At a special meeting of City Council Wednesday night, Councillors and the public heard a variety of concerns brought forward by City staff regarding the Wellington-Dufferin-Guelph Board of Health’s plans to build and own new facilities in Guelph and Orangeville.
City Treasurer Margaret Neubauer presented Council with financial context to show the current and potential future costs of Public Health facilities for City of Guelph taxpayers.
Currently, the Health Unit’s facilities in Guelph, Fergus, Mount Forest, and Dufferin County are leased, and the Provincial government pays approximately 75% of the lease costs. The Province has stated it will not contribute to the new facilities’ capital costs. The Board of Health’s position is that the City of Guelph and the Counties of Wellington and Dufferin will be responsible for 100% of the capital costs.
Under the current lease arrangements, with a 75% Provincial subsidy, the City of Guelph’s share of facility costs for Guelph and Orangeville is $68,000 annually. Under the Board of Health’s plan to build and own new facilities, Guelph’s share would increase to $988,000 annually, and the project would add $10.8 million to the City’s outstanding debt. City of Guelph taxpayers would pay 40% more for public health services each year due to this capital project alone. While the municipality would be liable for the debt, the Board of Health would have ownership of the building.
“The City does not debate that a new Public Health location is needed, and we fully support the delivery of Public Health programs and services,” said Mark Amorosi, Executive Director of Human Resources and Legal Services. “However, the City has a number of outstanding concerns and questions about how the Board is proposing to construct and finance this project. We believe there are other options that are less costly to local taxpayers, and would allow the Province to fund a portion of the costs.”
Council heard that one option would be for the municipality to build and own the new facility and lease it back to the Board of Health, which would significantly reduce the City’s annual costs. This option would still increase the City’s debt, but it would allow the City to retain title to the asset. Another option would be to enter into a commercial lease for an existing facility, which would reduce annual costs while having no impact on the City’s debt. Under each of these scenarios, the Province would potentially contribute up to 75% of the lease costs.
Concerns about governance were also raised by City staff, including the apparent lack of consultation with partners, collaborators and citizens on the location, accessibility and centralization of services proposed in the Board of Health’s Space Needs Assessment.
Staff questioned the sequencing of approvals for the Space Needs Assessment prior to the Board’s approval of its Strategic Plan—a Plan that includes a section on new facilities. “A best practice in developing any new facility is to ensure the needs of the public and partners are well understood,” says Guelph’s Executive Director of Community & Social Services, Ann Pappert. “This ensures facilities are aligned with long-term plans and meet client needs. That there is no reference in the document to the public or partners being involved is troubling. Further, why the Space Needs Assessment was completed and approved before the Board of Health’s Strategic Plan is among the City’s questions.”
The Ontario Public Health Standards call for collaboration among boards of health, their community partners, academic institutions and government in the interpretation and prioritization of needs. The City remains concerned this step has been overlooked.
In March, the City was granted a temporary injunction to stop the Board of Health from incurring further costs on the project, pending an argument for a more permanent injunction. The City is seeking clarity on funding and the Board’s authority to incur debt in the City’s name without its consent.
Staff will report back to Council at its meeting on April 26 with recommendations about how to address the issues brought forth at Wednesday’s meeting.