The Capital Region Board needs to address Edmonton’s veto if it wants to get anywhere, says the mayor of Warburg, but the board’s chair says it’s the province’s job to do so.
Board members delayed and defeated two proposals Thursday to change the Capital Region Board’s (CRB) voting structure, which requires any successful vote to have the support of 17 of the board’s 24 members representing 75 per cent of the region’s population. This gives Edmonton an effective veto, as it has about 70 per cent of the area’s people, and can make successful votes tough to get.
Warburg Mayor Dawson Kohl asked the board to review its voting structure.
“The voting structure is the fundamental issue blocking our progress to effective planning,” he told the board, and the main problem was Edmonton’s veto power. “It is unpalatable for the Village of Warburg to allow one municipality that much power over a region of 23.”
This country was founded based on representation by population, Kohl said in an interview, and the board needed a structure that recognized that as well as Edmonton’s size.
The board voted 22-2 to postpone the motion until after this fall’s election, with Warburg and Sturgeon County opposed.
Parkland County Mayor Rodney Shaigec proposed a complex change that he asserts would eliminate Edmonton’s veto.
This change was linked to a legal challenge Parkland made last month against the province that, if successful, could negate the board’s existence. In a letter to the board, Shaigec said he would drop this challenge if the board agreed to his changes and approved Parkland’s Acheson industrial park area structure plan (which Edmonton had previously vetoed).
Right now, board administrators say yes or no to development proposals based on whether or not they match the board’s regional growth plan. Those decisions can be appealed to the board, which then votes directly on the proposal.
This makes it tough for a proposal to pass, as it needs a double-majority to succeed – if Edmonton (or any group of eight communities) doesn’t like it, it doesn’t happen, even if administration approved it.
Shaigec’s idea would have the board instead vote on whether or not to override administration’s decision. This makes passage easier, as Edmonton would need a double-majority to stop any item approved by administration.
This will allow the board to get beyond its current impasse and fulfil its mandate, Shaigec told the board. “If an application is truly in the best interest of the region, that will be demonstrated at this table.”
The board voted down Shaigec’s proposal 15-9, with Beaumont, Edmonton, Fort Saskatchewan, Warburg, Leduc, Calmar, Morinville, Devon and St. Albert opposed.
After the vote, Sturgeon County Mayor Don Rigney said Shaigec’s proposal would have improved board operations. “Parkland’s (Acheson) plan hit the target on the bull's-eye,” he said, “but the City of Edmonton said, ‘No we’re moving the target (it vetoed it).’ ” Shaigec’s idea would make it more likely that compliant plans would actually pass.
The board needs to change something, Kohl said, but he wasn’t sure if Shaigec’s idea was the right one. “We need to sit down, get in a room, and throw out ideas.”
But it was up to the provincial government, not the board, to make such changes, said St. Albert mayor and board chair Nolan Crouse. “The province has mandated us our voting structure,” he said, and it wasn’t the board’s place to change it. “The province is going to have to provide the key leadership or at least be at the table.”
Crouse said he was personally okay with the current voting structure, and had yet to hear of a better one. “Edmonton’s got 75 per cent of the population. There needs to be some formula that works for them.”
Shaigec declined a request for an interview.
Parkland’s legal challenge of the board goes to court this Oct. 15.
