Is St. Albert City Council discussing too much city business behind closed doors ?
That was the concern Coun. Sheena Hughes raised this week when she questioned the need to go in camera to discuss items on the city council agenda. In total there were six items on the in camera agenda, two of which prompted questions that challenged the need for private council discussions.
"I'm just getting a little weary because we have so many in camera items that keep coming up before this council," said Hughes, who said she was concerned about this issue.
Hughes challenged why a discussion about alternative servicing should be private or even what the discussion would entail.
City manager Kevin Scoble's vague response did little to satisfy any potential public concerns. He said the topic of alternative servicing was "semi-related" to another motion on the agenda from Mayor Cathy Heron for a report on the feasibility of a municipal utility corporation, but added that was not the purpose of the presentation.
"The reasons were given as per FOIP, so it involves business interests of the municipality and economic interests, and it's related to utilities," Scoble said.
Coun. Natalie Joly joined Hughes in concern about another item on the in camera agenda. Both voted against going in camera to discuss a withdrawal from the public art reserve.
"I read through exceptions in FOIP, I could find nothing that really shows we need to go in-camera for this," Joly said.
That item was accompanied by a confidential report from city staff as well as a recommendation that was also not disclosed publicly. The rest of council voted to go in camera so the discussion was behind closed doors. The in camera part of the Tuesday's council meeting stretched for two hours.
When a longtime city councillor raises concerns about the number of times city council is going behind closed doors, perhaps taxpayers might also wonder what is going on. When a second councillor votes against going in camera it raises more concerns.
Earlier this year city council went in camera to discuss pay increases for council, an item that had been discussed publicly by previous city councillors.
This is going on against a backdrop of other worrying trends at city hall. An increasing amount of city business seems to be approved in the consent agenda, which is where councillors vote, but there is no discussion at council about why they voted the way they did or even the implications of what has been approved.
The city is considering a number of controversial changes including storm water rates, electric franchise fees, and setting up its own utility corporation. The city may have good reasons for exploring these and other efforts. When so many changes are underway it is doubly important that city council be open with its citizens.
City council championed open and transparent government when they were elected last fall. They need to keep that promise and stop hiding behind closed doors.
