In the interest of transparency and accuracy, I am responding here, point by point, to the statements contained in the municipal newsletter of October 1, 2025, in order to set the record straight and provide the public with an accurate picture of the situation.
Unlike the municipality, I do not have access to the complete list of citizens, so I am using this public platform, which I designed myself, to send you my response. This is currently the only means I have to set the record straight and share my perspective in a transparent manner.
The NorthHatley.info website is a public opinion blog.
Its purpose is to allow people to express their personal views on municipal and community issues. By definition, an opinion piece is not intended to be neutral: it is based on a personal interpretation of observable facts.
Facts about the site:
- All my opinion pieces are identified with an “opinion” label.
- All my texts are signed by the author Philippe Marchesseault or another author.
- All my texts are accompanied by examples, photos, links, and references from which I interpret my opinion.
- The About section specifies the author and the purpose of the blog.
Through its municipal newsletter, written in such a way as to undermine my credibility, the municipality seeks to portray citizen criticism as a personal or irrational reaction.
Rather than responding to the substance of the issue, it chooses to attribute bitter intentions to me.
| Statement by the municipality | Citizen response |
| The municipality of North Hatley completely dissociates itself from the information published by Mr. Marchesseault on the Northhatley.info website. | It is entirely legitimate for the municipality to point out that it is not associated with my website. This website is an independent citizen initiative dedicated to analysis and public discussion. It aims to encourage transparency, participation, and dialogue among citizens. |
| His publications are a pretext for criticizing elected officials and municipal employees. | My articles target practices, not individuals: administrative laxity, ethical breaches, partisan use of resources, restricting citizen participation, questionable financial management, and violations of fundamental democratic rights. Highlighting these issues is not “bashing”; it is contributing to better governance. |
| Projects that were not authorized for him. | In 2024, the municipality rejected the activities of the Navigo promoters. This decision is legitimate from a regulatory standpoint. The problem lies in the ethics of the process. The decision appears to have been influenced by personal and political considerations rather than regulatory criteria. |
| Resentment toward municipal decisions. | I respect the decision to reject the Navigo project. The problem lies in the fact that the decision appears to have been influenced by personal and political considerations rather than regulatory criteria. |
| The municipality intends to enforce its municipal regulations. | I agree with this principle. However, it must be applied fairly. Some companies are given leeway, while others face increased requirements. The same applies to citizens. My requests for clarification have gone unanswered. Regulatory transparency is essential to public trust. |
| The municipality refuses to give in to pressure motivated by personal interests. | I agree in principle. But refusing to bow to pressure should not mean ignoring citizens. Cases of administrative laxity, intimidation (e.g., Mr. Reed), and sovereign decisions made without consultation (master plan, demolitions, contracts) demonstrate the opposite. |
| The municipality accuses certain citizens of encouraging others to make unfavorable choices. | Presenting questioning as a threat is a repressive attitude. The role of an administration is to listen and engage in dialogue, not to judge opinions. Freedom of expression for citizens is at the heart of democracy. |
| Regulations must be applied fairly and not to satisfy certain individuals. | I agree with this principle. But the facts show inconsistencies: my private dock has been limited to 20 m², while several others exceed 29 m². The rental of private docks is prohibite, yet permitted or tolerated in all municipalities bordering Lake Massawippi. Commercial terraces occupy the shoreline and signs are installed on the sidewalks. Fairness must be visible, not just declared. |
| Mr. Marchesseault is neither a lawyer, nor a municipal inspector, nor a municipal manager. | I have never claimed to be one. I draw on my professional background in management, technology, and communication, and I exercise a fundamental right: that of analyzing and questioning the decisions of my elected representatives. Democracy does not require a degree to be vigilant. |
| He gives his opinion on subjects he does not understand. | My writings are clearly identified as the opinions of a citizen. I have tried to obtain official responses, without success, as has my colleague Mr. Reed. It is paradoxical to criticize a citizen for asking questions when the administration itself refuses to provide explanations. |
| Information generated by AI is often incomplete or inaccurate. | This is also true of this municipal newsletter, which contains incomplete and speculative statements. The caution recommended to citizens should apply to the administration itself. |
| Some publications may suggest that he gives advice freely. | I always make it clear that my writings are opinions and that I am neither a lawyer nor an urban planner. My goal is to analyze and explain municipal issues in layman’s terms, not to give legal advice. |
| Be cautious with information coming from Mr. Marchesseault or the AI. | AI is a tool, not a source of authority. I use it to structure my texts, not to form my judgments. If the municipality believes it poses a problem, it should address OpenAI, not citizens. |
| He keeps spouting poorly researched opinions. | All my publications are based on official documents, photos, and public sources. Municipal newsletters, on the other hand, do not include references or explanatory notes. My approach remains more documented than the one I am criticized for. |
| He compensates for his lack of skill by using AI. | I use AI as a professional tool for summarizing and verifying information. AI has no political bias or emotions: it enhances clarity, it does not replace it. My analyses remain human and accountable. Forgive me for occasionally having fun running a ChatGPT analysis. |
| His publications contain incomplete and biased statements. | I admit that I am not neutral: I deal with public governance and ethics. But my comments are based on verifiable facts. My goal is to improve transparency, not to undermine it. |
| Mr. Marchesseault is a citizen like any other who expresses highly subjective opinions. | That is precisely the role of an opinion piece: to offer a personal perspective on public life. It is by expressing our views that local democracy remains alive. |
| Be careful not to assume that this information is reliable or objective. | My writings are identified as opinions. They are based on public facts, often taken from municipal documents themselves. Accusing a citizen of bias for exercising their right to freedom of expression is to misunderstand freedom of opinion. |
Municipal politics is neglected by the population. When citizens withdraw from municipal debate, elected officials and administrators are left to decide alone. Local democracy weakens when participation fades.
I will continue to publish with the aim of promoting more transparent and open municipal governance that respects citizens’ right to expression.
I invite other citizens to make their voices heard, while recognizing that the current climate of tension and dissuasion in North Hatley may discourage many from speaking out.
This is evidenced, among other things, by the formal notice sent to Mr. Reed for expressing concerns about municipal finances, as well as the municipal newsletter sent to all citizens with a message aimed at undermining the credibility of a citizen who was simply trying to highlight weaknesses in governance.
On that note, happy voting on November 2!
