Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutJanuary 15, 2026 - Council - AddendumTHE CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF BAYHAM COUNCIL MEETING ADDENDUM Thursday, January 15, 2026 11.2 A Report PS-01/26 by Steve Adams, Manager of Public Works|Drainage Superintendent re Capital Items Nos. PW-25 and PW-29 – Tandem Plow Trucks – Canoe Procurement Group 11.2 B Report FR-01/26 by Harry Baranik, Fire Chief re 2025/2026 Mental Health Supports for Public Safety Personnel (MHS4PSP) Grant 13.2 A Report CAO-02/26 by Thomas Thayer, CAO re Elgin County Transportation Master Plan REPORT PHYSICAL SERVICES TO: Mayor & Members of Council FROM: Steve Adams, Manager of Public Works/Drainage Superintendent DATE: January 15, 2026 REPORT: PS-01/26 SUBJECT: CAPITAL ITEMS NOS. PW-25 AND PW-29 – TANDEM PLOW TRUCKS – CANOE PROCUREMENT GROUP BACKGROUND At its March 19, 2015 meeting, Council adopted By-law No. 2015-030, being a by-law to define procurement policies and procedures for The Corporation of the Municipality of Bayham. At its November 4, 2025 meeting, Council received Report TR-19/25 re 2026-2035 Capital Budget – Draft, and passed the following motion, in part: A. Report TR-19/25 by Lorne James, Treasurer re 2026-2035 Capital Budget – Draft Moved by: Councillor Emerson Seconded by: Councillor Chilcott THAT Report TR-19/25 re 2026-2035 Capital Budget - Draft be received for information; AND THAT Council approve in principle the 2026-2035 Capital Budget presented with the following edits: • Bring forward PR-09 to 2026 funded by the Parkland Reserve AND THAT consideration be given to funding East Beach capital items using Infrastructure Ontario (IO) debt, subject to receipt of a Report on the paid parking pilot program to come to Council on November 20, 2025 and Council establishing the paid parking program as a permanent revenue source for the East Beach; AND THAT a staff report be presented in 2026 for further discussion for locations of PR-06. The 2026-2035 Capital budget includes the following Items under the Public Works portfolio: • Capital Item No. PW-25 Tandem Truck - $540,000, replacement of a 2014 International Tandem Plow truck. • Capital Item No. PW-29 Tandem Truck - $540,000, replacement of a 2015 Mack tandem Plow truck. DISCUSSION The June 15, 2023 presentation by Canoe Procurement Group of Canada focused on the advantages of municipal group procurement offered through Canoe under the LAS, AMO Business Services. The Municipality’s Procurement By-law No. 2015-030 permits group procurement by way of Sections 9.28 and 9.29, entitled “Co-operative Purchasing”, specifically where it is deemed in the Municipality’s best interest to do so. Staff sought support through Canoe for the purposes of procuring the Tandem Trucks identified in Capital Items Nos. PW-25 and PW-29. As per the Canoe procurement process, staff received the following 2026 tandem truck quotation, dated January 9, 2026, from Viking-Cives Ltd. The quotation is valid until February 1, 2026 with anticipated build date is Q2 2027: Bidder Total Vehicle Cost Freightliner (Premier Truck Group) supplied with Viking-Cives Equipment $474,215 + HST each Following discussions with the truck and chassis supplier and the vehicle builder, the builder has offered a $15,000 reduction per vehicle, resulting in a revised cost of $459,215 + HST per unit. This cost reduction is reflected if the Municipality elects to pay for the chassis upfront in 2026, the initial 2026 payment would be $462,190.00 + HST for two chassis. Upon completion and delivery of the units in Q1 or Q2 of 2027, the remaining balance of $456,240.00 + HST will be paid in full, at which time all warranties will commence. This represents a total savings of $30,000 for both units, reflecting reduced interest costs passed from the dealer to the manufacturer. Financial impacts, as set out in the 2026–2035 Capital Budget, include a total of $1,040,000 funded through the tax levy, with an additional $40,000 anticipated from the sale of the proposed surplus units. It is recommended that any surplus funding from the 2026/7 purchase would be transferred to a reserve for future use by the Public Works department. STRATEGIC PLAN 1.1: Quality of Place > To invest in community infrastructure initiatives that create an effective foundation that contribute to Bayham’s quality of life and economic prospects. Initiative(s): Focus on core infrastructure based on the Asset Management Plan and compliance with legislation. 