Council calls the marina deal a ‘huge success’—I call it settling for scraps

In his latest column, Nathan Colquhoun criticizes City Council for rubber-stamping a sole-sourced marina contract until 2031, arguing that prioritizing relationships over competitive bidding has left Sarnia settling for scraps.

It happened exactly as I feared it would.

On Monday, Sarnia City Council voted unanimously to lock us into another five years with the current operator of the Andrew S. Brandt Marina without ever asking the open market what our waterfront is actually worth.

In my last column, I argued that leasing our prime waterfront asset for the equivalent of $11,667 a month was a bad deal for taxpayers. I argued that after nearly 20 years, it was time to issue a Request for Proposals (RFP) to see if we could get a better vision, a better profit split, or a higher lease rate.

Instead, Council engaged in a nostalgia-fueled love-in, rubber-stamping a sole-sourced contract that runs until 2031.

The commentary around the horseshoe revealed exactly why Sarnia struggles to grow. Our leadership confuses personal relationships with fiscal responsibility, and they mistake "better than it was in 2003" for "best possible value in 2025."

Councillor Anne Marie Gillis led the charge, calling the arrangement a "huge success story". She reminisced about 25 years ago when the city took over the property, noting that skeptics at the time thought profit sharing would "never happen".

With all due respect to Councillor Gillis, the standard for success in 2025 cannot be "it’s better than the mess we inherited in the 90s." Of course it’s a success compared to a derelict property. But is it a success compared to what the marina could be generating in today’s market?

Then came Councillor Bill Dennis, who praised the operator, Dave Brown, as a "cheerleader" for the community.

"This guy loves Sarnia," Dennis said. "He eats, breathes, and sleeps Sarnia".

Councillor Dennis pointed to the operator’s purchase of a $40,000 shuttle van to ferry boaters to local shops as proof of this benevolence, calling it something "you just can't buy".

Here is where they miss the point entirely.

Buying a shuttle van to move customers from their boats to spending locations isn't charity; it is a business expense. Furthermore, if Council had done their due diligence, they might have heard from boaters who claim that shuttle is rarely where it is supposed to be.

While Council was busy praising the operator's capital investments, they failed to ask the people actually using the service if the facility reflects that value. If they had, they might have heard about rotting docks, sinking fingers, and a level of maintenance that does not match the "premier" label the operator claims.

I am sure Mr. Brown is a fantastic cheerleader for Sarnia. But we are not elected to make deals with "great guys." We are elected to manage public assets.

When we conflate the likability of an operator with the value of a contract, we fail our fiduciary duty.

By accepting the operator’s offer of $140,000 a year, we are effectively saying that the crown jewel of our waterfront—including the fuel docks, the restaurant space, and the slips—is worth less in monthly rent than a couple of storefronts on London Road.

The operator proposed this rate, and Council accepted it with a smile, grateful that they didn't have to do the hard work of an open bidding process.

They call it a "predictable revenue stream." I call it leaving money on the table.

If this really is a "premier marina operation in The Great Lakes," surely a competitive bidding process would have confirmed that. If the current deal is truly unbeatable, the current operator would have won the bid anyway.

But by skipping that step, Council has signaled to every business in Sarnia: if you’ve been here long enough, and if you’re nice enough to us, you don’t have to compete. You just have to ask.

We are now locked in until 2031. Let’s hope that by the time the next contract comes up, we have a Council that understands the difference between a "success story" and a sweetheart deal.