Shushing Man

Chatham-Kent Council Ignores Transparency, Quickly Goes to the Mall

July 5, 2021

July 5, 2021

Chatham-Kent Council Six Months Later

Back in December Chatham-Kent’s Councillors ended up with eggs on their faces.  It came to light that they were having secret meetings with a group looking to potentially purchase the  Downtown Chatham Centre (DCC).  Apparently, these meetings revolved around the Municipality becoming partners in this group and then using the old Mall property as a replacement for the Civic Centre. Those meetings had the look and feel of a backroom deal in the works right down to a whistleblower Councillor who made them public knowledge.   Exactly what was discussed and with whom is still not really known.  

As those closed-door talks concluded, CAO Don Shropshire said “I think a lot of the public is curious to know what happened, but I need that decision from council.”  He wanted to encourage our Councilors to create an information report that could be shared publicly.  Despite assurances by Council that these closed-door meetings were nothing to worry about, this report, it seems, was never created. If it does exist, it’s nearly impossible to find on the Municipal website.  It’s another example of Council’s seeming belief that if you are just a common taxpayer, you didn’t need to know. 

Did they hope that Chatham-Kent would forget? 

On June 25 it was announced that the DCC property was purchased by a group of local investors.  Three days later Council supported a surprise motion to conduct a feasibility study on moving out of the Civic Centre and to become tenants in the old mall.  

Is that the smell of cigar smoke coming from a back room where deals are made?  The timing of this motion and the way it was brought to council seems odd.  Six months ago, Council was done with the DCC property.  Now, potential municipal use of the property is so important that the motion had to be rushed through.   

The normal procedure is to enter a Notice of Motion, with the Motion considered at a future council session.  But not this one.  This one was so important they had to get the ball rolling because July 12, the date of the next Council meeting, was just too long to wait. It’s almost like they didn’t want any public input at all.  

Chatham-Kent Council Speeding Past Your Questions

Sort of like how they really didn’t want public input six months ago.  There was a curious statement made by Councillor Thompson in a December interview with the Chatham Daily News. When the paper noted that “any decision made in closed session must eventually come to open council, Thompson seemed resigned that the matter could be ‘pretty much decided’ by that point.” 

Do we have the same dynamics in play here?  The motion was rushed through. The public had no idea that using DCC space was back on the table.  Once the study is done, will its conclusions be pretty much a done deal?  Are the conclusions of this study pretty much a done deal already?  

Council’s haste also raises questions.  How many meetings happened between Councillors and Administration, officially or unofficially, before the property was purchased?  Is the group that purchased the DCC the same potential ownership group that was involved last December? Was this ownership group privately given feedback as to what would work for the Municipality?  Were assurances given that if it was bought, Council would see how the taxpayers could help out?

Of course, if Council had followed normal procedure, there would have been an opportunity at subsequent meetings to address any concerns.  Citizens would have been able to weigh in, which would have provided a quick scan of public perception.  The due diligence case could be coherently presented, leaving us with something better than the “it doesn’t cost us anything” justification. 

Chatham-Kent Cigar and Brandy

Council and Administration have a transparency problem that they just can’t seem to avoid.  It is likely that nothing untoward is happening behind the scenes, but the people who run the Municipality, both elected and hired, are too often reluctant to pull back the curtain and let the rest of us taxpayers know for sure.   

The Civic Centre has issues that will be costly to address no matter what route is pursued.  Yes, Council should do their due diligence to ensure taxpayer revenue is spent efficiently.   They simply need to do it in a way that promotes engagement with the people of Chatham-Kent and doesn’t smell like distant cigar smoke from a backroom. 

Please support Candid Badger!  Help us continue to bring a variety of stories, local and distant, to the community.

Follow The Candid Badger!

If you find value in Candid Badger’s articles, please consider making a small contribution to keeping the lights on. 

Just a Toonie will do!

It’s like tipping your writer.


  1. Mark

    This nonsense goes on in little cities too. Wow! I’ve read Darrins “Message From The Mayor” The people are not being respected. Doin this behind the public’s back. This mayor should keep his word and do his job.

  2. H David Goldsmith

    This problem is not limited to physical properties issues. Our local council has a track record of hiding vital topics and administration hiding things from council. A couple of examples: A police officer obtaining a very expensive SUV for his personal use, and then used that vehicle to drive to and from a “conference” in Texas along with a fellow officer, 1500 miles each way so that they could take their wives on a vacation trip. Council has a legal responsibility to examine and approve budgets for all departments, yet our police department refuses to provide detailed budget info only summary.

    Another example, four or five years ago a presentation was made to council to amalgamate fire and EMS services into one department It was a fairly elaborate presentation comparing costs & benefits for three options. To this day administration cannot (or will not) provide detail financial date to show how those cost & benefit numbers were calculated. This could lead one to speculate the numbers were just pulled out of the air by the creator of the presentation. Council to this day has yet to pass a motion demanding that administration provide the data.

    Council has an obligation to represent the taxpayers who elected them. Instead they seem to blindly approve every whim of administration.

    So much for transparency!!

    We have a lot of deadwood on council that needs clearing out this fall.

  3. Carmen McCauley

    It has been reported that not only will cityhall move to the mall, but a 5000 seat theatre would be constructed. That would be a theatre two blocks from the Cultural Centre’s theatre and four blocks from the Capital Theatre. Who is the moron who came up with THIS idea?

  4. Carmen McCauley

    It has been reported that not only will cityhall move to the mall, but a 5000 seat theatre would be constructed. That would be a theatre two blocks from the Cultural Centre’s theatre and four blocks from the Capital Theatre. Who is the moron who came up with THIS idea?


Submit a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

You May Also Like…

Understanding The U.S. Electoral College

Understanding The U.S. Electoral College

If you follow any US Presidential election, you have most likely heard about the “Electoral College". It’s not a well-understood process even in the United States. And it is once again making the news as the nation gears up for the 2024 Presidential Election. Mostly,...

Please Stop Asking How Much Charities Pay Staff

Please Stop Asking How Much Charities Pay Staff

Since the beginning of the pandemic small communities across North America have begun to experience many issues that were once prominent in larger cities. Challenges brought on by a lack of mental health resources, inflationary pressure, and economic uncertainty have...

Share This

Know someone who would enjoy this story?

Share this post with your friends!