Regarding the proposed restructuring of Sorensen Beach boundaries to include Heritage Valley, we are adamantly OPPOSED to this.
October 12, 2021 McKillop RM 220 held a Council Meeting on which I attended virtually. At that time, I raised the question if this restructuring of boundaries was in fact going forward, as I had only heard rumors. The Reeve informed me that there would have to be consultation with the Heritage Valley residents explaining the pros and cons of such an amalgamation. Resolution 2021/0530 was then carried to discuss this issue at the next General Meeting.
The issue was raised again at the November 16, 2021 McKillop General Meeting, at which time resolution 2021/0572 was approved and carried to assist the Sorensen Beach council with the amalgamation of Heritage Valley. There are no meeting minutes on the Sorensen Beach website to determine if a ratepayer vote was conducted, what the results were, or if the decision was decided by their 3-person council.
On June 11, 2021, RM Councilor 1 and the RM Reeve attended a meeting at the hamlet of Sorensen Beach where they explained the process that would need to be followed should Sorensen Beach decide to move forward with the amalgamation. Sorensen Beach then planned to hold a meeting September 10, 2021 I am unable to review the minutes of this meeting as they are not posted on the Sorensen Beach website and the RM of McKillop is not able to provide me with a copy.
As of this writing, the RM of McKillop Administration, including the Reeve and RM Councilor 1, have failed to provide any correspondence especially the pros and cons of the proposed amalgamation/annexation as stated would happen by the Reeve at the October 12, 2021 general meeting.
In my opinion, this inaction appears to contravene the RM’s own Bylaw #326/2017 Council Member Code of Ethics Bylaw Section 3.3.4.1 which in part states “Member of Council shall endeavor to conduct and convey Council business and all their duties in an open and transparent manner, so that stake holders can view the process and rationale used to reach decision and the reasons for taking certain actions.” I also question how the Reeve and Councilor 1 met their obligation under Section 3.3.6.1 which in part states “Member of Council shall serve their constituents in a conscientious and diligent manner …” and Section 3.3.6.2 which states “A member shall strive, by focusing on issues important to the community and demonstrating leadership, to build and inspire the public’s trust and confidence in local government.”
A letter from the RM of MiKillop dated May 9, 2022, which I received on May 19 states that it “intends” to restructure the existing Hamlet boundary to include Heritage Valley. It then goes on to say the letter is to inform us of the “annexation” all of which indicates that the RM of McKillop has already decided that this amalgamation/annexation will occur regardless of what the ratepayers in Heritage Valley have to say.
According to the RM’s letter of May 9, 2022 the reasons for the proposed restructuring is in my opinion ambiguous at best stating “that some ratepayers of Heritage Valley have requested this amalgamation and it will provide a chance to work together on challenges and share resources.” The RM has not stipulated if it was 1 or 2 or dozens of Heritage Valley ratepayers that have made this request which leads a person to wonder if it only takes 1 person to have the RM waste time and resources on such a proposal. As for working together on challenges, I’d like to know what challenges there are as a Heritage Valley resident I’m not aware of any. As for sharing resources the RM has not clearly stated what resources Sorensen Beach may have that would benefit the ratepayers of Heritage Valley.
According to the Sorenen Beach Meeting Minutes of June 11, 2021 the Reeve who was in attendance stated the advantage to Sorensen Beach would be that they would receive 43% of taxes paid by Heritage Valley ratepayers and that the disadvantage would be that we, including Heritage Valley, would be a bigger entity which would require more expenses incurred. So there appears to be no benefit for the ratepayers of Heritage Valley to support this amalgamation, that is if we have a say in the matter at all.
Also, the RM’s May 9 letter states to contact the Chief Administrative Officer for the RM of McKillop if there are any questions. I called to request information and ask questions regarding this only to get a voice mail that says she is out of the office until May 24 which is only 2 days before the written submissions by the ratepayers have to be received by the RM. Clearly this issue is of such great importance to the Chief Administrative Officer that she cannot be reached days before the submission deadline. According to her voicemail, she has not left anyone else in charge to answer the questions of the ratepayers.
When I called the RM’s office on May 16 to inform them that some of the ratepayers have fulltime jobs and cannot take time off work to attend a 09:00am meeting. I was told that the meeting will also be a Zoom meeting so that should help! How does that help when we are required to work. For me personally I’m on a course that day. Does the RM expect me to take the time away from the course to attend this meeting? Obviously, they do! They are so committed to not putting themselves out to support the working-class ratepayers that they will hold important meetings during the day when some of us cannot attend. This in my opinion is clearly a type of discrimination against those of us that work for a living. And to support this the Saskatchewan Humans Right Commission states on their website that: “Discrimination is unfair action taken against others because they belong to a certain group.” This RM clearly takes unfair action against the working ratepayers.
The RM has also not explained how the governance of the new boundaries would work. Currently the Sorensen Beach Council is made up of 3 individuals, 2 of which are husband and wife, which in itself could be a conflict of interest. But what will the council look like if this amalgamation goes through? There is and has been no guidance or explanation from either the RM or Sorensen Beach on how the governance will change or if it will change at all. This could leave the Heritage Valley Ratepayers at a significant disadvantage if there is no change in governance.
Questions that I ask the RM of Mckillop to respond to:
- Is this an amalgamation or an annex of Heritage Valley?
- Has the decision already been made by the RM to proceed with the amalgamation/annex as indicated by their May 9 letter?
- How many people from Heritage Valley have requested the amalgamation/annex?
- Did Sorensen Beach hold a public ratepayers vote on the amalgamation/annex proposal? If they did how many ratepayers turned out and what was the final vote for and against?
- What are the benefits to Heritage Valley ratepayers if the amalgamating/annex occurs with Sorensen Beach?
- What are the negatives to Heritage Valley rate payers if the amalgamating/annex occurs with Sorensen Beach?
- What will the impact be on Heritage Valley ratepayers taxes if the amalgamation/annex occurs?
- What will the impact be on Heritage Valley ratepayers taxes if the amalgamation/annex doesn’t occur?
- Is it legal to amalgamate/annex property that is classified as agriculture land?
- What are the specific challenges the RM’s May 9 letter is referring to?
- What resources would be shared with Heritage Valley ratepayers as referenced in the May 9 letter?
- Will there be changes to the governance of Sorensen Beach and Heritage Valley if this amalgamation/annex goes forward?
- What and how will the governance change and what will be the timelines?
- How will Heritage Valley ratepayers be afforded a vote on capital budget items if the amalgamation/annex goes through?
- Why has the RM’s Administration including the Reeve and Councilor 1 not made any effort to inform the Heritage Valley ratepayers of the pending amalgamation/annex in the months prior to their May 9 letter?
- Why has the Chief Administrative Officer not left others in charge to answer questions regarding this matter while away from the office until May 24?
- Does this Administration feel that they have fulfilled their duties to the fullest as stated in the Council Member Code of Ethics Bylaw 326/2017?
- Why are meetings of this nature held during the day when many of the residents have full time positions?
- Can the meeting be held at a time that would not discriminate against the working class to attend?
- Will the RM respond via email to my questions listed above?
- Will the RM speak my questions listed above and their response at the June 16, 2022 public meeting?
As a fulltime ratepayer of Heritage Valley, I respectfully request that the RM of McKillop formally respond to the questions listed in this email in a return email and at the June 16, 2022 public meeting so ratepayers in attendance can hear the questions and the RM’s response.
Letter published as-is without editing by LMT.
Opinions expressed here are those solely of the author and don't necessarily represent those of the publisher.
