rather than imagining it.
In November 2023 Blue Mountain Resorts came to council with a proposal to build staff housing on land it already owns at Scenic Caves Road: two five-storey buildings for up to 301 of its employees. Skelton presented it himself. The request was that the Town use the Province’s housing accelerator to shorten the approval. Council’s answer was to ask staff for a report comparing that route with the ordinary one, and to encourage the resort to talk to its neighbours.
So the resort came to council asking to house the people who work here. Not for a tax concession. Not for Town land. For permission to build housing on its own property for its own workers, in a town that cannot staff its restaurants, its shops or its own municipal departments.
A week later the neighbours arrived at committee. What they objected to was density, scale and the character of the neighbourhood. One likened the project to a short-term rental “on steroids.” Another said the buildings would sit “within a beer can toss of a quiet sub-division of mostly seniors.” A third said that “life as we know it in our neighbourhood will never be the same.”
These are people living in subdivisions built for skiers, in a town whose economy is skiing, objecting to housing for the people who run the skiing. It is the argument of the homeowner beside the airport complaining about the noise. It doesn’t matter if you have been here for 50 years. The world has changed. But Council rejected the request, too much controversy.
That is the business the resort has brought to this council. By Moreau’s own count it has appeared before council four times in four years. Anyone claiming the hill is capturing the Town should be asked to name what it is supposed to have captured.
What the Act actually requires
The Municipal Conflict of Interest Act is a great deal narrower than the people invoking it have suggested.
It deals with pecuniary interests, which the courts have taken to mean financial ones. Under section 3, a pecuniary interest held by a spouse is deemed to be the member’s, but only where the member knows of it. Where the Act applies, section 5 requires the member to declare the interest, take no part in the discussion, cast no vote, and make no attempt to influence the outcome. The declaration goes into the minutes and the minutes are public.
The Act is equally specific about when it does not apply. Section 4(j) exempts an interest “in common with electors generally.” Section 4(k) exempts an interest “so remote or insignificant in its nature that it cannot reasonably be regarded as likely to influence the member.”
Those two clauses dispose of most of what is being claimed in this election.
The argument against Moreau is not that she would vote on a contract with her husband’s employer. It is broader and vaguer than that. It runs: the hill drives the growth, the growth drives the sewers and the roads and the infrastructure, almost everything on a council agenda touches the resort somewhere down the chain, therefore she is conflicted in everything and cannot govern.
Follow that to the end of the line. If a general economic connection to the town’s largest industry disqualifies a member, then every councillor who owns a house whose value moves with the visitor economy is conflicted on every planning decision. So is every councillor who runs a business serving visitors, who rents out a property, or whose income depends in any way on the trade the hill brings. So is anyone who works anywhere in this economy. On that test nobody in The Blue Mountains could sit on this council at all, which is a fair description of what the argument is actually for.
Section 4 exists to prevent exactly this. An interest shared with electors generally is not a conflict. A connection too remote to be likely to influence a vote is not a conflict. A conflict is a financial interest in the matter in front of council — a contract, a property, a decision from which a measurable benefit flows — and it is identified item by item, on the agenda, by a member who declares it and leaves the room. It is not a condition a candidate carries into office and wears for four years.
Moreau has not hidden any of this. Her campaign site names her husband and his position, sets out the Act, points to the Integrity Commissioner, and states that her duty is to residents and not to any company. The disclosure was made before anyone demanded it. Any resident who believes a declaration should have been made and was not can take it to the Integrity Commissioner, an office this town has used before.
So the remedy exists, it is statutory, it is enforceable, and it operates one agenda item at a time. What is being offered instead is the proposition that a woman cannot be trusted to apply a law she has already said she will apply.
What the accusation is actually saying
Strip away the civic language and the picture being painted is of Marni Moreau sitting in her own living room while her husband explains to her how to run the Town.
No one has produced evidence of it. No one has needed to, because the accusation does not run on evidence. It runs on the assumption that a married woman holding office is a conduit rather than a principal. That assumption is older than this election and it has never been respectable. It should be named for what it is and then discarded.
What is actually on the record about her
She holds an honours degree in history from Western. She worked in Japan. She spent more than twenty-five years in senior sales and media partnerships in Toronto, with clients including Tim Hortons, Ford and TD, and grew her advertising portfolio at Rogers Sportsnet by more than forty per cent. She was a national top performer in sales at CMH Heli-Skiing. Her father sat on this council and raised the money for several of the buildings residents now take for granted.
Asked in our questionnaire to name a difficult professional decision, she described being put on the negotiating team when Sportsnet restructured its print, radio and television operations, because, in her words, that is what she does best: “Walk into a room where good people have stopped talking and get them working together again.”
Then there is the film festival, which she co-founded. It is worth understanding why that matters, and it is not the films. A festival is a logistics problem with a deadline. Volunteers had to be recruited, trained and scheduled. Visitors had to be handled by people who knew what they were doing. It worked, and the people who came left satisfied and will come back. That is operational management, executed in this community, in public, where anyone could watch it succeed or fail.
This town has a council that lost control of a sewage budget by nineteen million dollars, drained its reserves, and could not tell residents what any of it would cost. If Marni Moreau runs a council the way she ran that festival, we will be in considerably better shape than we are now.
The question on the ballot is whether a candidate can do the job. On the evidence, that question has an answer, and it has nothing to do with who she is married to.
Part Two: Who Killed the Campus of Care
The second of this election’s two kills, examined.
The accusation is that Paul Reale and a group of neighbours living near 125 Peel Street stopped the Campus of Care — that the long-term care beds, the seniors’ housing and the workers’ housing this community needed are gone because of them.
I believed it when I first heard it. Then I read the file.
It started under the last council
On 22 February 2021 the previous council, under Mayor Alar Soever, bought 125 Peel Street — thirty-two acres at the western edge of Thornbury — for $3,450,000. Eleven months later the Minister of Long-Term Care approved 160 beds for The Blue Mountains, to be built on that land. The beds were the hard part, and the Town had them.
What was proposed then was a modest thing. The Town’s vision document of 2 March 2022 set two mandatory elements and no more: the 160-bed home, which it called the project anchor, and attainable housing for the people who would staff it. The campus was to be “financially self-sustaining without need of ongoing Town financial support.” That is what this council inherited — a defined project, on land already bought, with a provincial bed allocation in hand.
What came back
On 17 May 2023 a concept was unveiled: ten buildings, six of them five storeys, across 18.7 acres, with a $15 million land deal attached. The 160 beds were still there, but now they were the smallest part of it. Retirement living had been added, then hundreds of apartments, then a daycare. By our estimate the site would have housed between 1,500 and 2,000 people in a village of 3,500. Council voted 7–0.
Eighteen point seven acres is nine and a third football fields, and it does not fit. One five-storey building — ten suites to a floor at fifteen hundred square feet — needs a floor plate of about eighteen thousand square feet, and with its seventy-five parking spaces, entrance, setbacks and snow storage it takes two-thirds of a field. There were six. Add two thousand feet of internal road, the 160-bed home, two workforce buildings and a daycare, and six and a half of the nine and a third fields are under building, asphalt and road. Seventy per cent of the site. What is left has to absorb the stormwater, the setbacks, the buffers and every square foot of green space the place would ever have.
The gaps between those buildings are fire routes and driveways. Set six five-storey blocks on seventy per cent of a site at the entrance to a harbour village and you do not get a campus. You get a wall, and it is the first thing anyone would see arriving in Thornbury.
The promise that it would be financially self-sustaining went with it. By June 2024 there was an $11.5 million servicing estimate on the Town’s side of the ledger.
What it would have done to Thornbury
The part nobody costed in public is what it would have done to the pipes.
After the $29 million Phase 1A expansion the Thornbury plant has design capacity for 6,913 units. Of those, 3,727 are allocated and 1,466 reserved, leaving 1,720 uncommitted — about 3,700 people. At the Town’s own 2.15 persons per unit the campus would have taken 700 to 930 of them: between 41 and 54 per cent of every drop of sewage capacity the upgraded plant has left, committed to one site.
Water is worse, because there is only one system. The Town has 2,242 uncommitted units in total, for everywhere. The campus would have consumed between 31 and 41 per cent of the entire town’s remaining water for eighteen acres in Thornbury — while the Town’s own study projects two-thirds of all growth to 2033 in Craigleith.
And the plant already fails in the rain. In 2025 it averaged 2,761 cubic metres a day and peaked at 12,690 against a rated peak of 7,196 — seventy-six per cent over, with nobody new connected.
I should declare something
When the accusation reached me — that Paul Reale was responsible for the cancellation of the Campus of Care — I believed it, and I was angry with him. This town needs long-term care beds. It needs housing for the people who work here. The Province had approved a hundred and sixty of them, and it looked as though someone had talked us out of it.
Then I read the file, and I ran the numbers.
