Your news this week: Haying in the 30’s another success - 3 Mundare Foundation funds garden - 6 Charter school gets funding - 10 OPINION: Bozo Eruptions - 4
Proud to be an Independent CANADIAN Publication
FREE
Vol. 19, No. 17, Wednesday, March 20, 2024 www.LamontLeader.com
Lamont County sends letter to Minister to stymie inspection brought on by 900 name taxpayers’ petition BY JANA SEMENIUK AND JOHN MATHER Lamont County Councillor Neil Woitas spoke out against a letter by Lamont County Council sent to the Minister of Municipal Affairs Ric McIvor last week, attempting to stymie the possibility of an inspection on the county. The 11-page letter was published on the county’s website Mar. 13 after it was sent to the minister. Earlier this year, residents unhappy with the governance of Lamont County collected 900 signatures, more than the required 778, urging the minister to consider a municipal inspection on the county. Upon receiving the petition on Feb. 12, a member of the minister’s office was designated to review the petition and will declare it’s sufficiency within 45 days; March 28. If sufficient, the minister will determine the next steps in regard to a possible municipal inspection on the County. In the meantime, during their Mar. 12 regular council meeting, Lamont County voted in favour of a motion to send the letter to Alberta Municipal Affairs Minister Ric McIvor voicing their displeasure with a petition asking for a municipal audit of the County. The letter was discussed in closed session before council came and presented a motion to vote on sending it to McIver. In a recorded vote, Division Five Councillor Neil Woitas opposed the motion and sent out an email to all councillors and to the Minister’s office disassociating himself from the letter publicly. “As I read this letter, I was not comfortable with the content. When it came to having the motion for sending this letter and putting it on the website I asked for a recorded vote. Result was;
Woitas against,” said Woitas in his email. “Please do not include councillor Woitas on this letter.” In their letter, Lamont County, under the signature of Reeve David Diduck, stated “based on reporting within our community, it is our understanding that this petition makes allegations regarding the governance and administrative leadership of Lamont County. Specifically, we understand these matters to be: 1. Allegations that staffing costs are not reasonable; 2. Allegations that mill rates are not reasonable; and 3. Concerns with proposed changes to the County's Land Use Bylaw.” The County stated they are presenting, “a detailed position paper to provide the Minister of Municipal Affairs clarity on these matters, in the hope that the Minister will determine that the cost and disruption of an inspection are unwarranted, regardless of the sufficiency of the petition.” It added the inspection would adversely impact timely progress towards the priorities established for the community by Council. “We wish to reinforce that the purpose of an Inspection is to investigate matters that are irregular, improper, or improvident in nature,” said the County’s letter. “They are not intended to be a mechanism for disgruntled citizens, representing a minority of residents, to take political action in response to misinformation or disagreements with County decisions.” According to the government’s municipal statistics on Lamont County, a total population of 3,890 people was recorded in 2022 with 829 of them under the age of 19. Graeme McElheran, Alberta Municipal Affairs director of communications, said his department is not aware of another municipality submitting a letter, such as the one Lamont
County’s letter to the minister. “We are disappointed but not surprised that the county would take it upon themselves to attempt to quash a democratic process that Lamont County residents are entitled to exercise,” they said. “Over 900 ratepayers signed the petition which, in our opinion, appears to be a pretty strong message.” Gagnon and Holowach added that they trust the process set out by the minister’s office and believe the County has only raised more questions by prematurely issuing a letter speaking out against a possible inspection. “One cannot help but surmise that something must be Lamont Councillor Neil Woitas stated officially amiss to prematurely submit a that he was opposed to sending the letter. letter to the minister prior to sufficiency of the petition County has written, but said munici- being determined. Without having palities frequently share their perspec- seen the actual petition or supporting tives on other issues. documents Lamont County has “The ministry is not aware of a sim- addressed three items based on “comilar situation in recent memory. munity information’. It was very preHowever, there is nothing in the legis- sumptuous of the County to assume lation that prevents a municipality that those items were the only issues. from doing this, and municipal coun- Their letter actually raises the question cils frequently write to the Minister to of Why?” they said. “We are optimistic share their perspectives as locally elect- and trust the minister will base his ed leaders on local and provincial decision with careful consideration to issues,” he said. determine the criteria and rationale for “The Minister received Lamont the need and requirement for a municCounty’s letter and position paper, and ipal inspection of Lamont County. We it will be reviewed and considered. The believe due process will be followed.” Minister awaits the determination of Reeve David Diduck was attending the petition’s sufficiency before decid- the Rural Municipalities Conference in ing on next steps.” Edmonton early this week and wasn’t Meanwhile, representatives of available for comment by press deadLamont County’s petition, Sada line. Lamont Leader will give Lamont Gagnon and Sylvia Holowach, issued a County Council and/or the CAO furstatement to the Lamont Leader with ther time to comment on the letter their views regarding Lamont prior to the decision March 28.