HALDIMAND—Strong mayor powers were again the subject of a heated debate at Council on Tuesday, May 20, 2025.
Mayor Shelley Ann Bentley accepted the powers in a letter to Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing Rob Flack on April 23, with no Council discussion and in opposition to the previously unanimous Council vote to reject the powers in 2023.
The May 20 discussion began with Cayuga businessman John Edelman asking Bentley to rescind her acceptance of the powers, defining democracy as maintaining each councillor’s voice for their constituents.
He noted Councillor Brad Adams and MPP Bobbi Ann Brady have supported the mayor’s decision, expressing their trust in Bentley to wield the powers appropriately.
“I’m not doubting you’re a good person,” Edelman said to Bentley. “But just being a good person should not rob us of the democracy that people should have a voice here.”
He posited that with Bentley’s decision, democracy in Haldimand is “in the toilet.”
Bentley responded to Edelman, agreeing with him on the importance of democracy, adding, “I’m not here to change the culture of our community at all; 169 municipalities received these strong mayor powers. So, as Councillor (Dan) Lawrence put out, I either need to lead, or we’re not going to lead at all.”
Bentley said on April 9 that she and Haldimand CAO Cathy Case received a letter from the Minister regarding the expansion of strong mayor powers to Haldimand; it requested a confirmation of Haldimand’s commitment to the province’s target of 4,200 new housing starts by 2031. The same day, Case sent an email to Council, which Bentley said outlined “the various letters we had already submitted to the Ministry … (that) reaffirmed Council’s earlier adoption of a housing pledge and our ongoing commitment to supporting housing growth and development in alignment with the provincial targets established in 2023. (Case) further advised that if a different response was being considered, it should be discussed at an upcoming CIC (Council-in-Committee) for transparency.”
In her explanation of why she accepted the powers, Bentley said, “We were committed to those housing targets in a different form in 2023,” and furthermore, “I did not receive any correspondence from any councillors at that time indicating alternative direction.”
Councillor Dan Lawrence said he didn’t respond to Case’s email because he thought the matter was closed: “We had had several discussions; we had taken votes that we were all on the same page unanimously and very passionate against strong mayor (powers). So, maybe that’s bad on me for not responding to you and giving my voice – again – as I thought we were all on the same page.”
Bentley said the Ministry’s deadline to respond was April 25, before the next regularly scheduled CIC meeting on April 29.
In response, O’Neill said, “I want to push back on the timeline you provided.… That timeline could have been solved by (calling for) a special Council meeting.”
He also questioned why Bentley had not included members of Council or County staff on her response to the Minister.
Bentley said considering the recent appointment of the new housing minister, she wanted the opportunity to demonstrate “collaboration over confrontation.”
She added, “Council has consistently called upon me to demonstrate leadership, and I viewed this as an opportunity to do so in a constructive and forward-looking manner.”
Bentley iterated the importance of listening to her constituents and remaining “mindful of who we serve…. I want it to be clear that while I may never need to exercise these authorities, they remain a tool that can be used if and when necessary, in the interest of the constituents.”
Edelman returned to the podium to interject, “The people spoke through seven individuals here at the beginning of your tenure. I don’t know why we needed to have another discussion…. This is undemocratic and this is dangerous.”
Councillor Brad Adams came to Bentley’s defense, iterating a belief that her actions represent what the people want.
“Too many times in the last year I’ve heard decisions made that are clearly against the will of the people. Accepting these powers doesn’t mean we’re abandoning democracy. It means we’re using every available tool to fix a broken system,” said Adams.
He said using the powers to hold “internal bureaucracy to account” is a matter of serving democracy, not subverting it.
Lawrence said, “I think it’s wrong in any situation for any municipality to accept them, let alone request them. Too much power in one pair of hands.”
He pointed out that any future mayor would also have access to the powers now.
Bentley said the powers would be rescinded if the targets aren’t met by 2031, and said that’s “something to think about.”
O’Neill iterated his previous comments about the “hypocrisy” in the mayor’s actions.
“For the mayor to then go behind Council’s back, behind staff, and behind you – the public – to accept those powers anyway is not just a policy shift, it’s a breach of trust,” he said, calling the change a “fundamental shift in how power is exercised in Haldimand. If we don’t push back, then we’re telling our staff and communities that trust, transparency, and accountability no longer matter.”
Following the discussion, County Clerk Chad Curtis provided a breakdown of Bentley’s new powers into three categories: legislative, administrative, and financial.
Under the legislative powers, Bentley can veto bylaws that interfere with a Provincial priority, and she can require Council to consider an issue. Bentley will be required to provide two days’ notice of an intention to veto a bylaw, which will be shared on the County’s website for public record.
Her administrative powers allow her to “hire, dismiss, or exercise any other prescribed employment powers with respect to the head of any division of any other part of the organization structure,” including the CAO and senior management.
Finally, the financial powers allow her to present a budget and to approve a budget.
Curtis’ full breakdown can be viewed on the May 20 Council agenda on Haldimand’s website. The mayor can elect to delegate some or all of her administrative powers to the County or Council, but she cannot delegate her financial or legislative powers.
As the discussion drew to a close, O’Neill asked Bentley what had changed since the 2023 vote. Bentley cited the removal of Brady from last year’s Association of Municipalities of Ontario delegation, calling it undemocratic, and noted the recent elections of candidates in Wards 1 and 4 who are opposed to a potential Minister’s Zoning Order for Nanticoke.
“That’s a big change,” she said. “Are we all listening to our constituents? I’m not convinced of that. So that’s changed. We should bring back democracy, absolutely.”
The following Council meeting on May 26 saw the issue raised again as Shirton put forth a motion asking Bentley to relinquish control over staffing decisions to Council.
Bentley said she’s read emails from residents on the issue and has registered for a learning session on the powers, which she hopes will deepen her understanding.
“Importantly, I retain ability to delegate authority back at any time. There’s not a rush. I don’t have to do it immediately, so I will not do so until it becomes clear that it serves our community,” said Bentley.
She added, “I just want to be clear. I will not be pressured or bullied into relinquishing any of these powers prematurely.”
O’Neill and Lawrence brought up online discourse surrounding the “human resources” concerns related to the delay in announcing the MZO submission, cited by Bentley as a reason for accepting the powers. MPP Bobbi Ann Brady backed the decision based on the “human resources” concern.
“That term keeps coming up over and over again,” said O’Neill. “I just didn’t know when the MPP reached out to you for your reasoning on strong mayor if you cited specific human resource issues.… If there are very specific and important HR issues, I feel like it would be nice if Council knew them, not just the MPP.”
Bentley held her stance, saying she asked for an MZO update for months before learning of Empire’s September submission in January 2025.
“I was getting the agenda three days before just like everyone else here and finding out what was on the agenda. With my busy schedule, sometimes it’s hard to keep your hand on the pulse,” she added.
O’Neill called Shirton’s motion a “symbolic” gesture. While the motion passed in a 4-3 vote, with Adams and McKeen siding with Bentley, the vote ultimately changes nothing.
Curtis explained, “Strong mayor powers supercede procedural bylaws. If the mayor wanted to bequeath any of these powers, delegate any of these powers, she would have to do it via mayoral decision. Council, this motion can pass, but it’s not binding on the mayor to write a mayoral decision for this.”
O’Neill stated, “The fact that a motion that would possibly be passed by a majority of the Council doesn’t have any weight, I think that says all it needs to say, like how undemocratic this whole thing is.”
Adams stated, “This is really just virtue signalling and it doesn’t hold any weight anyways, so I don’t see why we would vote on it, so no, not in favour.”