Yes, this was NIMBY. It was people objecting to something in their own back yard. They were right. The yard in question was Thornbury. This plan had no business being thrust on this community the way it was, and every person in that village should have stood up with them.
Paul — I would have been there beside you, holding a placard, telling them to stop this outrageous plan.
What actually killed it
The Town’s own post-mortem is a public document and it is not ambiguous. Report FAF.24.144, before council on 12 November 2024: “In April 2024, Council approved the Development Charges By-law that included updated fees… Unfortunately, due to these changes, the Campus of Care’s financial viability could not be negotiated further.”
Read that report end to end and you will not find the word opposition. Not deputation. Not servicing. Not Peel Street South. Not delay. The residents are not in it at all.
The mayor said the same publicly. The Deputy Mayor, answering this questionnaire, says the developer withdrew. The regional headline that day was “Development charge hike scuttles plan for long-term care home.”
That bylaw was passed by this council in April 2024. Four developers appealed it with 178 objections to the Town’s numbers. The Town settled, cut the charge on a single-family home by about 40 per cent, and refunded $1,074,995.
The project was killed by a bylaw, and the bylaw was this council’s.
Where Reale actually appears
He appears often. On the Peel Street servicing file he is the most prolific deputant in the record: he spoke on 30 April 2024, presented a second resident’s deputation that night as well as his own, returned on 13 May and came back on 11 June.
What he asked for is in those documents. A Secondary Plan for Thornbury West. Release of the traffic study, the active transportation study and the tree inventory, refused to him in April, which residents then had to pursue through Freedom of Information. A pause on the servicing decision until there had been a public session with the MPP and the Minister. And a number: development charges for water and wastewater running “upwards to $123,000 per unit, which puts this project under the Town’s unaffordability category before infrastructure is even put into the ground.”
His 13 May deputation opens: “While I fully recognize our urgent need for long-term care and attainable housing, I am compelled as a concerned resident to question the methods we are employing.”
Nowhere in the record does he ask council to cancel the Campus of Care.
What he and his neighbours did change was the road: on 11 June council voted 7–0 for rural cross-sections, a twenty-metre right of way on Peel, tree protection and Ministry of Transportation sign-off before design went past 60 per cent. They won on the servicing design. They did not stop the project — council approved carrying on, 6–0 in May and 7–0 in June.
What he said when it collapsed
Nine days after the termination he wrote an editorial headed “The Collapse of the Campus of Care.” He did not claim it. He called council’s decision “an act of steadfast leadership.” A man who had just brought down a project would take the credit; he handed it to the council he had spent three years holding to account.
But welcoming an outcome is not causing one. A man with no vote, no seat and no staff did not end an eighteen-month negotiation between a town, a developer and a care operator.
What Paul Reale actually did
For three years he went to council meetings and read the staff reports — not the summaries, the reports. He wrote about a hundred editions of a community newsletter over two years explaining what council had decided and what it would cost, and resigned as its editor before filing his nomination papers, a distinction most people in public life never trouble to draw.
He is a historian by training: an Honours B.A. and an M.A. in History from Toronto, doctoral studies at Chicago, seven years teaching at the University of Toronto. That matters, and not as decoration. A historian is trained to go to the primary document and test the claim against what the record says. It is the skill this town has been shortest of.
And on the two numbers he chased he was right twice. The servicing works he questioned became part of the wastewater programme that ran $19.7 million over budget, which this council has still never independently audited. The development charge assumptions he called unrealistic were found to be exactly that, at the Ontario Land Tribunal, and the Town paid back more than a million dollars.
He had no vote, no staff, no budget and no seat. He had the documents, and he read them.
The verdict
The accusation is that Paul Reale killed the Campus of Care.
He did not. The Town’s own report says a bylaw did, and names it. He never asked for the project to be cancelled. He asked for a plan, for the studies, and for someone to explain an $11.5 million number that had sat in a budget for two years without a breakdown — and on that, and on the development charges, the record has since proved him right.
What he did was stand up, repeatedly, in a room where almost nobody else bothered, and ask what it was going to cost. That used to be called doing your homework. In this election it is being called a kill.
The Summary
People keep stopping me to ask who they should vote for. A few have asked whether I would run for mayor myself, which I take as a compliment to my persistence rather than my judgement, and the answer is no.
Here is what I will say. We are lucky. There are two capable people on this ballot. They are not the same — they come at the job from different directions, with different instincts about how a town should be run — but both are activists in the proper sense of the word, both have done real work in the world before asking for this one, and both bring skills this council has conspicuously lacked.
My job is not to tell you who to vote for. I did tell you who not to vote for, and I stand by every word of it, because that judgement rested on four years of a public record anyone can check.
This one is yours.
Below you will find both candidates’ answers to the twenty-two questions I put to them on 30 August, in full and unedited, with nothing added. Read them. They are the candidates in their own words, which is more than any accusation will ever give you.
Then make your decision, and vote.
Voting closes Monday, 26 October, by internet and telephone.
The candidates in their own words
The twenty-two questions put to the candidates for mayor of The Blue Mountains on 30 August 2026, with the answers of Marni Moreau and Paul Reale. Every answer appears in full and unedited, in alphabetical order, with nothing added. Box marks are reported exactly as they appear on the returned questionnaire, including blanks, double marks and anything written in instead of ticking.
1. Priorities
Every candidate says infrastructure, affordability and accountability matter. That costs nothing to say. The question is what happens when they collide in one budget, and in this town they already have: reserves have fallen from roughly $82 million in 2021 to a projected $6.7 million by the end of this year, about $99 million of projects is committed and under way with more than $150 million further planned, and the asset management reserve stands at roughly $1.8 million. A mayor who will not say which priority gives way is telling you they intend to decide it later, in a budget meeting most residents will never watch. So the question is put plainly: rank them, and name the one that loses.
The question asked: Rank your top three priorities for the 2026–2030 term. For each, outline what you would actually do, and by when. If they compete for the same dollar in the 2027 budget, say which one gives way.
The Shulman Report · 2026 Mayoral Candidate Questionnaire
Second of twenty-two questions put to the three candidates for mayor of The Blue Mountains on 30 August. All three returned a questionnaire. Every answer below appears in full and unedited. The note headed The issue is mine; everything under a candidate’s name is theirs. The series, and how to read it, is explained in the Question 1 post.
Marni Moreau
1. Unite the Town of The Blue Mountains
2. Finances
3. Transportation
1. Unite the Town of the Blue Mountains: Our Town is at a crucial moment. We need to hire a Director of Operations, Planning, and Corporate and Financial Services. I would look to change the tone in Town Hall to be one of collaboration and innovation under a consensus building leader that brings everyone in. We have many skilled residents in the area that are willing to contribute and we should take advantage of their skills and resources. I grew up here and understand the interconnections of TBM, our integrated tourism driven economy and our agricultural rural communities. Additionally I understand and appreciate the seasonal homeowners who come here, often for decades (sometimes for generations!) and frequently retire here. If elected mayor, I’d get everyone at the same table working together.
2. Finances: Look at the asset management plan and update forecasts. We cannot plan on numbers that are outdated or based on unprecedented times of expansion. Building permits are down and the economy is subject to international trade tensions. There’s no sense in building for what isn’t coming. Establish a budget with clear oversight and communication protocols. We need to look at what we must build, how to finance and manage it. Defining the difference between wants vs needs will clarify budget priorities. And finally fix our project management. The $19 million over budget Bay Street project was due to bundling multiple projects, inadequate regular reporting requirements with budget checks and a lack of sufficient triggers for Council participation and resident communication. We must have staff implement those changes for every project.
3. Transportation: A point-to-point transportation mode must be supported as soon as possible. I would look into innovative solutions such as the app based electric van system like the one presented to Town by ARGO. The lack of options negatively affects everyone in the Town of the Blue Mountains, Including tourists, people trying to get to medical appointments, youth and workers.
The first priority would be an examination of the asset management plan to determine current forecast accuracy in this economic climate and make tough decisions about what moves forward and what is delayed or cancelled. I would prioritize not increasing resident taxes. Consulting extensively with the other six members of Council I would put forward a budget I would hope we could agree on and move forward quickly. Like my father Peter Moreau who persuaded Leonard Shore to champion the LE Shore Library, I would use named gifts and partnerships to tap into additional resources and use the Community Improvement Plan for things that ratepayers want such as supporting healthcare or passion projects like the Georgian Triangle Humane Society.
Another priority would be to look at budget items from an overall perspective, for example creating a Parks and Trails Master Plan for the entire municipality before committing to Moreau Park. My goal is to achieve these things in the first 6 months. Parks are from a specific reserve fund so that wouldn’t pull from anything else. When priorities compete for the same dollar in the 2027 budget, we look at forecast assumptions first, needs second and in tandem with private/public partnerships and other funding possibilities. After that tackle tough decisions on re-sizing, delaying and cancelling other projects.
