Ratepayers MeetingRegina – January 9th, 2018Silton – January 10th, 2018

Meeting Agenda1) What is the RM 220 Ratepayers Association (RPA)2) How to Shape Council Decisions – Government Doc3) Review of April 26th, 2017 RPA Meeting - Silton

i. 3 petitions requesting public meetingii. Landfill & lagoon updatesiii. Property tax updateiv. 2 petitions for financial and management audits

i. RM Administrator’s sufficiency reportv. Petition for RM boundary changesvi. Other business

4) Priorities Moving Forward with RM Council5) How People Can Help6) Comments, Concerns or Compliments

Fast Facts - RM of McKillop No. 220• RM 220 along the SE shore of Last

Mountain Lake, N of Craven

• 2016 Census pop of 732 (525 in 2011) permanent residents, 1800+ including seasonal & agricultural ratepayers

• Ratepayers from 9 organized hamlets, 10 unorganized hamlets, subdivided lots & agricultural land

• Resort Villages of Glen Harbour, Island View, Pelican’s Point, Sask Beach & Sunset Cove, Villages of Silton, Bulyea & Town of Strasbourg while in RM 220 area, own Municipalities

• Ratepayers represented by 6 division Councillors and a Reeve

• 2017 Revenue for RM 220 ~$2.2 Million• 1.7 Million from Ratepayers

What is the RM 220 RPA?• The RM 220 RPA is an unincorporated, citizen’s group

dedicated to fair taxes, less waste and accountable RM of McKillop No. 220 Council spending.

• RM 220 RPA are volunteers.

• The RM 220 RPA was founded in January 2017 when a concerned group of citizens initiated 3 petitions for a public meeting in reaction to RM’s:– Interim Development Control Bylaw– Potential Disposition of Fox’s Point– Garbage Bylaw

• RM Council held public meeting June 17th, 2017 in response to RPA 220 January petitions.

What is the RM 220 RPA?• The RM 220 RPA documents are distributed to

interested people on 3 associated emails lists. Any RM ratepayer is welcome to receive news releases and information documents

• To inform the public, the RM 220 has issued media releases which have been published in LumsdenWaterfront Press and Last Mountain Times newspapers as well as distributed to government officials and local politicians

• RM 220 RPA has met with government officials, organized petitions, submitted ethical complaints and attempted to mobilize citizens to affect RM policy adherence or change

How Citizen’s Can Shape Council Decisions?

Become Informed Research the Issue

• Municipalities ActMeet with Council Public Meeting of VotersPlebiscites & Referendums Petition for Audits Ombudsman Sask Electoral Process Legal Challenge RCMP

Petition for Financial & Management Audits

• Petitions submitted with 400+ voter signatures August 11th, 2017 - 244 signatures required

• Reeve Howard Arndt makes disrespectful comments regarding petitions and ratepayers at Sept 1st, 2017 meeting & in published articles

– 7 ethical complaints filed by RPA, still not resolved

– Council not adhering to procedures in Bylaw 326 regarding investigation of complaints (hired firm $175/hr)

– Concern about conflict-of-interest between investigating firm and RM lawyer

Petitions Con’t

September 22nd, 2017 RM Administrator Michele Cruise-Pratchler reported petitions insufficient based on legal counsel opinion – majority of Council accepted report

– RPA requested 7 times to see legal opinion

Petitions Con’t

RPA received anonymous copy of legal opinion – RPA sought legal advice –RM’s legal opinion is

Attestation statement is on

every page.

Petitions Con’t

RPA demanding reversal of Administrator’s report of insufficiency & audits completed– Complaints filed with Ombudsmen, RCMP &

professional associations (Jan 5th)

– Also sent a letter to RM Council on January 5, 2018 demanding that the Administrator be immediately terminated with cause as she knew, or ought to have known, that the legal opinion was wrong. It is her legislated duty to report petition sufficiency

– Administrator ???

Petitions Con’t

RM lawyer’s letter to RM Council January 5th

We later discovered that our opinion that the petitions were invalid as they did not comply with clause 133(1)(b) of the MA was incorrect. We continue to assert that the petition questions are invalid because they do not assert any concern or reason to conduct either a financial audit or management audit, as appears to be required on a full reading of the MA.

Petitions Con’t• RM Council has now decided with majority

consensus to ‘negotiate’ the scope of the audits.

• Legal Counsel being directed by Administrator and not via Council resolution.

