[5:07] Good morning. My name is Sally Cooer
[5:09] Johnson and I will be the chair of this
[5:11] council meeting for today, February 2nd,
[5:15] 2026.
[5:17] I call this meeting to order at 1 1:00.
[5:21] I will proceed with today's com uh
[5:24] members. We have five counselors in
[5:27] attendance and one mayor and councelor
[5:30] McNab is not present for today's
[5:32] meeting.
[5:34] Could I ask um councelor Ducet to um put
[5:40] the to put the motion for the adoption
[5:43] of the gen agenda?
[5:46] » Uh I motion that we adopt the agenda
[5:50] please and thank you.
[5:51] » Okay. And could I ask uh councelor
[5:53] Jesperson to put the to adopt the
[5:56] minutes of Oh, could we have a vote on
[5:59] that, please? All in favor?
[6:03] » All in favor? Okay, moving on to the
[6:06] adoption of the minutes. Uh, councelor
[6:09] Jesperson,
[6:10] » Deputy Mayor Sally Cooer Johnson, there
[6:12] are no minutes to adopt for this agenda.
[6:15] » Okay. No delegations
[6:18] and or anything like that. New business.
[6:20] Okay. So then we'll just move on to uh
[6:23] 6A1 which is the creation of a rural
[6:26] charter. I will hand that over to uh
[6:30] Mayor Shagus.
[6:33] » Thank you madam chair. So I am going to
[6:34] put a motion forward that the creation
[6:36] of the rural charter be tabled uh to the
[6:39] June 23rd 2026 council meeting at
[6:42] Parkland County Center in council
[6:44] chambers. And the reason I'm tableing
[6:46] this, I um had hoped to uh bring this
[6:49] matter before the PMAN zone meeting uh
[6:52] on the 9th of February. Um they do need
[6:55] agenda items in believe that the
[6:57] deadline is today or tomorrow. Um and I
[7:01] [clears throat] I believe we need to uh
[7:04] spend a little bit more time in
[7:05] presenting the uh and developing the
[7:07] background information so uh it's
[7:09] provides greater clarity to the
[7:11] delegates um at the zone meeting. uh
[7:14] should it get past council. So, um with
[7:17] that, I do have the tableing motion on
[7:19] the floor.
[7:20] » Okay. At this time, um does anybody have
[7:23] any uh questions for clarification?
[7:29] Okay.
[7:32] Okay. I I guess I understand what you're
[7:34] doing. Um, I think it would be
[7:35] interesting to find out um let uh the
[7:39] RMA speak to it to find out if they
[7:41] actually do any measurable enforcable
[7:44] outcomes at this stage.
[7:48] Um, okay. So, I guess we can move on
[7:52] since that would be tabled, but we'll
[7:53] put we'll we'll have a vote on that. All
[7:56] in favor?
[8:00] So, moved. Okay. Um then we'll move on
[8:03] to uh 6 A2
[8:07] increase the general corporate corporate
[8:09] income tax rate. I'll hand that to Mayor
[8:12] Shagus.
[8:13] » Thank you, Madam Chair. So, I'm bringing
[8:15] this motion forward and I'll read it in
[8:16] for the records. And that is that um
[8:21] uh this motion is for the Rural
[8:24] Municipalities of Alberta to advocate to
[8:26] the government of Alberta to increase
[8:28] the general corporate income tax rate
[8:30] from 8% to 9 and a a half% while
[8:34] maintaining the current small business
[8:35] corporate income tax rate. and further
[8:38] be resolved that all new revenue
[8:40] generated from the corporate income tax
[8:42] be directed to grant funding to Alberta
[8:44] municipalities to address infrastructure
[8:47] deficits. And I would speak to that if I
[8:48] may.
[8:49] » Of course.
[8:50] » Thank you. So I am bringing this forward
[8:53] um recognizing the significant financial
[8:55] challenges
[8:56] um that municipalities are having and
[8:59] the growing responsibilities that we
[9:01] have without um corresponding increases
[9:04] in revenues. Um, I think this is uh
[9:08] about uh this motion does bring about uh
[9:10] and addresses fiscal responsibility and
[9:13] long-term sustainability of Alberta
[9:15] municipalities and also helps address uh
[9:18] the many uh issues that we do have uh
[9:22] across the province, both urban and
[9:24] rural municipalities regarding
[9:25] infrastructure deficits. And uh
[9:28] currently in the [clears throat]
[9:30] province of Alberta, we do have the
[9:31] lowest uh general corporate income tax
[9:34] at 8%. Um and it's the lowest among all
[9:37] Canadian provinces and uh sign
[9:40] significantly below the the national
[9:43] average and it also is competitive with
[9:46] most of the American states. Um,
[9:49] according to a 2025 report from the
[9:52] Fraser Institute, Alberta's general top
[9:55] combined corporate income tax uh is the
[9:58] seventh lowest amongst 61 peer
[10:01] jurisdictions and the lowest of any
[10:03] province at 23%.
