Thorold Case Study (Part Three): First Debate Over Partners for Climate Protection Program, February 7, 2023
Thorold Case Study (Part Three): First Debate Over Partners for Climate Protection Program, February 7, 2023
Councillors Handley and DeRose Speak to Legitimate Concerns Regarding the PCP Program
Heated Debate at Thorold Council Over Partners for Climate Protection Program
Thorold, ON – February 7, 2023 – The Thorold City Council meeting on Tuesday evening was marked by a contentious debate over the city’s potential participation in the Partners for Climate Protection (PCP) program. The proposal to join the PCP program sparked intense discussion, with several councillors voicing strong opposition to what they perceive as a deceptive and financially burdensome initiative.
Proposal and Recommendations
Jason Simpson, a representative from the planning department, presented report DS8 2023, which recommended Thorold’s participation in the PCP program. The proposal included three key points:
Receiving the report on the financial considerations of the PCP program.
Approving Thorold’s participation in the PCP program.
Appointing an elected official and a planning staff member as joint contacts for the program.
Simpson claimed that the program provides municipalities with tools and resources to reduce greenhouse gas emissions at no initial cost.
Strong Opposition
Councillors Handley and DeRose led the charge against the PCP program, voicing significant concerns about its transparency, financial impact, and affiliations.
Councillor Handley questioned the motivations behind the PCP program, highlighting its connections to international organizations like the World Economic Forum and major corporations such as Google and BlackRock. Handley argued that the program could lead to undue influence on local policies and jeopardize the municipality’s autonomy. He stated, “Joining this program means ceding control to an organization that believes in 'You will own nothing and be happy.' I cannot support such a deceptive and controlling initiative.”
Councillor DeRose echoed these concerns, emphasizing the potential financial burden on the city. He argued that despite claims of no initial cost, the long-term implications could be severe, with increased staff workload and significant expenses associated with implementing the program’s recommendations. “This initiative will lead to us being told we need to replace all gas-powered vehicles within our city fleet with electric ones, a cost that will be unbearable for property owners,” DeRose said. He also criticized the program for trying to guilt municipalities into compliance without providing clear financial projections.
Amended Proposal and Approval
Councillor DeAngelo proposed an amendment to the original recommendation, suggesting that the city’s participation in the PCP program be approved with the condition of conducting a one-year annual review. This review would allow the council to assess the program’s benefits and determine whether to continue participation. The amended proposal received a seconder in Councillor Longo and was put to a vote. Despite significant opposition, the council approved the amendment, paving the way for Thorold’s tentative participation in the PCP program with a planned review after one year.
Reasons Not to Join the Partners for Climate Protection (PCP) Program
Staff Workload: Participation in the PCP program could add to the already significant workload of the planning department and other municipal staff, potentially affecting their ability to meet existing deadlines and responsibilities.
Misleading Cost Savings: The claim of cost savings is contested, as the program could actually require significantly more time and resources than necessary, diverting attention and funds from other critical projects.
Financial Concerns: There are uncertainties about the long-term financial implications of the program, including potential costs associated with implementing recommended changes and achieving the program’s milestones.
Skepticism of Funding Sources: Concerns about the funding sources and affiliations of the PCP program, such as ties to large multinational corporations, may lead to distrust and reluctance to join.
Perceived Ineffectiveness: Some council members believe that the program’s initiatives may not significantly impact climate change or provide tangible benefits to the municipality, especially given its size and emission levels.
Public Opinion: There is a risk of backlash from constituents who are skeptical of the program's motives or who may be concerned about the influence of external organizations on local governance.
Autonomy Concerns: Joining the PCP program may be seen as ceding too much control to external entities, which could influence local policies and priorities in ways that are not aligned with the community’s interests.
Focus on Local Issues: Some council members prefer to address climate and environmental issues through local initiatives tailored specifically to the community’s needs, rather than through a national or international program.
Potential for Future Obligations: Even though the program is presented as voluntary and free of cost initially, there are concerns that future obligations or costs could arise as the municipality progresses through the program’s milestones.
