Acrimonious exchanges at the county council meeting chambers forced a county councillor to leave the room to regain his composure after incendiary comments from a delegate left him visibly angry.
James Nibourg left the council meeting on Wednesday, May 11, for a short while after comments about a contract snafu from delegate Earl Marshall.
Marshall was at the meeting to voice concerns about a vote at the last county meeting, where council voted to allow gravel at the edge of their gravel lot to be crushed by their neighbour at a cost of $75,000.
The price fell under the threshold required to make the job a public tender, and after a discussion, council voted in favour of letting the neighbouring business crush the gravel.
However, it was discovered in short order that there had been a math error and that the cost of the work was in fact $175,000, not $75,000. This put the job over the threshold, so council rescinded its vote due to the error. No contract was signed.
Marshall, whose company owns gravel crushing contracts with the county, stated that council was "caught with their hands in the cookie jar," and that was the only reason they didn't go through with the original motion. Marshall addressed council in an angry and derogatory fashion, barely remaining within the lines of common courtesy for most of his discourse, and crossing them several times.
After Marshall threatened legal action, Nibourg stood up and said, "I'm not going to take this crap" and exited the chambers. As he left, he said, "You insult us over social media, come here and insult us here? This is BS."
Nibourg returned after regaining his composure in time to hear Reeve Wayne Nixon point out that the county had nothing to gain from this supposed collaboration, and that there was simply a mathematical error.
Marshall finished his presentation, but not before calling unnamed councillors "lowlifes."
Councillor Greggory Jackson made a motion to pass the matter over to legal, so experts could ensure that the county took all necessary steps to ensure the issue, from the original mistake to the next step, were handled in accordance with law. The motion passed unanimously.
Code of Conduct signed...mostlyTwo councillors refused to sign the new Code of Conduct put forward by the county.
The code was proposed earlier this year, and staff and council put their heads together to craft a code of conduct that not only would govern their behaviour, but would also protect them against accusations of misconduct.
Councillor Dave Grover, however, had issue on the language of the document, which stipulated that councillors cannot speak about matters discussed when the public is not present.
"I think it's a gag order," he said.
Grover said he felt meetings were public even if the public chose to not come to them, but councillor Les Stulberg pointed out the term referred to "in camera" meetings, not public meetings where the public chose to not attend.
In-camera meetings, where council meets without public oversight, are governed by strict rules. They are used to deal with personnel matters such as discipline or wages, legal matters and so forth.
Even though it was clarified, Grover still refused to sign the document. Councillor Ernie Gendre also did not sign.
Taxes not forgivenCouncil was asked to make a decision on a request to forgive taxes for the McKay Property Venture. In the past several years, while the subdivision was being developed, the county had forgiven taxes.
However, with several lots now completed and sold, county decided to not forgive the year's taxes.
"It was in the development stages (when we forgave taxes)," Stulberg said. "But now lots are sold. So there's no longer need to consider forgiving taxes."
Joe Gendre used an analogy to make his point.
"As a farmer, I don't get paid before I sell my crop," he said. "Are my taxes forgiven? No."
A motion was made to forgive the municipal taxes portion of the venture's tax bill and was defeated, with councillor Grover voting in favour.
Yield sign dramaA recent change at the Range Road 22-0 and Township Road 39-2 intersection near Nevis had residents of the area seeing red.
Shelley Beebe appeared before council to explain why the change in placement of a yield sign at the intersection is not only an inconvenience to residents, but also a danger.
According to Beebe, the majority of traffic is heading north-south, and so the yield sign being changed from east-west to north-south is not simply inconvenient, but dangerous as drivers drive through.
Council thanked Beebe for her letter, presentation and the petition she had gathered. Councillor Joe Gendre made a motion to return the yield signs to their previous position, and the motion passed.
Editor's note: In the print edition of this story, it was reported that the tax forgiveness vote was unanimously defeated. This was reported in error as Councillor Dave Grover voted in favour, and this story has been thus amended.