30 metres of controversy

Vigorous debate over changes to rules for existing buildings located close to water bodies in South Frontenac

When South Frontenac Planner Lindsay Mills brought forward a package of so-called 'housekeeping' amendments to the township's zoning bylaw in early February, he expected that as much public interest would be generated as was the case in the past when these kinds of amendments have come forward. That is, none at all.

That is what happened for 10 of the 12 amendments in the package that he submitted, but for two of them there have been strong, negative responses.

These responses, totaling over 30 written submissions and 12 or so oral submissions to a meeting of the South Frontenac Committee of the Whole this week, concern changes to the way the township will deal with buildings that are located less than 30 metres away from a body of water.

Since the township adopted its ground-breaking Official Plan in 2005, no construction has been permitted within 30 metres of water bodies, which is something that lake associations encouraged at the time, and still do.

However, those houses and cottages that were already built before 2005, many of which were located within the 30 metre setback, were and still are legal, captured under the term “legal non-conforming”.

The bylaw that has been in place since 2005 says that while these properties are legal, and can be repaired and improved, those improvements cannot include anything that expands their size in any direction.

The change that is being proposed by the township planning department is the addition of a sentence to the existing bylaw, which says “reconstruction of the building is prohibited”. Planner Mills says this was already implied in the existing wording but that it should be made more explicit.

The other change he is proposing is the addition of a definition of when a building ceases to exist, which will be as follows: “Once the walls of an existing structure within the minimum 30 metre setback have been removed, the land is considered vacant and the structure cannot be rebuilt within the 30 metre setback.”

In addition, Mills proposes to eliminate a clause in the bylaw that permits the replacement of a building if it were destroyed by “fire, lightning, explosion, tempest, flood or act of God, or a demolition permit” from the township.

Noting that a property owner could leave their property to deteriorate in order to claim it is no longer suitable to live in, and then “argue they should be allowed to reconstruct”, Mills said it would be better to let the township's committee of adjustment deal with this kind of circumstance instead of including it in the zoning bylaw.

“There should be no issue at the committee after any kind of catastrophic event, and the township can minimize the fees we charge in those cases,” he said in a telephone interview this week. “In my experience the committee has only once refused to allow someone to build, and that was a case where there was virtually no dry land to build on.”

The first concerns about the proposed changes came in January from Chief Building Official, Brian Gass.

Gass, who has since left to take a job near Ottawa, said that if residents feel that a bylaw is “unfair or not reasonable” it might lead them to bypass the permit process and build illegally.

“It is proven that illegal construction is one of the most common causes of unsafe construction practices” he wrote.

Over the past few weeks, the Sydenham Lake Association has taken up the issue, recommending that the passage of the bylaw be deferred to make time for a full public airing of opinions. The Committee of the Whole meeting on Tuesday night was the first of two opportunities for public discussion.

After Lindsay Mills presented his perspective on the proposed changes, Councilor Ron Sleeth spoke in favor of keeping the clause that permits rebuilding properties destroyed or damaged by an 'Act of God’.

Councilor Alan Revill agreed, saying that based upon his building official experience, having a provision for replacement on the same footprint if there had been damage beyond the owners’ control should remain in the bylaw. “There’s increasing chance of this possibility, with climate change,” he said.

He added that in the event of total loss, insurance might not grant full relief if the building were required to move to another site. “Every situation is different; perhaps we can’t legislate for all.”

“Let's not add more layers of bureaucracy.” said Councilor Mark Schjerning.

Sydenham Lake Association member, Jeff Peck, spoke next, setting the tone for the presentations that followed by calling for thoughtful dialogue even if, like himself, the speakers did not agree with Mills’ proposals. Speaking on behalf of the association he said that it was important that this issue receive a full public airing, and that although the township had posted information on its website and in local papers, it was unlikely to reach seasonal residents.

Speaking for himself and not the association, Peck emphasized that owners should have the right to use and maintain their non-compliant properties instead of having to rely on the discretion of a committee of adjustment, should their structure be damaged by an ‘Act of God’.

Earlier, in an interview with the News, he talked about experiences he has had dealing with the existing bylaw on behalf of himself, and relatives and neighbours, where the interpretation of the bylaw by staff made it difficult to properly maintain legal non-conforming properties within the 30 metre setback.