Resource Drain: The program could drain resources and time from other essential services and projects, creating inefficiencies and potentially compromising the municipality’s ability to meet other critical needs and obligations.
Meeting Script: DS8 2023 - Partners for Climate Change Program (PCP) Financial Considerations
0:12 Mayor: Can I get a mover and a seconder for report DS8 2023 on the Partners for Climate Change Program (PCP) Financial Considerations?
0:17 Councillor Decker: I move.
Councillor Sentence: I second.
0:25 Mayor: Thank you very much everyone.
0:33 Mayor: Okay, DS8 2023, the Partners for Climate Change Program (PCP) Financial Considerations. We have a mover and a seconder. I’ll now get Jason Simpson to put the report on the floor and then we’ll open it for discussion.
0:50 Jason Simpson: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. The recommendations of this report are:
That report DS8 2023 dated February 7th, 2023, regarding the Partners for Climate Protection Program Financial considerations be received.
That the City of Thorold’s participation in the PCP program be approved.
That Council appoint an elected official as a joint contact alongside an assigned planning staff member for PCP program updates and plan endorsement.
That concludes the recommendations of this report.
1:26 Mayor: Thank you very much, Jason. I’ll open the floor for questions. Go ahead, Councillor Handley.
1:33 Councillor Handley: I know that I had asked for this to be brought back for discussion in the budget meetings, and it's been pushed up to this. It’s been mentioned that there’s legislation. Can I ask why Council never received a copy of the actual legislation in print? I'm not saying that the legislation isn’t there, but I know that in the past Council has been told items that didn’t come to fruition, and we're here tonight to make a decision. From what I read, it’s being kind of said that it's being legislated and that we have to do it, but yet only 500 municipalities across Canada are part of it. So is it legislated, or is this something that we’re doing voluntarily?
2:23 Jason Simpson: Through the Mayor, thank you for the question. Joining the PCP is not legislated. However, it is legislated within the Planning Act as well as other provincial legislation that when taking into consideration planning functions or planning recommendations, the impact on the environment and resilience to climate change be taken into consideration. Should Council have a desire to receive a copy of the Planning Act, then I'd certainly be happy to provide that to them.
3:05 Councillor Handley: Secondly, can I ask, I thought maybe when I read this that maybe this should have been brought forward as a committee of Council, as we do with our POR Robinson Committees, our Housing Committee, seeing that we're into an environmental change. Instead of using staff time, we could seek out the public. But if I can, can I comment now, or do I have to wait?
3:22 Mayor: The report is on the floor, so you can comment.
3:25 Councillor Handley: So I want to comment. I'm not in support of joining the Partners for Climate Protection. I've done a significant amount of research. Ron, you’re not a conspiracy theorist. I agree with you. I've done a lot of research myself, and like you, when people voice their personal opinions and it doesn’t go with the flow, you're considered a conspiracy theorist. I just want to say I don’t consider you a conspiracy theorist. I appreciate everything you've done.
The PCP, if you look up their site, it actually states to help communities across Canada better understand and employ these concepts. The Partners for Climate Protection (PCP) program from ICLEI Canada. That’s the catch - ICLEI Canada. Remember, there are only 500 municipalities across Canada, and I don’t know if you know what ICLEI is, but it's actually an organization closely associated with the World Economic Forum, and their funding partner is the Real Estate Foundation of BC, and one of the biggest ones in the United States. My concern is the BlackRock owner who is one of the biggest real estate holders in the US. He was named to the Board of Trustees and they believe in Klaus Schwab's theory, "You will own nothing and be happy." And you can check yourself, PCP is solely funded by ICLEI, which is funded by Google and many other multibillion-dollar corporations. They support UN climate change, biological diversity, and combat desertification, but that’s talking about alternative farming, alternative livelihoods. They talk about eating crickets, mealworms, among other edible insects. They actually say right in their literature, "We influence sustainable policy and drive local action for low emissions and nature-based solutions." They put that right in it - that’s what their objectives are. It’s part of the World Economic Forum, equitable, resilient, and circular development.
