Barrhead is unique.
That is what a group of about 50 people heard on Tuesday, June 16, at the Barrhead Senior Citizens Drop-In Centre, during a presentation by GCS Consulting about the amalgamation process.
GCS Consulting is the company hired by the town and county of Barrhead to provide information and options regarding amalgamation to the joint committee. The Town of Barrhead started the process on Sept. 9, 2014 when council unanimously voted to approve Coun. Don Smith’s motion to contact Alberta Municipal Affairs to start amalgamation negotiations with Barrhead County.
Gabe Shelley, a director for GCS Consulting Inc., said the town initiated the process after council became frustrated with its inability to reach an agreement over what they perceive to be an equitable funding arrangement over the operating costs for facilities and services, mostly in the area of recreation.
“The town thinks the county should contribute proportionally to the number of its residents who use these facilities,” he said. “While the county feels that it has a number of different priorities. They are willing to contribute, but not to the level the town thinks is appropriate. The aquatic centre is just the latest example of this.”
Shelley said over the years there have been a number of attempts to solve the issue, with limited success.
“This situation isn’t new. Russ (his presentation partner) and I work with quite a few municipalities across the province who have similar issues with a municipal partner,” he said, adding that many municipalities have issues about sharing resources and funding.
While the situation may not be new, he said it is unique.
According to Alberta Municipal Affairs criteria, both the town and county are viable municipalities.
“Typically what happens in these situations is that you have one viable and one non-viable municipality. For example you may have one very rich municipality, which usually is the rural partner and the not so rich town,” Shelley said, adding that is not the situation in Barrhead. “What you have here is two, not quite equal in population municipalities, and both, while not rich, are still viable.”
CGS Consulting’s role in the process is to collect information and come up with a study that includes possible solutions to present to the amalgamation committee to help repair the relationship between the two municipalities.
The amalgamation committee is a 14 member joint body consisting of the councils, including the mayor and reeve, of both municipalities and their chief administrative officers (CAO). The CAO’s don’t have voting rights, but are there to advise the other members on legalities. Because of potential animosity between the two councils, an independent facilitator is also part of the committee. The committee meets every two weeks.
“It is all about building a base of information on which to make an intelligent decision on amalgamation,” Shelley said. “We are looking at financials, services, volumes and agreements to come up with a picture of the current situation.”
The next step of the process is to determine the consequences of amalgamation.
Under the current system each municipality has its own set of governance, administrative structure and assets.
“The issue is that it hasn’t seemed to work,” he said.
Under amalgamation, the two municipalities would consolidate all its assets and departments into one body. A new council and administrative structure would also be created.
“There would be costs involved, which may or may not be offset by the consolidation of departments,” he said, adding that amalgamation has other implications.
For example, Shelley said provincial legislation requires a water commission must have two partners.
“Either you find another dance partner or you collapse the water commission and it becomes part of the assets and liabilities of the new municipality,” he said, adding becoming a single municipality is a difficult transition. “These things are hard to do and it’s not something that you do overnight, but it does have the potential of solving some of the broader issues between the town and the county.”
However, Shelley said there is no guarantee that amalgamation will happen, adding there are many obstacles in the way.
“The amalgamation committee may not agree with it, or it may go to a plebiscite and it fails, or the minister (Municipal Affairs) doesn’t agree with it, etc., then you are back at square one,” he said, adding that is why GCS Consulting is investigating other options that could improve the current situation.
Among the options they are investigating include forming a regional partnership, such as a joint recreation board.
“It has no effect on governance, there is still two councils, no effect on government structure or assets, but it could help eliminate some of the areas of tension between the town and county,” he said.
Another option is a regional commission, similar to Barrhead’s Water Commission. The two councils would set up and fund the commission that would have a separate board with the authority to run its operations under the mandate agreed to by the two municipalities.
These options may not be in the final report, but are some of the options that Shelley and his team are investigating. Currently, CGS Consulting is collecting information for the final study report, which they hope will be completed by October.
“We have been gathering a lot of information, from financial statements, volume reports, from both the town and the county and others,” he said, adding that they have also been interviewing members of the councils, senior managers along with other stakeholders such as Woodlands County, who have an intersest in this decision.
Later on in the process CGS Consulting will also be looking for public input from town and county residents thorough a 10 question survey, which will be available online or a hardcopy that will be mailed to every household.
After the amalgamation committee receives the report, the facilitator’s work will start in earnest.
Shelley said the committee would ask questions such as: What do we agree with? Where are our differences and how can we move ahead?
The process is estimated to take until March of 2016.
“By the end of the entire process the goal is that the amalgamation committee and the two councils working together will come to a conclusion on what option we would like to do and write a letter to the minister,” he said, adding that if the change is minor the two councils could do that together. “However, if it is a major change like amalgamation, the committee would have to submit a request saying we would like to change our status and the minister would take it to cabinet for approval or disapproval of this change of municipal status.”
Shelley and his colleague Russ Heppell, then opened to the floor. The pair couldn’t answer a lot of the questions from the floor saying they weren’t about the process. An audience member asked the pair when the study would be made public. Shelley said his team would present the study to the amalgamation committee and Municipal Affairs and it would be up to the committee or the minister of Municipal Affairs’ to make the study public.
Others asked if there was a vote on amalgamation how the vote would be tallied.
Heppell said that he believed the Municipal Affairs minister would give area residents a chance to vote in a plebiscite and residents would be able to see how both the town and county voted.
“But that is just my guess,” he said. “In my experience governments like to do what is popular. In the end it would be up to the minister.”
On Wednesday, June 24, CGS Consultants will give the same presentation, this time at the Summerdale Community Hall at 7 p.m.
