WESTLOCK – Westlock County Coun. Dennis Primeau thinks the municipality should have engaged with stakeholders when they completed a recreational facility cost sharing agreement with the Town of Westlock.
The agreement is part of the intermunicipal collaborative framework between the two municipalities, which received unanimous approval from town council March 23.
It also passed in county council March 31, but only after heated discussions between other councillors and Primeau, who wanted the vote postponed until engagement with the public was completed.
“The only part (of the ICF) that I think the taxpayers want to discuss is the recreational part. That’s the one that I think is the big one, and I think they have the right not participate. I would not feel comfortable passing this without having citizen engagement,” said Primeau while moving to postpone passing of the ICF.
Embedded in the ICF is a five-year cost-sharing agreement between town and county, whereby the county will contribute $309,582 to the town for recreational costs in 2020. By 2025, the amount will increase to $468,925.
This, Primeau thinks, should have been put to discussion in front of ratepayers, something he says was mentioned in the negotiation protocols.
“This was probably the most important part of the negotiation, to check in with the people that are paying the bills. This is their county, this is their taxes, and we did not do that,” said Primeau, a statement that was met with an audible sigh.
Primeau’s rejection of the ICF and his insistence that a councillor can automatically postpone voting without council approval was “nonsense, absolute nonsense,” said Coun. Victor Julyan, who accused his colleague of “trying to destroy something again.”
“We have a responsibility to honour the agreement that we have said we would honour. We said we would do it; the town have passed theirs and we should be doing the same thing. It’s the only honourable thing to do. Pandemic or no pandemic, this has to go ahead.
“This would’ve been appropriate at the last meeting with the town,” he said.
Other councillors believed the agreement was reached by compromise from both municipalities: Coun. Jared Stitsen called the ICF a “win-win for all the residents,” while Hall said “we were all a bit surprised it went so well.”
“During this negotiation, based on the usage that the town presented, they probably would’ve liked to have more funding than we agreed to. Based on the county’s ability to pay, we probably would’ve liked to pay less, but usually when both sides don’t get what they want, you’ve reached a good agreement,” said deputy reeve Brian Coleman.
The document was “a long time coming,” agreed town council at their meeting.
Councillors instead brought up the timeliness and significance of the document, with Coun. Curtis Snell saying the five joint meetings revealed the “genuine good will” of both parties.
“I think this is one of the most significant things we’ve done as a council. … I really feel, and I hope all of our council feels that we’ve really set a new standard of collaboration and understanding with our county partners and look forward to working across our boundaries for the benefit of all of us,” said mayor Ralph Leriger.
“I’ve been on council longer than anybody and this is finally coming to fruition, at least the best that we could get and I’m pretty happy,” said Coun. Clem Fagnan.
Primeau was the only councillor to vote against the ICF, after his request to postpone a vote on the document was rejected by council.
ICF details
“Both (municipalities) are committed to fostering intermunicipal cooperation in a non-adversarial, informal and cost-effective manner,” reads the ICF.
Councils also agree that each service is to be provided to residents of both municipalities at the same costs.
Those services which are already provided jointly include emergency, recreation, Family and Community Support Services, the library and the airport.
With rec cost-sharing finalized, town and county have committed to “reach mutually acceptable arrangements” regarding fire and rescue services, emergency management agency and services and a recreation master plan in the future.
The first two have to be completed by Dec. 31, 2021. They have until Jan. 31, 2022 to begin the rec master plan talks.
The Village of Clyde will also be included in those discussions “for the potential of creating three-party municipal agreements.” At March 31 meeting, county councillors also unanimously approved an ICF with Clyde.
The rest of the document clarifies rules of engagement between the two municipalities, said town CAO Simone Wiley, not what the items for discussion will be.
Disputes
The ICF has to be reviewed every five years.
In the eventuality that the municipalities cannot agree on future projects, the CAOs have 30 days to resolve the dispute or it gets passed on to the two councils.
If councils can’t come to a resolution within 60 days, mediators will be hired and the process can’t last any longer than three months.
