Council attempts to resolve changes to its remuneration policy

By Cal Braid
Taber Times
Local Journalism Initiative Reporter

At a June 9 meeting of town council, it reviewed Policy C-2 – Council Remuneration with an administrative recommendation that council approve it as presented.

 The policy was last tweaked 12 years ago in May 2013 and in 2025 the administration  proposed several wording changes for clarification of the monthly salary, per diem and meals, and travel expenses.

 The administration also recommended the removal of section 2.5 of the policy that makes reference to establishing a three-person committee of public members to review and provide recommendations on council remuneration during the fourth year of a council term. The administration felt that continuing to use a committee would add additional bureaucracy to a sensitive issue.

 The proposed changes are as follows, with parentheses around the rulings that the administration suggested should be struck from the policy.

 The first proposed change in Section 2.1 was: “Mayor and Councillors will receive a monthly salary (with a travel and subsistence allowance) for the required attendance at Council and Committee meetings and various community events.”

 Section 2.2 would read,  “Mayor and councillors will receive (remuneration) per diem for the required attendance at out-of-town functions as an official representative of the Town of Taber.

 Section 2.5 would be struck entirely to eliminate (“Council may establish a three-person member-at-large committee to review remuneration in the fourth year of a Council term to provide a recommendation for remuneration to Council for consideration prior to the annual budget meeting.”)

 Mayor Prokop and Coun. Firth both agreed that they would prefer to keep Sec 2.5 but change the three-person committee to a five-person committee. Coun. McLean was in favour of striking the section and using the current council to advise on remuneration. Her rationale was that the current council could objectively make those informed decisions because they would be making them for future councillors rather than themselves. McLean’s idea was supported by two other councillors.

 CAO Derrin Thibault said that in 2017, the Town advertised for the committee and there was no response from locals. Firth put forward a motion to accept the policy revisions but keep 2.5 and change it from three to five people. Council voted and the motion was defeated 4-3. McLean then moved to have the policy approved as presented, and her motion was also defeated 4-3.

 “I think there’s confusion here, Mr. Thibault,” the mayor said.

 “There is. You’ve voted for it to not stay the same and voted for it to not change,” Thibault said to some bemusement and laughter.

 The problem was that the outcome negated the updated policy and left council with nothing but the old policy. The mayor and CAO agreed it was double-negative and Thibault said it would be nice to have a positive motion put forward.

 Finance director Rob Osmond entered the conversation over a speaker and said, “If we simply had a motion that the policy was reviewed and would proceed without change, then we would have at least recorded that it has come back for its four-year review.”

 Coun. Bekkering advised that the policy return at a later date rather than council running afoul of the Municipal Government Act. No further motion was entered and council will return to the subject, perhaps with a broader set of recommendations from the administration.

 It then moved into a discussion about mayor and council salaries, and after reviewing the numbers and recommendations, councillors moved to delay the discussion until the matter of Policy C-2 had been resolved.