Larry Arpaio of the Bobs and Crow Lake Association congratulated the township on having an Official Plan that is beginning to address the environment and lake quality, but asked whether there was a danger of creating a 2-tier real estate scenario, in which those structures within the 30-metre setback would be of less value than those further from the shore.

Other speakers were concerned about the township’s goal, as stated by Mills, of eventually having all structures located behind the 30-metre setback. Several are using family homes and cottages that are over 100 years old, but have been maintained as viable structures.

Council will hear further delegations at the May 10 COW meeting, and will make their decision at the May 17 Council meeting.

Waste Disposal Site Update

David Bucholtz, of Cambium, Inc. presented the annual update of the township’s waste disposal sites. All of the five active sites: Portland, Loughborough, Bradshaw, Salem and Green Bay are functioning well. Some of the environmental issues at Portland have been addressed by partially capping the site and addressing the challenge of surface water run-off. Its remaining life at the current rate of fill is about 28 years. Loughborough, once it gains compliance for groundwater, has a life of five years left, with the potential of another nine years once if the remaining capacity of phase 2 is realized. Bradshaw has about 11 years' capacity; Salem, 13 years; and Green Bay 18 years. All sites have an attendant’s shelter and a varying range of facilities for recycling materials.

Mayor Vandewal asked whether it would be of any financial gain to fill and close the smaller sites first before continuing with Portland and Loughborough.

Councilor Ron Sleeth asked whether there would be any gain in bringing Storrington’s waste into the township sites, rather than continuing to pay to truck it away.

Bucholz said that neither question can be answered without further research.

Road Allowance Closure Request

Boy Scouts of Canada have asked the township to consider closing and selling to them a fragment of road allowance that runs across the Otter Lake Scout Camp property from their boundary with Frontenac Park to a cliff overlooking the lake. It was discovered when they sought a building permit for a new four-season facility. Council has no objection to closing the road allowance, as it is of no foreseeable use to the township. However, there was no agreement re the price to be charged. Unopened road allowances have a range of four possible rates per square foot, depending on the property’s location in relation to water. Planner Mills was asked to bring a recommendation to the next meeting.

Pathways for Children & Youth is pleased to add something new to our menu of treatment options. Starting May 11, 2016. We are offering walk-in single-session counselling. There is no referral process, no waiting for a scheduled appointment, and no fee. Just walk-in to our Mill Street location in Sydenham, at 4365 Mill St., 1 to 4p.m., Appointments start at 1 p.m. with the last appointment being 3 p.m.

A single session offered in a timely fashion to individuals and families ready to work towards a solution to a problem or concern is all many people require to decrease stress and get things moving in the right direction.

Children, youth (under 18), parents and families can use this service. The Walk-in clinics will be held every second Wednesday from 1 to 4 p.m. (last appointment at 3 p.m.)

You can expect an hour-long conversation with a Pathways counselor, which focuses on a child or youth’s behavioural, emotional, or other mental health concern and a solution focused plan.

For more information visit www.pathwayschildrenyouth.org; email Pathways intake at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., or phone 613-546-1422 ext. 1

Collins Lake subdivision proposal controversial

Standing room was scarce as Storrington residents crowded into Council chambers on April 5 for a public meeting to hear and comment upon a proposal for a 51-unit, 60-hectare subdivision above Collins Lake, south of Inverary. Nineteen individuals spoke of their concerns and since then at least 18 letters have come to Council, not all from the verbal presenters. None have been in support of the proposal.

Most of the speakers identified as residents of Lyons Landing, an older, 100-unit subdivision which abuts the area proposed for development, and which would share an access road out to Holmes Road, just east of Perth Road.

The public meeting was called by the township at the request of the County Council, which is the decision-making body for all subdivision proposals within the County. South Frontenac is one of the ‘commenting agencies’ in this process, and also would need to rezone the property before it could be developed.

Township Planner Lindsay Mills’ report to Council carried three recommendations: 1) receive the comments and attachments; 2) defer any decision about rezoning until comments from the public meeting are reviewed; 3) forward the planning report, including attachments and comments from the public meeting, to the County.

Mills’ summary of the proposal pointed out the areas which complied with the Township’s Official Plan and those which called for site plan requirements. It said Public Works will need to review the impact on the area roads of the additional traffic from 51 more residences. It also highlighted the peer review of the hydrogeological and terrain analysis and servicing reports done by Malroze Engineering.