[10:06] Alberta holds the third lowest combined
[10:09] sales tax in North America at 5%.
[10:12] So unquestionably uh unquestionably
[10:15] maintaining a competitive uh business
[10:17] environment is important for the
[10:18] province. Uh but Alberta's overall tax
[10:21] structure including uh no provincial
[10:24] sales tax, no provincial payroll tax and
[10:26] the low natural resource royalties,
[10:28] there are substantial uh advantages to
[10:32] businesses operating in the province.
[10:35] And so I I believe increasing the income
[10:37] tax rate to 9 and a half still keeps
[10:39] Alberta uh competitive um amongst
[10:43] jurisdictions across North America while
[10:46] uh generating significant new provincial
[10:48] revenues.
[10:52] the uh the uh anticipated revenue
[10:56] conservatively would be about a billion
[10:57] dollars a year. And again, this would be
[10:59] directed at um grant funding for
[11:02] municipalities uh both urban and rural.
[11:05] Um we did receive information from uh
[11:09] last week where I identified the
[11:11] significant infrastructure deficit of
[11:13] the urban municipalities. Alberta
[11:15] municipalities which represent the uh
[11:18] roughly 260 urban municipalities
[11:20] estimates that their infrastructure
[11:23] deficit is about 30 billion and
[11:25] currently for RMA members the rural
[11:28] members it's about 20 billion. Again, as
[11:30] shared last week, um RMA is forecasting
[11:33] that the rural uh infrastructure deficit
[11:36] will climb to roughly 40 billion dollars
[11:38] by 2028 if all things remain constant.
[11:42] So um I see this as an opportunity to
[11:46] um again help support uh rural
[11:49] municipalities and industry as a whole.
[11:51] And there might be some people who
[11:53] believe this might have a negative
[11:55] impact on the economy. Uh but with the
[11:58] significant investment that is required
[12:00] for infrastructure improvements and
[12:02] enhancements uh that will create uh
[12:05] significant jobs and I believe it'll
[12:07] also improve to uh greater efficiencies
[12:10] and uh effectiveness in the movements of
[12:12] goods and services which uh will
[12:15] increase uh the province's position and
[12:18] our GDP. So happy to answer any
[12:21] questions. Thank you, Madam Chair.
[12:23] » Okay. Thank you very much. I guess we'll
[12:25] open that up to debate. Councelor Ducet,
[12:27] » I would just like to ask the mayor um
[12:29] for information. Um when was the last
[12:32] time the corporate rate was raised,
[12:36] please? And thanks.
[12:38] » I don't have that information. Um, but
[12:42] it was in uh when Premier Kenny was the
[12:46] uh premier of Alberta, he did lower it
[12:47] from 12% to 8 8%. Um, and so that's been
[12:51] in place for I think I think that was in
[12:53] 2018 or 2019.
[12:57] Councelor Olsen,
[13:01] » I think I it's more of a comment than a
[13:03] question, but um
[13:06] RMA has just launched a campaign called
[13:08] Close the Gap, which is targeted
[13:11] directly at reducing
[13:14] infrastructure deficits. So I what I
[13:16] what I'm not sure of is if something
[13:20] like this is already proposed within
[13:23] that campaign. And if that's the case,
[13:26] um I think this is certainly the time to
[13:28] get on board with that campaign and
[13:30] support
[13:32] as a whole um the movement. Thank you.
[13:36] » Thank you for that comment. Anybody
[13:39] else? Uh Councelor Jesperson,
[13:43] » I just have a few questions. Um
[13:45] [clears throat] could this really affect
[13:48] uh businesses that want to move into
[13:50] Alberta negatively? right now where we
[13:52] seem to be the place to to go and uh I
[13:57] don't know I feel this could affect it.
[13:58] Um the second is
[14:01] how is this going to affect businesses
[14:03] coming to Aches
[14:05] » And uh the third is this even something
[14:08] that uh uh as a municipal government we
[14:11] should be pushing forward or advocating
[14:13] for this is kind of their thing.
