Adams Wanted Clement Cornwall Condo Project In Camera & Mayor Spins? JULY 11, 2017

Cornwall Ontario – Sources have confirmed to CFN that City CAO Maureen Adams wanted the Clement Marina Condo project kept in camera, but that some on council stated it wasn’t an in camera issue which led to a 6-5 vote to move the issue to PAC.

Because the meeting was in camera CFN cannot confirm which five elected officials deemed it fine to steal have waterfront development meetings in secret from the public?

At the first meeting of POW Cornwall, a group devoted to having the city be transparent and have true open public consultations before rezoning or developing any of our waterfront three former city councilors shared snippets about how committees like the Waterfront are essentially rigged with “yes” people to simply perpetuate management and council’s direction.

An example would be this writer, who even though he ran for mayor, has been denied a seat on any city committees even though it’s tradition that people that run for office get priority over those that didn’t.

The big question becomes is why the CAO felt that the project should be done in camera and which five elected officials were fine with it?

Today Mayor Leslie O’Shaughnessy issued a release of spin.  We’re going to examine a few of the statements in BLUE.

Mayor O’Shaughnessy provides clarification on waterfront development 

At Monday’s City Council meeting, Mayor Leslie O’Shaughnessy took a moment to provide some clarification on the recent commentary in the community regarding waterfront development. 

“This City Council has not investigated nor encouraged waterfront development,” the Mayor said. 

If that were true why was the developer allowed to present to council?  How did they get to PAC without owning the land?  And of course it could be a sneaky way of saying it was Ms Adams and Mark Boileau?

Mayor O’Shaughnessy stated there have been a number of articles and opinion pieces in local media with incorrect information surrounding the conceptual development presented by developer CH Clement Construction at a recent Planning Advisory and Hearing Committee (PAC) meeting. 

How do you say that without offering any examples or proof?  We at CFN are always happy to print a retraction and apology if we’d made any error.  We’re not Hugo Rodrigues who defames people.

“Cornwall City Council as a whole has never met behind closed doors or in private with Mr. Clement. In one article, it had indicated that I had met with Mr. Clement. I have never met with Mr. Clement,” he said. “Also in a letter to the editor, it had indicated that I am the third Mayor to promote waterfront development which is completely untrue. I have not done so. I have never met with the people from the baseball association. I have never met with the people from the Legion in regards to development on our waterfront.” 

Does this mean council as a part?  We know from the POW Cornwall meeting that at least once councilor has met with the Clement folks and participated in meetings with Minor League Baseball.

City Council made a decision to allow Mr. Clement to make a presentation at a PAC meeting, the Mayor added, and the matter has not progressed beyond that. 

Again, the release doesn’t state that the reason to move it to PAC was that Ms Adams wanted it to be in camera. 

“The motion at the end of that meeting was to receive the report. I moved the motion to also include ‘with no further action’,” he said. 

At this time, there has been no recommendation to City Council to proceed any further with the matter, Mayor O’Shaughnessy said. If it were to even proceed, procedure would dictate that the matter be presented to the Waterfront Development Committee for a report and additional research be undertaken. 

And there’s the rub.  Just because there’s not a recommendation doesn’t mean the project wouldn’t go forward.   And if your committees are essentially a bunch of Keitha Fisher’s “going to committee” essentially is a farce.

Such a proposal would also require an Official Plan amendment and a Zoning change, both of which involve public input components. 

When?  On Monday mornings at 8AM?  Wasn’t the PAC meeting in fact about rezoning?

“All of the things that would ever happen on our waterfront will require complete public input processes,” he added. 

And that’s all that POW Cornwall has asked, yet the Freeholder used a headline suggesting that the group was somehow against the Clement company, which it never was.   Who wouldn’t want transparency and full open public consultations?    Sadly it appears at least five council members.   Not a single sitting elected official or management member attended the POW meeting, nor did any of the local media except for CFN alert the public of the meeting which was to initiate a 1,000 signature petition to support its position.

What an odd town…

What we do know is that this was yet another attempt to put condos in the Lamoureux Park area under shady circumstances.

You can download an official POW Cornwall petition sheet from the facebook group which is open and transparent to the public.  LINK

What do you think dear CFN viewers?  You can post your comments below.


  1. The condo proposal is a great idea for that area, its whats needed to promote our waterfront city, whats there now is geese, goose shit, e-bikers flying around and Cornwall’ss finest loafing around. If those are the things we want to promote then don’t build condo’s, leave it as is. Lamoureux park is still there for people to enjoy, lets take advantage of our waterfront as other communities have.