Paul Reale
1. Restore the Town’s financial footing.
2. Plan first. Build better.
3. Change how Town Hall makes decisions.
My first priority is to get the Town’s financial house in order. In the first 100 days, I would review the operating budget to protect core services and analyze the capital program and 10-year plan to decide what starts, stops, pauses, or continues. If we treat everything as a priority, then nothing is a priority.
Second, “Plan First. Build Better.” In the first year, I would seek council approval for a requirement that major project and growth proposals address infrastructure, costs, timing, environmental constraints and community needs before council commits.
Third, from day one, I would work with council to give staff clear direction and the support and resources needed to deliver, with council accountable to residents for results.
If these compete for the same 2027 dollar, new discretionary spending under #3 waits, but not resources needed for core services. Changing how we work starts immediately.
The three rankings side by side
2. The tax levy, and the commercial base
Two numbers sit behind this question. The first is the levy itself, and on a no-intervention path the municipal tax on a $1 million home here rises about 69 per cent by 2030 while the fixed water charge more than doubles. The second is quieter and matters more over a term: non-residential property makes up roughly 8 per cent of this town’s assessment base. That is a very small commercial shoulder for a town carrying this much infrastructure, and every point it does not grow is a point the residential taxpayer carries instead. A candidate who names a commercial target is taking on something measurable. A candidate who will not name a levy number should at least be naming something they would stop doing.
The question asked: Over the 2026–2030 term, the average annual levy increase I will work toward is [below inflation / at inflation / inflation + up to 3% / more than inflation + 3% / I will not commit to a number]. Non-residential property makes up roughly 8 per cent of the Town’s assessment base; over the term I would work toward [a stated numeric target / growth without a target / no change]. Outline your fiscal platform. Name at least one specific service, programme or project you would reduce, defer or eliminate.
Marni Moreau
☒ At inflation
Commercial base: ☒ Growth without a target
I would reduce the use of consultants. We have too many unused reports sitting on a shelf. I would support the new restructuring of Staff. I would consider the forecasting for our large infrastructure projects and look at how the recent dip in building is affecting our revenue, and our asset plans. There is no sense in overbuilding infrastructure based on previous unprecedented growth numbers. Having seasonal homeowners that do not use many Town services but pay taxes has been an advantage. When the results of the 2026 census come back we must plan Craigleith to transition from a Resort Area to a Settlement Area. The town of Thornbury and Clarksburg is partially protected from sprawl by the Special Agriculture land that surrounds it. This has also limited our ability to find land zoned for light industry. I would look into supporting the many work from home businesses that make it possible for all types of companies to thrive here as well as opportunities for light industry.
Paul Reale
☒ I will not commit to a number
Commercial base: ☒ Growth without a target
I will not promise a levy percentage before we know what the Town must provide and what those obligations will actually cost.
I would build a five-year financial plan showing the cost to complete, finance, operate and maintain our existing commitments, and test what happens if grants or development charges fall short.
That plan would guide which capital projects start, continue, pause or stop. I would review spending, staffing and contracts to set achievable savings targets for 2027, while protecting the services the Town needs to provide and reporting publicly on results.
As one specific deferral, I would defer scheduled replacements in the 2027 IT Continuous Improvements program where existing equipment remains reliable and fit for purpose, while protecting cybersecurity and essential service delivery.
Where each candidate stands
3. A municipal services corporation — and, if not, then what
Disclosure, repeated from the questionnaire: I have published in favour of moving water and wastewater into a municipal services corporation. This question was put to every candidate in identical terms, and every answer is published in full — including answers that reject that position outright.
In November 2025 the Province passed a law allowing water and wastewater to be moved into an arm’s-length public corporation, and in April 2026 it asked municipalities whether they were interested. The Blue Mountains carries roughly $57 million in water and wastewater debt. The Thornbury plant is approaching $50M. The Town’s own servicing policy concedes growth has outpaced the projects meant to serve it. Existing long-term debt cannot be moved into a corporation, so the question is who finances what comes next.
The question asked: On a municipal services corporation for water and wastewater, my position is [actively pursue membership / complete the analysis, then decide / oppose / undecided]. If The Blue Mountains were invited to join a regional corporation anchored in Simcoe County, I would [join / negotiate terms first / decline]. If you would NOT join a corporation: do you expect the Province to fund this town’s next major water or wastewater project? Outline your platform.
Marni Moreau
☒ Complete the analysis, then decide If invited into a Simcoe-anchored corporation: ☒ Negotiate terms first Provincial funding: no box marked
Council has voted to ask the Province for an Expression of Interest for a Municipal Services Corporation (MSC), so we will get more information on this issue. Then staff and council will look at the cost per household for a Municipal Services Corporation for water and wastewater versus continuing to do it ourselves.
We need to understand the timing and costs of the change and the assumptions and variables affecting our forecasted water and wastewater capacity. A key calculation will be how joining a MSC would affect ratepayer’s fees and what the costs will be if we continue to manage that as a Town. The terms of our current debt agreements would need to be examined.
If we joined a MSC the water or wastewater asset goes to the MSC and the debt stays with us, but can be extended longer and is off the balance sheet. Transition costs and timing will also be important factors. Joining a MSC could allow neighbouring communities that are connected by watersheds or by Georgian Bay to access higher levels of expertise and operational efficiencies and procurement advantages. Another factor that could be used to measure the value of the MSC would be the positive effects on Georgian Bay.
It’s also important to know that right now we have access to the deepest water in the area, award winning professionals on staff, a completed wastewater plant that came in under budget and drinking water that wins awards for best tasting in Ontario and North America.
If we needed to pay for all of the upgrades we would need an immediate examination of cost cutting opportunities, updated projections and innovative and traditional funding and grant sources would be investigated and acted upon. The Town has secured a $25 million Housing-Enabling Water Systems (HEWS) grant in September 2024. We are also currently applying to the province for the Development Charge Reduction Program (30%) that, if successful and the numbers make sense, would be available in 2027-2028.
No matter what the direction of the decisions made around the Municipal Services Corporation we should continue our efforts to decrease the 25% water loss and to improve Inflow and Infiltration which is when stormwater gets into the sewer. Fixing the pipes may mean we can delay long enough and to have better information to inform this important decision.
Paul Reale
☒ Complete the analysis, then decide If invited into a Simcoe-anchored corporation: ☒ Negotiate terms first Provincial funding: no box marked
I am open to a regional corporation, but joining one is not the only alternative to relying on grants. Municipalities can apply through Infrastructure Ontario’s Housing Enabling Water Infrastructure Financing (HEWI) program for eligible water infrastructure loans with repayment terms of up to 40 years. The Town’s June report (ADM.26.038) identified substantial unused borrowing capacity.
4. Capital cost control, and who is accountable when it fails
Three bundled projects — the Craigleith lift station, the Mill Street pumping station and the Bay–Grey Street linear works — went from $34.79 million to $53.56 million. Thornbury came in 92 per cent over budget, Craigleith 54 per cent. Council learned the full variance in November 2025, after the fact. Staff report ADM-26-015 found that bundling obscured the cost pressure on each project, and that escalation should have been triggered at the Craigleith tender. The question asks what mechanism would catch it next time.
The question asked: The reporting threshold at which a cost variance must come to council should be [any variance over $100,000 / over $500,000 / over 10% of budget / set by staff]. Outline what you would change in procurement, estimating, contingency and staff-to-council reporting so that a nine-figure programme cannot drift by half before council hears about it. Be specific about mechanisms, not intentions.
Marni Moreau
☒ Any variance over $100,000
Estimating and budgeting has often been done with only a 30% engineering report. This has proven to be inadequate to rely upon for the entire project’s projections. A recost must be done at 60% and 90% of the conceptual plan to get better estimates and avoid surprise overruns.
Each project should receive separate budgets and be tracked independently and quarterly. A 100,000 overrun should trigger a report to Council at the next meeting. There needs to be a fixed moment when someone has to stop and ask, “this has changed, do we proceed?”
The project expanding to new builds and lack of formal rebaselining also affected the Mill Street, Bay Street and the Craigleith lift station which were all approved on conceptual estimates, then the scope grew and the budget never got re-set.
I have years of managing multi-million dollar projects and campaigns arriving at completion on time and on budget. This is what I bring to Town Hall that no other candidate for mayor has.
Paul Reale
☒ Any variance over $100,000
For major projects, I would require approval gates at 30%, 60% and 90% design, and again before contract award, with updated costs and funding at each stage. Conventional construction tenders would require at least 90% design, independently checked estimates and Finance sign-off.
Estimates must show their confidence range and explain any change from the approved budget. Contingency must be tied to identified risks, with every draw approved and recorded.
Monthly public reports to council, signed by the project lead and Treasurer, would show the approved budget, forecast final cost, remaining contingency and schedule. Any cumulative forecast overrun above $100,000—or a material change in scope, funding or risk—would come back to Council before further related commitments are made.
