It was an evening not for decision-making but for sharing information.
A public information meeting to update the community on the current state of the Elgin County Railway Museum building and an exciting look at what the future could hold.
A well-attended session on Thursday at the CASO station to present an overview of the current condition of the building, with a discussion of the challenges and opportunities for the structure.
The takeaway was quite stark. The museum will be closed to the public for an extended period of time to allow the roof to be removed, along with the walls, to determine the structural integrity and undertake remedial action.
And then put all the pieces back together again.
Friday morning, we spoke with Scott Sleightholm, President of Railworks Coalition, to compare notes on what transpired the previous evening.
“I was happy with the turnout, absolutely. Because it was to bring people up to date on where we’re at, given everything that’s happened since January (when the city ordered the museum closed).”
The museum has hired Toronto-based structural engineers, Blackwell, to determine the status of the museum building.
That report was presented to the museum membership on Wednesday.
“So we don’t have a direction that we’re going yet, and we still have to explore a few options. It was to keep everybody up to date on where we are at the moment.”
The museum partnered with LGA Architectural Partners of Toronto about a year ago to undertake what Sleightholm refers to as “master visioning” for the museum.
“Knowing that we need to develop a long-term solution or long-term plan. So they’ve worked with us to develop some conceptual drawings and renderings of what the building could be.
“Again, just to get people thinking and really looking outside of what the building currently is, what could it be.
“Obviously, as the board and the membership, our Number 1 goal is the museum itself.”
The organization has already been advised that the museum alone is not going to be able to financially sustain the building.
“So we would need alternative revenue sources. The museum would be first and foremost, but then obviously we need some additional revenue streams in order to pay the bills.”
According to Lord Cultural Resources, a world-renowned cultural planning firm focused on museums, cultural districts, and the creative economy, museums get about 35 to 40 per cent of their operating revenue from the actual museum.
With the remainder coming from other sources.
“So it’s not just an Elgin County Railway Museum situation. That’s museums in general across the world right now.”
Sleightholm stressed, “In the end, the membership of the museum makes the ultimate decision on what path we go down, but we as an organization want this building and the museum to represent what the community wants as well so we need to hear from the community to figure out where their desires are and how that fits into our long-term plan.”
What he envisions is the building not only housing the museum and its permanent collection, but also including an exhibition centre or hall.
“We’ll still have the history of the museum and the railway around the building, but could we at the same time put a trade show, put a wedding in amongst there, put all sorts of things, and then in addition to that, we would need some key long-term tenants for the additional source of revenue.”
Not unlike the magnificent transformation that has taken place at the CASO station.
Keep in mind that three years ago next month, the museum was the backdrop for then-Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s announcement that PowerCo is going to locate its EV battery gigafactory in St. Thomas.
Throughout the session on Thursday evening, Sleightholm stressed the importance of transparency.
“That’s been my goal since stepping into this role with the organization: transparency from myself and the board.
“I know there are certain things online out there, but my goal has been transparency from Day 1. We have regular meetings to, again, open lines of communication, not just within the organization, but also within the community.”
“We understand where we are today, and what are the steps we take to move forward. Everybody seems to be on board and wants to have those conversations, which is great.”
Sleightholm stressed that it is the museum membership that will determine what path the museum takes.
“So, if you want a seat at the table, I encourage anyone and everyone to get a membership, and that way you have a seat at the table and have a voice in that room when it comes to voting on those decisions.”
As to the next step for the museum?
“There’s still more information gathering that we need to do. Present some possible options or pathways that membership can discuss and vote on, and from there, we’d meet with the public and say we’re looking at going down this road or that road.
“We’re a lot further ahead than we’ve been in many years, and so it’s an exciting time. As I said yesterday, maybe not the most uplifting news with regard to the current state of the building, but we’re at a turning point for the organization, and therefore for the community as well.
“We understand where we are today, and what are the steps we take to move forward. Everybody seems to be on board and wants to have those conversations, which is great.”
Related post:
FINDING THAT SWEET SPOT TO LOCATE AN AQUATIC CENTRE
The sense of frustration was palpable in the council chamber last Monday (March 9) as members prepared to discuss the final report of the Aquatic Centre Feasibility Study and decide next steps.
The presentation of the report signalled completion of the mandate of the community and aquatic centre committee, chaired by Coun. Lori Baldwin-Sands.
Future discussions will proceed with council members in committee of the whole.
The two flashpoints at this time are the projected cost of the facility and the lack of a location.
The price tag for the centre is north of $100 million according to the report, and as such, sources of funding are critical.
Hand in hand with that figure is the annual operating cost of the facility, which is pegged at more than $1 million.
However, the real stumbling block is where the centre is to be situated.
Five years ago, the city completed a preliminary investigation of potential sites for a centre.
A mandatory consideration was that any potential site had to be municipally owned land with a minimum area of 2.5 hectares.
“I do look forward to seeing that financial breakdown and what we’re going to need to do. But you know, identifying a site certainly would be a priority.”
