Alberta’s UCP government plans to introduce legislation that will “limit the ability of municipalities to enact bylaws that are contrary to provincial public health policy and expertise.”
In a news release Tuesday, the province said it will propose amendments to the Municipal Government Act (MGA).
The changes will “restrict the ability of municipalities to pass bylaws that contradict public health policies and rules enacted by the province.”
The news release did not say when the proposed amendments would be introduced, though Premier Jason Kenney said it will be “very soon” during the morning news conference. A government spokesperson said the amendments would be introduced “in the coming weeks.”
On Tuesday, Alberta moved into Stage 2 of its reopening plan, lifting nearly all COVID-19 public health measures.
This marks the end of all indoor and outdoor public gathering limits, the lifting of capacity limits at large entertainment venues and the end of the provincial work-from-home order.
The provincial mask mandate has also been lifted, with some exceptions.
However, some municipalities, including the City of Edmonton, voted to keep their mask mandate in place for a while longer.
This means masks will still be mandatory for everyone two and older at indoor public spaces and public vehicles in Edmonton until further notice.
Edmonton councillors decided to extend the face-covering bylaw in the absence of Alberta’s health data and widespread PCR testing numbers.
“We wanted to have some measures that were concrete, that people could follow along with,” Councillor Andrew Knack said. “But with the challenge in testing, I think that is causing us to have to reevaluate.”
Edmonton Mayor Amarjeet Sohi called the move by the provincial government an “overreach of authority” that he worries will have implications far beyond the mask bylaw.
“Today’s announcement by the premier to take away the local government’s ability to make our own decisions is deeply disappointing,” Sohi said.
“Where I’m concerned is that every time a municipality makes a decision that the province doesn’t like, would they continue to abuse the MGA in taking that ability away? What happens if the province doesn’t like our smoking bylaw tomorrow and they come out and say, ‘We need to cancel that.’ And they use the MGA to do so?
“It is something that can affect all municipalities across the province if the government decides to alter the MGA whenever they do not like a policy a municipality has in place.”
Sohi said he will be consulting with the city’s legal department, council colleagues and other municipal organizations to see how the move by the provincial government can be challenged.
Sohi stressed that the during the pandemic, the Alberta government encouraged and expected municipalities to pass their own bylaws based on local realities and what was in the best interest of their communities.
“This is very serious,” the mayor said. “With this threat of the MGA, it really circumvents that decision-making process because municipalities are governed by the MGA and the province has this authority to overrule local decision making, which is very concerning for the long term.”
Sohi said an Edmonton council meeting scheduled for March 8 to discuss the city’s face coverings bylaw will still go forward.
Calgary’s mask bylaw was set to end when the provincial one was lifted.
Mayor Jyoti Gondek called back to the premier’s comments made earlier in the pandemic encouraging municipalities to enact bylaws to protect their citizens, a power they currently have under the MGA.
“That was then, this is now. We are hearing (from Kenney) that municipalities couldn’t possibly manage public health and safety, so he’s actually going to rewrite the Municipal Government Act to make sure we can’t do anything,” Gondek said Tuesday afternoon.
Calgary’s city council made a formal request to the chief medical officer of health for the data that supported the decision to lift public health measures, but has yet to receive it.
Gondek also noted that she wasn’t invited to have a conversation about reopening, but did thank the ministers who gave her the heads up.
“But I think they may be equally as surprised and unaware of how this rewrite is going to take place.”
She noted that under Step 2, the city’s bylaw and peace officers no longer have the authority to enforce the provincial mask mandate that remains for transit.
“The city would have to enact its own bylaw, but we can’t because apparently, according to the Municipal Government Act that will be rewritten, we won’t have that power,” Calgary’s mayor said, who arrived at the afternoon press conference wearing a mask.
Gondek said opening up the act for masks seemed small considering the change around fiscal structures municipalities have been asking the province to change for years.
“At a time that we should be focused on municipal provincial relationships that help us understand how we are going to manage the emergency in transit operating funds, how we’re going to manage affordable housing, how we are going to help people in situations of mental health crisis – instead of any of those things, we are talking about masks,” Gondek said.
“It feels a lot like the overreach of this provincial government won’t end.”
On Tuesday, the province said it would propose legislation to keep rules across Alberta consistent.
“Of course, there will still be those Albertans who choose to wear masks more generally, and who make choices for themselves and their families that are right for them and their level of risk. These Albertans must be respected for their choices,” Kenney said.
