Chestermere City Council called a second special meeting, rejecting, and opposing the municipal affairs draft inspection report on Jan. 10.
The previous special meeting on Dec. 9, 2022, rejecting the draft inspection report was disallowed due to a timestamp issue.
Kim Wallace, the City Director of Corporate Services presented the city’s official response to the draft inspection report, for the second time.
Wallace explained that she, the City Director of Community Operations Cam Wong, and the City Director of Growth and Planning Travis Fillier declined to accept the report.
“The City of Chestermere’s refusal to accept the draft report is due to the Public Inquiries Act, the inspection does not adhere to the act. Natural Justice and Procedural Fairness was not followed during the inspection process, and lack of evidence in the draft inspection report, the draft inspection report does not support the overall inspection of the ministerial order,” Wallace said.
The city’s official rejection of the report indicated sections of the Public Inquiries Act were not followed, including evidence, attendance of witnesses, admissibility of evidence, the right to call witnesses, and notice of an allegation of misconduct.
The city’s response said the commissioner has the power to summon anyone as a witness and requires them to provide evidence, and that the city has a reasonable and legitimate right for witness testimony and supporting documents.
Under attendance of witnesses, the commissioner can enforce the attendance of witnesses, where they must provide evidence, Wallace explained, evidence or documents that supported witness testimony was not supplied.
Wallace said the city made repeated requests of Cuff & Associates to provide the City of Chestermere with all witness statements and evidence but was ignored and denied.
She said the City of Chestermere was not given the opportunity to call, examine or cross-examine the witnesses or review the evidence used in the draft inspection report, and the city wasn’t given an opportunity to examine or respond to evidence.
The City of Chestermere declined to respond to the draft inspection report after alleging breaches to the principles of Natural Justice and Procedural Fairness such as disclosure, opportunity to respond, duty to consider all evidence, legitimate expectation, freedom from bias, and the right to reason.
The report indicated that breaches to Natural Justice and Procedural Fairness were made as not all evidence was disclosed to the city, the city did not have the opportunity to respond to the evidence, and the city wasn’t able to provide a rebuttal to the evidence.
The report also alleged the possibility of bias against the City of Chestermere.
“The applicant doesn’t have to prove that the decision-maker was biased, the possibility of bias may be enough to show bias,” Wallace said.
Adding, “The City of Chestermere had the right to have an unbiased minister deem if an inspection was or wasn’t necessary after a preliminary review. We also had the right to have an inspector who did not have any prior professional dealings with the councils of the City of Chestermere. It is evident that Cuff & Associates were provided with a pre-defined outcome by municipal affairs, which demonstrates bias when conducting an inspection at the City of Chestermere.”
The City of Chestermere found a lack of evidence regarding the key issues outlined in the draft inspection report such as members of council acting alone and outside of council resolution, code of conduct infractions, members of council performing administrative functions and duties, improper council meeting procedures and conduct, and the sale of municipal property not in accordance with the Municipal Government Act (MGA).
“In conclusion, without supporting evidence for the overall scope of the inspection, with a process that did not follow both the Public Inquiries Act and the Principles of Natural Justice and Procedural Fairness by Cuff & Associates, city administration is declining and rejecting the draft inspection report,” Wallace said.
City administration suggested two options for municipal affairs going forward, either rescind or redo the inspection.
City administration recommended to rescind the inspection.
“The concept of a municipal inspection is founded on a great principle of ensuring breaches are not committed by a municipality. However, in this case, does the cost not outweigh the benefit?” Wallace said.
She added, the inspection has not only caused stress to Chestermere residents and staffers, but cost the city significantly with issues with audits, the bank, and caused the city to miss grant opportunities.
“It is our opinion that a municipal inspection should only be undertaken in extreme circumstances. With a 95 per cent unanimous voting rate, our council is well run and high functioning,” Wallace said. “In any other world, the City of Chestermere would not be seen as a city in need of a municipal inspection.”
City Councillor Ritesh Narayan expressed concerns about the timeline of the presentation being brought to council for decision, explaining that the city’s legal department opinion should have been presented to council first.
“I strongly disagree, because the evidence I supported you with is evidence from the inquires act,” Wallace said. “In our opinion, based on what we observed, as administration, found documentation regarding Natural Justice and Procedural Fairness, and the privacy act, we had every right to comment the way we did.”
City administration is now requesting municipal affairs weigh all of the information before making a decision that will impact Chestermere residents, staff, and the municipality.
The city’s official response to the draft inspection report was accepted for information, with a 4-2 vote, with Mayor Jeff Colvin and City Councillors Stephen Hanley, Blaine Funk, and Mel Foat, voting in favour, and councillors Narayan and Shannon Dean voting in opposition.
Colvin carried a motion with a 4-2 vote agreeing with city administration’s rejection of the draft inspection report based on breaches of the Public Inquiries Act, Natural Justice and Procedural Fairness, and alleged lack of evidence.
City administration requested that Colvin, the deputy mayor, and chosen city councillors meet with the Minister of Municipal Affairs, Rebecca Schulz.
A motion by Hanley was carried authorizing Colvin to write a letter to the Schulz requesting to meet.
“I’d like to request this meeting involve all of council,” Dean said.
Dean requested to make a motion to allow all councillors to be involved in the meeting with Schulz, however, the motion request was defeated with a 4-2 vote.
This is a continuing story. Watch for follow-up stories.