When you go to the ICLEI website, who funds the group that we're asking to join today, their first heading is "non-governmental organization." It’s private-driven. Just to let Council know, the ICLEI Secretary General has been appointed to the World Economic Forum’s Council on Urbanization. That concerns me because they mention in their documents about circular development. Circular, in terms of an argument, is already containing an assumption of what is to be proved and is therefore fallacious, based on mistaken belief. They promote that - it's all in their literature. I'm not a conspiracy theorist, but I think each and everyone should have their own opinion and be able to say what they feel and believe in. So at this time, I cannot support joining the Partners for Climate Protection because their leader believes in "You will own nothing and be happy." That’s why I can’t support it.
8:27 Councillor Handley: Thank you, Councillor Handley. I had Councillor O'Hare next.
8:30 Councillor O'Hare: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Through you, I just want to comment on one fact, and I think it says it all. It's a fact that states, in 2020, direct industrial greenhouse gas emissions accounted for 24% of total US greenhouse gas emissions. This is from the EPA, the Environmental Protection Agency. These are facts, and these are things we have to recognize. I fully support joining the PCP program. I think this is our future that we have to be looking out for. This is something that will give tools to staff to help guide the direction whereby greenhouse gases can be reduced throughout our city. So short and brief, thank you.
9:01 Mayor: Thank you, Councillor Sentence.
9:03 Councillor Sentence: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Some good arguments and good information. I’ll just give my personal opinion, as we all have the right to give our opinion. I believe there is a climate problem, and we should be trying to leave this world better for our kids and their kids. I'm a visual person; you see the glaciers, you see other things. I have not done the research that you guys have done, but I believe there is a problem. This is a free tool to bring back recommendations that we don’t have to take or pay for at that point. My personal opinion is that we do have a problem. There are 8 billion people, there’s an overpopulation problem, and if each municipality, each person did their part, maybe it would get better. That’s my personal opinion, so if it's a free tool to get into this and just bring back recommendations, I will support going into this. Thank you.
9:58 Mayor: Thank you. Councillor DeRose.
10:01 Councillor DeRose: Through you, Mr. Mayor, I just want to make a comment. My concern is that taxpayers will have to deal with the financial consequences of not knowing the long-term effects of this endeavor and what this report proposes. We already pay for federal government’s climate change initiatives every time we put on our heat in our homes, fill up our cars, or buy goods and services. We pay for provincial climate initiatives through our provincial taxes. We pay for the Region's climate initiatives through our property taxes. I feel that when I read this report, I read it three times, and every time it was trying to make me feel guilty, even though Thorold has done its part and already taken serious environmental initiatives over the years. Case in point is the $200,000 electric Zamboni we purchased and other environmental initiatives that have been mentioned to me over the years.
Where is this report taking us? In my opinion, this initiative will lead us to being told we will need to replace all gas-powered vehicles within our city fleet with electric ones. The cost will be unbearable for property owners as far as property taxes go. When I asked staff yesterday how much this would cost, how much changing over to electric vehicles would cost, they did not have that information because they couldn’t provide a ballpark figure. How is that going to work for the fire trucks and other emergency vehicles? Would you want to trust an electric vehicle to save your life? This report also cites and criticizes fertilizer usage as something we have to change. So they want to minimize farmers' fertilizer usage. Tell that to our farmers who are trying to do their part by growing and creating a local food supply chain. The downside is we reduce fertilizer usage and transport food from halfway around the world from a place that doesn't handicap their farmers.
The City of Thorold does not manufacture goods; our emissions are negligible. The irony is that Thorold taxpayers are going to be on the hook for initiatives that will not improve the climate one bit. We are expanding the Hopea corridor with industries that are emitting gases into the atmosphere. We're supporting development to the point where we brag that we’re the fourth fastest-growing city in Ontario, eighth fastest in Canada, but not one word or concern by anyone on the environmental damage that all this development is creating. Additionally, farmland is being destroyed as we speak. This report cites the United Nations and has tentacles attached to the World Economic Forum, probably the two most corrupt entities in the world, and that's who this report is asking us to trust and join up with.