“In a free society, people deserve to be able to make free choices and we should respect that. However, something Albertans do not deserve right now is uncertainty and confusion.
“There has been too much division over the COVID era in our society. We need to do everything we can to put that division behind us,” the premier said.
“We are concerned that a patchwork of separate policies across the province could just lead to greater division, confusion, enforcement difficulty, with no compelling public health rationale, and that’s why we’ve decided to move forward united with a clear consistent approach that all Albertans can easily understand and comply with.”
Kenney said the legal advice the province has received is that this is “the only way to put an end to the issue.”
“We don’t have the power to order municipalities not to use their very broad bylaw power; that’s currently found in the Municipal Government Act. But if we amend the act then – that amendment – provincial law overrides the municipal bylaw authority.”
The premier also said he didn’t see this as a political move against Edmonton.
“We’ve been very patient and demonstrated great flexibility for different policies from municipalities over the past two years. We indicated three weeks ago that we were looking at this issue and as I said then, if municipalities decided that they’re going to confuse the public with entirety separate policies, we may move forward with this.
“We appreciate the decisions made by Edmonton and Calgary councils to not impose their own proof of vaccination programs. In the case of Calgary, also to align itself with the province on the mask mandate.
“After two years of this, I think the broad public rightfully expects consistency and clarity and this removes the issue from a potential kind of a political virtue signalling exercise by municipal councillors when this is not a matter of property within their jurisdiction.”
On Tuesday afternoon, Cathy Heron, president of Alberta Municipalities, issued a statement on social media, calling the planned amendment “an unfortunate turn of events” that the group was never consulted about.
Heron said the organization — that represents villages, cities, towns and other municipalities — “finds the provincial government’s ‘top-down’ approach to be heavy-handed and unnecessary.
“It seems like a short-term political calculation that could influence long-term governance decisions at the municipal level.”
If carried through, it would set a “dangerous precedent,” she said.
“After all, if the provincial government can amend the MGA whenever a local government disagrees with it or wishes to take a different approach, then municipalities will have lost some of their autonomy and some of their freedom to decide and act locally in the best interests of their residents and businesses,” she said.
The premier said the province would be happy to listen to municipal concerns about COVID-19 policy.
“But you can see this is becoming a mess in Edmonton, where they’ve actually said that they’re not going to enforce their own bylaw.
“You know who really pays the price for this? Front-line workers… teenagers in retail shops and waiters and waitresses then have to navigate their way through a policy dispute between the provincial and civic government. That’s just not responsible. That’s why we’re taking this position,” Kenney said.
Alberta’s chief medical officer of health Dr. Deena Hinshaw has previously said Albertans may still choose to wear face masks in public and that people should make choices based on their own comfort level. She also encouraged Albertans to be kind and respectful of other people’s individual choices.
University of Alberta law professor Eric Adams said the premier has been suggesting the province might take this kind of action.
“A number of factors, presumably the impending leadership review that he’s facing in a few weeks, convinced him that a stronger hand is necessary from the province and that not only should Alberta remove its own mask requirements, it should take the rather extraordinary step of making sure municipalities couldn’t have their own bylaws around masking.”
Adams said this stance appears to contradict Kenney’s earlier position promoting localized responses to the pandemic.
“The premier himself was, a year ago or a little more, was advocating for localized approaches, that cities were different from small towns, and that the province was diverse and that he was relying on local masking mandates precisely because of those differences. We’re hearing a very different message out of the premier now.”
This move shows “democratic tension,” Adams added.
“It’s true the province has the constitutional authority over municipalities. They have the jurisdiction to tell municipalities what to do or what not to do as long as they’re keeping with the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
“Yes, the power exists, but just because a power exists doesn’t mean it should be used. This is normally a government that spends a lot of time arguing about the importance of local governance, knowledge on the ground, and supposedly promoting local people making decisions about their local interests.”
The province has jurisdiction and the constitutional authority to make this move, Adams said, but cities could still push back.
“However, everything the province does through law has to comply with the Charter. One possibility might be that a municipality would argue that a legal change to their powers, which made a city unable to take local health measures, may not comply with the Charter of Rights and Freedoms around the life, liberty and security of the person rights that all of us have.
“It’s a little strange to see a province take away power of a city to protect the health of its residents — that is what this province appears to be doing.”
–with files from Caley Gibson and Adam Toy, Global News
Comments