The Malroz review, which Mills appended in full, concludes that: “There are a number of concerns with respect to the water quality and quantity that we recommend be addressed to the County’s satisfaction prior to approval of the proposed subdivision…Considering the variability of the groundwater quality and quantity data we are of the opinion that the current studies do not support servicing of the site through private individual services at this time.” The same review lists 24 items in the developer’s report that are contradictory or unclear. It also asks for a copy of a 1990 report prepared for the same site by Oliver, Mangione, McCalla and Associates, which the developers reference, but do not provide.

The public meeting lasted two hours and there were 19 speakers, many applauded by the onlookers. Chief concern was quality and quantity of water and fears that 51 new wells would lower the aquifer for both the new development and the existing Lyons Landing wells. “People will be drinking each others’ urine,” commented one speaker.

Other common concerns related to:

• traffic and safety at entrances to the main roads, as well as pedestrian safety along Lakefield Drive, the road adjoining the two subdivisions

• the large number of additional homes to be added to a relatively rural area,

• loss of green space

• environmental threats to wildlife: habitat loss

• lack of space in existing schools

• water run-off and potential pollution of Collins Lake

• loss of a popular area for hiking and picnicking

• lack of access to the above-mentioned 1990 report.

Worth noting was lack of mention of the several sites of archeological interest on the site, which are currently being examined in greater detail.

Due perhaps to the late hour, Council neglected to forward the current proposal and all comments from the public to the County.  

Public meeting re Storrington condo proposal

At the County’s request, Council held a public meeting for input concerning Shield Shores, a waterfront condominium proposal by Barry Campbell. This would be for 18 residents on an 82-acre property lying between Wellington Street and Dog Lake, just outside Battersea. The plan’s common elements include a private park, trail access to the park, two water access points and interior roads.

Planner Mills’ notes point to one lot contained within the area that is listed as “to be retained” yet is not described anywhere in the application. Only six lots have waterfront: all others would share two small water access points, one of which Mills feared could encourage too much boating activity in a constricted water-space, even though neither of these access points is intended to include docks or boat launches. Three of the waterfront lots would have good views but are situated high on sheer cliffs, with no apparent means of access to the lake.

Hydro transmission line easement crosses the property, but seems not to interfere with the proposed development. Malroz is currently peer-reviewing the Hydrogeological and Terrain analysis reports, so their review is not yet available. The Cataraqui Regional Conservation Authority has made 27 recommendations, and suggests that Council defer any decision until all their recommendations and concerns are addressed. A current right of way access to an existing waterfront property crosses two of the proposed lots, and cannot be closed unless the owner of the existing lot gives permission. (She has some concerns about the alternate access offered by the developer.)

Speaking on behalf of the property owner, Mike Keene of Fotennn agreed that the property labelled as retained would have to be brought into the plan in some way, and said they planned to do some revisions to the proposal once all the commenting reports were in.

Mills’ recommendations were as usual: that Council receive the comments and attachments of the planning report, defer any decision until comments from the public are reviewed, and forward the planning report and comments from the public to the County.

Four local residents spoke at the public meeting. Jeff Peters had concerns about the negative effect 18 properties with lawns, driveways and septic systems would have on such a shallow lake. Sharon Freeman, who lives across the road, said the property owner had already cleared out a lot of trees and underbrush, thus already destroying the natural habitat for wildlife. Mary Bird, whose property is surrounded by the land under discussion, said that there are far fewer Grey Rat Snakes since the recent clearing of the land. Matt Rennie said that with lots running four deep back from the water, this appeared to amount to “backlot development.” He asked why the pubic meeting was being held before the proposal was complete, and whether there would be another public meeting later.

Fran Willes also asked whether the public meeting was premature, because the submission was incomplete.

Mayor Vandewal said the public meeting was being held now because the County had requested it. He added that a landowner is free to cut all the trees he wishes: the controls on shoreline protection are only in the development agreement, once a proposal is accepted.

The current planner’s report and all comments from the public meeting are to be forwarded to the County.

CAO Orr reminded those present that only those who have commented on a proposal, either at the public meeting or by letter to Council or the County, will be eligible to either call for an OMB review or speak at one.

(As an oversight from the last Council meeting, Council also agreed to forward to the County the planner’s report and all comments from the public meeting concerning the Collins Lake subdivision proposal.)