An ironic example of "do as I say, not as I do" is the Paris 2016 Climate Accord, which is cited in the report. It sets targets that are unachievable by 2030, but the elites that travel to Paris are giving themselves pats on the back and emitting more greenhouse gases at that one conference than the municipality of Thorold will emit in the next 100 years. Ironically, we didn’t do our due diligence and allowed a developer to destroy our infamous frog pond without Council being made aware. Now, we're presented with a report that tries to persuade Council that Thorold’s climate initiatives will be felt across Canada. I don’t believe that for a second. My main concern is the number of staff time that will be needed over the next 10 years to work on the five milestones. Correct me if I'm wrong, but staff doesn’t have the answers; we don’t know. It's an unknown. The report is flawed, and I believe parts of it were provided to our planning staff by outside entities.
In closing, how efficient and reliable will our city's services be delivered using a horse and buggy in the future? Thank you.
13:25 Mayor: Thank you, Councillor DeRose. Is there anyone else that wants to speak to this report?
13:30 Councillor Decker: Through you, Mr. Mayor, to the appropriate staff. It says that it’s a tool so that you can access resources. Jason, are you obligated to stay in this initiative? Can you get out anytime you want if you feel like the tool isn’t providing you the resources that you need or that you thought maybe it would provide?
13:53 Jason Simpson: Through the Mayor, to Councillor Decker, municipalities who opt in to join the group do have the ability to opt out at any time.
14:02 Councillor Decker: And it costs nothing? And once again, it's just a tool to use to provide resources to help, like you said, with the planning department, but if you feel the tool is not providing you what you need, then you can leave at any time?
14:14 Jason Simpson: Through the Mayor, that was the intention of staff, to utilize the tools for some of the work that needs to be undergone.
14:20 Councillor Decker: Okay, thank you, Jason.
14:22 Mayor: Is there anyone else before I go back to Councillor Handley? Go ahead, Councillor Handley.
14:26 Councillor Handley: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I just want to make it clear, I'm not against greenhouse initiatives. Councillor D'Angelo can attest to this. I was going to bring all the newspaper articles with me tonight. Henry was elected Mayor in 2006. In 2008, I brought an initiative to the city regarding replacing our lighting at the arena. I gave an initiative; I even introduced a lot of businesses downtown to a free program where they could get lighting. Club Capri actually took advantage of it. The city didn't take me up on my initiative to get rid of the halogen light bulbs and go with high-efficiency incandescent lighting. We could go from 480-watt bulbs to 250-watt bulbs. The city didn't take me up then.
I was going to bring a newspaper article; I was actually standing on a pile of wood chips at the Thorold Public Works building when we recognized that in the future we could have a potential for 2,500 dead ash trees in Thorold. I proposed that back then, and that’s how long it took to do this operational building, that we could actually install a kiln that burns wood chips. The same business right now is running in that plant at the old Resolute Paper mill. I'll bring you the newspaper articles. I brought that to Council in 2008 and said we can reduce greenhouse gases back then. We can put a kiln that can hold 14 days worth of chips, and we can burn our own wood chips from all the trees that are going to be cut down in the City of Thorold. They didn't take me up on the initiative, but now it's a global agenda. It's different. If you want, I'll present you with all the newspaper articles.
I just want to make that clear. I'm not against greenhouse gases or saying that climate isn't changing.
17:28 Mayor: Thank you, Councillor Handley. Is there anyone else that wants to speak?
17:31 Councillor O'Hare: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I’d just like to say one small thing, and that is that this program doesn’t cost us anything, and we are not bound by any suggestions that we discover through utilizing these tools that will be available to us. But if in any small way it’s able to reduce our electrical costs, reduce our heating usage, then through some small measure, wouldn't we want that? Not just for cost savings but also to reduce the greenhouse gases. So as I say, we’re not bound by it, but it is a tool, regardless of who it's from, that we can utilize.
18:03 Mayor: Thank you. Anyone else?
18:05 Councillor DeRose: Through you, Mr. Mayor, the Manager of Building, Jason, are you able to tell us over the next 10 years, to reach the five milestones, what it’s going to cost us in staff time?