  2. If Lamoureux Park was built up with condos then nobody could go there (public) because that would be private property. Get out and enjoy your park. Hubby and I just came back from the park where we go and we were bitten with mosquitos because of the weather but great to get out as usual every morning. There are places for condos like on Water Street where land can be purchased from private owne

  3. The Mayor has stated, “out of whack” & “this City Council has not encouraged waterfront Development”. It is alleged, (Tim Horton’s talk) that two, high ranking City officials along with Mr. Clement & the Baseball people, met to discuss building condos on & near existing diamonds . If, this is out of “whack” please set the record ?

  4. Interesting article , if true wonder who the 5 council members were that
    were content in receiving the Clement proposal in camera ?
    Again if true guess the 5 council members in question weren’t concerned with transparency

  5. Jules, nobody has said anything about condo’s at Lamoureux Park area, the area that is being look at is in front of Marina and property to east that has nothing on it right now. Please read comment carefully next time.

  6. Good afternoon Jeff,,,, I must jump in on your inaccurate comment , to our most beloved “Jules” (lol) …. The boundaries for Lamoureux Park, is Bergeron Drive to the east & the new CBSA area to the west, the river to the south & the south curbing of Water. St…… The proposed condo development, is well within these boundaries. The Official Waterfront Plan is available on-line.

  7. The majority of citizens have spoken. How hard is it for C H Clement, O’Shaughnessy, Adams and city council to understand this?? No condos on the waterfront. Brockville now regrets destroying their waterfront to appease developers. Will we never learn?? Will city council and the feds listen to us?

  8. Ivan, the condos are not on Lamoureux park green space, the old RATS Nest is certainly not part of Lamoureux park either, it’s too bad we can’t advance our city like other communities have done, I guess then all other waterfront cities must have made mistakes, funny how these communities have prospered. Guess you must enjoy goose shit, e-bikers and Cornwall finest that are the only 3things to see

  9. Jeff and Ivan I know very well where the baseball (Legion Park is located) and the entire waterfront since we used to walk in that park on a daily basis. I know the park inside out just like here in Ottawa. When you build along the river it becomes something ugly and I can tell you that what I am saying is the truth. The waterfront should be left alone for the public to enjoy not for a few rich

  10. Yes, other waterfront cities have made mistakes…
    Case in point is Toronto, where the city has spent $30 million for a 7.5 acre park instead of reclaiming and remediating the waterfront as industries moved out; Kingston has a crappy waterfront downtown; Brockville has a postage stamp park on the water, and; Vancouver has the most tasteless skyline by the shore you can imagine.

  11. I agree with Lassie. All the cities mentioned have said to others to not make the same mistakes they made by giving into developers “requests.”

  12. We have been to the Rats Nest maybe twice with some friends and it is a beautiful spot. Why go and destroy the river area with condos. I have seen the type of condos in the picture on line and here in Ottawa across from where I live and slightly down the ways by a few buildings is the exact same building and always for sale and for rent. The same with the high rise nearby for sale and for rent.

  13. Jeff & others <

    Just in case your not aware the Rats Nest is long gone on the most beautiful
    Spot on Cornwall's Waterfront , the very best spot to view our waterfront
    from . It is a Public Park recently named Parc Pointe Maligne Park .
    That Park is for the people , not development yet CH Clement would deprive
    us even of our Park land for Condo's . Shame

  14. Believe Me is absolutely right. I have been to the Rats Nest when it was a bar and the view from that bar was absolutely beautiful and the developers will snatch that up quick like and destroy the park and I don’t say that lightly. The Rats Nest used to be a police club of Cornwall where the cops would go there to drink and we had friends who took us there. The view is something else.

  15. Jeff I do get your drift about wanting to fix Cornwall and I am with you on that but the park is for the general public. I know about wanting to attract other people to Cornwall and all but this is a terrible idea loaded with those condos and it would be different if that marina was not just as a marina but other things as well. Eventually those owners will tire and want out and then what.

  16. The S-F reports C H Clement as saying, “Despite the mayor’s distancing from the project last week, he believes that project will continue to move through the process towards becoming a reality.”

    And if he leases the land rather than buying it, he can do just that. That’s how the Chem Tanks got past us.

    Stop this greedy bunch now!

Leave a Reply