Municipalities are right to be concerned about the province overriding local authority on masking and vaccine bylaws, a political science professor says.
Announced March 8, proposed changes to the Municipal Government Act under Bill 4 would require municipalities to receive approval from the minister of Municipal Affairs in consultation with the chief medical officer of health before instating masking and COVID-19 vaccine bylaws.
However, the city would maintain authority over municipally-owned infrastructure, such as recreation centres and transit.
Municipal Affairs Minister Ric McIver described the amendments as a “defensive maneuver” during a media briefing March 8.
“We believe that aligning municipal bylaws with the provincial approach to public-health issues will benefit all Albertans by providing certainty and clarity,” McIver said.
Chaldeans Mensah, an associate professor of political science at MacEwan University, said that although the amendments are narrow in their focus, they are still an “intrusive push” by the province.
Mensah noted the United Conservative Party (UCP) government initially ceded authority to municipalities at the beginning of the pandemic, encouraging them to put health measures in place. Mensah said this move “deflect[ed] political responsibility … to the municipal level,” arguing the decision to take responsibility back is an equally political response.
“The premier’s leadership is coming under review, and he needs the backing of rural areas,” Mensah said, adding that this means restricting cities such as Edmonton, which Mensah noted house progressive councils.
Mensah described the changes as an "attack” on the idea that lower-level governments are better placed to make decisions that affect their local areas, also known as subsidiarity.
“The concern of municipalities’ is a valid one," Mensah said.
Though most municipalities followed the province when it lifted its masking rules on March 1, Edmonton city council kept its bylaw in place until March 8.
During Edmonton city council's debate — which took place at the same time the province announced Bill 4 — Mayor Amarjeet Sohi argued that keeping the bylaw in place would be “more of a performative act.”
“[It won’t be] a substantive act to actually protect people because we won’t have that ability,” Sohi told council. “We are treated like kids by the province.”
St. Albert Mayor Cathy Heron spoke out against Bill 4 in her capacity as Alberta Municipalities president during a March 9 event in Edmonton.
"It sets a precedent for future legislative changes when all of a sudden a municipality and the government of Alberta disagree," Heron told reporters. "That's a precedent we don't appreciate."
Change of tone
With the province changing its tune on the role of local governments in pandemic response, municipalities have also reversed on previous calls for more provincial action.
In September 2021, a dozen mayors in the Edmonton region — including Heron — called on the province to stop downloading public-health responsibilities onto municipalities and school boards.
"Residents should not be expecting municipal councils to assume public-health policy development and responsibilities," the letter said. "A rapidly growing majority of our community members are looking to you ... to demonstrate leadership during these difficult times."
Heron was unavailable both times The Gazette requested an interview. When asked to comment on local authorities reneging calls for the province to take the lead, Heron said in an email that she doesn't see the response as backtracking.
She said earlier in the pandemic, regional mayors called on the province to bring in an Alberta-wide mandate to avoid "a patchwork" of public-health measures.
"I am disappointed in Bill 4, but not because of anything related to COVID-19," Heron said in the email. "My disappointment is the use of legislation when the Government of Alberta disagrees with one municipality. It has set a dangerous precedent."
Councillors weigh in
Coun. Natalie Joly called the lack of consultation on Bill 4 “unconscionable.”
“It’s really damaging to relationships,” Joly said. “My concerns are not so much specific to any one issue, they’re more to do with the fact that the province is not consulting with municipalities on the legislation that allows us to operate.”
Coun. Shelley Biermanski said she sees both sides, noting the province has access to medical data that municipalities currently do not.
“At this point in time, I think people should be working together, not saying ‘I don’t agree with your direction now,’” Biermanski said. “Everybody wants to stop fighting. Everybody wants a collective future.”
Coun. Ken MacKay said he believes the changes are a “really aggressive response” to target a single community.
“Shaving off a little bit of powers within the Municipal Government Act for a municipality — is that a death by a thousand cuts?” MacKay asked.
MacKay said he is worried about the precedent the change could set for all communities in Alberta.
“If the government is willing to take on one of the biggest communities … what does that mean for the mid-size and the smaller communities?” MacKay asked. “That’s a little concerning.”
Narrowness recognizes local autonomy: Nally
UCP Morinville-St. Albert MLA Dale Nally was not available for an interview, but responded to councillor concerns in a statement sent to The Gazette.
In the statement, Nally said Alberta's government "recognizes the importance of local autonomy," noting the proposed changes are focused on public-health requirements related to COVID-19.
“The past two years have been long and hard for Albertans, and they deserve clear and consistent public-health policies throughout the province as we learn to live with COVID-19," Nally said in the statement.
Marie Renaud, St. Albert MLA with the opposition, said in an interview that Bill 4 constitutes "incredible overreach" from the province.
"It's incredibly disrespectful to governments at the municipal level," Renaud said. "These are duly elected officials that are tasked with making decisions for their communities."
Renaud argued Bill 4 is an "acute example of the degradation" of relationships between the two levels of government.
"You have to have solid relationships to be able to work together," Renaud said. "This is a clear message that this government believes they know best, and they're not interested in working with municipal partners."
She highlighted UCP MLA Shane Getson's comments to the Western Standard, where Getson described municipalities as the "children of the province."
"If the children get not aligned, maybe it’s time for someone to get spanked," Getson said on March 3.
"It's hateful rhetoric," Renaud said, noting the UCP has not condemned the comments. "I believe it only incites division."
Tensions mount
Disagreement is already widespread between Albertan municipalities and the province, Mensah said. He highlighted other key issues where the two levels of government differ, such as methods to address crime, and infrastructure funding shortfalls.
At the March 9 Alberta Municipalities meeting in Edmonton, members voted to reject the UCP government's proposed provincial police service model. On the level of infrastructure funding, the province's newly released budget sets aside $485 million in Municipal Sustainability Initiative (MSI) funding, less than half of the $1.2 billion forecasted infrastructure repair funding for the fiscal year ending in March of 2022.
“These issues require real cooperation in order to be addressed,” Mensah said. “We are caught in a situation … that is not a good recipe for finding long-term solutions to problems.”