3.2: Quality of Governance > To continually demonstrate financial responsibility to the community. Initiative(s): Not applicable. RECOMMENDATION 1. THAT Report PS-01/26 re Capital Items Nos. PW-25 and PW-29 – Tandem Plow Trucks – Canoe Procurement Group be received for information; 2. AND THAT the Council of The Corporation of the Municipality of Bayham approve the procurement of two (2) new Freightliner Tandem Trucks supplied with Viking-Cives equipment, as outlined in the quotation received from Viking-Cives Ltd., for the quoted amount of $918,430.00 + HST Respectfully Submitted by: Reviewed by: Steve Adams Thomas Thayer, CMO, AOMC Manager of Public Works|Drainage Superintendent Chief Administrative Officer REPORT FIRE DEPARTMENT TO: Mayor & Members of Council FROM: Harry Baranik, Fire Chief / CEMC DATE: January 15, 2026 REPORT: FR-01/26 SUBJECT: 2025/2026 MENTAL HEALTH SUPPORTS FOR PUBLIC SAFETY PERSONNEL (MHS4PSP) GRANT BACKGROUND Mental Health in Public Service employees cost the provincial government millions of dollars through the health system and claims under WSIB. Ontario Municipalities also lose millions in loss wages from Mental Health Claims. Most importantly, are the lives that are loss due to suicides from first responders. Firefighters are up to a 14 percent higher risk of suicide than the general public. On November 19, 2024, Ontario’s Solicitor General, The Right Honourable Michael Kerzner, announced that the SOLGEN had partnered with Wounded Warriors Canada to provide specialized services through Warrior Health for fire, corrections, emergency health, police personnel, and others who support Ontario’s public safety system. This was a grant for $32,000,00. The Warrior Health program includes: • Free services available to all public safety personnel (PSP) through a digital web portal such as: internet-based cognitive behavioral therapy (ICBT) and peer-support tools, now available from the Warrior Health website: www.warriorhealth.ca. • Fee-for-service programs available for purchase by public safety organizations (PSOs) for their staff. It includes options such as general wellness programs, peer support training, and other trauma-informed mental health programs that employers (e.g., PSOs) across Ontario can purchase. On May 27, 2025, the Wounded Warriors went live with their on-line portal for those mentioned above. In June 2025, the Solicitor General made a further announcement to help provide first responders access to some of the Fee-for-service programs. The caveat being that the monies would be received in January 2026 and be used by March 31, 2026. DISCUSSION In June 2025, when the Ontario Solicitor General announced the MHS4PSP Grant, there was the allowance for services to combine their granted monies in order to provide more educational opportunities to those combined services. Most of the Fire Chiefs of Elgin County agreed to combine their grant monies with the Township of Malahide administering the grant. On November 14, 2025, the Ontario Government announced the successful recipients for the grant. In their announcement, they advised: Township of Malahide - $25,000 Township of Malahide (Bayham Fire and Emergency Services) - $25,000 Township of Malahide (Southwold Fire Department) - $25,000 Township of Malahide (West Elgin Fire Department) - $25,000 The programs applied for and accepted include: Trillium Health Partners First Responder New Employee Onboarding - Psychoeducation Wounded Warriors Canada Strength Warrior Homewood PTSD Awareness Trillium Health Partners Preventing and Managing Burnout in a Rural Community Environment Homewood Suicide Awareness for Leaders Wounded Warriors Canada Peer Support Fundamentals Training (24hrs) Four of these courses are virtual-based. The first course – First Responder New Employee Onboarding begins January 16, 2026. STRATEGIC PLAN 3.2: Quality of Governance > To continually demonstrate financial responsibility to the community Initiative: Actively seek and apply for grants to support operational and capital projects. RECOMMENDATION 1. THAT Report FR-01/26 re 2025/2026 Mental Health Supports for Public Safety Personnel (MHS4PSP) Grant be received for information. Respectfully submitted: Reviewed by: Harry Baranik Thomas Thayer, CMO, AOMC Fire Chief/CEMC/By-Law Chief Administrative Officer B.A., CMM III Police Professional/ Fire Services Executive, CEMC, CAFI REPORT CAO TO: Mayor & Members of Council FROM: Thomas Thayer, Chief Administrative Officer DATE: January 15, 2026 REPORT: CAO-02/26 SUBJECT: ELGIN COUNTY TRANSPORTATION MASTER PLAN BACKGROUND On December 11, 2025, Elgin County Council approved the final draft of the Transportation Master Plan (TMP), branded “Elgin in Motion,” and released it for a 30-day public review period before final adoption. The Municipality of Bayham was advised on December 15, 2025 that comments will be accepted until January 16, 2026. The TMP is intended to guide County transportation planning over the long term and includes directions on road network priorities, safety, multimodal connections, and potential changes to road ownership and responsibilities between the County and lower-tier municipalities. The TMP also describes how the County developed the recommendations. The County first identified transportation needs and opportunities and organized them under six