Port Burwell Village Association

06/09/2026

05/30/2026

**THINK DIFFERENT**

Here’s to the “crazies.”

The ones who ask questions.
The ones who read the reports.
The ones who show up, speak up, and refuse to pretend everything is fine when it isn’t.

If caring about transparency, fairness, public money, and accountable local government makes us “crazy” — then Bayham could use a few more crazies.

This one’s for the people who refuse to look away.

My (http://jeremy.abbett.net) tribute to Steve Jobs (1955 - 2011). A remix of the never aired Steve Jobs narrated version of the iconic Think Different comme...

05/28/2026

For years, the Port Burwell Lighthouse has stood as Bayham’s only historic architectural structure — a symbol of our identity, our heritage, and our place on the Lake Erie shoreline. It is a municipal asset that deserves responsible stewardship and proactive preservation.

Recently, Central Elgin Council demonstrated what accountability looks like by putting a motion forward to the province to preserve a portion of the structure, rather than demolishing the entire historic site. That is responsible governance: acknowledging the historic significance, taking ownership, and putting their best foot forward to protecting a community landmark.

Bayham has taken a different path. Rather than accepting responsibility for preserving the Port Burwell Lighthouse, council has attempted to shift both the duty and the cost onto an outside group. Off‑loading a municipal obligation is not leadership. It is a neglect of responsibility for the only historic architectural structure in our municipality.

The lighthouse is more than a building — it is a defining symbol used for decades in Bayham’s marketing, letterhead, and municipal identity. Allowing it to deteriorate while avoiding responsibility for its preservation sends a troubling message about how we value our history and our community assets.

Bayham residents deserve a council that protects what makes this community unique. Preserving the Port Burwell Lighthouse is not optional. It is a core responsibility of municipal leadership.

05/09/2026

Bayham Governance Watch: What Council’s May 7 Discussion Revealed

Bayham residents should listen carefully to the May 7 Council discussion about Integrity Commissioner and Closed Meeting Investigator complaint costs.

Not just for the dollars.

Listen to how some members of Council talk about residents who ask questions, file complaints, criticize decisions, or use lawful accountability processes.

Then ask yourself:

Do we really want these people representing us for another four years?

What was supposed to be a discussion about complaint costs quickly became something far more revealing — a window into how some members of Council think about the public.

Councillor Emerson’s comments were the most revealing. He appeared unable to clearly recall his own July 17, 2025 harassment motion, yet pushed to connect Marni Wolfe’s letter to that same unresolved track. His solution was not better answers, better transparency, or better governance. Council had already directed staff to seek legal advice on harassment and abuse protections — taxpayer-funded advice that appears aimed at finding ways to manage public criticism. Now Emerson appeared to support spending even more taxpayer money to develop policies and procedures around how the public interacts with Council. So while Council complains about the cost of accountability mechanisms, Emerson’s answer seems to be another taxpayer-funded exercise — not to address the issues residents are raising, but to manage the residents raising them. That is not public engagement. That is institutional self-protection.

Councillor Froese’s comments were equally troubling. He treated roughly $40,000 in Integrity Commissioner-related costs as if it were proof that Council is “upstanding” and above reproach. That is simply not a serious governance argument. A finding of “no breach” under a narrow Code of Conduct test does not mean Council has shown good judgment, good governance, transparency, fairness, or sound policy-making. It only means the conduct did not cross the specific threshold under that particular code. Those are not the same thing.

And then there is Mayor Ketchabaw.

He tried to sound like the moderating voice in the room, but his most revealing comment was that, while the Integrity Commissioner governs how Council interacts with the public, there is “nothing other than civil court” governing how the public interacts with Council.

Think about that.

The Mayor is framing public criticism as something to be dealt with through civil litigation rather than democratic engagement. That is a remarkable mindset for the head of Council.

This is not just one awkward discussion.

It is a glimpse into the political culture that has shaped Bayham for years: defensive, dismissive of scrutiny, and more interested in managing criticism than learning from it.

Mayor Ketchabaw has been part of Bayham Council for roughly two decades. His voice has helped shape this culture. After all that time, residents should be asking whether this is the kind of leadership Bayham needs for another four years.

Bayham can do better.

Vote wisely.