Tomorrow: Questions 5 and 6 — strong mayor powers, and who pays for growth.
5. Strong mayor powers
The question asked: As mayor I would use strong mayor powers [yes, where useful / only in a defined emergency / no, never]. I will delegate authority over the CAO back to council [yes / no]. Outline your position on how this town should be governed, and what you would commit to in writing on day one.
Marni Moreau
None of the printed options marked. She has written in her own: ☒ To draft of budget as mandated Delegate authority over the CAO back to council: ☒ No
To me, “strong mayor” powers are an oxymoron. If you need to use a veto, your argument wasn’t that strong. My expertise is in working on a problem to get everyone around the table to collaborate. The Council is composed of seven elected individuals. I would not diminish the will of the residents that elected those people to veto any decision. I plan to lead collaboratively and while I am able to make hard decisions when needed, my goal would be to unify the council behind decisions. I can’t say no, I’ll never use the powers because the mayor must bring forward the budget under the Act. I would look to the Councillors to help shape the budget and move forward, and, as I have done in the past, create consensus.
Paul Reale
☒ Only in a defined emergency Delegate authority over the CAO back to council: ☒ Yes
I would govern by building consensus, not by using strong mayor powers to work around Council. On day one, I would delegate authority over the CAO back to council and commit in writing that I would use strong mayor powers only in a genuine emergency where immediate action is required.
My job as Mayor would be to bring Council together around clear priorities, give staff clear direction and the resources to deliver, and maintain oversight of the result. Residents should be heard before important decisions are made and be able to see whether council delivered what it promised.
I would take full responsibility for my own decisions and leadership, explain council’s decisions to residents and answer for the results. The buck stops with me.
6. Development charges — who pays for growth
The question asked: Residential development charges in this town should be [increased / held / reduced further to unlock grants / undecided]. Development charges on attainable and affordable housing units specifically should be [eliminated / reduced / deferred / unchanged]. Outline your platform. Development charges fund growth-related capital. If they fall, name what fills the hole — the levy, the rate base, debt, or projects that do not get built.
Marni Moreau
Residential: ☒ Undecided Attainable and affordable: ☒ Eliminated · ☒ Reduced · ☒ Deferred (three boxes marked)
The Provincial government’s funding is changing and municipalities are coming under increased financial pressure. Whether development charges increase, decrease or are eliminated or traded for other funding opportunities in the end the taxpayer has to pay.
This balance will differ depending on the project we are considering. Middle housing, accessible options, attainable and affordable rentals, commercial and communal areas and daycare considerations are all areas that could be prioritized.
Only after examining every angle of a specific project can I tell you what tools would work to help achieve this goal, but nothing would be off the table. Details of what the builder delivers and what the Town can provide will be public and specific.
When development charges are less than planned, what fills the hole is more efficient government, fewer consulting fees, fewer studies, more grants, more private/public partnerships and use of the Community Improvement Program.
One of the most important things we can do is look at the forecast assumptions for our future infrastructure needs and update them to reflect the economic reality of 2026.
Paul Reale
Residential: ☒ Held Attainable and affordable: ☒ Reduced
I would hold general residential development charges unless a confirmed funding agreement leaves the Town financially better off. For affordable and attainable housing, I would support targeted reductions where affordability is enforceable and the lost revenue has an identified replacement source.
I would also explore voluntary early-payment agreements with developers where legally permitted and where the Town’s financing savings exceed the cost of the incentive. Earlier payment can improve cash flow, but it does not replace lost revenue.
If development-charge revenue falls, projects that can safely wait should be phased or deferred, and projects that are no longer justified should be cancelled. For essential work, any remaining gap would ultimately fall to utility rates for water and wastewater or the levy for tax-supported projects. Borrowing can spread the cost over time, but council still has to say who will repay it.
7. Housing
The question asked: Would you commit to a numeric target for affordable and attainable housing units, including rental, created during the term? If yes, state the target and the definition you are using. Outline your housing platform: which tools you would actually use — municipal land, development-charge deferrals, zoning, public–private partnerships, incentive programmes, strong mayor powers — and how each is paid for.
Marni Moreau
☒ No
Target and definition lines left blank.
Through our Planning Department, we can collaborate with developers to support more mixed housing developments. As a Town we must be willing to give up some tax revenue to create opportunities to fill in the missing middle without affecting the character of the area. That revenue could be provided through grants or loans. In certain situations private-public cooperation can support things like daycare, commercial space and accessible housing.
The Town spent about $770,000 trying to build attainable housing and failed. I would not use strong mayor powers, I would use my collaborative leadership to listen to council members and residents to find a solution.
On Canada Day I met someone who told me that Bruce County has run a Housing Concierge since 2024 that has a point person for each project. I love this idea. One number, one email, one person who walks you through. The service helps developers with pre-development reviews navigate approvals, funding and partnerships. They also made a “Build in Bruce” webpage and a “Book a Call” option for specialized affordable housing support.
We know what the town needs, and it’s the municipality’s job to create opportunities that make business sense to build. We know we need mixed housing, the missing middle for our professionals, accessible options for people downsizing and rentals, while also protecting our character and charm.
You may not see it, but homelessness here is real. It’s couch surfing, living in your car, or a family one bill away from being in trouble. That’s Grey County’s service to deliver, and I’ll make sure our Town is pushing them to deliver it here.
Paul Reale
☒ Yes
Target: 215 units by 2030. Definition used: The affordable-housing definition in the Town’s 2026 Official Plan review: ownership priced at the lower of 10% below the average resale price or a price carrying annual housing expenses no greater than 30% of gross household income; rental at the lower of average local market rent or 30% of gross household income.
I would encourage additional residential units (ARUs) by reducing remaining eligible fees. A Community Planning Permit System would set clear development rules for smaller homes and rentals on serviced sites, with implementation paid through the planning budget.
Any Town land contribution would require enforceable agreements specifying how many units remain affordable or attainable, aiming to secure affordability in perpetuity. Nonprofit or private partners would finance construction, with rents covering operations and repayments. Land discounts would be disclosed as public contributions.
Fee relief and development-charge deferral costs would come from a capped Community Improvement Plan budget funded through reprioritized levy spending, and confirmed grants. I would work through council, not use strong mayor powers to force approvals.
8. Asset management and the renewal gap
The question asked: Do you accept your town’s asset management plan’s estimate of the annual funding gap? Outline how you would close the gap between what this town owns and what it is setting aside to replace it — and if you would not close it, say so and say what fails first.
Marni Moreau
☒ No
First, the Town needs to hire a Treasurer. I have experience working on hiring and retention teams of major organizations and I would bring that expertise.
If elected Mayor I would examine the assumptions that we are using to estimate what future capacity we need. I don’t accept the estimate because it was built on record breaking years that we are not experiencing now. Also it counts assets we haven’t yet built. The first thing the new council should look at is what the asset plan looks like with today’s economic forecast.
The funding gap is one that many municipalities face right now and the next Council will have to make some hard decisions about what needs to be done now and how to finance that or what can be delayed or cancelled. We should also look at provincial grants, loans, a municipal services corporation and where shared services with our neighboring communities can reduce expenses.
Fixing water loss could be the most efficient tool we have to restore our ability to provide capacity for buildings going forward. We must professionally manage major infrastructure projects to avoid unintended costs, such as rebaseline when the project expands, not bundling projects and costing at 60% and 90% design.
Paul Reale
☒ Yes
I would establish a multi-year asset-renewal plan tied directly to the Asset Management Plan. Each budget would increase contributions toward the required level, with tax-supported assets funded through the levy and water/wastewater through a long-term rate plan that accounts for grants, debt, operating costs and affordability. The AMP currently identifies annual shortfalls of about $5.9 million for tax-supported assets and $2.4 million for water/wastewater.
I would also reduce the gap by prioritizing critical and high-risk assets, extending useful life through preventative maintenance and avoiding premature replacement. For long-lived infrastructure, I would use debt strategically so costs are shared over the asset’s life. Confirmed grants would reduce the local burden. Lower-priority and discretionary capital would wait before core infrastructure is allowed to deteriorate.
9. Council, staff and professional governance
The question asked: The Blue Mountains budgeted 191.74 permanent full-time equivalent positions in 2026, up from 185.61, for roughly 9,000 households. Fully-loaded compensation rose about 10 per cent in a year with no new hires, with the cost-of-living adjustment set at 5 per cent. Over the term, the permanent staff complement should [grow / hold flat / shrink]. Reliance on outside consultants should [increase / stay the same / decrease]. I will support publishing closed-session subject matter and voting records to the fullest extent the Municipal Act permits [yes / no]. Outline your platform on how this town is run: the mayor–CAO relationship, where council’s role ends and staff’s begins, what you would change in the first hundred days, and how residents will be able to see what the town spends, owes and owns in a form a non-accountant can read.