goals, including three overarching goals (Environmental Protection, Fiscal Responsibility, Future Readiness) and three mobility goals (Efficient County and Inter Regional Connections, Healthy Communities, Economic Prosperity). The County then developed and assessed potential actions against these goals before selecting the recommended package, which includes both infrastructure and non-infrastructure items such as capital projects, operational changes, studies and monitoring, policy work, and proposed asset transfers. Because the recommendations may affect Bayham’s capital planning, operations, service levels, growth management, and coordination with adjacent municipalities and agencies, staff have reviewed the TMP and prepared municipal comments for Council’s and ultimately the County’s consideration. DISCUSSION From the six goals outlined in the TMP, 12 focus areas were established, including the identification of 26 action items. These focus areas are lettered A through L in the summary report. The Focus Areas and Action Items that are notable and may have direct impact to Bayham are identified below: Focus Area A – Responding to Anticipated Road Capacity Constraints A2 – Develop a County carpool lot strategy that formalizes the County's role in carpool lot provision, identifies strategic locations and corridors, and provides a criteria-based assessment framework to assess candidate lot locations and prioritize carpool lot provision. The preliminary locations identified as part of the TMP can then be assessed as part of this strategy, along with other candidate locations that may be identified. Focus Area C – Rationalizing County Transportation Network Assets C1– County Staff to develop an implementation action plan and asset transfer protocol to facilitate the transfer of approximately 22km of County roads to Local Municipal Partner ownership, per the TMP’s County road rationalization assessment’s recommended near term transfers. Near-term transfers to Bayham include: • Fulton Street (Vienna) • Chatham Street, south of Nova Scotia Line/Bridge Street (Port Burwell) • Wellington Street (Port Burwell) • Victoria Street, between Robinson and Wellington (Port Burwell) Long-term transfers to Bayham include: • County Road 55, between Heritage Line and Glen Erie Line • Eden Line, between Plank Road and Culloden Road C3 – County Staff to initiate asset transfer protocol to facilitate the transfer of five bridges as recommended by the TMP bridge assessment Bayham bridges include: • Edison Drive Bridge – Edison Drive, Vienna Focus Area D – Supporting Safety on County Roads D1 – Continue to review collision data and public safety concerns toward identifying County road locations with a higher frequency of collisions, and implement mitigating measures and other safety considerations to improve road user safety D2 – Continue to apply Federal and Provincial guidance/best practices in addressing speed limit reduction requests for County roads. Identify and apply appropriate roadway design measures that encourage traffic to travel at posted speeds while also maintaining County road traffic mobility priority. D3 – Continue to engage with partners about road safety concerns and mitigations required; explore the potential of formalizing a County Safety Council, with representation from local municipal partners, Ontario Provincial Police and County Council, for the purpose of information and resource sharing. Focus Area E – Responsiveness to Changes and Challenges E1 – In accordance with the Ontario’s Development Charges Act, 1997, conduct a County Development Charges Background Study to quantify the financial impact of growth on County infrastructure and services, and to outline a rationale for charging these fees to developers; implement study recommendations as appropriate. E2 – With LMPs, clarify the County's role in the implementation and maintenance of expanded electric vehicle (EV) charging infrastructure. As appropriate, develop a County EV charging strategy with LMPs that would leverage Federal and Provincial sources of funding. E4 – Continue to obtain up-to-date transportation information as a foundation for effective transportation-related decision-making. This includes continuing the County's traffic classification count program on County roads, and exploring additional potential cost-effective opportunities for transportation data and modelling, e.g. Strava cycling data, potential expansion of the City of London's household travel survey to Elgin County, and leveraging transportation modelling to be conducted as part of MTO's Highway 3 connectivity study. Focus Area F – Passenger and Transit Service Provision F1 – Explore in further detail how to provide passenger transit service connectivity across Elgin County, leveraging potential municipal transit service partnerships/or implementing a County-led service, leveraging available Federal and Provincial