05/02/2026

Strengthening Accountability & Transparency: Addressing Misconceptions

There’s been some recent discussion about the $40,000 spent on Integrity Commissioner (IC) services between 2023 and 2025. A local municipal advocate suggests that this money was spent on frivolous complaints, but the reality is more nuanced.

1. The Role of the Integrity Commissioner
The Integrity Commissioner is not just there to respond to public complaints. The CAO himself has sought advice from the IC to ensure that the municipality is following proper procedures. This shows that the IC’s role is essential for ensuring good governance and legal compliance—not just for responding to public complaints. If the CAO uses these services to make sure everything is done right, why should it be considered wasteful when the public does the same?

2. Public Engagement and Accountability
The Municipal Act makes it clear that public engagement is not just about electing representatives—it’s also about involving the public in the decision-making process. Elected officials must ensure the public has input and not just make decisions in a vacuum. This is essential for good governance, and ignoring it leads to a lack of transparency.

3. The Real Value of IC Services
Yes, there is a cost associated with these services, but this cost helps ensure that the municipality is transparent, fair, and accountable. Without these services, there’s a real risk of the municipality not acting in the best interests of the community. We need to view the cost of these services as an investment in ethical decision-making and good governance.

We have uncovered a plethora of questionable practices within this current governing body. Instead of dismissing complaints as frivolous and failing to respond to emails, let’s work together to ensure that the municipality is acting ethically and transparently for the benefit of everyone in our community.

04/21/2026

Do Bayham’s Advisory Committees truly advise… or simply reflect decisions already made?
Advisory committees are meant to bring community voices into local decision-making.
But for that to work, two things have to be true:�👉 the right people need to be at the table�👉 and they need the ability to actually advise

What we know today
* Committee appointments are made in closed session
* There is no public reporting on:
* how many people applied
* what qualifications applicants bring
* Agendas are largely staff-directed
* Council members often chair the committees

Why this matters
Advisory committees are intended to:
* provide independent community input
* bring forward local knowledge and perspective
* strengthen decisions before they reach Council
But when:
* the selection process isn’t visible
* and committees cannot shape their own discussions
…it becomes difficult to know whether they are:�👉 advising�or�👉 reinforcing decisions already made

A better path forward
* Transparent selection process
* Clear, merit-based criteria
* Ability to raise their own agenda items
* Direct reporting to Council

Bottom line
Advisory committees should be a bridge between the community and Council —�not just a formal step in the process.

ACCOUNTABILITY STARTS WITH ACCESS TO ANSWERS

04/18/2026

Recently, someone suggested that the revitalization concepts I’ve shared for Port Burwell were created to serve my own interests.

The drawings and proposals I’ve put forward are concepts for discussion only.

They are not development applications, they are not tied to any private project.

These ideas are meant to help our community imagine what Port Burwell could look like over the next 40 years — something we have been missing for far too long.

My work has focused on long‑standing issues that affect everyone:

* present and future parking pressures
* infrastructure concerns at the public beach
* opportunities for the marine museum and library
* better connectivity between the Provincial Park and downtown
* strategies to bring thousands of park visitors into our local businesses
* a Main Street that reflects pride, identity, and long‑term planning

These are public‑realm challenges, not private ones. And yes — if Port Burwell becomes stronger, more vibrant, and better planned, I benefit. But no differently than every resident, business owner, and future generation who calls this community home.

Port Burwell has been without a clear direction for years. Offering a vision, even a conceptual one, will always attract criticism from those who are uncomfortable with change or unsure of the motives behind it. I understand that. But I also know that doing nothing is not an option if we want a thriving, resilient community.

I give my time and effort because it’s the right thing to do, and because Bayham deserves thoughtful, transparent, forward‑looking planning.

Rumours or assumptions about my motives will not deter me from putting this community first.

I will continue to share ideas, invite discussion, and help build a future that benefits all of us.

04/15/2026

The Port Burwell Main Street Revitalization study is nearing completion. The next study area 3 (Memorial Park) is presently being developed to address future parking, pedestrian walkways and the Port Burwell Bandshell. These concepts are for discussion purposes only. What is your vision for our waterfront, feel free to share, your input is vital in planning Port Burwell’s future.