18:18 Jason Simpson: Through the Mayor, that analysis has not been identified, nor has it been identified that we would even be striving for those five milestones. That would be a Council decision. Right now, we’re just looking to join to gain access to those free tools.
18:32 Councillor DeRose: So you can’t tell us a projected cost?
18:36 Jason Simpson: Through the Mayor, I wouldn’t be able to tell you a projected cost or if there would be any cost at all.
18:42 Councillor DeRose: There wouldn’t be any cost at all? How about staff time? Staff’s going to be working on the milestones. It seems like an incredible amount of time. I disagree with that. I think it will cost a lot. Thank you.
18:56 Mayor: Thank you. Anyone else before the report gets voted on? Go ahead, Councillor DeAngelo.
19:03 Councillor DeAngelo: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I'm not going to really speak on this. I have quite a bit of questions and some comments, but I'd rather defer this to the Environment, Climate Change, and Biodiversity Advisory Committee. I think they could have a good discussion there and bring back some thoughtful information. That’s my suggestion, so I'm going to be deferring it. I know there are some people for it, some against it, but I think we set up these committees, let's utilize some resources of the members that sit on these committees.
19:39 Mayor: So you're asking to defer it to that committee?
19:42 Councillor DeAngelo: Yes, Mr. Mayor.
19:43 Mayor: Can I get a seconder for that deferral? Councillor DeRose. There’s no debate on that. It’s referring this to the Environment, Climate Change, and Biodiversity Advisory Committee. All those in favor? Opposed?
20:09 Mayor: The motion to defer is opposed. We can go back and talk to the report. Go ahead, Councillor Neale.
20:14 Councillor Neale: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I’ll make a few comments. I didn’t support that deferral because it’s going to go to a committee that’s concerned about the environment, and my feeling is they’re just going to come back and say go ahead and do it. There's been a lot of discussion tonight. It doesn’t cost anything; it’s tools. At any time in the future, we can opt out if we wish. If budget requirements come to Council or a budget meeting, we can turn it down and throw the program out. So I understand there’s a lot of passion here. There are people that say it's not a conspiracy theory, yet we’re worried about large international companies. I just think we need to, in my opinion, it costs nothing. Take it and see if it's of value. If it's not, get rid of it. But again, the reason I didn’t go for the deferral was, what’s the point? It’s like asking the pope if we should go to church, really.
20:58 Mayor: Is there anyone else further that wants to speak to the report before we call the vote? Go ahead, Councillor DeAngelo.
21:03 Councillor DeAngelo: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. That wasn’t my intent to get the pope involved, but I do have a couple of questions. I'm not sure, is the Region of Niagara a member at this point in time? If someone can answer that?
21:19 Jason Simpson: Mr. Mayor, if we could defer this to Meaghan Birbeck who’s on the line, she’d be able to answer that question better than I could.
21:24 Meaghan Birbeck: Through the chair, to my knowledge, the Niagara Region is still a member of the PCP program. Other local municipalities around us are St. Catharines, Welland, West Lincoln, and Grimsby.
21:40 Councillor DeAngelo: Through you, Mr. Mayor, having other municipalities involved in this program, has there been any discussion with them to see if there’s been a benefit? Have they gained anything from membership at this point in time?
21:51 Meaghan Birbeck: Through the chair, they have gained the ability to use tools that have allowed them to, instead of utilizing consultants to work on projects, they’ve been able to do it themselves easier through their committee groups and with minimal staff time.
22:10 Councillor DeAngelo: That sort of answers that question. One of my biggest concerns right now is our planning department is really taxed in getting their work out the door and meeting deadlines and timelines. I don’t want to burden them with additional work because we’re one of the fastest-growing cities. There are a lot of complaints out there, phone calls not being returned, emails not being returned. I was at the Committee of Adjustment; there are some reports that aren’t coming there on a timely basis. That’s my concern, is the planning department having the ability. I know there’s staff time that will be going into this. I just don’t want other work being put aside. We’re just revamping the planning department; we’ve added a couple of new additional members, which is great. I think that alleviates some of the concerns I just mentioned, but I just, and that was part of my deferral, to get through a bit of the reorganization and a bit of movement, getting planning caught up with the work that has to be done that's critical for us moving forward with a lot of items. I just don’t want this to become a burden and use extra time. So if we do move forward with this, I would like to see a record or tracking of how much time is being spent on this from our planning department because if other things aren’t getting done, that’s one of the critical things I’m very concerned about. I just wanted to make sure that was out there. And then I had some other questions, but I don’t want to be here all night discussing this. I think there have been a lot of good points, but I'm very, very concerned about the planning department and their capacity to deal with the workload that’s being put upon them. Thank you.