sources. Explore the potential for partnerships with City of St. Thomas, Middlesex County, City of London and Town of Tillsonburg to expand the provision of transit services into Elgin County in the short-term. Explore further initiating a County-led pilot transit service that would complement the expanded services that can be available through municipal transit service partnerships. Focus Area I – Pedestrian Crossings of County Roads I1 – Develop a clear and consistent decision-making framework for implementing pedestrian crossing opportunities across County roadways, in collaboration with Local Municipal Partners and where current pedestrian infrastructure exists. Focus Area K – Supporting the Movement of Agricultural Equipment K1 – Ensure that agricultural equipment is considered in the design and maintenance of rural County roads. While staff are generally supportive of the TMP and many of the Focus Areas and associated proposed Action Items, there are a few that merit increased discussion due to potential impacts to Bayham in the coming years. These are discussed below and highlighted in the attached document: Carpool Locations Bayham is the only municipality that does not have a proposed carpool location within its geography. Malahide also does not, but Aylmer does, and as Aylmer is surrounded wholly by Malahide, staff reasonably assume Malahide residents would have direct access to Aylmer’s carpool hub. Bayham has no such access. Given Focus Area E’s proposal for EV charging stations and a County-wide approach, it may be reasonable to recommend a carpool location in Bayham, where an EV station can a co-located. Currently, no carpool locations are proposed in Bayham, and every other municipality has one generally within its geographic boundaries. Bayham has an Electric Charging Station in its 2026-2035 Capital Budget as Item No. FA-06. This is also important given Focus Area F’s proposal for enhanced, County-wide alternative transportation options. Carpooling is an alternative transportation option that can be arranging privately rather than something actioned and implemented by a level of government (ex. regional bus transportation). The lack of a dedicated carpool location in Bayham implicitly hinders alternative transport and access to services and amenities not found in the municipality. Road Rationalization The draft TMP identifies road rationalization as “the process of reviewing and optimizing the road network within the County to ensure each roadway’s function aligns with County vs. Local Municipal Partner ownership. The process involves applying a logical framework to determine which roads serve County mobility objectives to a sufficient degree to remain in or be added to the County road network.” Bayham staff were first engaged on road rationalization in 2021 and again in 2022, but not since. Given the data collected at the time and the requirement for a logical framework for continuation in, or removal from the County’s road network, staff question whether the data used to underpin the recommendations are current enough to substantiate such transfers. For instance, Pressey Road connects Malahide with Tillsonburg and has seen an increase in traffic over the last few years. In 2022, staff made recommendation to consider a transfer of Pressey Road to the County. This was rejected at the time, but nearly four years have passed since the last meaningful discussion on road rationalization, and staff recommend, once again, that this transfer be considered. Bayham is the lower-tier municipality most impacted by the recommended road-asset transfers. From Bayham’s perspective any additional roads or bridges added to Bayham’s infrastructure portfolio will increase operational costs associated with maintenance, and will expand Bayham’s capital footprint and overall lifecycle costing, which has a direct impact on the Asset Management Plan and approved Financial Strategy. Insurance premiums will also increase due to the addition of road and bridge assets. Staff have concerns about what funding, if any, will be provided under a transfer protocol and in what condition the assets will be transferred. It is worth noting that, if a transfer does occur, funding under the Road Maintenance Agreement will be negatively impacted as maintenance funding will shift entirely to Bayham. Historically, Bayham has incurred greater than projected costs to maintain County roads. There are also costs and administrative time required to establish new boundary road agreements and determine new drainage assessments. County Road 55 is a boundary road between Bayham and Norfolk. If transferred, it will require a boundary road agreement to outline roles and responsibilities of each municipality regarding maintenance, capital improvements, and drainage assessments. Bayham will be further responsible for the drainage assessments on all newly-obtained roads, which is yet another