The Snowplow Doesn't Know Where the Municipal Boundary Is

The Snowplow Doesn't Know Where the Municipal Boundary Is

If you have lived through an Ottawa Valley winter, you know the routine.

You wake up, look out the window, realize the forecast was unfortunately accurate, and somewhere before most of us have poured our first coffee, municipal crews are already out plowing, sanding and salting roads.

Now imagine a plow travelling down a road and reaching an invisible line on a map.

On one side: Laurentian Valley.

On the other: Petawawa, Pembroke, the County, or another neighbouring municipality.

From the driver's seat, it is still the same snow.

That is where I think we should be asking a pretty simple question:

Are there places where working together would give residents the same or better service for less money and less wasted time?

Not everywhere.

But certainly somewhere.

We already share more than people might realize

Shared services aren't a new or radical idea in Laurentian Valley.

In fact, they are already part of how our community operates.

Laurentian Valley, Pembroke and Petawawa jointly went to market in 2026 for a municipal curbside waste-collection contract rather than each municipality independently running essentially the same procurement process.

Laurentian Valley also participates with other Renfrew County municipalities in a bulk highway-salt contract covering the 2025–26 and 2026–27 winter seasons. The participating municipalities purchase under the same tender and are billed for what they actually use.

We have long-standing shared relationships with Pembroke around services such as water and wastewater, recreation and library access. In the 2025 budget alone, Laurentian Valley committed $493,500 toward its joint recreation arrangement with Pembroke and $155,000 for Pembroke Public Library services.

Even our history is tied to shared services. The former municipalities that became Laurentian Valley had already shared staff, municipal facilities and fire services before amalgamation.

So this isn't really a debate about whether municipalities can work together.

They already do.

The better question is whether we are looking for those opportunities consistently enough.

Snow removal is a good example

Laurentian Valley has its own Public Works operation, and Township equipment operators are responsible for plowing, sanding, salting and ice removal on municipal roads and properties. Some winter work is also contracted out; for example, the Township separately tendered snow clearing for various municipal parking lots.

Winter maintenance isn't cheap.

The Township's 2026 budget includes approximately $95,000 under snowplowing and $318,000 for sand and salt, before considering the broader cost of vehicles, equipment, facilities and staff that support Public Works. Public Works represents about 21 cents of every local tax dollar in the Township's published tax breakdown.

That doesn't mean those costs are unreasonable. We live in Renfrew County. Snow removal is not exactly an optional service.

It does mean it is worth continually asking whether each dollar is being used as efficiently as possible.

There is already evidence of exactly this kind of thinking between Laurentian Valley and Petawawa. In 2024, Petawawa brought forward a proposed Winter Maintenance Operations Agreement on Boundary Roads with Laurentian Valley.

That concept makes sense to me.

If one municipality's truck is already travelling down a boundary road, there may be circumstances where it makes more sense for that truck to complete a section rather than have another truck travel kilometres to reach the same place from the opposite direction.

The snow doesn't care whose logo is on the door.

Residents care that the road is clear.

But I wouldn't simply combine everything

This is where shared services need a little common sense.

A snowstorm hits everybody at roughly the same time.

So selling half the Township's snowplows and assuming Pembroke or Petawawa will have spare equipment during a major storm would probably be a terrible business plan. Their equipment will be busy too.

Shared services work best when they solve an actual inefficiency.

That could mean coordinating boundary-road routes, jointly purchasing salt or other materials, sharing certain specialized or infrequently used equipment, coordinating contracts, combining training or procurement, or having formal mutual-aid arrangements when equipment breaks down.

It doesn't necessarily mean one giant regional Public Works department.

And it definitely shouldn't mean poorer service simply because somebody found a cheaper number on a spreadsheet.

There are more opportunities worth examining

My approach would be to have Laurentian Valley identify services and purchases that fall into three practical categories:

Things we all buy anyway. Salt, fuel, tires, culverts, certain road materials, software, engineering services or contracted work may sometimes be cheaper when municipalities combine purchasing power. Things we own but don't use every day. Specialized machinery, trailers, generators or other equipment may be candidates for carefully structured equipment-sharing arrangements rather than every municipality purchasing its own. Things that cross a municipal boundary. Snow routes, drainage, waste collection, transportation planning and emergency response don't suddenly become different problems because somebody drew a line on a map.

And Laurentian Valley is unusually suited to this conversation. The Township itself describes us as one of the most interconnected municipalities in Renfrew County, sharing boundaries with seven neighbouring municipalities.

There is a lot of border to work with.

The test should always be simple

I don't support shared services simply because the words shared services sound efficient.

Before Laurentian Valley enters any agreement, residents should be able to see the business case.

Does it save money over the full life of the service?

Does it maintain or improve the level of service residents receive?

Who is responsible when something goes wrong?

Are response times clearly defined?

Are insurance, equipment, labour and maintenance costs actually included?

Can residents still hold their own Council accountable?

If the answers don't add up, we shouldn't do it.

If they do, it would be hard to justify paying more just so everybody can have their own version of exactly the same thing.

That is also consistent with the platform I am running on: supporting competitive procurement, shared services and partnerships where they improve value without reducing accountability.

Cooperation without giving up who we are

I think there is sometimes a fear that talking about shared services automatically leads to talking about amalgamation.

I don't see it that way.

If you and your neighbour share a snowblower, nobody has suggested knocking down the fence and combining the houses.

You are simply recognizing that sometimes cooperation makes more sense than duplication.

Laurentian Valley should remain Laurentian Valley.

But we're surrounded by communities whose residents travel the same roads, work at the same employers, shop at the same businesses, use many of the same facilities and deal with the same January snowstorms.

Where it makes sense to work together, we should.

Where it doesn't, we shouldn't.

That's not complicated government.

That's just being practical with people's money.

My commitment

I will advocate for a formal review of shared-service opportunities with our neighbouring municipalities, starting with areas where there is already demonstrated cooperation: Public Works, procurement, winter maintenance, waste collection, recreation and other common municipal services.

Not with a predetermined answer.

Not with promises of imaginary savings.

But with the numbers on the table.

If we can send a truck fewer kilometres, avoid buying duplicate equipment, get a better price by purchasing together, reduce administrative work, or provide residents with a better service for the same money, we should seriously consider it.

Same community. Same snowstorm. Same tax pressures.

Sometimes working together is simply the practical thing to do.

— Travis Czech Candidate for Laurentian Valley Councillor Local. Practical. Accountable.