According to Alberta Municipal Affairs, closed committee of the whole meetings were never discussed during the Municipal Corporate Review (MCR) of the Town of Athabasca in March 2013.
“I talked with one of the municipal advisors, and he informs me that they never talked about committee of the whole meetings,” said Jerry Ward, public affairs officer for Municipal Affairs.
The advisors involved in the review are not permitted to speak to the media, Ward said.
Ward explained the pair of reviewers attended a council meeting and did interviews with council and administration in order to do a review of the town’s operations. From these observations, the advisors released a report containing 31 recommendations to improve operations of council and administration.
“They did not address committee meetings, and as (the reviewers) said, and I would suspect, they would never advise something … that is stated clearly and plainly in the (Municipal Government Act),” Ward said.
The Municipal Government Act (MGA) states that any meeting of council must be open to the public.
At the time of the municipal review, previous council was holding closed committee of the whole meetings once a month on average, explained councillor Tim Verhaeghe. This was one of the reasons he brought a motion forward at the June 3, 2014, meeting of the current council to begin holding the meetings once more.
Despite the comments from Municipal Affairs, Verhaeghe said the reviewers must have known the meetings were taking place, as they are referenced in the MCR.
In the Procedural Bylaw section of the review, it states, “Some of the areas to be addressed should include definitions that explain the meaning of a word or expression unique to the bylaw, such as the meaning of committee of the whole.”
“I can’t comment on what this person said or didn’t say. All I can comment on is it is referenced in the MCR. It’s right there in black and white … if they didn’t know we were having them, why would that even be in there?” Verhaeghe said.
Verhaeghe explained that the review was very thorough and the reviewers looked at every part of the town’s operations.
“We were having committee of the whole, and they went through how we were doing things with a fine-toothed comb,” he said.
Verhaeghe could not confirm if the reviewers were explicitly told that these meetings were taking place.
“I can’t say with any degree of certainty that they were told we were having two council meetings a month plus one committee of the whole once a month on average. I’m assuming they knew, and that is further supported by (the MCR) under Procedural Bylaw,” he said.
The motion to start having the closed meetings again passed with a 5-2 vote last month with councillors Nichole Adams and Tanu Tyszka-Evans opposed. The pair stated the meetings are a strict violation of the MGA and that the public has the right to attend all council meetings.
The pair sent a letter to Minister of Municipal Affairs Greg Weadick explaining their concerns with council having these meetings. The response they received was dated for Jan. 16, 1998, and is a “generic response” Adams said.
She characterized the response as discouraging.
“It’s just a form letter — no personal response at all,” she said.
The letter states that a petition can be made for an inquiry, but Adams is unsure whether or not that will go forward at this time.
“You can only beat your head against a brick wall so many times. You get discouraged,” she said.