added cost. It is unknown if costs for drainage assessments and boundary agreements will be included in the contemplated financial compensation. Staff strongly recommend that Bayham staff be consulted with respect to any established transfer protocol. Inclusion of the Manager of Public Works and Treasurer should be mandatory where infrastructure assets and financial implications are the topic. The TMP does indicate that a transfer protocol may be underway as targeted assets have been identified. To date, no consultation has occurred with Bayham outside of asset identification. When discussions were ongoing, it was mentioned that a transfer protocol would include important background information to support lower-tier decision-making, including documents such as bridge inspection reports, road condition reports, and any up-to-date designs and drawings for proposed works in the County’s possession. Bayham strongly recommends this intent be carried into any new round of discussion. Development Charges Staff and Council have previously considered and commented upon an earlier iteration of County Development Charges. At that time, Council was generally opposed to the concept. Staff understand and are in favour of the concept of development charges, and have since implemented local development charges on the majority of Bayham’s capital portfolio. Staff do continue to question, however, what actual benefit Bayham will receive if a County development charge proceeds. Elgin County and area growth projections are heavily skewed to the geographic centre and environs near to St. Thomas. This is due to the ongoing PowerCo development and secondary industrial development. The TMP identifies under Focus Area A, a significant number of road infrastructure projects to the benefit of St. Thomas and Central Elgin, extending as far east as Aylmer. Staff believe that a County development charge would see implementation to a greater degree in these areas, and would leave relatively less for Bayham. Bayham staff are generally in support of the TMP’s overall intent and direction. Staff have prepared a set of municipal comments for County consideration, including observations on several action areas that may affect Bayham’s capital and operational costs and asset management planning, growth management, and coordination with adjacent municipalities and agencies. For communication purposes and transparency, staff are presenting our comments to Council for endorsement and direction to provide same to Elgin County prior to the January 16, 2026 comment deadline. STRATEGIC PLAN 1.1: Quality of Place > To invest in community infrastructure initiatives that create an effective foundation that contributes to Bayham’s quality of life and economic prospects. Initiative(s): Focus on core infrastructure base don the Asset Management Plan and compliance with legislation 2.1: Quality of Life > To work collaboratively with community organizations and others in ensuring the availability of a diverse range of passive recreational, heritage, cultural and other community services that contribute to enriching Bayham’s valued quality of life. Initiative(s): Strategic improvement to recreational amenities to promote healthy living 3.2: Quality of Governance > To continually demonstrate financial responsibility to the community. Initiative(s): Not applicable 3.3: Quality of Governance > To strategically engage in partnerships, joint ventures and other collaborative activities that leverage the Municipality’s resources and capabilities in order to achieve enhanced efficiencies and benefits for the community and its residents. Initiative(s): Encourage ongoing networking with provincial and federal partners and other industry representatives ATTACHMENTS 1. Staff comments – Elgin County Draft Transportation Master Plan RECOMMENDATION 1. THAT Report CAO-02/26 re Elgin County Transportation Master Plan be received for information. 2. AND THAT staff be directed to submit the comments to Elgin County prior to the closure of the public comment period. Respectfully Submitted by: Thomas Thayer, CMO, AOMC Chief Administrative Officer January 15, 2026 Municipality of Bayham Comments – Elgin County Draft Transportation Master Plan The Municipality of Bayham (“Bayham”) has reviewed the Draft Transportation Master Plan (TMP) as formally adopted by County Council on December 11, 2025. Bayham is generally supportive of the TMP, but is providing the following comments to ensure proper consideration of meaningful consultation and a well thought-out road rationalization transfer protocol are established with ongoing lower-tier input. Focus Area A – Responding to Anticipated Road Capacity Constraints Bayham has no real input on Items A1 as they tend to focus on the centre of the County and are in general proximity to the anticipated growth areas around PowerCo as illustrated in Exhibit 4.1. Clearly the intent is to