As the front page story in this week’s Journal shows, the Town of St. Paul is required to hold a byelection before the new year if it wants to operate according to the Municipal Government Act (MGA). So far, council has no intention to hold an election within 90 days of a vacancy as required by the MGA and has decided sometime in January will do, under the inaccurate understanding of when and how a resignation on council becomes effective.
The meeting minutes were amended at the Oct. 24 meeting to state the vacancy left by the new fire chief became effective on Oct. 11. Both the mayor and CAO have erroneously interpreted the MGA as saying that council must ratify or accept a resignation before it becomes effective, but the MGA mentions nothing of council ratification. In fact, the MGA states a resignation is effective when received by the CAO. The CAO must report it to council, but that does not affect the date of when the resignation is official.
When informed about the MGA direction, both mayor and CAO insisted the resignation must be ratified by council. As Municipal Affairs confirmed, no such action is necessary.
Even more troubling is that the mayor and CAO apparently see no problem that if they are correct, the Town had a councillor, Trevor Kotowich, who was at the same time the fire chief of the St. Paul Fire Department – both an employee of the Town and part of the legislative branch which makes rules governing employees. That was not the intention of Kotowich, who resigned in a letter dated Sept. 23 and received by the CAO on Sept. 30, the day he started the position as fire chief. Arguing that the resignation is effective when ratified by council only opens a whole other can of worms.
Council must meet immediately to rectify the situation and call a byelection before the new year to be within the prescribed 90 days of a resignation of the MGA. An emergency meeting should be called this week to get the ball rolling. To delay any further would disadvantage potential candidates already set back by council’s dithering on the matter. One would have thought it reasonable with the resignation at the end of September to have a byelection sometime in November, but with lost time due to council’s error in interpreting the Act, candidates will have to hit the ground running no matter when its called, if it is at all, before the new year.
It is not desirable to have a byelection at the height of Christmas activities, but considering the requirements of the provincial legislation, voters certainly have a right to go to the polls before the new year. To have an election by mid or early December, if called this week, is entirely feasible. Council should call a meeting this week and set a date. Anything less is an infringement of the MGA and taxpayers’ rights to a byelection within 90 days.
Further, if council does not call a byelection before the new year, it risks being ordered to do so by the Minister of Municipal Affairs. If town residents so desire, they could apply to the Alberta Court of Appeal. A disregard for the rules brought a storm of criticism only weeks ago. Ignoring the MGA threatens to bring another.
