Skip to content

Subdivision highlights RVC council divisions

SubdivisionArgument
Councillors clashed over reconsidering a subdivision application during a recent Rocky View County council meeting. File Photo/Rocky View Publishing

A subdivision application considered by Rocky View County (RVC) council at the regular meeting Oct. 22, further exposed divisions among councillors.

The application – creating a 12.5-acre parcel with a 141.92-acre remainder southeast of Crossfield, north of Township Road 282 and on the east side of Range Road 31 – was considered and unanimously approved early in the day’s proceedings. However, problems arose when Coun. Daniel Henn made a motion to reconsider the decision later in the meeting.

“There was a slight miscalculation in the package,” he said. “What I’m trying to do is look after the landowner so that he’s not paying an exorbitant amount of Municipal Reserve (MR)…. I’m just trying to make it as clear as possible for council, administration and the applicant what the actual MR number will be.”

Under council’s Procedure Bylaw, a motion to reconsider a previous decision may occur if it is made at the same meeting and proposed by a councillor who was on the prevailing side of the decision. Henn’s motion fit those criteria, but Coun. Kevin Hanson cast the sole opposing vote to the motion, which was carried 8-1.

Municipal Clerk Charlotte Satink then advised Henn, in order to make the amendment he sought, he would need to withdraw his original motion to approve the subdivision. Under the Procedure Bylaw, motions can only be withdrawn with the unanimous consent of council. Hanson again voted in opposition, eliciting frustration – on RVC’s video recording of the meeting, Reeve Greg Boehlke can be heard muttering under his breath.

“I’m wondering if I could ask Coun. Hanson A, to reconsider or B, at least – throw me a bone here,” Henn said.

“Would you like to change your mind about the RMA?” Hanson responded, in reference to a decision made earlier in the day where council voted to rescind permission for Hanson, Couns. Crystal Kissel and Samanntha Wright to attend the Fall RMA Conference and be reimbursed for their expenses. Although Henn and Coun. Mark Kamachi originally voted on a motion in September to grant that permission, Henn and Kamachi later introduced a notice of motion to rescind the approval, which was granted.

“OK, now we’re holding things up for ransom here,” Boehlke said.

“There’s a lot of mind changing going on lately, and I’d like people to consider, thoughtfully, what we’re doing and not rushing through things,” Hanson said later in the meeting. “I just think this makes us look very unprofessional.”

While Boehlke didn’t think Hanson’s comment about the RMA was in earnest, he said he did take exception to “holding up a subdivision over another item that had absolutely nothing to do with that particular resident.”

“I think that was a misstep on Coun. Hanson’s part. I think if he could get that one back, he’d probably rethink it,” he said.

In an interview, Hanson maintained he was not trying to hold a decision for ransom, and downplayed his comment about as an attempt at humour. He emphasized his opposition was that the original decision had not been properly thought through, despite council’s full access to the agenda for a full week and the ability to ask questions of staff.

“To suggest that there was a math error really bothered me, and to suggest perhaps administration had done something wrong really bothered me, when, really, what it was was the inattention of the councillor,” Hanson said.

“There’s been far too many redos and reconsiderations. People are questioning how much careful consideration and sober thinking is going into these decisions.”

Satink advised council an amendment could be made to Henn’s original motion, and Deputy Reeve Al Schule moved to amend a subdivision condition to collect MR payment on 10 per cent of the newly created lot. Hanson again cast the only opposing vote, and the amendment carried 8-1.

“Note that I do this because I stick with our current policy – I’m pretty consistent with that,” Hanson said. “Normally, there’s an additional piece of information that talks about a caveat or a delay on the remaining parcel, and I don’t see that in this situation, which makes me very nervous.”

Council then voted unanimously to approve the amended subdivision.

Boehlke downplayed the level of disagreement occurring between councillors, saying council is comprised of “nine strong personalities around that table,” and there is “nothing wrong with disagreeing with someone, to have a healthy debate.”

“The good thing about what’s going on in council is, there’s good business being done every time we have a meeting,” he said. “I know we look horribly unprofessional when we do stuff like this, when we have these little meltdowns, and I think a lot of that comes down to better preparation by councillors.”

For his part, Boehlke said he’s committed to “try to do better myself” by trying “to learn something every week and bring it to the next meeting,” thus leading by example and “coaching councillors to do the same.”

“No matter what’s happening behind the scenes, we should be, in public, a council that’s working for the people,” he said. “That’s the image I would like to have, way before this year’s up. I’d like to have it at the next meeting.”

push icon
Be the first to read breaking stories. Enable push notifications on your device. Disable anytime.
No thanks