focus improvements geographically in a combination of Southwold, Central Elgin, Malahide, and Aylmer. Bayham is outside of the priority area. This noted, Item A2 and associated Exhibit 4.2 propose carpool locations across the County. Exhibit 4.2 is clear that Bayham is the only municipality that does not have a proposed carpool location (it is assumed that Malahide will use Aylmer’s). Bayham requests that consideration be given to identifying secondary locations across the County for future expansion, including one in Bayham. Focus Area C – Rationalizing County Transportation Network Assets The draft TMP identifies road rationalization as “the process of reviewing and optimizing the road network within the County to ensure each roadway’s function aligns with County vs. Local Municipal Partner ownership. The process involves applying a logical framework to determine which roads serve County mobility objectives to a sufficient degree to remain in or be added to the County road network.” Bayham is the lower-tier municipality and appears most impacted by the recommended road- asset transfers. Bayham notes that the following roads and bridges are slated for downloading in the near- and long-term, as noted on Exhibit 4.4: • Fulton Street (Vienna) • Chatham Street, south of Nova Scotia Line/Bridge Street (Port Burwell) • Wellington Street (Port Burwell) • Victoria Street, between Robinson and Wellington (Port Burwell) • County Road 55, between Heritage Line and Glen Erie Line • Eden Line, between Plank Road and Culloden Road • Edison Drive Bridge – Edison Drive, Vienna Bayham staff were first engaged on road rationalization in 2021 and again in 2022, but not since. Given the data collected at the time and the requirement for a logical framework for continuation in, or removal from the County’s road network, Bayham questions whether the data used to underpin the recommendations are current enough to substantiate such transfers. Pressey Road, which is a boundary road on the north end of Bayham, connects Malahide with Tillsonburg and has seen an increase in traffic over the last few years. In 2022, Bayham made recommendation to consider a transfer of Pressey Road to the County. This was rejected at the time, but nearly four years have passed since the last meaningful discussion on road rationalization. Bayham, once again, is recommending the consideration of a transfer of Pressey Road to the County. From Bayham’s perspective any additional roads or bridges added to Bayham’s infrastructure portfolio will increase operational costs associated with proper staffing and maintenance, and will expand Bayham’s capital footprint and overall lifecycle costing, which has a direct impact to the Asset Management Plan and approved Financial Strategy. Insurance premiums will also increase due to the addition of road and bridge assets into Bayham’s portfolio. Bayham has concerns about what funding, if any, will be provided under a transfer protocol and in what condition the assets will be transferred. It is worth noting that, if a transfer does occur, funding under the Road Maintenance Agreement (RMA) will be negatively impacted as maintenance funding will shift entirely to Bayham. Historically, Bayham has incurred greater than projected costs to maintain County roads, which was identified to the County during discussions over the RMA, but was not something that County was willing to adjust at that time. There are also costs and administrative time required to establish new boundary road agreements and determine new drainage assessments. County Road 55 is a boundary road between Bayham and Norfolk. If transferred, it will require a boundary road agreement to outline roles and responsibilities of each municipality regarding maintenance, capital improvements, and drainage assessments. Bayham will be responsible for the drainage assessments on all newly-obtained roads, which is yet another added cost. Are costs for drainage assessments and boundary agreements included in contemplated financial compensation? Bayham staff should be consulted with respect to any established transfer protocol. Inclusion of the Manager of Public Works and Treasurer should be mandatory where infrastructure assets and financial implications are the topic. The TMP does indicate that a transfer protocol may be underway as targeted assets have been identified. Since 2022, no consultation has occurred with Bayham outside of asset identification. Back when discussions were ongoing, it was mentioned that a transfer protocol would include important background information to support lower-tier decision-making, including documents such as bridge inspection reports, road condition reports, and any up-to-date designs and drawings for proposed works in the County’s possession. Bayham strongly recommends this intent be carried into any new round of discussion. Focus Area D – Supporting Safety on County Roads Bayham