By Pam Wright, Local Journalism Initiative Reporter, Chatham Voice
A motion by a Chatham councillor to reinstate dust suppressant on gravel roads kicked up a cloud of controversy at Chatham-Kent council recently.
But after lengthy discussion, changes to the motion and following four deputations, council opted to bring back the service it did away with during the 2025 budget process.
Brought forward by Coun. Michael Bondy, the motion directs municipal staff to follow the procurement process this summer aiming for a partial application of suppressant to be completed this calendar year. Cost for the 2025 service is to be drawn from the strategic reserve.
The motion also directs administration to bring a report back prior to budget 2026 to determine whether to re-instate full dust control service across the municipality.
Bondy, who voted against the motion at budget, said he brought the issue back due to concerns raised at a Kent Federation of Agriculture meeting he attended in the winter. There, he said, he learned dust suppressant is very effective when used properly, contrary to what administration had said when speaking to it at budget time.
According to Bondy, he took it upon himself to call up a Bothwell trucking company that has provided the service to Chatham-Kent in the past. The councillor said he wanted to see if it was possible to get the service this year and the firm said that it was.
“It’s pretty simple,” Bondy told council. “We can bring this program back. I think this could work if council gives the direction to move ahead with this.”
But when Bondy relayed this information to council, that sparked concerns.
South Kent Coun. Anthony Ceccacci said that while he agreed to support the discussion, he didn’t think that a councillor should be reaching out to a company on their own, thereby circumventing the normal request for proposal (RFP) process.
“I’m definitely not comfortable with a councillor saying they called a company up and then putting that as a sole source in a motion,” he said.
West Kent Coun. Melissa Harrigan also stressed the municipality’s RFP procedure must be followed. She said she’s also worried the dust suppressant will be applied so late in the year, adding that’s not the “best use of taxpayer dollars.”
“I don’t think it’s the role of councillors to call vendors to see if they can provide a service in a certain time frame,” Harrigan said. However, she added Bondy’s motion was a good idea and that council “maybe made a knee-jerk reaction” about dust suppression during budget deliberations.
Harrigan stressed that council needs more information about the service in order to make a decision.
However, Bondy countered that he was simply trying to find out if applying suppressant was possible this year and he wasn’t trying to sole source the service.
At least one member of council said re-instating the service is a good idea. Wallaceburg Coun. Carmen McGregor, who voted against removing the service at budget time, has lived on a gravel road for 37 years. Not having dust suppressant is a problem, she said, noting this is the first year she’s had to wear a mask when cutting the grass.
The people making deputations agreed. Among them was Spence Line resident Betty Stirling, who said that clouds of dust on rural roads are a serious safety hazard, particularly for farm equipment and school buses, noting billowing dust affects the quality of life of those living in the country.
“There are days when the dust is so thick it feels like we are living in a perpetual haze,” Stirling said.
Removing the dust suppressant saved taxpayers a total of $1.3 million.
Be the first to comment