County of Brant Council supported a one-year funding arrangement for Willowbridge Community Services, Victim Services of Brant, Nova Vita and the Sexual Assault Centre of Brant during its regular council meeting on Tuesday, September 23, 2025.
Council previously declared intimate partner violence (IPV) and gender-based violence an epidemic in November 2023, and later approved a one-time allotment of $266,177 to be shared among the four non-profit organizations in March 2024.
While Council decided to extend the emergency funding in March 2025, Oakley recently expressed that the current arrangement lacks a formal structure to ensure sustainable service delivery, and introduced a new resolution during last Tuesday’s meeting to address the gap.
As part of the resolution, Oakley asked that staff be directed to develop a three-year service agreement to support intimate partner violence initiatives, with the intention of including it in the 2026 budget process.
His item stated that the three-year period would run from April 1, 2026 to April 1, 2029, and that the intimate partner violence funding would be allocated through the Brant Community Grant program so long as the recipients meet all the requirements.
Oakley’s resolution also asked that intimate partner violence and gender-based violence prevention be adopted as a key advocacy piece of the County of Brant’s government relations strategy, and that the municipality focus on lobbying the provincial government to:
- Declare intimate partner violence an epidemic in Ontario,
- Provide adequate funding to organizations that help support the victims of and work to prevent intimate partner and gender based violence in Ontario, and
- Make clear that the Council’s position is that this funding shortfall should be taken over before the County’s funding agreement ceases in April of 2029.
Lastly, the resolution also directed staff to produce an annual report on the status of intimate partner violence and gender-based violence funding, initiatives, statistics, and advocacy within the County of Brant.
Councillor Steve Howes said that while he appreciated what his wardmate was trying to do, he didn’t feel like he could support a three-year funding agreement at this time.
“We don’t know what we’re going into with the budget and tax situation for 2026 yet, let alone what 2027 and 2028 might look like,” he said. “While I support the cause and I look forward to a discussion about how we can financially support these organizations in the coming year, …I think this is a topic that we have to review each year and so I can’t support it in its current form.”
Ward 5 Councillor Christine Garneau then explained why she too would not be supporting the resolution.
“Fundamentally, I think what we have ahead of us is a difference of opinion about what our role is as a municipality and of Council, but also how we should use our authority to levy property taxes and I think we’re overstepping those here,” she said. “We can’t close every gap that’s handed to us. Tonight, the City of Brantford is discussing food insecurity, something that broadly affects the entire population, and that’s just another example of what we could be asked to step up for.”
Given that the County has a community grants program designed to address specific community needs and that grants are capped to ensure support for many groups, Garneau said the program would be a more appropriate mechanism for allocating funding for intimate partner and gender-based violence.
The Ward 5 Councillor also applauded the City of Brantford for creating a website to help address healthy relationships and intimate partner violence,
“This is more aligned with what I thought we were going to do when we first approved that resolution in November 2023,” said Garneau. “What I liked about it is that the City took a responsibility there for getting information out themselves, in a largely neutral and balanced way that reflected the diversity of those who interact with the theme at hand today.”
She added that both the municipality and the provincial government only have limited resources to handle all the priorities that come up on a daily basis, and that they shouldn’t be committing to a funding agreement that extends beyond the current council.
“We have to ask ourselves, should this be our single biggest ask? Should we be prioritizing this over others?” asked Garneau. “I can’t in the face of an affordability crisis, failing infrastructure and broader growth-related needs. … Lastly, I want to pick up on the idea of the three year commitment; I think that that extends well beyond our current term of Council and we shouldn’t be setting the priorities of the next Council.”
Later, Ward 3 Councillor John Bell said that while he was supportive of what the resolution was trying to achieve, he would move an amendment to have the three-year service agreement brought down to one so that it could be reviewed again once the next Council was in place.
Ward 4 Councillor Robert Chambers expressed that he wasn’t comfortable moving forward with the term “service agreement,” noting it implies the organizations would have to meet specific conditions to receive funding, whereas a grant would allow them to apply and be approved without such requirements.
“I’m not in favour of the service agreement because I think that’s an undue burden on the organizations,” he said. “I much prefer a grant like we’ve done in the past two years so they can do good work with the money they’ve got.”
Chambers also said he wasn’t a fan of the community grants program, preferring instead that the organizations appear before council each year to share their work and outcomes, allowing councillors to approve the funding directly like they used to. He also said that they need to keep in mind that the budget process is changing and should be careful how they move forward.
Overall, he said that while he was in support of providing the organizations with funding, he was not in support of the overall resolution as presented.
“I believe that the intent is to support these organizations to the extent that we’ve supported them into the future, but I think that is a decision that should be made annually, much like it always has been, and much like all the other organizations do accordingly,” said Chambers. “I don’t agree with them going through the community grants program, asking them to commit to a service agreement or asking our staff to produce a report when there would be a second-hand report. It may look like I’m not supporting the organizations and supporting the funding, but I am… I just don’t support the resolution.”
Following Chamber’s statements, Councillors voted on each of the resolutions’ actionable clauses separately, noting that an amendment was made to change the resolution from a three-year “service agreement” to a one-year “agreement.”
The first clause in regards to staff developing a one-year agreement to support intimate partner violence initiatives, with the intention of including it in the 2026 budget process carried on a vote of 7-4.
The second clause to adopt intimate partner violence and gender-based violence prevention as a key advocacy piece of the County of Brant’s government relations strategy, was carried on a vote 10-1.
The third clause to direct staff to produce an annual report on the status of intimate partner and gender based violence funding, initiatives, statistics, and advocacy within the County of Brant, was defeated on vote of 9-2.
Kimberly De Jong’s reporting is funded by the Canadian government through its Local Journalism Initiative.The funding allows her to report rural and agricultural stories from Blandford-Blenheim and Brant County. Reach her at kimberly.dejong@brantbeacon.ca.