[14:19] Um to the first question about Alberta's
[14:21] competitiveness um as mentioned um
[14:24] increasing it to 9 and a half% will
[14:26] still keep Alberta in a very competitive
[14:29] uh position relative to other
[14:31] municipalities. In fact Ontario and
[14:34] Quebec um their their corporate income
[14:37] tax is 11 a.5%. Um BC, Saskatchewan and
[14:42] Manitoba are at 12%. And again, Parkland
[14:45] or pardon me, um, Alberta does not have
[14:48] a provincial sales tax as well. Um, no
[14:50] payroll tax. So, we are still very
[14:53] competitive and I don't think it will uh
[14:55] impact or pro uh uh businesses from
[15:00] coming in nor the businesses in Aerson.
[15:02] Yes, there will be um additional
[15:05] additional um taxes being applied, but
[15:09] again for um businesses in Aches and
[15:13] some of the constraints that we're
[15:14] seeing uh in the transportation network,
[15:17] specifically roads, um those funds will
[15:20] be going to improve um the ability for
[15:23] businesses to move their products. Um,
[15:26] so I I think we still will see a very
[15:30] competitive business environment.
[15:33] » Okay, thanks for your comments. I guess
[15:35] uh my comments are that, you know, I
[15:38] appreciate you thinking outside the box
[15:41] because I know that when I've talked to
[15:44] ministers in the past, they said they do
[15:47] not want to always hear that we want
[15:49] something. They want us to come up with
[15:51] solutions every now and again. And I do
[15:53] see that you're proposing a solution,
[15:56] but I think that if the when the Alberta
[16:00] government asks us to or were to ask us
[16:03] to increase our rate, we wouldn't take
[16:04] that favorably. So I don't see that the
[16:08] government of Alberta is going to be
[16:10] taking this as a something helpful,
[16:13] asking them to increase taxes. And I'm
[16:16] very sure that me as a representative
[16:19] for my division, I don't want to be the
[16:23] the front person to be asking for tax
[16:26] increases right now. That won't be my
[16:29] job, especially for another organization
[16:33] that has that has nothing really to do
[16:36] with us. That I mean, they do have
[16:37] something to do with us, but
[16:40] it's bad enough we've got to rate uh
[16:41] advocate for our own increases. I don't
[16:44] want to be doing that for the Alberta
[16:46] government.
[16:48] So, I guess I'm I'm not going to be in
[16:51] favor of this motion.
[16:54] Go ahead. [snorts]
[16:58] Um
[17:00] I guess I didn't ask answer one of those
[17:03] questions. Is is this our wheelhouse?
[17:05] Our wheelhouse is to advocate for um our
[17:08] residents and our business community. Um
[17:10] rural municipalities as was identified
[17:13] in the closing uh the gap report
[17:15] identified that rural uh municipalities
[17:18] have roughly 130,000
[17:21] 130,000 km of road 10,000 km of water
[17:24] and wastewater mains and 8,000 bridges
[17:27] and culverts um to maintain. Uh the
[17:30] funding le levels haven't been there.
[17:32] They've been cut um as I shared last
[17:34] week. Um that does not help our
[17:37] residents. um that does not help our
[17:39] business communities when uh we cannot
[17:42] provide safe means of trans
[17:44] transportation. This also affects our
[17:45] residents through safety issues um which
[17:49] as all of you are aware and heard on the
[17:53] campa campaign trail. There was calls
[17:55] for and Parkland County did advocate for
[17:58] some improvements to the provincial road
[17:59] network because of safety concerns. That
[18:01] money isn't available right now. The
[18:03] grants keep getting cut. Um, this year,
[18:06] 2026, marks the 40-year anniversary when
[18:09] the provincial government um downloaded
[18:12] um the responsibility for bridges to
[18:14] rural municipalities.
[18:16] I'd like to see this 40-year anniversary
[18:20] be a time to celebrate that we actually
[18:23] receive funding um at a level that helps
[18:26] us to assist our residents um and the
[18:29] business community to have u more
[18:31] effective um infrastructure whether it's
[18:35] water and wastewater. So we're not
[18:37] seeing significant increases in those
[18:40] rates which impacts our uh
[18:42] municipalities, our businesses. um
[18:46] funding for infrastructure like
[18:48] broadband um you can you know roads,
[18:52] water, wastewater uh broad broadband
[18:54] internet connect uh connectivity which
[18:56] is huge and has huge impacts for for our
[19:00] municipality and every residential or uh
[19:03] rural municipality if we don't have a
[19:06] robust system in place. Um so this is
[19:08] just a means uh to have uh additional
[19:11] funding provided to uh municipalities.
