.jpeg;w=960)
The Midland Bay Landing Development Corporation board is no more.
In an email sent to town clerk Sherri Edgar, the board lists a number of reasons why members have opted to resign en masse.
“I think the letter speaks for itself,” outgoing board chair Bill Kernohan told MidlandToday when asked for further comment about the decision.
The letter signed by Kernohan, vice-chair John Macintyre and members Zach Douglas, Teena Fazio and Robert Barber states that the board conducted “a fair and open developer selection process” last year and is disappointed its selected developer opted to bow out of the process.
“This is very disappointing news for the town since redevelopment of the MBL property will not proceed as and when planned and the significant benefits to the Town of transforming the former industrial waterfront into a vibrant mixed-use community bringing new residents and employment to Midland will be lost for the foreseeable future,” the board’s resignation letter states.
“The Shareholder’s Agreement mandates that MBLDC redevelop MLB in accordance with the Master Plan that was based on extensive public consultations. That mandate has been rejected by the newly elected Council as it wants to consider other options for the redevelopment of the MBL property.”
In its outgoing message, board members also note that council’s decision to reduce the board’s budget to $50,000 for the coming year “is insufficient funding by the Town for the Corporation to meet its obligations.”
In 2021, the board spent $250,000 on a 100-metre “demonstration promenade.” The concrete pathway was part of the plan to develop the 40-acre waterfront property, which would have featured 25% public space.
In 2022, the corporation’s operating budget was $354,000.
During a meeting two months ago, board members approved a budget of $229,000 to present to council in January. That $229,0000 figure included about $61,000 in honourariums and meeting expenses for the five board members with new board members Deputy Mayor Jack Contin and Mayor Bill Gordon declining the money.
The board’s move also follows a letter to acting CAO Andy Campbell and Kernohan from Georgian Communities citing that during the due diligence period of the original letter of intent that was signed last year and extended to March 15, “we have determined that there is considerable risk of political uncertainty as well as some technical issues regarding the development.”
The three-paragraph letter concludes with Georgian Communities official David Buston saying the company “is not prepared to participate” in two public meetings slated for February and asking that its $500,000 deposit be reimbursed.
The future of Midland Bay Landing became a major issue during last fall’s municipal election with some questioning the 25% set aside for public use and the majority of those elected supporting a ‘pause and rethink.’
“Up until the letter arrived from Georgian Communities mid-way through our budget deliberations, I was expecting to pass the board’s budget for 2023 with some minor reductions that were in line with other savings we attempted to find in the budget requests,” Gordon told MidlandToday.
Gordon said he had spoken to Kernohan in advance about a potential $40,000 reduction to the board's budget and hoped to worked together to find a number that would not impair the board’s ability to operate as they moved through the public consultations into the proposed sale agreement.
“We had discussed variations of this number and I was proposed to negotiate that with both the board and Council,” he said, noting that position changed once Georgian Communities decided to make an exit just before the first of the two planned public meetings.
“From my perspective, if the talk of public engagement was not genuine, I’d rather know before we sold the land and found those commitments to be hollow.”
Gordon said he suspects Georgian’s “ambiguous technical reasons” cited in its letter could be related to the ongoing economic downturn, inflationary pressures on cost of goods, soaring interest rates, labour market shortage and other pressures that are cooling both the sale and construction markets.
“I would have rather had public meetings, some compromises based on the public input, and have moved ahead in good faith. That can’t happen when only one side is at the table.
“It is unfortunate that Georgian Communities no longer saw the project as viable, but that is precisely why due diligence periods exist.”
But Gordon said once it became obvious the deal was dead, the discussion shifted then to the MBLDC board’s budget requirements.
“The board’s mandate was tied to the sale of the land and the development that would follow," Gordon said. "That all changed when the deal came off the table. The decision to remove the board’s funding for 2023 was an obvious choice as we attempted to wrestle down the budget that would impact our residents.”
Gordon said the board has done exactly what they were established to do and for that, he plans to thank them publicly at an upcoming meeting.
“The plans for the corporation will be the subject of a staff report and recommendation on March 1st,” Gordon said. “Unfortunately, the board members did not wait for that report and have instead chosen to vacate their positions in advance.
“While not entirely unexpected, their letter shows the deep sense of loss they feel because of Georgian’s decision. I empathize with their feelings, but don’t share their sense of gloom.”
Gordon said he was also initially saddened by Georgian's decision and had fully expected to work on compromises that balanced Georgian's need to make money on phase one with additional public realm improvements that would satisfy Midlanders.
“Notwithstanding, I believe that residents are generally happy that the project has died, however, it can’t be overstated that there is loss associated with Georgian’s decision,” Gordon said, referring to the economic benefits the development would have brought to the town over the short term.
“This may be a bitter pill to swallow for those who campaigned on moving ahead without a pause and without pre-sale public consultation who may feel that their position on this project cost them votes,” he said. “Regardless, we are where we are now and this is an opportunity to renew public engagement, revise the plans for the land and choose a new direction.”
Gordon said he plans to seek council support to establish a citizen-led steering committee to review the current plan, host new public sessions and establish next steps.
“For now, we course correct and set our sights on the future of this land and I encourage residents to attend the public engagement sessions that will be hosted this year where we will ensure that the current plan is clearly communicated, solicit feedback about any changes that may or may not impact the official plan and decide, together as a community, what next steps look like.”
