Last Monday I was forced to disrupt the council proceedings. I know that I was breaking the rule of order and this would cause disruption and be very difficult – and it did and it was. Unfortunately, there are no other channels to stop a meeting where a profound and egregious procedural misstep took place. The mayor allowed the opening up of discussion on a motion after voting had started. Two councilors had already cast their vote. An apology was given after the recess. This procedural error is so egregious that a new special meeting should probably be held. I am not sure an apology is adequate to negate such an error. I think it would be best to check with municipal affairs. I am not sure how an experienced mayor and CAO would let this procedural error happen.
I also found it worrisome that in the discussion portion of the meeting councilors were addressing the audience, giving speeches and in some cases lectures. Councilor Hutchison, however, did address other councilors correctly and stated his position and why he would vote a certain way. It looked as if some councilors and the mayor had prepared written speeches directed for and to the audience. The audience doesn’t get to vote on issues, in fact, after the question period, we are just observers. So I am not sure why they were addresses us. Discussion on the Motion is a debate among councilors on the issues, gathering facts, asking for clarification and persuading, through argument, why their position is correct. Queries should have been directed to the officer who proposed the idea of changing municipal status. Here are some of the questions that I would have expected. What would be the tax implication to residents if we do not increase our percentage of light-industrial, commercial, retail? What are the comparative mill rates of our competing municipalities? If we get a step up on other towns do you expect them to change their status to a city? No questions, however, were directed at this person. He did not make a presentation to council, which I found puzzling. I am not sure that councilors had documentation with them referring to this proposal – it didn’t appear so. They didn’t refer to it. The Municipal Government Act indicates that all decisions of council are to be made in public. I am concerned a decision may have been made prior to this meeting, whether formally or informally.
I think there is an argument to be made, although relatively thin, to change the status of our town to a city. I would have voted in favour of the motion.
Bill Peddlesden
Chestermere, AB
