Public forum -not closed doors

Coronation Review [Coronation, Alta] 01 Oct 2009: 4.

The Municipal Government Act (MGA) requires that all decisions by a Council be made in
public.

It seems the move by the Government of Alberta to focus it's financial efforts into infrastructure,
has sparked some undesirable activity that is making the public raise it's eyebrows.

It appears that decisions are being made "behind closed doors" and/or outside of the council
chambers.

The MGA clearly restricts to whom a Council can delegate its authority.

A Council cannot delegate its decision-making powers to anyone it chooses -there are strict
limitations to who it may delegate, namely only to a Council Committee, the Chief
Administrative Officer or Designated Officer.

All items of business must be presented at the Council meeting only and cannot be discussed and
decided upon "behind closed doors" or in other locations.

The public has a right to know the activities of the Council serving their community, after all, the
community is the taxpayers who pay the salaries of those on Council and those of the
Administration.

A good example of the consequences of "closed door" decisions is the case being heard presently
by Alberta Court of Queen's Bench.

It appears that EPCOR, which owns and operates high voltage substations and transmission lines
that form part of the Alberta interconnected electric system, and which is primarily situated in
the City of Edmonton, wanted permission from Edmonton City Council to form a new company
and sell a portion of it's shares to investors.

According to the Municipal Government Act, Edmonton City Council acted in an 'illegal'
manner when it held a "behind closed doors" shareholders' meeting to make the decision to spin
off the assets, valued at $2.8 billion, but this will be up to Alberta's Court of Queen's Bench to
decide.

"For years, City Council has ducked public accountability," said Dave Loken, spokesman for the
Coalition of Edmonton Civic Unions, who brought the issue to light.

The problem is not just a city problem, it's one that goes on in municipalities across the province.
The Government is beginning to realize the situation, at least with financial accountability, and
the plan to institute Bill 202 -the Municipal Auditor General, will bring these kinds of activities
to the forefront, at least within the way Councils perform in their financial matters.

But who will hold the general operation of the meetings and each Councillor to accountability?

It appears that the rights of the public are not being considered.

When does the public have a right to know what issues Council is bringing to the table?

In part, that's the job of the media! But it is becoming a time losing activity for the local media to
acquire any or all information that should be made available to the public, sometimes four to six
days.

Generally, at least in some parts of east central Alberta, Council's think that information can be
distributed when and where they determine.

How does this kind of behaviour serve the best interests of it's community?

Is it not Council's responsibility to represent it's residents, their desires and ideas before their
own and to maintain a strong, functioning community.

I guess that's the million dollar question?

Credit: Coronation Review

Copyright CanWest Digital Media Oct 1, 2009