Timeline for Zoning By-law Amendments re Lakefront Properties

(from April 5 Council meeting)

Planner Mills has recommended changes to the Comprehensive Zoning By-law that would remove section 5.11, which permits lakefront buildings destroyed by fire, flood or other disaster to be reconstructed on the same footprint. This has raised concerns among residents of older cottages and homes, which were built much closer to the water than would currently be permitted.

Councilor Schjerning is concerned that seasonal residents may not even learn about this until too late to ask for reconsideration, and asked why the rush.

Councilor Sleeth asked for an extension to the decision, for seasonal residents are still a big part of the Storrington community.

Councilor Sutherland said he was not sure this needed to be postponed, for the lake associations already were informed.

Councilor Revill thought very few would be affected but the change, and it is important not to permit residents to remove and replace lakeside structures.

Councilor McDougall said very few have been, or will be affected by the by-law change.

Council agreed to proceed with the suggested timeline: April 26, the Committee of the Whole will receive the planner’s report, legal opinions and delegations. If necessary, further delegations will be received May 10, and a final decision will be made at the May 17 council meeting. Lake associations will be informed of this timeline.

On Sat. April 23, the Kingston Frontenac Public Library will be hosting a talk about the Proportional Voting System at the Sydenham branch at 2 p.m. The talk will be given by Norm Hart of Fair Vote Canada

“Canada's current electoral system is based on the ‘first-past-the-post’ or ‘winner-takes-all’ system: each riding sends the candidate with the most votes to Ottawa and the party with the largest number of winning candidates forms the government,” says Programming and Outreach Librarian Anne Hall. “But whenever there are more than two parties running, the government will often be formed by a party with far less than 50 % of the total number of votes cast. One could argue that all the votes for the candidates who lost in each riding are lost or wasted.”

Fair Vote Canada believes there’s a better way: proportional voting, where everyone’s vote counts towards the end result, and the number of seats won by each party is proportional to the total number of votes cast. In the April 23 talk, Norm Hart will explain how proportional representation works.

Visit www.kfpl.ca or join the Facebook event: https://www.facebook.com/events/200020577041107/

Seven new jobs envisioned, mostly at upper management level

An organizational review by Toronto/Ottawa-based consultants, StrategyCorp, noted that South Frontenac spends less than most other comparable municipalities in a number of areas, including: administration, parks/recreation and facilities, fire and police, and planning/development.

However, if the final report they submitted to Council this week is adopted, that might all change.

Among the major recommendations in their report is the creation of an entire new administrative tier, with three new directors to be slotted in between the Chief Administrative Officer (CAO) and the departmental managers that are currently in place.

The positions of director of corporate services, director of development services, and director of infrastructure services are only three of seven new positions envisioned by the report. The other four are that of township clerk, a fire education officer, a communications officer and an economic development officer.

Because of the “lean management” structure that is currently in place in the township, there is no time available to management staff to look towards the future needs of the township, according to the report.

“Through interviews, all senior management staff noted that close to 100% of their time is devoted to day-to-day operations. This has resulted in an inability to address strategic planning concerns, as management of the urgent can often crowd out management of the important,” the report says.

One of the key insights of the report was that the current Chief Administrative Officer/Clerk, Wayne Orr, spends almost 100% of his time dealing with day-to-day matters.

“A municipalities' CAO should be its chief strategist. With the current weight of CAO and clerk responsibilities, combined with an unwieldy span of control, the CAO simply does not have the capacity to be South Frontenac's chief strategist at present,” said the report.

In order to address this, the report not only recommends creating a stand-alone clerk position to relieve the CAO of half of their responsibilities, it also says that the number of times council meets should change radically. Council currently meets almost every week, on the first and third Tuesdays of the month for a council meeting, and on the second and fourth Tuesdays as a committee of the whole.

Noting that “the frequency of Council and Committee of the Whole meetings is taxing on senior management staff” the report recommends eliminating the committee of the whole meetings entirely and limiting council meetings to one or two per month.

It says that this would allow senior management to work with council “in crafting more strategic agendas and to provide staff with more time to consider, reflect and prepare more robust reports”.

In place of the current structure, council committees would become more of a focal point for decision-making.

The report calls for four new positions to be created within a year or two, and three to follow later on.

One of those is a new clerk, to alleviate pressure on the CAO; two are at the new director level; and one is a fire prevention officer.

