Precedent says city should address Pointe Des Chenes Petition

17
Screenshot of the Pointe Des Chenes Petition.

Sault Ste. Marie doesn’t have a policy in regards to how petitions are dealt with by city hall.

That is the discovery made when trying to figure out how the petition for part of our city to move to Prince Township even ended up on the council agenda of Feb. 8.

So the petition in question, which when we checked had about 500 signatures, was not officially presented to council, yet was addressed as the first priority in the consent agenda.

The city took time to have CAO Malcolm White come up with a report on the petition and then took the time for Mayor Provenzano to address council in hopes of putting the issue to rest.

Without any real policy on when and how petitions are dealt with in the city, this action has set a precedent as what will be addressed by both the Mayor, CAO and council.

So why does this matter?

Given the precedent set by the city, the Pointe Des Chenes petition which currently has over 1000 signatures should be addressed during the next council meeting.

The petition, in support of keeping the park open, was started when members of the public felt their voices were being ignored yet again. It harkens back to what happened with the Hudson Street decision, where public didn’t feel like they had a say.

The next council meeting will be held February 22, 2021 at 4:30 p.m., it can normally be seen on the city’s YouTube page.

17 COMMENTS

  1. it is over $2000. for a seasonal lot. plus you pay your own PUC no lots have sewerage service and the water was undrinkable!! seems like a lot of money to me! they also collected money for winter storage

  2. It is a very narrow minded opinion to think PDC is supported by tax payers. It is totally supported by the people that rent sites in the campground. The city by their own admission have NOT fulfilled their obligation to contracts they made. Before you post an opinion check your facts.

  3. From my conversation with the Councilors, when this was made public, both
    Ward 5 gentlemen were in agreement that this was a concern. Matt Scott put forward a motion along with Marchi Bruni, an Sandra Hollingsworth to keep the campground open.This was voted down by the other members of Council.
    I truly believe that both the Day Park and Camp Ground are hidden Jewels. It is the ONLY public park where the residents of our community can swim and enjoy a day at the park. It is within the City limits. The park and camp ground have been abandoned by the City. Just take a walk through the Pointe Des Chenes Park and then a stroll through Bellvue park, note the difference. We all love to stroll through Bellvue Park. It is beautiful, and many people enjoy it, including myself. It would be really be nice to have a park like that in the westend where people could swim as well. Both parks should be enjoyed by all the residents of our community. Where are the huge tax dollars we pay going???? Not in the West End. The time has come for the CITY to invest in Pointe Des Chenes Park.
    The water issue is not a new one. It should have been dealt with years ago but previous Councils put it off. Now there is a larger problem, but not one that cannot be resolved.
    What a shame to let it go to ruins. Much investment has made in numerous projects around town invloving large sums of taxpayers money. Such as, the Downtown Plaza where the cost is estimated at 6 MILLION dollars. The park issue could resolved at a cost of under $350,000 INVEST IN THE PARK FOR THE ENTIRE COMMUNITY!!!!!!

  4. I think it should be financed and kept open, but only with a very limited number of seasonals and they should have to go thru a lottery process to get a lot every year.. I camped out there seasonal for 4years and it is a VERY closed society out there…If our glorious Mayor can force thru the purchase of a strip club lot for 4 times it’s value, getting Pointe Des Chenes back up to snuff should be no problem…

  5. The city should not keep a cancer causing park open anylonger and risk deaths n lawsuits. And besides it was the same few families enjoying the seasonal spots year after year. There was little to no new spots available as we have tried to join it the last 10 years

    • So you tried for ten years to join a cancer causing park ? So you want it closed because you couldn’t get in right Tony ?

    • Tony. If this is really a cancer causing park, the question should be,
      What is the city doing to rectify this before it starts getting into the river, or adjacent private properties and are they going after the ones responsible for this contamination?

  6. This city has to cut costs and in these covid times with all the distancing and shut downs campgrounds are hit hard. Unfortunately this is one luxury that ALL taxpayers have to pay for only a few to enjoy. I don’t believe for a minute that this campground makes a profit, even if they say it does

      • if it’s going to operate, it should not be on the tax payer’s back, it should be sold to a private company to run it, the city should not be operating a business whether it makes a profit or not and I don’t see this one as profitable, you talk about income but you know nothing about the expenses

    • Don B.
      So with that logic.
      Not everyone uses the library, hockey rinks, ball fields, the marinas, etc. Should we close them too? Covid will not be around forever, but it’s not the time to sell out the future.
      Having all these services available is what makes up the city. It’s what helps to improve and grow a city.
      What we really don’t need is an empty lot on Hudson St that was well overpaid for. We willl never get that money back.

Comments are closed.