is supportive of the TMP’s focus on road safety supports the TMP’s emphasis on road safety, including analysis, consultation, and potential mitigation solutions. Bayham has a number of areas on County roads that have, over the last five years, given rise to local concerns regarding safety. Bayham has received and forwarded on to the County various safety concerns on Plank Road and Eden Line, and has received requests for safe pedestrian crossing infrastructure in Straffordville and Port Burwell. Bayham encourages the County to consult with lower-tier partners and develop a Traffic Calming Policy for the County rather than sole reliance on the Canadian guide. A County policy would clearly articulate the County’s approach, provide a transparent and consistent framework for evaluating and prioritizing requests, and improve public understanding of how traffic calming warrants are determined and applied. This would make communication with the public easier with respect to traffic calming and may alleviate future requests to Bayham and County Council, respectively. Focus Area E – Responsiveness to Changes and Challenges Bayham has previously considered and commented upon an earlier iteration of County Development Charges. At that time, Bayham was generally opposed to the concept. Bayham understands and is in favour of the concept of development charges, and have since implemented local development charges on the majority of Bayham’s capital portfolio. Bayham does continue to question, however, what actual benefit Bayham will receive if a County development charge proceeds. Elgin County and area growth projections are heavily skewed to the geographic centre and environs near to St. Thomas. This is evidenced by the clear focus of Action Items geographically in proximity to St. Thomas and diminishing with distance. This is due to the ongoing PowerCo development and secondary industrial development. The TMP identifies under Focus Area A, a significant number of road infrastructure projects to the benefit of St. Thomas and Central Elgin, extending as far east as Aylmer. Bayham believes that a County development charge would see implementation to a greater degree in these areas, and would leave relatively less for Bayham. Bayham is supportive of a County EV Charging Strategy and any County support towards establishing a charging station in Bayham. Bayham’s 2026-2035 Capital Budget contains an item for an Electric Charging Station that could be further encouraged by the County’s policy decision to develop and implement a strategy for the whole County. If this comes to fruition, Bayham encourages siting of at least one such station publicly in Bayham. This location should be any future carpool location, as referenced under Focus Area A. Focus Area F – Passenger and Transit Service Provision Bayham strongly supports the TMP action item to explore and assess opportunities for expanded passenger transit connectivity across Elgin County, including partnerships with neighboring municipalities and agencies. Bayham used to have a line through Tillsonburg’s pilot T:Go program, which has since been discontinued. Bayham recognizes access to amenities in larger urban centres may be negatively impacted if viable alternative transportation options are not available to Bayham residents. There is also the possibility for a seasonal transit stop at the East Beach for those who cannot readily access transportation. Staff support the County’s intent to leverage partnerships and any available seed grant funding through upper levels of government for transportation expansion, as improved regional transit connections can benefit residents, provide access to important services and amenities, improve access to employment, and enhance regional partnerships and overall mobility. Focus Area I – Pedestrian Crossings of County Roads As noted in Focus Area D, Bayham has received a number of requests for safe pedestrian crossings on County roads where speed concerns have been raised. These include Plank Road in various locations including across from the Straffordville Public School, Robinson Street in Port Burwell, and Eden Line in Eden. Bayham is supportive of any consultation to create a County-wide, consistent policy or technical document to evaluate options for pedestrian crossings and implement safe measures for pedestrian crossings. Focus Area K – Supporting the Movement of Agricultural Equipment Bayham is a community that relies heavily on its vibrant agricultural sector. Bayham is supportive of the TMP’s proposal to ensure future road designs take into account large farm vehicles. Bayham encourages consultation on any road design technical standards or policies that apply to accommodating farm vehicles, and welcome the opportunity to supply input. Thank you for your time and consideration. Bayham remains committed to supporting the TMP and providing important input on local matters.