However, further research upped the size of the property to 3.5 hectares, or close to nine acres.
A potential location is further handicapped by the following criteria.
It must be within 800 metres of a bus route, a park, a multi-use trail, city-owned social housing units and within 800 metres of seniors’ housing and services.
In addition, it must be within 400 metres of residential zones and 1,200 metres of a high school.
It should come as no surprise that there is not a municipally owned site in St. Thomas that can meet these criteria.
The only property that comes close is the site of Central Elgin Collegiate Institute.
Demolish that for the aquatic centre, and you are no longer within 1,200 metres of a high school.
Not to mention you are minus one school.
The push from some members of council is to proceed with drawing up plans for this facility in order to be ready for any available government funding.
But, generally, government funding is limited to shovel-ready projects, and so you are back to Square 1, location.
Coun. Jeff Kohler had this observation, “I will be honest, I knew the price tag was going to be high, but I didn’t realize it was going to be this high.
“I do look forward to seeing that financial breakdown and what we’re going to need to do.
“But you know, identifying a site certainly would be a priority.”
Related post:
ADDITIONAL AFFORDABLE HOUSING NEEDED
Included in Monday’s (March 16) council agenda is the St. Thomas-Elgin 10-Year Housing and Homelessness Plan, which includes several statistics worth noting.
The report points out, “While we are increasingly seen across Canada as a model community in our housing and homelessness response, the affordability and stability challenges continue to grow – as will our area over the next 10 years.”
You have to go no further than Page 5 to be hit with this stark reality: “A household income of approximately $70,000 is needed to afford the average rent in St. Thomas – Elgin.”
“Given the increase over the past five years, there is a demonstrated need for additional affordable housing within the community.”
The report continues, “Currently, for people or households in receipt of Ontario Works or the Ontario Disability Support Program, the shelter allowances do not cover the cost of Average Market rent in St. Thomas-Elgin, or even the cost of deeply affordable rent set at 80 per cent of Average Market Rent. Additionally, a one-bedroom unit would not be considered affordable for a single senior on a fixed income either.”
On Page 33 of the report is a section related to a housing waitlist.
“As of the end of 2025, the total centralized housing waitlist for St. Thomas-Elgin included a total of 1,726 households. Approximately 30 per cent of the households on the waitlist currently do not reside in St. Thomas – Elgin.
“Since 2020, the waitlist for social housing has doubled. On average, there are about 100 new additions to the wait-list per year. The average wait-time for housing placement varies significantly based on location and the size of the unit needed.
“Given the increase over the past five years, there is a demonstrated need for additional affordable housing within the community.”
PUBLIC SECTOR SALARY DISCLOSURE
In Monday’s (March 16) council agenda package is a report from Jodi Brindley, Payroll Manager, dealing with required information under the Public Sector Salary Disclosure Act, 1996.
The Act requires organizations in receipt of substantial provincial funding to disclose the amount of salary and taxable benefits paid to individuals to whom the employer paid at least $100,000 as salary in a calendar year.
In this case, the listing is for the 2025 calendar year.
The report indicates that for 2025, 129 city employees received a salary of $100,000 or more compared with 105 employees in 2024.
The list includes 57 members of the St. Thomas Professional Fire Fighters Association, which is up from 53 in 2024.
And, 56 non-union employees are listed, up from 49 the previous year.
Members of the St. Thomas Police Service, the St. Thomas Public Library and the St. Economic Development Corporation are not included in that total.
However, if you include all municipal employees in 2025 covered by The Public Sector Salary Disclosure Act, 223 individuals received a salary of $100,000 or more.
St. Thomas Police Chief Marc Roskamp pulled in the highest salary last year at $256,357.
Nine other individuals earned in excess of $200,000 in 2025:
- Executive Director, Industrial Development Justin Lawrence – $224,538
- St. Thomas Fire Department Platoon Chief Steve Donker – $210,669
- St. Thomas Fire Department Platton Chief Barry Waite – $209,986
- St. Thomas Fire Department Platoon Chief Derek Didyk – $206,912
- Deputy Police Chief Steve Bogart – $205,244
- Director of Planning and Building Services Lou Pompilii – $200,639
- Former City Treasurer Dan Sheridan – $200,639
- Fire Captain Sean Hodgins – $200,616
- Fire Chief Dave Gregory – $200,107
Questions and comments may be emailed to City Scope
Visit us on Facebook
And a reminder, I can be heard weekday afternoons as news anchor and reporter on 94.1 myFM in St. Thomas. As always, your comments and input are appreciated.
Railworks still will not provide proof they have the right to legally operate the Elgin County Railway Museum even when requested by members in good standing.
When I did so, I was told to get a lawyer and contact the Museum’s lawyer. Just to find out through what legal mechanism a non charity could take full financial and operational control of a charity designated Museum.
Considering the “Museum” let go of their last staff member, there are no Museum professionals or employees remaining in the building or on payroll to the membership’s knowledge.
This would be a huge part of why they are failing. It’s a managed decline.