Residents seeking time with town council face new rules
Anyone hoping to make their case to Pincher Creek town council now gets five more minutes to do it, but they’ll need to do more of the work ahead of time.
Council adopted a rewritten procedural bylaw Sept. 28 that gives delegations 20 minutes instead of 15. It also requires written requests 10 days in advance, any slides by the same deadline, and a clear statement of what the delegation wants from council, such as funding or a letter of support.
Bylaw 1596-26 also drops three sections on petitions and changes how council chooses its deputy mayor. It passed second and third readings with one clerical fix and no other changes since first reading on Sept. 14.
The new bylaw repeals and replaces Bylaw 1596-24 in its entirety, following a months-long review by administration that found several outdated or incorrect clauses. The work is part of a broader review of town policies and procedures.
Delegations
The town’s chief administrative officer now sets the format for delegation requests, and submitting one doesn’t guarantee a spot at the next meeting. A person or group that has presented can’t return on the same subject for three months unless council waives the rule by special resolution.
CAO Konrad Dunbar said the goal is to give administration enough information to prepare for requests before a meeting, rather than fielding requests council has no information about.
“It’s not great for us when a delegation comes in and says, ‘We want this,’ and I don’t know about it,” he said.
The change can allow some requests to be dealt with at the same meeting rather than returning to a future agenda, he said.
Coun. Valerie Wynder questioned whether allowing the CAO to prescribe the format for delegation requests could unintentionally create barriers.
“I’m just wondering if limiting it to a specific online form or something might exclude some members of our community from being able to navigate that and have a delegation, because they maybe don’t have the skills to submit online,” she said.
She added that future administrations could interpret the provision differently and make it harder for some residents to bring matters before council.
Dunbar said the wording is intended to give the town flexibility as it moves toward more online and digital processes. The report to council says requests could come by form, online submission or email, as technology allows.
Coun. Mark Barber said staff would likely help any resident who struggled to submit a request in the required format.
The discussion also focused on whether council should make decisions immediately after hearing from a delegation.
Coun. Sahra Nodge said she supports receiving information in advance but does not want every request decided on the same night.
“Sometimes, there’s value in waiting two weeks to discuss something, because we can get caught up in the enthusiasm of a presenter and be very gung-ho and keen in the moment. And I’ve found that the reflection time from when someone presents something and then you’re deciding a couple weeks later is a valuable time to just kind of think about it,” she said.
Mayor Wayne Oliver agreed, saying there can be value in allowing a request to “percolate” before council makes a decision.
The bylaw gives council several options after hearing a delegation. It can receive the presentation as information, refer it to a committee, defer it to another meeting, appoint a special committee or deal with the matter at the meeting. Deciding that night takes a special resolution if the request isn’t a separate item on the agenda.
Dunbar said council retains that flexibility, and the changes were meant to create options for council, rather than obligations, while allowing administration to prepare items that are ready for a decision.
Petitions removed
The biggest change to the bylaw came at first reading, and it wasn’t in the original draft.
Nodge raised concerns that the bylaw’s petitions section conflicts with how the Municipal Government Act defines a petition, which is a formal process that requires signatures from a set percentage of electors.
She said using the same term for a much less formal process risks confusing residents about which route actually compels council action.
Dunbar said the sections were intended to address requests to council rather than create a separate public petition process. He noted other written requests can already be handled through the bylaw’s provisions on communication with council.
Council agreed the petition sections overlapped with the bylaw’s broader delegation and correspondence provisions and voted to remove sections 118, 119 and 120.
On Sept. 28, Nodge noted that a heading in the bylaw still referred to petitions, and council struck the word before passing the final readings.
Deputy mayor and committees
The changes also give council greater flexibility over the deputy mayor position.
The old bylaw provided for an automatic eight-month rotation. Council now chooses its deputy mayor each year using whatever method it considers appropriate. Dunbar said councils can use different approaches, including votes or dividing the position among multiple councillors.
Committee preferences are also handled differently. Councillors will provide their preferences to administration before the organizational meeting and staff will compile the responses into one summary for the agenda package.
Dunbar said this allows councillors to see which committees have attracted interest before making appointments. Council retains authority over the appointments.
Another change gives council, rather than staff, authority over councillor seating at the organizational meeting.
The annual council meeting schedule is removed from the body of the bylaw, and council instead sets its schedule by resolution at the organizational meeting.
Dunbar said this avoids amending the procedural bylaw whenever council wants to change a meeting date.
Correspondence and reports
The updated bylaw consolidates provisions dealing with communication to and from council. The old rules assumed signed paper letters, but Dunbar said most communication now comes by email.
Under the new wording, the CAO determines whether correspondence should go on an agenda, receive a direct response or be referred to the mayor, while council is still informed about what was received and how it was handled.
The bylaw also formalizes written council reports, following council’s June 22 direction to move away from verbal reports during meetings. Reports are due by 4 p.m. the Wednesday before each meeting, and a verbal report no longer counts.
One change doesn’t appear in the bylaw at all. When council finishes its agenda, the mayor now simply adjourns the meeting and notes the time, with no motion or vote, Dunbar told council Sept. 28. A motion is still needed to end a meeting before the agenda is done.
Council’s Oct. 26 organizational meeting will be the first held under the new rules, including choosing a deputy mayor and setting council’s seating and meeting schedule.
Related stories
News briefs from June 22 Town of Pincher Creek council table
Delegations, Municipal Government, Municipal Government Act, Petitions, Procedural Bylaws, public engagement, Town Council





