The report calls for an immediate re-design of the corporate services department this year, with the creation of a director of corporate services to oversee the work of the treasurer, a newly hired clerk, and the human resources officer.

South Frontenac Council meetings have been dominated, in recent months, with planning matters. At their meeting on April 7, for example, Council heard from over a dozen members of the public on a new subdivision proposal in the Storrington district, in a meeting that eventually ran over three hours.

To deal with planning, the StrategyCorp report calls for the immediate hiring of a director of development services to oversee the work of the planner, chief building official, and recreation supervisor.

“The Planning department is currently not working towards driving a comprehensive, streamlined development process. The department is very transactionally focused and the development flow chart that is currently being developed to guide the development process has been largely led by the CAO,” the report says.

It also identifies that the planning process is bogged down by a lack of clarity in the relationship between the township's planning department and that of Frontenac County.

“Reconciling the role of the Township vis-à-vis the County and setting clear roles for each level of government in the process” would be an immediate task to be undertaken by the new director of development services.

The position of fire prevention officer is proposed partly to improve the level of service, and partly to free up the fire chief to deal with administrative requirements.

While the report says Council needs to consider pay equity issues and recruitment issues if they implement the hiring that it calls for, it does not talk about the budgetary implications of its recommendations.  

A little rain didn’t stop the 1st Sydenham Sparks & Brownies or the 1st Frontenac Guides & Pathfinders! The girls could be found around the villages of Harrowsmith and Sydenham on April 2. Thank you to the Sydenham Foodland, Nellie’s Gas Bar and everyone that supported Cookie Day 2016.

Bicycle enthusiasts from across the Township of South Frontenac put their heads together to brainstorm what changes might be made in the township to create a more bicycle-friendly environment. The efforts began at two meetings, both of which took place on March 30 and included representatives from KLF&A Public Health, the Township of South Frontenac and South Frontenac Rides. The latter is a committee of South Frontenac Council made up almost entirely of community members interested in improving active transportation in South Frontenac.

At their first meeting on Wednesday, the three groups met privately to discuss the possibilities of coming up with a work plan to improve cycling infrastructure in the township. Guests spoke about what is currently in place in the community to support cycling and also the gaps that exist and how to best address them.

The groups developed five and two-year plans and also an immediate one-year action plan. A report is currently being created and will be presented to council in the near future. The plan will map out the suggestions identified by the stakeholders and gleaned through the lens of the Bicycle-Friendly Ontario program and will include some of the high-impact actions that the group and township can take, especially those that will have an immediate, visible impact.

The second part of the day included a public meeting where representatives from the three groups along with interested members of the community met for a presentation by Justin Jones, who is the manager of Bicycle-Friendly Ontario and is also with Share The Road Cycling Coalition.

Jones began by outlining his personal background, first as a car-dependent teenager in his hometown of Carstairs, Alberta and later, after moving to Toronto, as a cycling enthusiast. Jones cited numerous statistics in the presentation, like the fact that 54% of 18 to 34-year-olds would consider moving to another community that had better transportation options and further, that 66% of this age group said that “access to high quality transportation options” is one of their top three priorities when considering a new community to settle in.

Jones also noted that children these days are far less likely to walk or bike to school. Today only 24% (and dropping) of children do, whereas 58% of people over 30 years old used to walk or bike to school when they were children. He said, “It is very important to start reversing these trends.”

Jones went on to point to a pilot project done in the US where $25 million was invested in active transportation infrastructure (i.e. bicycle paths, trails etc.) in each of four various-sized communities. Results showed that the number of people walking went up by 22%; cyclists increased by 46-115%; and the number of collisions decreased by 18-55%.

Jones also spoke of the City of Thunder Bay, which has been increasing its active transportation infrastructure since 2010. Statistics have shown that cycling increased by 147%, and that the number of collisions involving cyclists decreased by 88%.

Jones stressed that bicycle-friendly communities involve much more than just lines on the road, but also the engineering of bike lanes, trails and bicycle parking, education, encouragements and incentives, and by-law enforcement. He spoke of the small town of Bemidji, Minnesota, which in 2012 earned bronze medal status as a bike-friendly community. The town engaged cyclists through a number of incentives and activities, which in time encouraged residents to support new cycling infrastructure policies.

