The town and county have failed to come to a recreation agreement.
Barrhead town councillors first broke the news during their regular meeting on Tuesday, Oct. 25, when they unanimously voted to inform Alberta Municipal Affairs minister Danielle Larivee that talks regarding a recreation agreement have concluded.
Right after the vote council adjourned the meeting without further comment.
The next morning, Town of Barrhead mayor Gerry St. Pierre and County of Barrhead reeve Doug Drozd released a joint press release stating that after six months of discussions and negotiations with a facilitator, including a last-ditch attempt on Oct. 19, the two sides are not able to reach an agreement.
The press release states that although consensus was arrived on some relevant matters, the major issues such as compensation for county and town owned facilities and services, used by all area residents, were not resolved.
“I’m disappointed that 14 people, around the table, over six months couldn’t reach an agreement,” St. Pierre said, adding he wasn’t sure what the next step would be, saying it would, in large part, depend on the response from Larivee.
Drozd echoed St. Pierre’s sentiments saying County of Barrhead council was disappointed that an agreement could not be reached, but added they believed it was a worthwhile process.
“In our opinion, we are not that far off. I think the minister should be able to give us some assistance and further direction to make this work,” he said. “For the most part the negotiations were really good, but the parts we are apart on we are just apart on. It has a lot to do with the philosophical difference on how we look at managing our municipalities.”
Both Drozd and St. Pierre said they were not able to go into details about the negotiations, which by mutual agreement are private.
However, in the past the town has publicly stated that they believe the county isn’t contributing its fair share to operating costs of recreational facilities, which both town and county residents use.
The county’s position has been that it has signed an agreement with the town that states, in exchange for $5 million of capital costs for the pool construction, they will contribute what they feel is fair in terms of recreational operation budgets. The agreement ends in 2017 after the municipal election.
The negotiations were in response to instructions Larivee gave to both municipalities in April.
In the letter, Larivee states after reviewing the Amalgamation Study report, she was not prepared to recommend amalgamation - at this time.
The study was conducted as a result of the town asking Municipal Affairs to start the process in the summer of 2014.
“It was apparent from the community feedback that the ratepayers from both municipalities want the town and county to work together for the betterment of the region. While I recognize amalgamation may not be the solution, I too strongly encourage you to pursue such opportunities,” she wrote in the letter dated April 2010, telling the two councils that they need to come to a renewed recreation agreement.
Larivee goes on to say that if the two parties do not come to an agreement in six months, she may be forced to use section 570(c) of the Municipal Government Act to ‘make a decision to settle an intermunicipal dispute.’
