Current Conditions
7.0 C
Mostly Cloudy
Today's Forecast
6 C
Periods of rain
Sponsored by Highland Ford

News And Views




Shop Local

More Local

Search The Web

Google Search

Local News

Shine your soapbox. PUC issue before Council Monday

Sunday, January 06, 2013   by: Staff



This is a public reminder for all ratepayers interested in being involved in the process under discussion before Council of the “opening of the current shareholders agreement between the P.U.C. and the City of Sault Ste Marie “

On December 3rd City Council meeting SSMRA organizers supported the motion to defer and postpone the resolution "to open shareholders the present agreement with the P.U.C." until January 7th (or a later) council meeting with the intent to permit time for all parties to thoroughly review the material required and achieve a better understanding and gain knowledge on this issue.

Presentation will be made by the SRA Procedural Group to council on the topic of the resolution – shareholder agreement as it relates to corporate donations. 

Concerning the ratepayer survey, it was confirmed at the Agenda Review meeting that this item will be dealt with in the same manner as past ratepayer surveys, that is a copy of the survey will be provided to council members but no presentation will be heard.

Public copies can be viewed here

We would like to remind those that have expressed interest in this process and wish to attend the city council meeting of Monday January 7, 2013 to be in council chambers on or around 4:30 p.m.

Thank you

Sault Ratepayers Events Group

(705) 575-9571


Note: Comments that appear on the site are not the opinion of If you see an abusive post, please click the link beside the post to report it.
Beej 1/6/2013 9:58:19 AM Report

Gouge us some more we like it!
We also love unplanned power outages and drinking swimming pool water!
Hell, send your execs to the tropics for a vacation on us!
Number One Son 1/6/2013 10:25:53 AM Report

No one elected the Rate-payers association to represent me at council. They do not represent the majority of the citizens of this city by any process. Our gutless council gives them a voice only because the represent a few extra vote than one. We elected our council to make decisions without being dictated to by a bunch of vigilantes. That is not how government should work.
cooper2006 1/6/2013 10:50:26 AM Report

One Son.
You are right, council should be representing us on this issue. With rates going up, 6 figure donations, new multi-million dollar legacy buildings, etc. they are not.

Pretty sad when an unelected association has your back and interests more then your members of council. Do you really think this would be an issue without the ratepayers??
blue diamond 1/6/2013 11:39:39 AM Report

Public copies are available here

I could not get this link to open? Any one else??
Grace 1/6/2013 12:01:48 PM Report

Number one can I borrow your shovel?
Want to dig a hole beside you so I can also have my head buried in the sand with my ass waving in the wind..sorry I don't want to be!

Not everyone is satisfied with watching from the bench.
mudrunner 1/6/2013 12:05:57 PM Report

The link is broken, or they ran out of taxpayers money to finish it.
Jimssm 1/6/2013 12:06:28 PM Report

There is no need to watch from the bench.

Just call your City Councillor.

I have a problem with the 'ratepayers association' if they take a position and represent it as coming from me. Gathering information and surveys is ok, but don't take as necessarily representative of the majority.
Jimssm 1/6/2013 12:15:23 PM Report

The ratepayers' survey link doesn't work or has been taken down.

thesharr 1/6/2013 12:18:36 PM Report

As a ratepayer and stake holder of the PUC as all residents of Sault ste Marie,I declare we vote to award ourselves a free month of PUC,like March.All in favour say yes,ok passed enjoy.What are they going to do cut everyone off, hmm,without us there's no them remember that.
Carol Martin 1/6/2013 12:19:14 PM Report

The link in the above story seems to be leading to an expired page. We're working on getting the document in another format and will relink as soon as we have it.
B Boy 1/6/2013 12:48:01 PM Report

Out of curiosity - anyone else in Ward 3 have trouble getting their councillor to respond to them?

