Mayoral Candidate Questionnaire The Blue Mountains | The Shulman Report | Questions 9 through 12
Ron Shulman – Questions 9 through 12 of the twenty-two 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, in alphabetical order, with nothing added.
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.
Peter Bordignon
Permanent staff complement: ☒ Shrink Outside consultants: ☒ Decrease Publishing closed-session subject matter and voting records: ☒ No — “most closed session meetings are legal advice, HR or land negotiations in nature”
My approach to running The Town of The Blue Mountains is built around clear direction, responsibility and teamwork.
Council’s job is to set priorities, approve the budget, establish policy and hold the organization accountable. The CAO and staff manage day-to-day operations and provide the professional expertise Council needs.
The Mayor should always bring those two sides together and not try to be the CAO.
In my first 100 days, I would focus on three things: establish clear, measurable Council priorities; strengthen reporting on major projects, finances, debt and reserves and undertake an organizational review focused on efficiency, duplication and value for taxpayers.
I also want greater financial clarity. Residents should be able to go online and easily see what the Town owns, what it owes, what we’re spending and what we’re committed to spending. Do this in plain language, not accounting jargon. Council needs to lead. Staff need to manage. And residents need to see the results.
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.
Peter Bordignon
Shared or regional services: ☒ Water / wastewater · ☒ Solid waste · ☒ Regional transit · ☒ Recreation · ☒ Economic development · ☒ Building and planning. Fire and None not marked. Amalgamation: ☒ Study it formally Grey County roads transfer: ☒ Accept only with a permanent revenue transfer — written in: “I supported accepting the road transfer only with a permanent revenue transfer for capital, while also ensuring The Town of The Blue Mountains also receives the future development charge revenue associated with those roads.”
The Town of The Blue Mountains should work with neighbouring municipalities as partners on issues that do not stop at municipal boundaries: transportation, housing, economic development, emergency services, watershed protection and major infrastructure. We should coordinate closely with Grey County, Collingwood, Meaford, Grey Highlands and Clearview, while pursuing joint procurement and sharing specialized expertise where it improves service and reduces costs.
I would be prepared to give up some local control over 2 items: regional transit planning and waste collection. Coordinating transit routes, schedules, fares and vehicles could provide more reliable service for residents, workers and visitors. Joint waste collection and disposal contracts could reduce duplication, strengthen our purchasing power and keep essential services for our residents.
Cooperation does not mean surrendering our community’s identity or authority. It means recognizing where shared services can produce better results. The test must be straightforward. Does the partnership improve service, protect taxpayers, maintain environmental standards and ensure clear, responsible public accountability?
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.
Peter Bordignon
☒ Yes, if a business case supports it Services: ☒ Water and wastewater · ☒ Recreation facilities · ☒ Transit · ☒ Economic development and tourism. Other services line left blank.
My platform includes exploring shared regional transit, waste collection, and water and wastewater services with neighbouring municipalities. We must remember that, under provincial legislation, the Town of The Blue Mountains is part of Grey County, not Simcoe County. So Grey County must remain our primary regional partner while we continue practical cross-boundary cooperation.
Coordinated transit routes, waste services and specialized water and wastewater expertise could reduce duplication, improve service and strengthen infrastructure planning. I would require a public business case demonstrating measurable savings or service improvements before proceeding. Grey County is already looking at many of these joint opportunities.
A joint board would have equal representation from each municipality, a rotating chair, public agendas and audited reporting. Major budget or service changes would require support from every participating municipality. I would not place local land-use planning, taxation or community-specific service standards under this. Shared services should proceed only when they deliver better results and not just another layer of administration.
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.
Peter Bordignon
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: ☒ Worth it only on conditions I will state
I believe there are benefits to exploring a regional governance model, with residents fully involved before any decision is made. Under provincial legislation, the Town of The Blue Mountains is part of Grey County, not Simcoe County. Again, so any discussion must begin within that reality.
Regional governance could improve coordination of transit, waste collection, water and wastewater infrastructure, housing, and economic development. It could reduce duplication, provide access to specialized expertise and strengthen our voice with provincial and federal governments and not compete for HR staff talent.
Exploration does not mean automatic support for amalgamation. Any proposal must demonstrate measurable savings or improved services, fair representation and strong local accountability. The Town of The Blue Mountains must retain its community identity and a meaningful voice in decisions. I would support an independent business case and comprehensive public consultation before deciding whether the benefits justify changing the current system.
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.
Two Towns, One Failure is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and
support my work, consider becoming a paid subscriber.
