LAURIE WEIR
It wasn’t just a veto.
When Rideau Lakes Mayor Arie Hoogenboom blocked a long-planned office retrofit using Ontario’s new strong mayor powers, it sent shockwaves through township politics.
For the first time, one person had the authority to override the majority of council. And he used it.
The May 26 decision, the township’s first formal use of the controversial powers, struck at the heart of a long-simmering infrastructure debate and reignited questions about democratic accountability, fiscal priorities and the shifting balance of power in local government.
The bylaw in question, passed May 12, would have allowed staff to tender the next phase of the Chantry office renovations, a $4.5-million project years in the making. But citing misalignment with provincial housing goals, rising debt and missed opportunities for smarter land use, Hoogenboom vetoed it.
Council can override him, but only with a two-thirds majority. That means six of eight councillors must vote to block the veto within 21 days, when it returns to the table on June 3. At last count, five councillors were solidly in favour of the retrofit. One vote may decide the future of the project.
Critics also note the veto came before council received final costing comparisons for the Chantry retrofit versus a potential new build. Without that data, some say, the decision was premature.
And with that, Rideau Lakes finds itself at the centre of a provincewide power struggle between mayoral authority and majority rule.
The case for strong mayor powers
Supporters of Ontario’s Strong Mayors, Building Homes Act argue that it gives municipal leaders the tools to act decisively, especially in the face of stalled or divided councils.
In his official Mayoral Decision MD-2025-01-a, Hoogenboom framed his veto as a defence of provincial housing priorities, stating that retrofitting the Chantry office in a non-growth hamlet would not advance the goal of building 1.5 million homes by 2031.
Instead, he cited a five-acre parcel of donated land along Highway 15 as a missed opportunity for a more strategic build, one that could support housing development and rural infrastructure in a growing area. That option, he noted, “was not properly considered by council.”
The strong mayor powers allowed him to act without delay, redirecting the conversation toward long-term growth and what he believes is a more prudent fiscal path.
Proponents of the legislation argue that in smaller municipalities with part-time councils and limited administrative bandwidth, empowering the head of council to take swift action may prevent costly missteps, or at least force critical debates that might otherwise be avoided.
The case against strong mayor powers
Critics see something else: a threat to local democracy.
Opponents argue that the powers allow a single individual — the mayor — to override the will of a duly elected council. In Rideau Lakes, five councillors had already voted to move the Chantry project forward. Their voices, and the constituents they represent, were effectively silenced by the mayor’s veto.
Coun. Paula Banks, who led a recent motion opposing the strong mayor framework, has called the powers undemocratic and dangerous. She says the veto undermines years of work and risks wasting $135,000 in design costs already incurred on the Chantry project. That brings the township’s total spending on planning for municipal office projects to more than $500,000, with little to show for it.
She’s not alone. In a special meeting on May 22, Rideau Lakes council passed a resolution calling on all 444 Ontario municipalities to reject the legislation and join a provincewide legal and advocacy campaign. That motion passed in the absence of Hoogenboom and two councillors who oppose the retrofit.
For critics, the timing of the veto — just four days later — felt like political retaliation cloaked in policy. And it has sparked concern that Rideau Lakes could become a case study in how strong mayor powers erode public trust and disrupt local consensus.
What this means for Rideau Lakes
This isn’t the first time a major capital project in Rideau Lakes has collapsed just before the finish line. In 2023, council rejected the $8.2-million Portland municipal hub in a tie vote, despite already spending more than $365,000 on architectural work.
The next chapter unfolds June 3, when council will decide whether to override the mayor’s veto. If they succeed, the Chantry retrofit proceeds to tender. If they don’t, the project is halted, and the township is back to square one on the future of its administrative offices.
Beyond the bricks and mortar, the vote is a referendum on governance.
Do strong mayor powers bring bold leadership or autocratic overreach? Are they a necessary correction to political gridlock, or a dangerous departure from collaborative democracy?
In Rideau Lakes, the answer may depend on who blinks first.