Marni Moreau
Permanent staff complement: ☒ Grow · ☒ Hold flat · ☒ Shrink (all three boxes marked) Outside consultants: ☒ Decrease Publishing closed-session subject matter and voting records: ☒ Yes
The first priority of the new Council should be to support hiring a director to fill the Director of Planning, Operations and Treasury with people who want to come and stay long term. Those individuals will shape what happens next in our town. When I worked in the corporate world we were given training sessions annually about how to retain staff. It’s very expensive to lose staff, not just the recruiting cost, but the loss of institutional memory and projects that don’t get adequately managed during the changeover.
Council sets direction, approves money, and makes sure communication is transparent and timely. The CAO reports to Council and has a written annual agreement with published objectives. If elected Mayor, I would work to change the tone of the Town Hall to be more collaborative and built on consensus. This type of work environment attracts the best talent.
Paul Reale
Permanent staff complement: ☒ Shrink Outside consultants: ☒ Decrease Publishing closed-session subject matter and voting records: ☒ Yes
The mayor should lead a council that works: members prepare, debate openly and make decisions together, even when they disagree. Council sets priorities, policy and budgets. Staff advises, implements council’s direction and comes back when costs, scope, risk or other material facts change. The mayor holds the CAO accountable for delivery.
In my first 100 days, I would review the Town’s new organizational structure with the CAO against service delivery, staffing, duplication, consultant use and accountability. Every vacancy and major external contract would be tested: eliminate, reduce, maintain or invest. My objective is a smaller permanent complement through attrition and restructuring while protecting core-service capacity.
Residents would get a quarterly scorecard showing what the Town spends, owes and owns: budget results, reserves, debt, major capital commitments, forecast costs and asset-replacement obligations. I will explain the results and answer for them. The buck stops with the mayor.
10. The region, and the structure of local government
The question asked: Collingwood, The Blue Mountains, Wasaga Beach, Clearview and Meaford share one economy, one labour market and, increasingly, one set of pipes. Existing arrangements include the South Georgian Bay Mayor and CAO Forum, transit, regional economic development, water servicing and mutual-aid fire agreements. Amalgamation of Collingwood and The Blue Mountains has been publicly proposed — see the disclosure on page one. Which would you actively pursue as shared or regional services? Check all that apply. On amalgamation of Collingwood and The Blue Mountains, my position is [support / study it formally / oppose / undecided]. Grey County has proposed transferring roads to the Town. On that transfer my position is [accept / accept only with a permanent revenue transfer / decline / undecided]. Outline how this town should work with its neighbouring municipalities — and name one thing you would give up local control over to get a better result.
Marni Moreau
Shared or regional services: ☒ Water / wastewater · ☒ Regional transit · ☒ Fire · ☒ Economic development. Solid waste, Recreation, Building and planning, and None not marked. Amalgamation: ☒ Oppose Grey County roads transfer: ☒ Decline
The Town of the Blue Mountains already works closely with Collingwood in transit, mutual aid fire agreements, economic development and water servicing. These are the types of issues that ignore our official boundaries and look to proximity or the watershed for structure. We already give up some local control in these areas and I support that.
Currently the Town of the Blue Mountains is one of nine municipalities in Grey and we carry about 29 per cent of the County levy. That’s about $22 million of $76 million in 2025. Being a small part of Simcoe would be a costly, time consuming change and it would not guarantee that more money stayed here. My first priority will always be the Town of the Blue Mountains ratepayer.
Paul Reale
Shared or regional services: ☒ Water / wastewater · ☒ Regional transit · ☒ Recreation · ☒ Fire · ☒ Economic development. Solid waste, Building and planning, and None not marked. Amalgamation: ☒ Oppose Grey County roads transfer: ☒ Decline
I would use the existing South Georgian Bay Mayor and CAO Forum to identify specific services where working together can lower costs or improve results. Any proposal should come back to Council with a business case showing the expected savings or service improvement, how costs and risks are shared, who is accountable and how performance will be measured and presented to the public.
Regional transit is one area where I would give up exclusive local control. People travel across municipal boundaries every day for work, health care, shopping, and recreation. Routes, schedules, fares and connections should therefore be planned as one network rather than municipality by municipality. I would support a jointly governed regional transit system, with representation from participating municipalities, agreed service standards and a transparent funding formula.
11. A joint services group with Collingwood
The question asked: Question 10 asks about co-operation in principle. This one asks about a specific vehicle: a standing joint services group between this town and Collingwood, with shared staff, shared procurement and a single management structure for the services placed inside it. Would you support creating a joint services group with Collingwood [yes / yes, if a business case supports it / no / undecided]? If yes, which services would you support being run jointly? Check all that apply. Outline your platform. Name the savings or service improvement you would expect, how a joint group would be governed so neither town is captured by the other, and what you would not put into it.
Marni Moreau
☒ Yes, if a business case supports it Services: ☒ Water and wastewater · ☒ Transit · ☒ Economic development and tourism · ☒ Procurement. Other services line left blank.
I would continue the transit, economic development and tourism, fire and water collaborations. I would investigate if there were areas where economies of scale could lower our costs such as procurement of items like paving or road salt. Any shared services should be monitored to make sure that both communities were benefiting. If there were any service reductions to residents I would not consider a collaboration.
Paul Reale
☒ Yes, if a business case supports it Services: ☒ Water and wastewater · ☒ Fire · ☒ Building inspection · ☒ Transit · ☒ Economic development and tourism · ☒ Human resources and payroll · ☒ Procurement Other services you would include: Stormwater, watershed and drainage planning, and natural asset management.
I would support a joint services group only where the business case shows that two municipalities can deliver a service at lower net cost or with better capacity than either can alone. The savings should come from eliminating duplicated administration, combining purchasing power and sharing specialized expertise that neither municipality needs full-time on its own. The test is net savings after transition costs, with service levels maintained or improved.
Governance has to prevent the larger municipality from dominating the smaller one. I would require equal representation, transparent cost-sharing based on who uses and benefits from the service, published performance measures, and approval from both councils for major changes.
I would not place functions in the group where local political judgment and direct accountability matter most, such as land-use planning, by-law enforcement, local road priorities or municipal finance.
12. Regional government for South Georgian Bay
The question asked: Beyond shared services and the amalgamation of two towns, a further proposal has been raised. A single regional government for South Georgian Bay, drawn on its natural geographic boundary, at a population of roughly 100,000. It would be responsible for water and wastewater, transportation, and other services now delivered separately by each municipality. Which of these benefits do you believe such a regional government would actually deliver? Check all that apply. Weighed against the loss of local control, those benefits are [clearly worth it / worth it only on conditions I will state / not worth it / undecided]. If you believe this is a good idea, explain the strategic benefits in your own words. If you do not, explain why.
Marni Moreau
Benefits: ☒ None of these Weighed against the loss of local control: ☒ Not worth it
I don’t believe amalgamation is a good idea for the ratepayers. Many things on the list of potential benefits of a regional government we are already collaborating on effectively. You don’t need a new government to do that, and it’s expensive to make those changes. I will always advocate, protect and represent the residents of the Town of the Blue Mountains, full stop. No other municipality has our unique combination of rural, resort and wealthy seasonal homeowners and retirees. We also are fortunate to have deep water access and infrastructure projects underway. We are the jewel of the area.
Paul Reale
Benefits: ☒ Water and wastewater planned and financed as one system rather than five · ☒ Transportation and transit planned across the whole travel-to-work area · ☒ A stronger position with the Province and other funders · ☒ The ability to attract and keep professional staff Weighed against the loss of local control: ☒ Not worth it
I see real value in regional cooperation, but I do not believe creating a single South Georgian Bay government is worth the loss of local control. The strongest regional opportunities — water and wastewater, transit, infrastructure planning, economic development and shared professional services — can be pursued through joint services and regional agreements without replacing local councils.
A new regional government would also have transition costs, another governance structure and difficult questions about representation, taxation, debt and whose priorities prevail. I would rather require each regional initiative to prove its own business case and give up local control only where doing so clearly improves the result.
Regional cooperation should follow the problem. I would not reorganize local government first and assume better service or lower costs will follow.
13. Contracting out municipal services
The question asked: Municipalities deliver some services with their own staff and buy others from contractors. This question asks where you would draw that line. Would you support contracting out services currently delivered in-house [yes / yes, where a business case supports it / no / undecided]? Which would you be prepared to contract out? Check all that apply. Others you would contract out. Services you would never contract out. Outline your platform. Say what test you would apply before contracting a service out, what you would do about the staff currently delivering it, and how service quality would be held to account once it sits with a contractor.
Marni Moreau
☒ Undecided Prepared to contract out: ☒ Transit and buses · ☒ Tree pruning and forestry Others you would contract out: “Without a business case, I would contract out nothing.” Services you would never contract out: “I want residents to be able to easily contact someone who can service their requests. If it is a service provided to residents that may require them to call Town Hall, I don’t want to use a contractor.”