In Ontario, Jones cited the town of Mississippi Mills, with a population of 12,000, which has instituted numerous cycling incentives including a small bike share program; a “Tweed Ride” where cyclists dress up in their finest for an afternoon ride; a women’s-only mountain biking event and more. Council there has passed an active transportation plan for 2016 that should see more incentives undertaken to promote cycling.

Jones also used Verona as an example. Most residents live within a 3 km radius of the town services and improved infrastructure there could see more cyclists taking to the roads to commute to their work places, schools and local services.

Following Jones’ presentation, guests were split into groups to determine what plans can be taken and put into place to increase cycling. Topics included short-term projects leading to longer-term investments; what the ideal infrastructure in South Frontenac might look like; what activities can encourage residents and children to ride; and what barriers are preventing them from doing so.

Mayor Ron Vandewal, who attended both meetings, said that he looks forward to seeing what happens with all the information gleaned from the two meetings. “There was lot of good information that came forward at both meetings and it will be interesting to see what we can do moving forward. I think that if we want taxpayers to buy into this, we also need to include other modes of active transportation like walking trails, sidewalks and more.”

Northern Frontenac Community Services (NFCS) is leading a community process to respond to issues of poverty and homelessness.

NFCS has received a grant from the United Way to respond to the issues in Frontenac County with support from Southern Frontenac Community Services (SFCS).

“One of the strategic directives of the City of Kingston's 10-year plan to eliminate homelessness is to develop a rural homelessness strategy and that is what motivated our agency to take on this initiative,” said Louise Moody, executive director of NFCS.

The rural strategy addresses the following goals in rural areas: expand housing options for low-income and homeless individuals; improve access to services; enhance targeted prevention; and promote local leadership in “ending homelessness” (i.e. putting an effective system in place to make the absence of housing short-term and rare, and eliminate long-term or repeated episodes of homelessness).

There are four levels of homelessness as defined by the Canadian Homelessness Research Network, and in Frontenac County the focus has been on level 3: provisionally accommodated; and level 4: at risk of homelessness.

“We have used the United Way funding to engage Kim Allen as a consultant to meet with community leaders, with people who have experienced poverty and homelessness/housing security issues, and service providers in the various communities of Frontenac County,” said Moody.

“Getting to meet people from throughout the county who are facing or have faced these issues, people who work in this area, and others who are interested in making a difference on a community level is key to ensuring that we can truly address these deep and complex issues,” said Kim Allen.

After two months of collecting information about rural poverty and housing security, NFCS is convening an all-day summit in Sharbot Lake on May 6. During the summit, participants will discuss the findings of the community consultations, explore the issues of rural poverty, identify assets in the community and develop new strategies to deal with the issues.

“We will employ a world cafe style process on May 6. The goal will be to access the collective wisdom, encourage intentional conversations, invite diverse contributions to the discussion and foster a sense of commitment to the necessary actions that will be identified at the summit,” said Allen.

A minimum of three strategies will be identified for the community to address/prevent homelessness as well as to help inform the City of Kingston's Homelessness strategy for Frontenac County and the United Way's Youth Homelessness strategy.

The geographic and economic diversity in Frontenac County will likely result in different initiatives being taken on in different communities within the County.

A further hope of the organizers is that by getting people who are committed to addressing these issues they will take it upon themselves to act collectively in the future, within and between the community of communities that is Frontenac County.

If you are interested in learning more about this community initiative or the summit, please contact Kim Allen at 613-583-4569 or This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it..

By popular demand, on Saturday, April 23 at 7:30 pm, the Grace Centre in Sydenham will present the return of “Sheesham, Lotus and 'Son: The New Kings of Old Time”, with Sheesham Crow, Lotus Wight and 'Son Sanderson. They are committed to the preservation of music and tradition of the past. The core of the show is a repertoire based on their love of the American fiddle tune, joyously played, not only with fiddle, but also with jaw-harps, banjos, and homemade instruments like the contrabass harmoni-phonium. Ragtime and blues never sounded so good. Their performance last year was sold out and very enthusiastically received. There was lots of toe-tapping and big smiles all round at the astounding musicianship and antics. The concert is a fundraiser for Southern Frontenac Community Services. Tickets are only $12 in advance and $15 at the door. No cost for children 10 and under. Tickets can be purchased at: Gilmour's in Harrowsmith; the SFCSC office at 4419 George Street; the One Stop in Sydenham; Ormsbee's Mercantile in Sunbury