Friday, March 29, 2024




March 27 2024

Did councillors have enough information to vote on consolidation?

With a municipal marriage in northeastern Nova Scotia on the horizon, the person facilitating the coming together has made some changes to the pre-nuptial agreement.

On Monday afternoon (March 25), Nova Scotia Minister of Municipal Affairs and Affordable Housing John Lohr released a statement outlining amendments to Bill 407 – the Antigonish Consolidation Act – the proposed legislation that would merge the Town of Antigonish and Municipality of the County of Antigonish.

Although he reiterated his and his department’s “respect” for the decision by both Antigonish municipal councils – in two separate votes – to move forward with their request for special legislation from the province that would facilitate consolidation, while describing municipal councils as a “voice for the people” that must recognized,” he noted the need to take these measures.

Lohr said in his press release – thoughts he reiterated to The Journal in an interview later in the day – that “reasonable concerns” were raised regarding Bill 407 during the law amendments committee sessions earlier this month that “cannot be ignored.”

One revision to the legislation tasks the Nova Scotia Utility and Review Board (NSUARB) with conducting “an independent analysis” and – by no later than August 1 – providing a report that determines if consolidation is in the “best interest” financially for the Antigonish town and county residents.

Lohr offered that the “most common feedback” from committee presenters centred on the lack of information on how the municipal merger would affect tax rates.

If the NSUARB determines that consolidation is not in the “best interest” of residents, it will be shelved.

This measure brings to mind an important question: if there wasn’t enough information available to the public about the financial impact, what was available to councillors when voting whether or not to move forward with the consolidation process? Would the upcoming report from the provincial utility and review board, regardless of its recommendation, cause councillors to reconsider their positions? Did the two councils have enough to work with in making their decisions?

A second amendment, Lohr explained, addresses concerns raised related to what some speakers believed to be a conflict of interest involving the transition committee that would be charged with completing the consolidation process. Its original make-up included the mayor and deputy mayor, along with the warden and deputy warden, which could be seen as a potential conflict of interest, if they decided to run in the next municipal election.

Warden Owen McCarron has confirmed that he would be running for mayor in a consolidated Antigonish. (Mayor Laurie Boucher is not re-offering in the 2024 municipal election.)

Noting that “at the very least” there could be perception of conflict, Lohr decided to appoint one person – rather than a committee – to carry out the transition. If consolidation reaches that stage of the process, former Richmond MLA and Liberal cabinet minister Michel Samson will serve as the NSUARB liaison and co-ordinator for transition.

As for the initial feedback to the amendments, it is – not surprisingly – mixed. No matter what changes have been made to Bill 407, some opponents to the consolidation process maintain that no legislative steps should proceed until a decision is rendered by the provincial court of appeal on a decision confirming the legality of the Municipality of the County of Antigonish’s application to the province for special legislation to enable the consolidation. It’s an argument reiterated by Anne-Marie Long – one of the claimants – in a story from Corey LeBlanc in this week’s edition.

As you will read in that piece, bringing the NSUARB into the fold has drawn a positive response; not to mention removing elected municipal officials from the transition (even though the alternative raises concern, for some, by having one person oversee the transition process).

Boucher and McCarron – in a joint press release – said the amendments “signify a crucial step” towards consolidation as the legislative process continues to unfold. They added that the municipalities remain “committed” to their decisions to consolidate.

Even with the amendments, the elephant in the room – probably the most common concern raised by opponents of the legislation not only during the law amendments sessions, but also throughout this more than two-year saga – remains the call for a plebiscite.

As the provincial minister told The Journal, the NSUARB will not have the power to call for a plebiscite, and he has no plan to make a vote on consolidation a part of the legislation.

As many of those calling for such a move have pointed out, wanting a plebiscite is not about being against consolidation; it is about providing residents with their say in what is probably the purest democratic way.

Although we understand the idea that councils are elected to represent the people, there are times when a decision – or at least a piece of the puzzle used to make the choice – should come directly from the horse’s mouth, so to speak. And in this case, in light of the mandate of the UARB review, it’s also fair to ask whether municipal councillors had all the financial impact information they needed to make an informed vote on the matter at the council table.

Yes, a plebiscite would cost money and take more time, but Antigonish town and county – and their residents – are already amidst a lengthy and costly process. It’s a reasonable argument that added time and money is secondary to giving people a ‘voice.’

The lingering effects of not giving people the opportunity to have their say, directly, could be significant. They include not only the potential for a rocky honeymoon following a municipal marriage, but also an impact at the ballot box in the next provincial and municipal elections.