Planning bill worries municipal officials

Hey there, time traveller!
This article was published 10/06/2020 (1413 days ago), so information in it may no longer be current.

A bill envisioned by the provincial government as a guiding hand is being viewed by local municipal officials as a fist.

Reeves and mayors are questioning the wisdom of Bill 48, the Planning Amendment and City of Winnipeg Charter Amendment Act, saying it could rob them of final authority over important land-use planning decisions.

The bill, introduced March 19 by Municipal Relations Minister Rochelle Squires, would repeal the 15-year-old Capital Region Partnership Act and create a formal capital planning region consisting of the City of Winnipeg and 17 surrounding municipalities.

In the Southeast, proposed members include the Town of Niverville and the rural municipalities of Springfield, Tache, and Ritchot.

Additional planning regions would eventually be established throughout Manitoba.

Each planning region would be guided by a board consisting of at least one representative from each participating municipality.

Its mandate would be to “enhance economic and social development by improving and coordinating sustainable land use and development in the region,” Bill 48 states.

Each board must create regional planning bylaws. Municipalities would then have to ensure their local decisions on subdivisions, rezonings, conditional uses, and development agreements align with the bylaw. Councils that don’t could be subject to a court injunction.

Bill 48 would also allow developers and landowners to appeal a wider range of land-use decisions to the Municipal Board, a quasi-judicial tribunal comprised of provincial appointees.

Currently, council decisions on subdivisions and conditional uses are final, while rezonings can be appealed.

Under Bill 48, an applicant could launch an appeal if their proposal was denied or delayed by council, or if they’re unhappy with a condition attached to a successful application.

Concerned citizens could make presentations during an appeal hearing, but couldn’t launch an appeal of their own.

The Municipal Board’s ruling on an appeal would be final.

Steinbach

Though it lies well outside Winnipeg, Steinbach could be included in a future planning region.

At a June 2 meeting, Steinbach city council voted to forward concerns about Bill 48 to the province, after reviewing a report prepared by city administrators.

City manager Troy Warkentin explained the bill was motivated by a 2019 provincial review that alleged dysfunction in Winnipeg’s planning department.

“The concerns that the province appears to want to address with this piece of legislation, don’t appear to be issues that are representative within the City of Steinbach,” Warkentin said.

The changes to the appeals process didn’t sit well with Councillor Damian Penner, who called Bill 48 “incredibly undemocratic.”

“We as municipal officials are the elected body and the voice for our citizens. We are the ones that live in the community, we are the ones that represent our community, we are the ones that understand our community,” Penner said.

Councillor Jac Siemens noted the city already employs professional planners who furnish council with expert recommendations on each land-use application.

“I would be bothered if we were to make a decision and the developer would then appeal to the municipal board and that becomes a final decision and we can’t appeal,” Siemens said.

Councillor Susan Penner questioned whether the bill could increase regulatory red tape, rather than reducing it, by involving the Municipal Board in more decisions of council.

Councillor Michael Zwaagstra concurred.

“We already have four to six-month delays when residents appeal…I’m concerned about creating even further delays if the developers have the ability to appeal.”

Tache

Tache council passed a resolution containing concerns about Bill 48 on March 31. This week, they passed a second resolution asking the Association of Manitoba Municipalities to lobby the province to conduct a full review of the bill before it’s passed into law.

Mayor Justin Bohemier said the bill has its upsides but suffers from a “blanket approach” mentality.

Tache’s initial resolution states each municipality has “unique characteristics that influence planning decisions.”

Bohemier couldn’t give an example of such a characteristic when asked, but explained locally elected officials are best positioned to make decisions that affect neighbourhoods.

Councillors, he said, can distinguish “growth you want to see” from applications that don’t have the community’s best interests at heart.

Tache’s resolution also states “meaningful dialogue has not taken place with the 18 affected municipalities,” questions why the bill was introduced during the COVID-19 pandemic, and requests an in-person meeting with Minister Squires that has yet to occur.

Bohemier said council is “very interested” in commenting on the bill when it reaches the legislative committee stage.

In the meantime, its chief administrative officer has joined a working group of other CAOs studying the bill.

Springfield

Springfield council passed a resolution nearly identical to Tache’s on April 7.

Mayor Tiffany Fell didn’t respond to an interview request.

Ritchot

The RM of Ritchot is taking a ‘wait and see’ approach to Bill 48. Council there has reviewed the bill but has refrained from passing a resolution expressing concerns.

CAO Mitch Duval said other capital-region municipalities have stirred up enough commotion about the bill already.

“Right now, we’re just going to ride the coattails,” Duval said.

Niverville

The Town of Niverville has also stopped short of expressing concerns to the province.

CAO Eric King said he’s joined the working group studying the bill.

Mayor Myron Dyck said town council has written Squires asking for Niverville to be removed from the proposed capital planning region and grouped into a future Southeast planning district, a change the bill allows for.

“When it comes to land use and land planning, we just see that perhaps there’s a better fit here with our immediate neighbours,” Dyck said.

The mayor said he still wants to know how much running a planning region will cost, and whether population will factor into board representation.

As for the broadening of the appeal process, Dyck said the Municipal Board is quicker and cheaper than the courts, the only recourse currently available to applicants denied by council.

An interview request emailed to Bob Schinkel of Schinkel Properties seeking a developer’s thoughts on Bill 48 was not returned.

Associations weigh in

The Association of Manitoba Municipalities harbours its own concerns about Bill 48.

In a statement, president Ralph Groening said the bill in its current form won’t accomplish its intended purpose of fueling economic growth and creating jobs.

“Bill 48…will shift decision-making powers regarding local land use planning away from all elected Councils to the provincially appointed Municipal Board. Such a move will assuredly create more red tape, significant financial and administrative costs, and loss of municipal autonomy.”

Ivan Normandeau, president of the Association of Manitoba Bilingual Municipalities, said the organization also sent a letter to the province opposing Bill 48.

“It kind of takes power away from the municipalities,” Normandeau said yesterday at a meeting in La Broquerie, where he serves as a councillor.

Colleen Sklar, executive director of the Winnipeg Metropolitan Region, said she supports the creation of planning regions.

“Most metro regions across North America have regional land use and servicing plans,” Sklar said.

The template proposed by Bill 48 is in step with planning regions in other provinces, and balances regional coordination and municipal autonomy, Sklar added.

“The minister has given the board, which is all of the leaders from the municipalities, the ability to write the first plan. They’ve got the power of the pen.”

Minister responds

In a phone interview, Squires said Bill 48 provides “a clear, consistent framework for development, reviews, and appeals.”

“This legislation doesn’t take away any existing powers of the municipality, or avenues for existing citizen input. It’s simply saying that as a municipal council, you can’t be always the legislature, the judge, and the jury at the same time,” Squires said.

“Bill 48 does not take away any of the existing powers of the municipality. Bill 48 puts a process at the end that will be there when things go off-side.”

A regional bylaw will bring more harmony and efficiency to the process of assessing land-use applications, Squires said.

“When municipalities are functioning adequately, there won’t be the need for appeals to be heard by the Municipal Board.”