Before contracting out a service I would want to make sure that the costs were considered including the costs of bringing the service back in-house in case of failure.
If a service was outsourced a written service standard should be public and enforced.
I would not support contracting out services where a resident would call Town to get service and then be sent to a contractor.
The service being contracted out would need to make a business case. Staff decisions on that level are made by the CAO.
Paul Reale
☒ Yes, where a business case supports it Prepared to contract out: ☒ Landscaping and parks maintenance · ☒ Transit and buses · ☒ Tree pruning and forestry Others you would contract out: Seasonal and specialized technical work where the Town does not require permanent full-time capacity. Services you would never contract out: By-law enforcement and final regulatory, financial and policy accountability.
I would contract out a service only where a full business case shows better value over the life of the contract, not just a lower first-year price. The comparison must include wages and benefits, equipment, supervision, transition costs, contract escalation, and whether the Town would lose important operational capacity.
If a service currently delivered by Town staff is contracted out, I would first use attrition, vacancies, reassignment and retraining to reduce the impact on existing staff. Staffing savings have to be real; outsourcing makes little sense if we continue carrying the same internal cost.
The Town would remain accountable for the service. Contracts would include measurable service standards, response times, reporting requirements and financial consequences for missed performance. Results would be reported publicly, and contracts would include review points and the ability to terminate or retender if promised savings or service levels are not being delivered.
14. Performance management
The question asked: Ontario discontinued the Municipal Performance Measurement Program effective the 2014 reporting year. Since then no province-wide requirement has obliged a municipality to publish what it achieves for the money it spends, though some measures survive inside the Financial Information Return. Residents can see what this town spends. They cannot easily see what it delivers. This town’s present ability to measure and report service performance is [adequate / inadequate / I have not reviewed it]. Within the term, the Town should publish a scorecard of service standards against results [annually / quarterly / no]. Building a culture of performance measurement in this town would require: check all that apply. Performance measurement should be owned by [council / the CAO / an officer reporting to council independently of the CAO / it is not a priority]. Building this capability costs money and staff time. You would [fund it as new spending / reallocate from within the existing budget / require it within current resources / not proceed]. Set out how you would build performance management into this town. Say what you would measure first, who answers for the numbers, and what happens when a measure shows a service is failing.
Marni Moreau
Present ability to measure and report: ☒ Inadequate Scorecard: none of the printed options marked. She has written in her own: ☒ Semi-Annually Building a culture of performance measurement would require: ☒ Every major report to council stating the measure by which it will be judged · ☒ An annual public account of what was delivered against what was budgeted Owned by: ☒ The CAO, as an internal management system Cost: ☒ Reallocate from within the existing budget
Project management and reporting need improvement. If elected mayor, I would request that the CAO work with staff to measure capital projects semi-annually against the original budget and create a management and reporting template for all projects. Each project should receive a separate budget and be tracked independently. An overrun triggers a report to Council at the next meeting. Project expansion and lack of formal rebaselining were major issues with recent projects including the $19 million dollar overrun.
We must continue our work reducing inflow and infiltration by replacing pipes at the end of their life and by measuring water losses by developments. Reducing the approximately 25% current loss would be the most cost effective way to increase water capacity. Water capacity limits not only houses, but businesses, day cares, long term care homes and schools.
Bylaw is an area where residents have expressed frustration. During the current reorganization of staff, this is a good time to look at bylaw training, scheduling and needs.
The CAO is the council’s only direct employee. I would work with my CAO to direct staff, measure performance and make necessary changes when performance falls short. In the case of a failure of service the date and fix would come to council.
Paul Reale
Present ability to measure and report: ☒ Inadequate Scorecard: ☒ Quarterly Building a culture of performance measurement would require: ☒ A small set of council-approved corporate measures, published and reported on a fixed cycle · ☒ Service standards for each department, reported against publicly · ☒ Every major report to council stating the measure by which it will be judged · ☒ An annual public account of what was delivered against what was budgeted · ☒ Resident satisfaction surveyed on a fixed cycle Owned by: ☒ Council, through targets it sets and publishes Cost: ☒ Reallocate from within the existing budget
I would start with the services residents rely on most and define, in a simple to read format, what level of service they should expect and how quickly the Town should deliver it. Performance management only works if the standard is clear before the result is measured.
Council should set and publish those expectations; the CAO should be accountable to council for the results, with department heads accountable through the CAO. Results should be reported publicly on a quarterly scorecard.
When a measure shows a service is failing, the number should trigger action. The CAO should identify the cause, the corrective action and when performance will recover. If fixing it requires more money, staff or a change in priorities, that decision comes back to council.
15. New water and wastewater infrastructure
The question asked: The Town carries roughly $57 million in water and wastewater debt. The Thornbury plant is approaching fifty years old. A $66 million new water-treatment programme has been carried to the Ministry of Infrastructure. The Town’s own servicing allocation policy concedes that growth has been outpacing completion of the projects meant to serve it. On the proposed new water-treatment programme [proceed as planned / proceed only with senior-government funding / pause and pursue regional supply / cancel]. Outline your platform for new water and wastewater infrastructure: what gets built, what gets deferred, the fixed water charge trajectory you will accept, and where the money comes from.
Marni Moreau
None of the printed options marked. She has written in her own: ☒ None of the Above
One of my first priorities if elected mayor is to examine the underlying assumptions of the water and wastewater capacity forecasts. The record breaking years that we are basing our future build out needs can be updated. Our economic situation has changed with a drop off in real estate sales, reduced building activity and uncertainty around tariffs and trade.
We have recently made great progress reducing leaks, but still lose about a quarter of our water before it gets to the tap. How much more progress we can make will determine the priority order of replacing our aging infrastructure. This is the most economical way to expand our capacity.
Anything mid-project should be finished and we should look at our other asset needs and score them according to urgency, necessity and financing. Then we look at the whole picture and determine what must be deferred, fixed or built. At this point we will hopefully have more information about the financial implications of a Municipal Services Corporation and know which neighbouring communities are interested.
Paul Reale
☒ Pause and pursue regional supply
My approach is plan first, then build better. We must maintain the infrastructure needed to provide safe, reliable service today, but I would pause major new capacity until council knows the need, scope, full cost and how it will be paid for.
Before committing to a major expansion, I would compare building additional capacity ourselves with regional supply and any other viable option. Growth-related projects should be phased to actual demand and deferred when the demand or funding is not there.
Growth should pay its eligible share through development charges, confirmed grants should reduce the local burden, and user rates should support the system. Also long-term debt can be used prudently for infrastructure that serves several generations.
I would not commit to a fixed water-charge trajectory before that work is done. Residents should see the full rate impact before council commits to the project, not after.
16. The overrun, and whether anyone is ever held to account
The question asked: Three bundled projects — the Craigleith lift station, the Mill Street pumping station and the Bay–Grey Street linear works — went from $34.79M to $53.56M. Council learned of the full variance in November 2025. Staff report ADM-26-015 found the bundling obscured individual cost pressure and that escalation should have been triggered at the Craigleith tender. Council spent $150,000 on value engineering, declined to spend more, and on 2 April 2026 asked for a performance audit from a body that does not review municipal matters. Thornbury came in 92 per cent over budget; Craigleith 54 per cent. An independent third-party performance audit of these projects should be commissioned [yes, in the first 90 days / yes, later in the term / no]. Its findings should be [published in full / received in closed session]. Outline what you would do. Name who would conduct it, by when, and what consequence would follow from an adverse finding.
Marni Moreau
Audit: ☒ No Findings: ☒ Published in full
We already spent $100,000 paying for an audit, KPMG’s Capital Project Delivery Review. I will support the Council and staff in implementing the recommendations. Spending more money to get another report on the shelf is a waste of resources.
The primary issues identified in the “overrun” of 19 million included that went wrong are:
• approved on conceptual estimates and no mandated recosting
• project expansion with no process triggering a public report to council
• no status reports or formal rebaselining after major changes
• no escalation thresholds where an unexpected expense triggers a public report to council
• three projects bundled together
There will be time spent on creating project templates and reporting that will prevent these issues in the future, and I would rather spend the money on that than on a second opinion. We also need to hire an experienced Director of Planning, Operations and a Treasurer. These major hires will shape the possibilities of the next Council.
Paul Reale
Audit: ☒ No Findings: no box marked
On March 9, 2026, Tom Maloney and I made a deputation asking council for an independent third-party review of the $19.7 million overrun. Council ultimately retained KPMG, and in July accepted its Capital Project Delivery Review as the final performance audit and investigative exercise into these projects.
KPMG identified the systemic problems I wanted examined: weak stage-gate controls, late escalation, poor project-level cost visibility, insufficient re-baselining and weak cost assurance.
