A long-running soap opera at North Battleford City Hall over whether to grant a residential tax incentive, finally ended Monday.
City council has upheld their original decision to grant a tax exemption to a property at 1302-107th Street.
It was the second time the issue was put to a vote after a notice of motion was issued by Councillor Cathy Richardson to reconsider the resolution. But the vote was the same as it was the first time - a 4-3 decision to grant the exemption.
With that, the issue appears settled after weeks of drama at City Hall.
The debate over whether to grant the property an Inner City Residential Development Exemption proved a tough one for council to come to a consensus on. The property was owned by Pat and Bev MacIsaac, but had since been bought by Dave and Erin Reiter, who stood to receive the tax exemption in the transaction. The Reiters appeared before council Monday to ask for an exemption.
City administration had originally turned down the incentive application, contending it did not qualify under the definition of "new build" because it was an existing house and garage that were moved onto the lot. Administration contended the incentive applied to new construction only and not to moves of existing houses.
After hearing from Bev MacIsaac in April, council ultimately granted the exemption by a 4-3 margin at their May 13 meeting. Councillors Trent Houk, Ray Fox, Ryan Bater and Cathy Richardson supported the resolution at that meeting.
However, Richardson was having second thoughts about her vote by the end of the week, and issued a Notice of Motion to reconsider the resolution to grant the exemption at the next regular council meeting scheduled for May 27.
Rather than wait that long, a special meeting was called for May 21 to reconsider the resolution. But it failed to even get to the floor for a vote, as a procedural motion requiring unanimous consent failed to pass.
With the tax exemption resolution back up for debate Monday, Richardson explained she was uncomfortable with her earlier vote.
"In hindsight I should have asked for the motion to be tabled at that meeting as I was very uncomfortable and undecided when casting my vote," said Richardson. She had decided to uphold the existing policy, and said she would vote against the exemption.
That prompted an upset reaction from Houk, who went so far as to suggest administration officials were pressuring council members on how to vote on the exemption issue.
"I feel as if I've been lobbied by administration and I don't feel that's administration's job," said Houk.
That notion was rejected by Councillor Greg Lightfoot, who said administration had provided plenty of information on the issue. "I do not feel pressured or lobbied," he said.
When the final vote was taken, Richardson's change of heart ended up having no impact in reversing the original decision. Councillor Don Buglas opted to join Houk, Fox and Bater in favour of granting the exemption. The vote carried 4-3- the same margin as the first vote.
