County councillors squared off against each other last week when they came to sharp disagreements over the budget and their new CAO.
County council voted 4-3 in favour of its 2012 budget and in favour of appointing Peter Tarnawsky as the county's interim chief administrative officer (CAO). Councillors Don McGeachy, David Kluthe and Mayor Don Rigney voted against both motions.
The Tarnawsky motion formalizes a decision made by council on Nov. 8 following a late-night in camera discussion. The agreement makes Tarnawsky the county's interim CAO for up to six months as council searches for a permanent replacement. Tarnawsky will be paid $15,000 a month, according to McGeachy.
Tarnawsky tangle
Tarnawsky was fired as the county's manager of public services this summer over his role in the county's presentation to the Alberta Utilities Commission (AUC) at a hearing on the Heartland Transmission Project. Council representatives under his supervision had told the AUC that the power line project should be approved "without delay," which was contrary to what council wanted. Then-CAO Chris Micek fired Tarnawsky, and Micek was essentially forced to resign by council a few weeks later.
That led to an in camera discussion on a personnel matter late at night on Nov. 8.
The conversation started on the topic of compensation for then-interim CAO Ian McKay, said Coun. Tom Flynn, but moved onto hiring a CAO. Flynn moved to add an item to the agenda to hire an interim CAO, which council voted 4-3 to do. When council moved in camera to discuss whom to hire, Rigney left the meeting in protest, followed 20 minutes later by Kluthe. The remaining councillors voted 4-1 to offer the job to Tarnawsky, with McGeachy opposed.
Fast-forward to last week's council meeting and the formal hiring of Tarnawsky. When Rigney tried to start a discussion on what had happened at the Heartland hearing, McGillis said that he was out of order and that issue was not part of this discussion.
"Well, I'm going to make it part of this discussion," Rigney said. "We spent $700,000 of taxpayer money [on the hearing] and we have yet to receive a cogent explanation of why it went as it did." McGillis called for a vote to rule Rigney out of order, which he won with the support of Flynn, Karen Shaw and Joe Milligan.
When McGillis said that he had no problem with this discussion beyond the fact that it was not on the agenda, Rigney became furious.
"This item was walked on the agenda at 8 o'clock at night to keep it from public purview!" he shouted, referring to the Nov. 8 decision.
"That's not true," said McGillis, who reminded Rigney that he had walked out before that vote was held.
"Yes," he replied, "because I will not participate in an illegal process!"
Rigney said Flynn's motion was added to the agenda in contravention of Robert's Rules of Order and good governance.
"I will not participate in a process that's corrupted and results in an illegitimate decision."
In an interview, Rigney denounced the whole situation as "obscene."
"We've hired [Tarnawsky] back without anybody getting an explanation as to what transpired."
Flynn said in an interview that his motion had been supported by a majority of council and authorized by county legal staff. "It's just democracy, and I think the mayor is not happy with democracy when he's not in the majority."
Budget brawl
As reported last week, Rigney blasted council's decision to pass a 6.85-per-cent tax hike as part of its 2012 budget, saying that the increase showed how spending was "right out of control" and that council needed to take a stronger lead on the budget.
McGillis agreed in an interview, but noted that Rigney had missed many of the budget's planning sessions.
"In just about every instance, the mayor chose not to attend, participate or display any leadership."
This tax hike was needed to keep services at their current levels, McGillis said, when asked to defend the budget. "We weren't looking at grandiose enhancements." The hike was due in part to three years of lower-than-required tax increases, which drained the county reserves, extensive roadwork and rising fuel prices.
County residents do pay more taxes now than they did a decade ago, he said in response to one of Rigney's comments, but that's due to higher property values — the mill rate or rate of taxation has actually dropped. The amount of property tax it charged each resident was also in line with what was charged in places like Red Deer, Leduc and Parkland County, he added.