I would not spend public money commissioning another audit of the same file. The work now is implementation. In my first 90 days, I would require a public report showing which KPMG recommendations have been implemented, which remain outstanding, who is responsible and the deadline for each.
17. The two bills every household pays
The question asked: Reserves fell from roughly $82 million in 2021 to a projected $6.7 million by the end of 2026. Audited long-term debt at the end of 2024 was only $5.24 million, because the capital programme was paid by draining reserves rather than borrowing. Roughly $99 million of projects is committed and under way with more than $150 million further planned, about 90 per cent of it water and wastewater — which lands on the water bill, not the tax bill. On a no-intervention path the municipal tax on a $1 million home rises about 69 per cent by 2030 and the fixed water charge more than doubles. Separately, section 290 of the Municipal Act forbids an operating deficit, and closing the projected $10.3 million operating gap by 2028 implies a further 42 per cent. Do you accept these projections [yes / no — I will supply my own figures / undecided]? Which of the $150 million in planned projects would you defer or cancel [none / some / most]? Outline your platform. Will you commit to a cap on the combined increase a household faces, and name specifically what you would cut to stay under it?
Marni Moreau
Accept these projections: ☒ Undecided Projects to defer or cancel: ☒ Some
I like to keep my commitments. It makes sense to finish what we have already started, but I would consider reducing projects if advised and it was necessary. Some projects may need to go on hold, be delayed or cancelled. First we will look at our asset management plan to determine if we are overbuilding based on the current economic situation. Then we will continue to work on reducing the approximately 25% of water that is lost in delivery. Water bills will depend on many decisions the next council will make, and I am one vote in seven so I cannot commit to a cap on pricing. I will say that the Town has already submitted an Expression of Interest to the province about a Municipal Services Corporation. The fees charged to my constituents would be a major factor in the analysis of whether or not this structure makes sense for our Town. There are different grants and loans that will assist us move these expenses into debt where they can be paid for by the people that will use them in the future and not land on our ratepayers tax bill.
Paul Reale
Accept these projections: ☒ No — I will supply my own figures Projects to defer or cancel: ☒ Some
The $6.7 million reserve projection came from an earlier forecast. The Town’s June 2026 updated Reserve and Reserve Fund Forecast in ADM.26.038 projects a $39.1 million negative funding position by the end of 2026 under the current capital plan and funding assumptions.
I will establish an affordability ceiling for the combined household impact of taxes and water/wastewater charges once a reliable five-year financial forecast is complete.
Staying within it means being willing to stop projects before the Town is locked in. I would pause the Craigleith Wastewater Treatment Plant upgrade program, whose 30% design estimate is $50.2 million against a $45 million approved construction budget, until Council determines what is needed now, what serves future growth, what can be phased and how each component will be funded. If the full program cannot be justified and financed affordably, it should not proceed as one commitment.
18. Thornbury, Craigleith and the Campus of Care
The question asked: The Town bought 32 acres at 125 Peel Street, Thornbury in February 2021 and selected peopleCare with Skyline/SkyDev to build 160 long-term care beds, seniors’ retirement living and attainable staff housing, to be delivered by CIHA order approved in April 2023. Negotiations were terminated in November 2024; servicing and the Peel Street reconstruction were cancelled; the Town kept the land and the beds moved to Craigleith. Meanwhile Thornbury West Phase 2 is suspended and the Thornbury plant nears fifty. The 32 acres at 125 Peel Street should, in the next term, be [brought back to market for seniors’ and attainable housing / used for another municipal purpose / sold / held undeveloped / undecided]. Long-term care, attainable housing and higher-density rental should be built in Thornbury as well as in the Craigleith corridor [agree / disagree]. State plainly what position you took on the Campus of Care at the time, and what you would do differently now. Then set out how a permanent base of roughly 9,000 households pays for a service load sized for visitors.
Marni Moreau
125 Peel Street: ☒ Undecided Built in Thornbury as well as Craigleith: ☒ Agree
Adding more Long term care beds in Thornbury is a priority and I would champion this as Mayor. I also recognize the need for accessible housing for Seniors, rentals, active transportation corridors, point-to-point transportation and the missing middle of housing. Higher density is appropriate where it does not affect the character of the area. This can be done through landscaping, location choice and scaling.
We need to examine the servicing needs of any property before choosing a development partner.
It does seem to me that the 125 Peel Street property is ideally located for something that benefits the municipality rather than another development of expensive, large scale homes. The majority of our current long term $ 4.7 million dollar debt is from this purchase.
Our seasonal homeowners pay the same taxes as full time residents, often on larger homes, and they use a fraction of the services. Our municipality greatly benefits from this financially.
Paul Reale
125 Peel Street: ☒ Brought back to market for seniors’ and attainable housing Built in Thornbury as well as Craigleith: ☒ Agree
I supported long-term care and attainable workforce housing then, and I support them now. What I opposed was putting taxpayers at risk to make the 125 Peel project work. In June 2024, I challenged the $11.5 million servicing estimate, asked where the money would come from and questioned whether the development-charge assumptions were realistic.
Those concerns proved well founded. Infrastructure tied to servicing 125 Peel became part of the wastewater program that later ran $19.7 million over budget. And the development-charge rates I questioned were subsequently reduced substantially through the 2026 OLT settlement.
I would take the same position today. Long-term care and workforce housing are important, but they do not justify an open-ended financial risk to residents. As mayor, I will support projects we need while insisting that the servicing costs, funding and taxpayer exposure are understood before council commits.
With roughly 9,000 households, we cannot size services for peak visitor demand and expect the residential tax base to carry the entire cost. Where tourism creates additional service demand, tourism should pay for tourism. I would use the Town’s share of the Municipal Accommodation Tax and appropriate user-pay revenues to offset identifiable visitor-related costs, and pursue regional cost-sharing where services benefit the broader South Georgian Bay area. Property taxes should primarily support the core level of service residents require year-round; the incremental cost of serving seasonal peaks should be recovered as directly as possible from the activity creating it.
19. Grey Road 19, and long-term care capacity
The question asked: Two separate projects sit on Grey Road 19. The first is a 192-bed peopleCare long-term care home on roughly 3.2 acres of municipal land the Town is selling, beside the new Craigleith fire hall. The second is a private proposal of approximately 612 rental units on a 9.95-hectare site at 796060 Grey Road 19, up to six storeys, being sought by Minister’s Zoning Order rather than by Official Plan and Zoning amendment. Separately, Errinrung is currently the only licensed long-term care home in Thornbury, with 60 beds. Please answer on each project separately. On the 192-bed long-term care home [support / oppose / undecided]. On the 612-unit rental proposal [support the units and the MZO route / support the units but oppose the MZO route / oppose the proposal / undecided]. If Errinrung closes or enters redevelopment before replacement capacity opens, the Town should [secure interim local capacity at municipal cost / accelerate the Craigleith home and accept a gap / reopen a Thornbury site / treat it as a provincial responsibility]. Outline your platform on long-term care and seniors’ housing, and explain your view of using a Minister’s Zoning Order to deliver housing in this town.
Marni Moreau
192-bed long-term care home: ☒ Support 612-unit rental proposal: ☒ Undecided If Errinrung closes: ☒ Reopen a Thornbury site
My mother was a nurse at Errinrung for years. I know what sixty beds mean to the families on this side of town. While I did not initially think the location was ideal, I do support the 192-bed home on Grey Road 19 and I want it open as quickly as the Province will move.
Sooner than later, I would like the Town to reopen a Thornbury site so people are not sent so far from their families and familiar surroundings.
Regarding the 612 rental units, I am undecided until I have seen the servicing numbers. The Town has about 14 percent of its water capacity left.
On the Minister’s Zoning Orders in general I have reservations. An MZO skips the Official Plan, the public meeting and the Council vote, and the Province’s own audit in 2024 found the orders were being used without clear rules. I prefer the Town’s process, done quickly and efficiently.
Paul Reale
192-bed long-term care home: ☒ Support 612-unit rental proposal: ☒ Undecided If Errinrung closes: ☒ Treat it as a provincial responsibility
I support getting the 192-bed peopleCare home built in Craigleith, and I want seniors’ housing options in Thornbury as well. I would bring 125 Peel back to market for seniors’ and attainable housing and use the Town’s land, planning and servicing tools to help create more places where residents can age in their own community.
The Province is responsible for long-term-care licensing and capacity; the Town should advocate strongly for local beds and remove municipal barriers, not take on open-ended provincial operating costs.
I also support more rental and workforce housing, but I do not support using an MZO to decide the Grey Road 19 proposal. An MZO should be exceptional, not a substitute for resolving density, height, servicing, environmental and infrastructure questions. I would put this proposal through the normal planning process and make that process efficient and transparent.
