I was there yesterday, September 23, 2025, to attend the long-awaited presentation of the master plan. First of all, I would like to highlight the excellent presentation by Domus Architecte et Design. I have drawn up a few master plans in a private context, and it is no easy task. Presenting a vision to citizens is a colossal undertaking! The work done by Domus Architecte et Design is very professional. Funny enough, I have nothing to say except congratulations.
Of course, if you read my articles, you know that I am critical of the current municipal administration. Please know that I make an effort to find the positive, and it is not easy. Mind you, I recognize that their work is very difficult and thankless. However, we are talking here about responsible adults who have chosen to enter municipal politics knowing the challenges that this represents.
In fact, I worked on a master plan with the previous municipal administration. The plan was developed with a budget of $0, that is, entirely with volunteer citizens who had specific expertise that could be useful in creating a master plan proposal for the population. I will refrain from naming the volunteers, but some of them were world-renowned. So, competence and interest were definitely present.
Unfortunately, this master plan ended up in the trash. It’s a safe bet that this new master plan will also end up in the trash. However, each master plan contains useful information for the development of the village. On the other hand, it’s important to remember that this document serves as a support and alignment tool (broad vision) and not as a constraint or action plan. The master plan guides and suggests broad long-term directions. It does not dictate specific actions. As is often said, it should not be taken “as gospel.”
Admittedly, the quality of the previous administration’s master plan was not the same as that of Domus Architecte et Design, since you obviously cannot compare a team of architects who worked on it for several months to a team of volunteer citizens who put together a “draft master plan” in their spare time over a few evenings during the year.
On the other hand, I believe in grassroots change (by citizens). Citizen initiatives are what transform the village at its own pace. Among those I know or have heard about. Of course, we can’t like them all, but they exist and serve part of the population.
- NHRS
- Meals on Wheels
- Lake Massawippi Conservation Club
- Jazz Festival
- Association for the Protection of Lake Massawippi (Bleu Massawippi)
- Vision 2000 (in the past)
- ANHA
- etc.
In a community of 675 residents, I believe that the role of our elected officials and the administration is to put in place tools that encourage citizen involvement. North Hatley is home to many brilliant people who are willing to volunteer their time to promote their village. The role of the administration is to get to know them, bring them together, equip them, and support them.
Spending $122,000 on a master plan is one way to do this in a context of debt. The master plan brings many good and beautiful ideas for the village. For my part, I would have invested in a platform to develop citizen initiatives. Basically, teach people to fish rather than give them fish. Sorry, I’m a fishing enthusiast! Don’t worry, I know it’s easy to say and not so easy to do! However, it’s the basis for bringing people together and moving forward with them, not for them. We need to create a living ecosystem that grows from the roots up.
For example, physical and virtual discussion and conference spaces. This doesn’t cost much and doesn’t require a lot of planning. Fortunately, this vibrant ecosystem already exists in North Hatley, but it is not connected to the administration or elected officials. In fact, I mainly see information dissemination meetings organized by our elected officials. Five elected officials and a director sitting at the front and citizens in the room is not an exchange, it is a broadcast in which the elected officials control the message. Dialogue seems to me to be rare or even non-existent. This is undoubtedly because the village is organized for dissemination rather than dialogue. Do our elected officials really want to engage in dialogue?
Despite everything, the main question that burns on my lips every day is: is the population of North Hatley really so eager for change? With over 50% of the population aged 55 and over and nearly 35% aged 65 and over, I get the impression that the population is conservative and mainly wants sound management of basic priorities, such as finances, maintenance of current infrastructure, and a few minor improvements over the years. Please correct me if I am wrong!
All these major projects are very interesting and inspiring. However, as you know, we are struggling to manage our current infrastructure, as illustrated by the following examples:
All these major projects are very interesting and inspiring. However, as you know, we are struggling to manage our current infrastructure, of which here are a few examples:
- Pancartes bienvenues à North Hatley.
- Cône qui traîne depuis des mois sur Ch. Capelton.
- Aucun commerce à l’ancien dépanneur.
- Augmentation des salaires des sauveteurs.
- Gestion de la descente publique.
- NHRS mis de côté.
- Non remboursement de la dette en 2024 (61k$).
- États financiers 2024 inexistants (dûs au 30 juin 2025).
- Entretien au parc de la Rivière.
- Rénovation à l’hôtel de ville.
- Passage sous le pont piétonnier à North Hatley
- Problèmes d’aqueduc / avis d’ébullition d’eau.
- Explosion des frais administratifs.
- Gestion de la descente du quai fédéral
- Vitesse sur la 108. Disparition des dos d’âne.
- Entretien et sécurité du bâtiment de la marina.
- Évolution des travaux à l’hôtel de ville.
- Gestion de crise.
- Parc de la rivière buts de soccer inutilisable
- Les conteneurs de la rue Mill.
- La gestion de la marina.
- etc.
Dans mon livre à moi, il faut commencer par marcher avant de courir, et il n’est peut-être pas nécessaire de courir à tout prix si cela ne nous intéresse pas. Actuellement, on ajoute d’importants projets de construction et d’aménagement du territoire alors qu’on a peine à entretenir nos quelques rues et nos 3 parcs.
The territory of North Hatley is limited to 4.6 km² in area, limiting the possibilities for constructing new housing and commercial buildings. Currently, the area and urban sprawl seem to me to be in balance with its population. Adding businesses when they are barely surviving seems illogical to me. I agree with adding housing to allow aging people to move from their homes to apartments. Also, wouldn’t we need senior residences like the Connaught was supposed to be? Of course, these are just rumors!
Perhaps we should ask ourselves why people live in or move to North Hatley. Certainly for its magnificent lake and charm, but also for its tranquility. Do we want to develop the village at breakneck speed at the risk of losing our tranquility and charm? This growth is irreversible. That’s fine if it’s what we really want. But why do we want it at all costs and, more importantly, who wants it at all costs? The elected officials or the population?
Moreover, according to my analysis, if you remove the debt for the water infrastructure, which will be paid off in a few years, North Hatley has a net positive budget of several hundred thousand dollars.
Being conservative does not prevent progress, but it ensures that we move forward at the pace of the population and its ecosystem. Judging by the average age in the church hall yesterday, I don’t get the impression that the people of North Hatley are looking for a rapid and major transformation of the village. Are we putting the cart before the horse, and if so, why?
Dreaming is important, but managing your dreams in a healthy way is essential!
With that in mind, happy thinking!
FUN FACT: Last night, Domus proposed in its master plan to connect the bike path (green route) that runs from the dam to Chemin de la Rivière via Chemin Capelton (Route 108) instead. Remember that this same bike path project redirected to Chemin de la Rivière was presented to the city council a few years ago. In fact, the municipality could have benefited from this project at very low cost since the Department of Transportation had to redo its underground infrastructure and rebuild afterwards (sorry, I don’t have the exact project details). As I recall, it was the current administration that opposed it… Correct me if I’m wrong? Forgive me, but I find this very funny!