[19:14] Yeah. And yes I recognize the provincial
[19:16] government also has their priorities and
[19:18] their funding funding priorities might
[19:20] be different from ours but our job is to
[19:22] advocate for the best outcome for our um
[19:26] residents and business community and I
[19:28] believe that this this would do that.
[19:30] Thank you
[19:32] » Councelor Ducette.
[19:34] Um,
[19:36] with the information that you provided
[19:37] to my question, I I think going back it
[19:40] it might have been a little shortsighted
[19:42] in my opinion uh of the provincial
[19:45] government to lower the rate, especially
[19:48] when
[19:49] we have um [snorts]
[19:52] the oil leases that uh haven't paid paid
[19:55] up on their taxes. So, I guess I I'm in
[19:58] agreeance. I I don't want to see the res
[20:01] I don't want to see further costs
[20:03] downloaded to our residents. So I don't
[20:06] see this as being a bad thing to
[20:08] advocate for some recovery of the
[20:11] percentage rate that was dropped in in
[20:13] the past. So um I think I'd be on board
[20:15] with it.
[20:19] » Councelor Jesperson.
[20:23] » I think I understand where you're going
[20:25] from or going or coming from. Um the the
[20:28] thing I struggle with is
[20:32] our corporations that are paying these
[20:35] taxes. Number one, it always goes back
[20:37] to the consumer and we're going to end
[20:39] up paying more for whatever product it
[20:41] is. And uh the infrastructure that the
[20:45] Alberta government decides to upgrade
[20:47] may not be our infrastructure.
[20:49] And uh I struggle with that at this
[20:52] point. And I just I feel like uh the
[20:55] consumer our residents are going to be
[20:57] paying for it indirectly and may not get
[20:59] anything in return.
[21:03] » Go ahead.
[21:04] » Um I would counter that by saying that
[21:08] we'll be paying for it directly. So
[21:11] deferring maintenance on infrastructure
[21:13] and I'll looked for um administration to
[21:16] make comment on this as well. um and
[21:19] it's in the reports um of RMA if you
[21:22] have an opportunity to take a look at
[21:23] some of those reports as well. Deferral
[21:25] of infrastructure maintenance and infra
[21:27] infrastructure improvements does come at
[21:31] a significant future cost um that's a
[21:34] cost going to be borne by our rateayers
[21:36] um and it'll be larger than making sure
[21:39] that there is remedial work being done
[21:41] or maintenance and maybe Mr. Hopkins can
[21:44] speak to to this matter as well. Um,
[21:46] this is about keeping our economy robust
[21:50] and ensuring that our our roads are
[21:52] safe. Um, that our water and wastewater
[21:55] systems do not fail. Um, there's issues
[21:58] with uh uh human health and safety um
[22:02] with failures, catastrophic failures of
[22:05] some of the infrastructure. Um, from my
[22:08] perspective, these investments are not
[22:10] only prudent, they're responsible
[22:12] investments. Um, and they need to be
[22:15] made before th those expenditures grow
[22:17] to an insurmountable rate where we will
[22:20] not be able to attract industry. Thank
[22:23] you,
[22:24] » Councelor Olsen.
[22:28] » [clears throat]
[22:29] » Does administration want to address that
[22:32] last comment first or
[22:35] I
[22:35] » I don't know if there's much else um for
[22:37] administration to add other than the
[22:38] fact that we do agree that um deferred
[22:41] maintenance is obviously an issue across
[22:43] Alberta for infrastructure
[22:45] um and it is contained in in the RMA
[22:47] report. But I think what we're talking
[22:48] about here is less so um county owned
[22:52] infrastructure but provincial owned
[22:54] infrastructure that's within the county
[22:58] and uh can you tell us or anybody tell
[23:01] us if there is something on the books
[23:03] right now at RMA in regards to this
[23:05] because seems to me that we have talked
[23:07] about
[23:11] » Uh to councelor Cooger Johnson currently
[23:14] there's nothing on the books for
[23:15] something like this with RMA um there is
[23:17] advocacy through the closing the gap
[23:19] initiative. Um
[23:21] » But no not focused directly on raising
[23:23] the corporate income tax.