20. Shared recreation and cultural facilities
The question asked: Collingwood is weighing a multi-use recreation centre and an arts and culture centre, both of which have been dealt with in closed session. Residents of The Blue Mountains would use either facility, and Collingwood candidates are being asked in the parallel questionnaire whether they would build them in partnership with this town. Would you support The Blue Mountains partnering with Collingwood on a multi-use recreation centre [yes / yes, if the cost share matches the usage share / no / undecided]? Would you support The Blue Mountains contributing to a regional arts and culture facility [yes / only in-kind or land / no / undecided]? Alternatively, The Blue Mountains should build its own recreation facility [agree / disagree / undecided]. The maximum capital contribution I would support toward a shared facility is: ____. Before any Blue Mountains contribution, a full public business case — total capital cost, annual operating subsidy and this Town’s share — should be published [yes / no]. Outline your platform on recreation and cultural facilities: build alone, build jointly, or buy access. State the test you would apply, and what this town would want in return for its money.
Marni Moreau
Partnering with Collingwood on a multi-use recreation centre: ☒ No Contributing to a regional arts and culture facility: ☒ Undecided Build its own recreation facility: ☒ Agree Maximum capital contribution: line left blank Full public business case published first: ☒ Yes
Collingwood is proceeding with a new proposed site for their new multi-use recreational facility. The plans are underway, and the currently proposed location is in Collingwood and would be less than ideal for the majority of Town of Blue Mountain residents. I know that recreation is a real gap here, and I believe The Blue Mountains should eventually plan its own facility, phased and fundable, the way the library and the community centre got built, which was by a large fundraising drive first. Also, the maintenance of a facility like this needs more than the cost to build and would add another big line to our annual budget so would have to be considered against our other financial needs.
If we cannot build something here in the near future, I would collaborate with Collingwood to see if we could buy access, for example a resident rate at a Collingwood facility.
Paul Reale
Partnering with Collingwood on a multi-use recreation centre: ☒ Yes, if the cost share matches the usage share Contributing to a regional arts and culture facility: ☒ Undecided Build its own recreation facility: ☒ Undecided Maximum capital contribution: “To be determined following a public business case.” Full public business case published first: ☒ Yes
One of the reasons the Town bought 125 Peel Street in 2021 was to secure land for a future multi-use community hub. Staff specifically identified it as a potential location for a regional recreation facility with neighbouring municipalities. That land is still ours, so before TBM commits millions toward a facility in another municipality, a portion of 125 Peel has to be part of the comparison.
I would test three options: build on land we already own, jointly build and own a regional facility, or purchase guaranteed access to another municipality’s facility. I would also invite Meaford and Grey Highlands into that discussion because our hockey, soccer, baseball and other programs already serve families across municipal boundaries.
The business case has to compare land, construction, debt, operating, maintenance and renewal costs. Ownership matters too. If TBM contributes land or capital, residents should receive an ownership interest or enforceable long-term access, fair booking times and rates, a governance role, and clear rights if the partnership ends or the asset is sold.
21. What you should be judged on
The question asked: Name up to three commitments you are prepared to be held to at the end of the term. Each must carry a number and a date. Outline how you believe a mayor’s performance should be measured, and what you would consider a failed term.
Marni Moreau
1. Work with the CAO to hire new talent and retain good staff, helping foster a collaborative Town Hall.
2. Examine the Asset Management Plan against current economic forecasts and decide with Council which projects to complete, rescale, pause or complete.
3. Prioritize updated Master Plans for Parks and Trails, Drainage and Flood Control and Transportation including point to point options.
A mayor that uses strong mayor powers to overrule council has not done the work the voters sent them in to do. Fostering a collaborative relationship between staff, council and residents is crucial. We need a mayor to attend and lead in person and be approachable by residents with criticism and questions.
The job of a mayor is to set the tone from the Chair, tell the truth in a timely manner and be the mayor of everyone, not just the latest and loudest voice in the room.
It is also crucial that communication about the Town’s current and future expenses and revenues, and projects be managed appropriately to prevent surprise overruns.
My timeline is as follows:
1. Treasurer and Planner hired by June 30, 2027, and no senior vacancy open longer than six months for the rest of my term.
2. Stage gates and the $100,000 variance rule were adopted as Council policy by March 31, 2027, and every capital project reported quarterly against its original budget from that date.
3. A point-to-point ride service, starting with medical appointments, running by Summer 2027
Voting is October 16 to 26, 2026, by internet and phone only.
You can vote at your principal residence AND your seasonal home. (and so can your spouse)
Check that you are on the voters’ list at thebluemountains.voterservices.ca
You can register online if you are a qualified voter not on the list.
Paul Reale
1. By March 2027, publish a five-year financial plan showing projected taxes, water and wastewater rates, reserves, debt and the full cost of the Town’s existing capital commitments.
2. By December 2027, complete a financial and project-health review of 100% of active capital projects valued at $1 million or more, with each project publicly identified to proceed, continue, pause, defer or reconsider, and reported quarterly thereafter.
3. By November 2030, have 215 affordable/attainble housing units created.
A mayor should be judged by whether the Town is financially stronger and more disciplined at the end of the term. If, after four years, we are still making commitments first and figuring out how to pay for them later, I would consider that a failed term. The buck stops with the mayor.
22. Leadership and accountability
The question asked: A mayor has one vote. What distinguishes mayors is not their platform but how they work — with council, with staff, and with residents who disagree with them. Council’s only employee is the Chief Administrative Officer. The CAO is responsible for all other staff. Any accountability a mayor wants in the professional ranks has to be built through that relationship. Five situations. Choose one answer in each. A major decision has the support of a bare majority of council. A staff recommendation is competent but less ambitious than what you campaigned on. Council votes against your position on a significant matter. By the end of your first year, the organisation should feel. The larger share of your time in the first year belongs. Accountability for professional staff work should be strengthened by: check all that apply. When a major project fails on cost or on schedule, the person publicly accountable should be. In your own words, what is the job of a mayor? Say what you would do to build accountability into the professional staff role. Then name a decision in your working life where you took a position that was unpopular with the people around you, and say what it cost you.
Marni Moreau
Bare majority of council: ☒ Delay it to build a wider majority
Less ambitious staff recommendation: ☒ Send it back with your own direction
Council votes against your position: ☒ Implement it and defend it publicly
By the end of your first year: ☒ Substantially restructured
Larger share of your time: ☒ Running the town’s own business
Accountability strengthened by: ☒ A written annual performance agreement for the CAO, with published objectives · ☒ Public reporting of every major project against its original budget and schedule · ☒ Senior staff compensation tied to delivery on budget and on time
Person publicly accountable when a major project fails: ☒ No individual — it is a process failure
The job of a mayor is to set the tone and lead.
The CAO is the only direct report and should have a written agreement every year with clear objectives.
When Sportsnet restructured to be able to merge their print, radio and television for major campaigns, everyone wanted the best deal for their department. I was chosen to be on that negotiation team because that’s what I do best. Walk into a room where good people have stopped talking and get them working together again.
Town Hall needs that right now. Staff are leaving, residents are outraged, and Council and Staff sometimes seem opposed. If elected mayor, I would foster a collaborative environment that brings out the best in staff, council and residents.
I’ve found that making tough decisions might be uncomfortable at the moment, but when looking at the long term effects of not fixing the problem, that’s always a worse outcome.
Voting is October 16 to 26, 2026, by internet and phone only.
You can vote at your principal residence AND your seasonal home. (and so can your spouse)
Check that you are on the voters’ list at thebluemountains.voterservices.ca
You can register online if you are a qualified voter not on the list.
Paul Reale
Bare majority of council: ☒ Delay it to build a wider majority
Less ambitious staff recommendation: ☒ Adopt it and pursue the rest separately
Council votes against your position: ☒ Implement it and defend it publicly
By the end of your first year: ☒ Noticeably different in how it works
Larger share of your time: ☒ Running the town’s own business
Accountability strengthened by: ☒ A written annual performance agreement for the CAO, with published objectives · ☒ Named professional sign-off on cost estimates and major reports to council · ☒ A fixed period within which staff must report a variance to council · ☒ Public reporting of every major project against its original budget and schedule
Person publicly accountable when a major project fails: ☒ The mayor
The mayor’s job is to lead council, build consensus and make sure seven elected members can work through difficult choices and make decisions together. That means making sure councillors have the information and support they need. The mayor also has to set the tone for accountability and take responsibility for the result.
Professional accountability starts with the CAO. I would establish a written annual performance agreement tied to council’s priorities, with measurable objectives residents can see. When major projects materially change in cost, scope or risk, the process must require that information to return to council while choices remain.
In my business, we moved classes online during COVID. When we could reopen for in-person classes, some customers wanted the online option to continue. I ended it because I believed in-person interaction was fundamental to the quality of our program. We lost some customers, but I accepted that cost because maintaining the quality of what we delivered mattered more than trying to satisfy everyone.
Two Towns, One Failure is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a paid subscriber.
Much Appreciate You Sharing This Post - It Helps MUCH!!!