As the RM Council and Administrator has: wrongly scuttled the petitions, now spent ~$10,000 in legal fees and further damaged their integrity in the eyes of many ratepayers, we are sceptical that the RM can negotiate in good faith.

PARCS Dec 5, 2017 letter to Sask Party Leader candidates regarding Fair Representation by Pop in RMs

The term ‘rep by pop’ refers to the principle that each elected representative (whether that be an MP, an MLA, or a Municipal Councilor) should represent a roughly equivalent number of voters. The Mowat Paper documents the historical importance of “representation by population as one of Canada’s founding constitutional principles”.

• The Federal Government, under the Electoral Boundaries Readjustment Act, readjusts the number of federal constituencies after each decennial (ten year) census which in turn readjusts the number of provincial representatives in the House of Commons based on the relocation of population. Similarly, the Saskatchewan Constituency Boundaries Commission reconsiders the election constituency boundaries every ten years and revises the boundaries to reflect the changes in population in each part of the province.

• Most rural municipality division boundaries, however, have never been altered to allow for changing populations since the RM was established. The RM of McKillop electoral boundaries were established in 1910.

Fair Representation by Population

• 2017 proposal supports the principle of the ‘proportionate representation’ of all ratepayers in McKillop No. 220 (Fair Representation Act).

• 2017 proposal will ensure that, though currently over-represented stakeholders may lose some of the extra influence conferred by that over-representation, they will nevertheless be fairly and proportionally represented by population.

• Stakeholders that are presently over-represented would still have a significant voice at the Council table that is secured if continued growth occurs in other divisions.

Power at the RM Council Table

Current Electoral Boundary 1910

RPA Boundary Proposal 2017

Est % Ratepayers in Current & New Proposed Electoral Division

RM 220Division

CURRENTBoundary %

PROPOSEDBoundary % Councillor Vote

1 14% 19% Wild – NO

2 6% 12% Smith – NO

3 4% 21% Wilson – NO

4 54% 18% Kuderewko – YES

5 4% 11% Helgeson – NO

6 18% 19% LaBatte - YES

Reeve Howard Arndt voted against RPA 220 proposal

Petition for Referendum on RPA 220 Boundary Proposal – January 2018

• Petition needs 15% of voters signing, 110+ voters

• RM Administrator Michele Cruise-Pratchler’s duty to report on petition sufficiency

• RM Administrator Michele Cruise-Pratchler duty to serve as electoral officer and organize referendum date, place and ballot counting.

That the Council of the Rural Municipality of McKillop No. 220 request the Minister of Municipal Affairs of the Government of Saskatchewan to alter the divisional boundaries of the RM of McKillop No. 220 in accordance with the proposed boundaries drawn on the map as shown in the petition? (YES or NO).

ALTERNATIVE IDEA

Resort Village of the District

of Katepwa

Story shared at PARCS Convention 2017

Note: RPA 220 not endorsing this idea but presenting for

ratepayers’ information.

Story shared at PARCS Convention 2017Note: RPA 220 not endorsing this idea but

presenting for ratepayers’ information.

Alternate IdeaResort Village

of Last Mountain Lake

East ?

• Similar proposal discussed 20 years ago – no traction

• Proposal must be initiated by a municipality such as a Resort Village

• Note: RPA 220 not endorsing this idea but presenting for ratepayers’ information

Other Business

1) Withdrawal of 7 of 12 Last Mountain Regional Landfill partners in spring 2017– November 2017 remaining partners administratively separated

from RM of McKillop, Reeve Arndt steps down as Chair

2) Administration and viability of RM Lagoon• Withdrawal of partners

3) Dramatic increase in RM legal fees in 2017

4) RM Shop being considered in Bulyea

5) Hwy 322 completion

6) Some Council members and Administrator taking action/spending money prior to formal Council approval

7) Termination of recent employees and closing RM office Tuesday to Friday until mid-February 2018

8) Administrator appointed to restructuring committee

Discussed at RM December Meeting

How People Can Help

• Inform yourself of issues• Email Reeve and Councillors statement of RPA

support rm220general@rm220.ca• Attend a Council meeting• Visit the RM website

– https://rmofmckillop220.com/• Send complaint to Ombudsman Sask

– https://www.ombudsman.sk.ca/

How Can People Help (Con’t)

Help the RM 220 Ratepayers Association with:– Show support by signing petitions or put

name on email list– Administration - volunteer– Research– Funding for legal advice

• Donation at meeting• GoFundMe page (search – ‘ratepayers’)

Comments, Concerns, Compliments?

rm220rpa@gmail.com