23:56 Mayor: Okay, is there anyone else before I call the vote? Go ahead, Councillor O'Hare.
24:00 Councillor O'Hare: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. This would be a question for Meaghan as well if I may. I understand that it's mandated that we do the Energy Conservation and Demand Management Plan every five years. So I assume that we're due for one of these plans, an update or…
24:15 Meaghan Birbeck: Through the chair, the update would be due by the beginning of summer of next year. This would be something that would be across different departments, primarily Public Works and Planning.
24:28 Councillor O'Hare: I read in the report that the cost of completing the work through this would be approximately $50,000. Through the report, are you saying that this $50,000 could be reduced simply by using this PCP program?
24:44 Meaghan Birbeck: Through the chair, that was the thought of staff.
24:47 Councillor O'Hare: Great, thank you very much.
24:50 Jason Simpson: I just wanted to comment on Councillor O'Hare's question there. Right now, we're just looking to access the tools in hopes that we would be able to minimize costs to the municipality by doing some of that work in-house, but until we actually get access to those tools, we wouldn’t be able to give a realistic number as to what it may be reduced by.
25:10 Mayor: Okay, did I get a mover and a seconder?
25:14 Councillor Sentence: You already have it.
25:16 Mayor: Okay, I have a mover and a seconder, so I’ll call the question. All those in favor?
25:24 Councillor DeAngelo: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I'm just wondering if I could change the recommendation here. In terms of participating, can we change recommendation number two, that the city's participation in the PCP program be approved, to include a one-year annual review of the program? I’m not wordsmithing this the greatest, but what I’d like to see is this as a pilot project for the next year. Let’s see what tools come back, and in a year review this to determine if we’re going to maintain this and keep going forward with it. I'd like to see something like that in there that gives me a bit more comfort level.
26:00 Mayor: Would you have a seconder for that amendment?
26:04 Councillor Longo: Seconded.
26:06 Mayor: Okay, and we'll get the wording and make sure everybody's happy with the wording.
26:12 Mayor: The amendment reads: "That the city's participation in the PCP program be approved with the condition that staff be directed to conduct a one-year annual review of the program."
26:21 Councillor DeAngelo: As long as at that point in time when it comes back, Council has the ability to continue or not continue. I'm good with that; that captures my thoughts.
26:26 Mayor: Anybody else? Is everybody good with that? Okay, we’ll put that question on the floor with that amendment. All those in favor?
The amended motion passed, and the meeting continued with further discussions on other agenda items.
Advertisement for Delegations
Attention Thorold Residents!
Join us on June 18, 2024, at the City of Thorold Council Meeting to voice your concerns against the Partners for Climate Protection (PCP) Program.
Voice Your Opinion: This is your chance to share your perspective on important community decisions.
Influence Policy: Your input can help shape the direction of local policies and programs.
Engage with Leaders: Interact directly with council members and other community leaders.
Your input is crucial in shaping our community's approach to climate action.
Date: June 18, 2024
Time: 7:00 PM
Location: City Hall, Thorold
Make your voice heard. Stand for local control and transparency!
For more details, visit Thorold City Council.
To support our recommendations, fill out the Thorold Statement of Support and email to our KICLEI Niagara Contact.
Declaration Of Support For Thorold Council Resolution To Leave the PCP
Duncan Spence
KICLEI Niagara
To those that just say it's a free tool...you can get a crack pipe off your local dealer, I mean after all it's just a free tool with no obligation and you can quit at anytime! But do you trust that your crack dealer is giving you the straight goods on the health benefits of Heroin?
I appreciate the work you are doing. Keep it up.