Letter to a Springwater councillor

No adequate answer to question of why Midhurst is to have population rivalling that of entire township
AWARE Simcoe posted September 2 2013
Dear Springwater Councillor,
Regarding the numbers for the MSP, on the May 14th public information meeting it was admitted that the population size of the MSP was NOT forced upon Springwater Township by either the province or the county. That, in fact, the Amendment that allowed the first 300 hectares was permissive rather than prescriptive.  So in other words, they have allowed us to proceed but it is not forced upon us.

In addition, the growth forecasts for SPRINGWATER set by both the province and the county (6-8,000) are WELL below what is being proposed just for Midhurst (25,000). In fact, Midhurst’s population forecast from the MSP is 4-5x higher than previously set targets.  Why?? Both the county and the province appealed the MSP originally due to it exceeding growth forecasts along with other issues. So the MSP population growth clearly could not have come from the higher levels of government as you suggested. The origin must lie elsewhere.
So again, there must be a reason why Midhurst is destined to have a population that rivals that of the entire township. To this date, I have not received an adequate answer, so I am starting to wonder.
You talked about the township not being able to have the coffers to fend itself from a lawsuit by developers if the MSP is repealed. I and similarly minded people concur that this is true. However, I also don’t feel the township will have the coffers long term to sustain the costs of this development.
For example, Brampton is one of the fastest growing communities in Canada and has roughly grown 20% in population for the last few years. They also have one of the highest and quickest growing tax rates in Canada (CDN taxpayers federation). The MSP outlines that Midhurst will grow over 856% in 15-20 years. Something that it took Barrie to do in 52 yrs and Toronto in just over 80. How do you expect a rural township with minimal servicing and limited tax base to pay for this intensification?  Will the township be continually forced to build and develop to pay for the infrastructure and related costs? Orillia, which has a similar population to the new planned city of Midhurst commits 20% of its total budget to policing (CTV Barrie). This level of policing will be needed here too.
Downward spiral of costs
This seems like a downward spiral of costs and one that leads to the urbanization of a beautiful rural township to afford this pricey plan. I am sure that many residents and voters would not appreciate this potential vision for Springwater.
Furthermore, as outlined in the documents preparing for budget ’14, Springwater is already in infrastructure debt. I can see having the developer pay for the infrastructure, but they will not be there in 5-10 years when we need to resurface the roads, build new bridges or change the membranes in the waste water treatment plant (WWTP).
This development will only bring more infrastructure to maintain and an especially costly WWTP.  The development charges will only last so long and that is if the houses sell as expected. In addition, is it not also true that the Midhurst WWTP will be included in the cost sharing plan for WWTPs between Snow Valley and Elmvale residents? Therefore, is it not also likely that Elmvale and Snow Valley residents will see an increase in their sewer/water bill?
Finally, it was admitted at the May 14th meeting that residents of Midhurst may have to hook up to sewers if a future council finds it necessary.  Considering the costly nature of this WWTP, it seems likely to me.  Will residents be willing to incur $30,000+ to hook up?   Can Springwater and its residents afford that? I imagine if you asked the forecasts of the MSP to be done beyond 5 years, I doubt the answer would be yes unless we take on even more debt.  In financial times like these, I can’t imagine how that would be prudent.
To me, either way we can’t afford the MSP whether it be long term or from a lawsuit. That being said, the cost of a potential lawsuit will likely be less to residents as servicing levels will undoubtedly increase considerably. Once you factor in the quality of life, environmental repercussions and agricultural impacts – the cost of the lawsuit seems minor.
Not a decision that can be undone
So if your thoughts are truly with sparing taxpayers from financial repercussions, then I think the costs of the MSP need to be expanded beyond the next year or two. This is a rabbit’s hole with an unknown financial, cultural and environmental depth. It’s unfortunate that your council has to be answerable to a previous council’s decision, but you also have an opportunity to take the remaining time to ensure that their decision was well founded. 
This is not a decision that can be undone once the water is flowing with effluent, the farms are paved and the infrastructure debt increases.  It is time to either repeal the MSP or put a moratorium on it until the voters can decide what type of Springwater that they want to see.
Respectfully,
Margaret Prophet
Midhurst