A recent Yorkton, Sask., court decision could affect the way all Saskatchewan municipal officials do their jobs, delegates to the Saskatchewan Association of Rural Municipalities convention were told last week.
The RM of Churchbridge reeve and two other men, who were found guilty on Sept. 6 of draining water illegally, were sentenced Nov. 1.
The RM was fined $5,000 and reeve Leo Fuhr was fined $1,000 on a conviction under the Wildlife Habitat Protection Act. Tom Werle, a member of the Langenburg East Conservation and Development Authority, was also fined $1,000.
Read Also
Claims filed in Alberta hailstorm aftermath
The numbers are still coming in for the cost of the damage caused by a huge hail storm that hit various areas of Alberta Aug. 20.
They were found guilty of altering lands within a protected area without a permit.
For clearing a channel without a permit – a charge under the Environmental Management and Protection Act – the RM was fined $15,000, while Fuhr and councillor Doug Reetz were fined $1,000 each.
Defence lawyer Dave Rusnak said last week his clients were seriously considering an appeal. As well, he said the impact of judge R.A. Rathgeber’s decision will be felt far beyond the RM.
“This affects all members of municipal governments who have been elected,” he said.
SARM president Sinclair Harrison told the convention the same thing.
He said it is clear a message was being sent to every municipality.
Rusnak said councils have authority under the RM Act to maintain drainage and channels.
He said the legislation under which the defendants were charged is normally applied to fish and fish habitat.
The RM’s work involved drainage of land not considered fish habitat.
Harrison warned that municipalities may be unable to replace a culvert without an environmental assessment, and he said common sense has to prevail.
“We cannot do our job under legislation like that.”
The SARM board presented a resolution to the convention asking the province for “an exemption from prosecution for individual members of council where the municipality could be prosecuted and the individual members of council were acting in what they honestly believed to be the best interests of their ratepayers.”
Some delegates thought that might give elected officials too much authority.
Gary Hoppe, from the RM of Glenside, noted the resolution doesn’t distinguish between what is legal and what is in good faith.
But Harrison said the board is not asking for immunity.
And he suggested there could be a reason the government wants to prosecute council members.
“If the province wants to drive amalgamation, how could they do it? They could discourage people from running for office.”
The resolution passed.
