Is the touchy subject of municipal amalgamation about to resurface?
Amalgamation of the Town and County of Athabasca was defeated in a plebiscite in April 2004, but it was resurrected during a closed-door joint town and county council meeting held March 28, councillor George Hawryluk revealed at the Athabasca town council meeting last Tuesday.
“I would like to know the purpose and intention as to why the amalgamation issue between the Town of Athabasca and the Athabasca County was added to the agenda for the joint council meeting on March 28,” Hawryluk asked.
He asked for clarification why the topic was added to the agenda without the prior consent and knowledge of council.
Mayor Roger Morrill said he added the amalgamation item to the agenda, adding that he believes amalgamation might be worth rehashing.
“I thought it might be a good idea to at least put it out there,” said Morrill. “It was not to discuss anything other than defining the benefits and negatives, and presenting factual evidence in a timely, informative procedure, headed by the appropriate groups.
“I am not saying that I am in favour or not of amalgamation,” Morrill added, “but I believe that consideration of the negatives and positives should be explored, especially in light of the very successful amalgamation in Lac La Biche and Thorhild.”
Hawryluk questioned the process by which amalgamation was added to the joint council meeting agenda, and councillors Paula Evans and Tim Verhaeghe both agreed that perhaps council should decide, prior to the joint council meeting, what is going to be added to the agenda, and not have any last minute additions.
Cherniwchan said that although the council does meet prior to the joint council meetings to discuss topics, he does not think limiting the topics to just those previously discussed is necessary.
“These joint council meetings are to share ideas, regardless of what the topic is. Any topic brought forth is of a conceptual nature, for discussion purposes,” Cherniwchan said, noting that no motions are made there and no action is taken.
“We are all individuals – elected individuals – speak for yourselves,” said Cherniwchan.
Cherniwchan insinuated that last Tuesday’s discussion of the joint council meeting should not have taken place publicly.
Immediately after Hawryluk asked about the amalgamation item on the joint council meeting agenda, Cherniwchan made a motion to move that discussion in-camera. However, a quick vote by council defeated the motion, and the debate continued within the regular meeting of council.
Cherniwchan then scolded Hawryluk, as he was under the impression the amalgamation issue was to be kept confidential between the town and county councillors.
“I am disappointed, councillor Hawryluk, that you would bring this up when the point was made very clearly and succinctly, at the meeting, what we were not to do – you’ve gone and done it,” said Cherniwchan.
But councillor Tim Verhaeghe rebutted Cherniwchan’s statement, asserting that the conversation was not agreed to be undisclosed.
“You said it was agreed upon that we wouldn’t discuss it, but that wasn’t agreed upon. It was one councillor’s suggestion from the county,” Verhaeghe said.