The closest response I've had was one of them forwarding my email directly to another city contact with nothing further. The other seemingly couldn't be bothered to respond.

zartan 1/6/2013 12:56:08 PM Report

Need this story simplified! who is this contract between? shareholders and puc? puc and city? who wants to change the corporate donation clause and why? is this that inportant to ratepayers or just another meeting to justify paid councel members? soo today; you gotta give more detail to keep us interested in issues, otherwise, this is just another venting blog.
Zap 1/6/2013 1:15:54 PM Report

The puc is abusive and a human rights issue.
frnlak 1/6/2013 1:41:12 PM Report

Grace....Your ass waving in the wind ? Sounds like a good place to park a bicycle.
Ricatoni 1/6/2013 1:47:50 PM Report


Is this the tax payers money and company or not?

Does anyone know how much a councillor actually earns in one year?? Do they have benefits to? or just an actual wage?

Also I would like to know what this Curran guy gets for a wage in one year??

Can anyone answer any of these questions?
the coach 1/6/2013 2:07:23 PM Report

The PUC has not direction and is lead by over paid leaders. The council members that do not return your calls, cast them aside, they do not deserve your vote. And the members who sit on the fence for political gain, get rid of them too. Puppets are for kids. Appointments are not dilomatic, and as tax payers who pay way too much on PUC bills, we should be able to vote who runs this disorganized crew.
SaultRentals 1/6/2013 3:13:31 PM Report

Here is a another public link to the survey results:
Grace 1/6/2013 3:51:17 PM Report

Jimm ,
I guess I don’t have a problem with a ratepayers association that you do. I took the time to read the agreement and complete the survey. I gave my opinion. Did you? Besides any survey only represents those that took the time to bother to participate … as for those that didn’t …guess they should show up Monday.
I thought this was done very well. I did not find any question on the survey take any position other than a focus on read the documented material before taking the survey. It really did help me understand what was being discussed. The way I look at it instead of speaking with a councilor I can put my opinion to all of the councilors whether they pay any attention to what I said I’ll have to wait and see.
I see the link issue has been solved!
Thim 1/6/2013 5:06:48 PM Report

Excerpt from City Solicitors Report...

In 1998 the Electricity Act required municipalities to convert existing electricity utilities into corporations. In 2000 City Council passed By-law 2000-183 which
effectively restructured the PUC Commission. The then existing PUC
Commission transformed and incorporated into PUC Inc. PUC Inc. became a
non-offering corporation with one shareholder. The sole shareholder is the City
of Sault Ste. Marie. PUC Distribution Inc. was also created at that time. PUC
Inc. holds 100% of the shares of PUC Distribution Inc. PUC Inc. is governed by the Ontario Business Corporations Act and the Shareholder Agreement that
exists between the City and PUC Inc. The Municipal Conflict of Interest Act
applies to local boards. With the restructuring of PUC into a corporation the Municipal Conflict of Interest Act no longer applies to PUC Inc. PUC Inc. is not a
local board and not subject to the provisions of that Act. However, the Ontario Business Corporations Act imposes strict duties on the officers and directors of Ontario corporations. In essence, an officer's or director's duty is to manage the corporation. Additionally, the officer or director loyalty and in good faith towards the has a common law fiduciary duty
to the corporation. That is to say, the officer or director must act with corporation. Specifically with regard to conflict of interest, the Ontario Business Corporations Act requires officers and directors to disclose interests which they may have in material contracts or transactions
relating to the Corporation. The material contract or transaction must be fair and in the best interest of the corporation.
Additionally, the existing Shareholder's Agreement lists a number of matters that require City Council's approval prior to the PUC acting. None of the Articles in the Shareholder's Agreement address a donation such as the one in question.
Accordingly, only the Ontario Business Corporations Act regulates the allegation at hand.

The Act requires the disclosure of "material interests" by officers or directors, however, the Act does not define the term material interests. Case law assists in the definition and indicates that a material interest includes a personal
relationship with the person who is a party to a material contract. In this case, there would be difficulty proving a personal relationship and a material contract.
pruden 1/6/2013 5:07:55 PM Report

B Boy, Ward 3 councillors do not respond to ANY E-MAILS........I'm not impressed and hope someone else comes forward for the next election to represent Ward 3..
Brian Hayes is no good as an MP but at least he responded to e-mails and got action, when he was a councillor.
Note: Comments that appear on the site are not the opinion of If you see an abusive post, please click the link beside the post to report it.
Advertising | Membership | Terms of Service | Privacy Policy | About | Contact Us | Feedback

Copyright ©2014 - All rights reserved