[23:24] » Yeah.
[23:25] » But but advocating to the province to
[23:27] understand the unique needs of rural
[23:29] municipalities when it comes to the
[23:31] amount of infrastructure that is within
[23:33] our borders and that we have to maintain
[23:35] or support maintaining um and just
[23:37] getting the province to recognize that
[23:39] that comes at a cost and it does require
[23:41] an investment.
[23:43] » Okay.
[23:45] Councelor Olsen.
[23:48] » Yeah, and I'll just echo again my my
[23:51] comment on on the close the gap campaign
[23:54] where I believe that there are several
[23:57] initiatives being taken uh very
[24:00] seriously and requiring a a vast amount
[24:02] of work by RMA on our behalf for the
[24:05] infrastructure issues as well as police
[24:07] funding
[24:09] um
[24:11] and the like. So I think for me I would
[24:16] I would like to see us become heavily on
[24:19] board with that.
[24:21] Not that this is not something that the
[24:23] government should be looking at. I I
[24:25] can't imagine that it's not something
[24:27] they wouldn't look at. Um,
[24:31] so I feel like our advocacy
[24:35] energy needs to be directed towards the
[24:39] initiatives on the table currently with
[24:40] RMA.
[24:42] » Thank you. I guess I concur with that
[24:45] that uh I mean I agree that
[24:47] infrastructure deficits are a problem.
[24:50] That's why I'm surprised that well there
[24:52] is it they are addressing it at that
[24:54] level at the RMA level. But I'm not
[24:57] interested in increasing advocating for
[25:01] tax increases for that.
[25:06] » Is there any other comments out there
[25:08] before we go to vote or
[25:11] » Just in closing? I do hope I have
[25:13] support from uh council to move this
[25:15] forward. Um we I think all of council is
[25:18] aware that we do have uh one bridge that
[25:21] was permanently closed. We do have
[25:22] others that were identified as um
[25:26] as a safety concern. Um we start closing
[25:30] bridges, start closing roads. Um that
[25:33] has implications for safe emergency
[25:36] response services. That has implications
[25:38] for uh businesses um throughout Parkland
[25:42] County, including our agricultural
[25:44] sector. That impacts our bottom line. Um
[25:46] that's that um does not reflect well on
[25:49] our ability and any uh municipality to
[25:52] attract further f further investment and
[25:55] and uh businesses into the province. And
[25:58] this is a competitive global
[26:00] environment. We're dealing with many of
[26:02] the businesses now um do not have to
[26:04] locate. They're not married to a
[26:06] specific province or a region in this
[26:09] country. Um so we need to ensure that we
[26:12] can provide the type of infrastructure
[26:14] that supports uh industry as a whole to
[26:17] maintain um our competitive nature and
[26:19] to be able to attract um retained
[26:21] [clears throat] current current
[26:23] businesses and attract new businesses in
[26:25] the future. Thank you.
[26:29] » Okay. Anybody else?
[26:32] » Councelor Olsen. My final comment just
[26:35] surrounds around the fact that
[26:37] um
[26:40] you know I fully understand the
[26:43] the ideology behind the a tax increase
[26:46] here. Unfortunately, we have no
[26:48] guarantee that the 1.5%
[26:52] uh extra tax collected would be put into
[26:55] any other account besides general
[26:57] accounts for this government. Uh I think
[27:00] we've seen that in the past.
[27:02] I just um
[27:06] I'm just not sure that this is where we
[27:08] want to uh expend our energy at this
[27:11] time.
[27:14] » Okay. Okay. So, I guess there's a motion
[27:18] on the floor and if we don't have any
[27:20] further questions or comments, we are
[27:23] ready for the vote. Um is we put it on
[27:27] the floor, didn't we? Okay. So I guess
[27:31] the vote is okay. So
[27:34] all in favor
[27:38] opposed
[27:43] okay the motion is carried
[27:46] » Defeated
[27:47] » Defeated.
[27:49] » Oh defeated. Oh it was a tie. Sorry I
[27:51] didn't see somebody's arm obviously.
[27:54] Okay. So it's defeated because it is a
[27:56] tie. Okay. And that's it everybody. Um,
[28:00] this comes to the close of our meeting
[28:02] already. Um,
[28:06] so I will ask
[28:10] Mayor Shagus to
[28:12] » Just so I will adjourn the meeting at
[28:15] 123.
[28:20] » I didn't see what
[28:23] I was in favor of all three motions.