March 13, 2001

Dear Fellow Citizen:

Subject:
The battle against annexation 4th report

     The municipal scene has taken on a somewhat other-worldly aspect these days, as the anti-merger forces continue to do battle with those who would impose on us an Island-wide megacity.

First you have the Transition Committee, the would-be architects of this ponderous municipal structure. The Transition Committee is a group of non-elected people reporting to Minister Harel, most of whom have zero experience in municipal matters - a fact which does not stop them from being paid handsomely for their efforts. They are assisted in their work by many municipal employees and by five suburban mayors who, a scant three months ago, were promising they would never ever let their cities be swallowed up. Then you have a number of pretenders to the throne of the megacity. One candidate, Gérald Tremblay, has managed to get the support of many of the suburban mayors who seemingly see no contradiction in following Plan A and Plan B contemporaneously. In other words, they want both to fight and to assume the fight is lost. Understandably, the media have interpreted all these mixed messages by concluding the megacity is almost inevitable.

     And then you have the spoilsports: a group of mayors, with your humble servant as their spokesman, who are trying to stop the whole infernal scheme from ever seeing the light of day. Not only have we managed to get 18 cities to contest the law creating the megacity, but also we are instituting an active media and political campaign to complement this counterattack.

For those of you who know me, I am not in the habit of tilting at windmills. Likewise, City Council is not made up of people who champion lost causes. We are convinced, not only of the justness of our cause, but that it can be won. And we are getting an enormous boost from the news out of Toronto and Ottawa. In fact, Premier Harris has called a halt to any future forced mergers. We recently got Professor Sancton to tell everybody here what a financial fiasco the Toronto megacity has proved to be, with its $305 million shortfall.

I also wanted to tell you a bit about our legal position. Westmount is pursuing an independent legal contestation of Bill 170. It is coordinated with the four groups of lawyers representing the other 17 cities. Our initial idea was to try to get an interim injunction. When we started pleading on February 19, the judge strongly suggested it would be better to go directly to the main case rather that appear before the bench three times (interim injunction, interlocutory injunction, and finally, to argue on the merits) - not to mention the possibility of appeals. The judge forced the Government legal team to accept the relatively early date of May 22. She also made reference to the "extremely serious matters" contained in our action. Certainly we should know where we stand legally by mid-summer.

Westmount started researching a possible contestation of forced mergers over 14 months ago, almost a year before any other city. Our action revolves around a number of arguments attacking the constitutionality of Bill 170, chief of which are the following:

1) The 1998 Supreme Court judgment regarding the secession of Quebec established a number of unwritten constitutional principles, one of which was the principle of democracy. By dissolving the City of Westmount and by creating the megacity of Montreal, our citizens' democratic access to municipal institutions would be severely compromised. Indeed, even the creation of the non-elected Transition Committee with sweeping powers clearly usurps local democracy.

2) This same judgment established the principle of the protection of minorities and therefore the assurance of a thriving anglophone culture and language in Quebec. By requiring that the megacity operate exclusively in French, and by creating bilingual arrondissements with virtually no powers and no legal status, the government is abolishing the only level of government that represents the anglophone minority in Quebec. Certainly, Bill 170 has a disproportionate effect on the anglophone community. The purported desire to rationalise the municipal landscape is not a sufficiently necessary (or probably achievable) objective to justify the abolition of an anglophone institution that has existed for 127 years. Besides, the linguistic effects of Bill 170 goes well beyond mere municipal considerations.

3) The City of Westmount has the status of a common-law corporation, which requires the approval of its founders - that is, its citizens - for its dissolution. (Last year's referendum clearly states where Westmount citizens stand on that matter.)

4) Bill 170 results in an expropriation without compensation.

5) Bill 170 violates the principle of the independence of the judiciary.

With the exception of the fourth one, none of these arguments could or were used when Toronto cities tried to quash their forced amalgamation into a megacity in 1997.

Many Westmounters ask me what they can do. Well, the Westmount Municipal Association has been a staunch ally and partner with us in this battle. Call them at 989-9752. Also, DemocraCité (www.democracite.org) has been active in keeping the flame alive. [You should also see WindowsOnWestmount by the Nicholsons of Westmount DTN]

We will be holding a public information session on March 28th, 7:30 p.m. at Victoria Hall. The purpose of this meeting is to brief Westmounters on the status of the megacity fight. Meanwhile, if you have any questions, please don't hesitate to call your councillor.

Yours truly,
Peter F. Trent
March 13, 2001

Peter F. Trent

The Latest Story
"The man behind the mayor"
By Jan Kaluza

14/Nov/2000 Lawyers lay groundwork
By: MICHAEL MAINVILLE The Gazette
They aren't giving up the political fight yet, but opponents of Quebec's municipal-merger plans are already devising legal strategies to challenge a law creating an island-wide megacity. When the Quebec government tables its legislation on municipal restructuring tomorrow, one of the first steps taken by local municipalities and lobby groups opposed to municipal mergers will be to rush copies to their lawyers for study.

from "Westmount Explained" by Don Wedge

council meeting of October 2.

1.2 Referendum: Because Louis Bernard's report November 19.

1.3 Tax rates: The mayor was unable to forecast the impact of the new valuations on the 2001 tax rates. The minister had said variable tax rates would be permitted and if implemented this would help overcome the switch of the tax load from commercial to residential. But many other factors handicapped budget forecasting - among them relief from downloading which could continue for municipalities (Westmount and 21 others) disputing it in court, the government's offer to pay 100 per cent of tax on their local properties, the increase to $3 million as a share in MUC costs which was to take place over four years (except that the MUC's future was unclear do the proposals for island-wide reorganization).

1.4 New region: The mayor expressed "relative satisfaction" with most of the arrangements for the new Montreal Metropolitan Community. The government had not given it enough energy; It lacked strength and a need for a two-thirds majority might stultify decision-making. Control of urban sprawl would extend beyond the MMC's borders. Policy on air and water quality matters would rest with the MMC, but implementation would rest with municipalities or their agencies.

1.5 Publications' control: In a rare move, council held a public policy-forming discussion. Six of the eight members present took part (Cllr Lulham was absent on Communities in Bloom business). Members accepted a staff suggestion that there were four types of information flyers - two of which (simple issues or emergency measures) could be approved by the commissioner concerned and two of which (policy explanations and those referring to third parties) needed full council consent. Additionally, before anything can be posted on the city's web site, it has to be approved by the city's editorial committee.

1.6 Population decrease: Concerned at the population decrease shown in the key statistics for the two decades to 1996, council is looking for measures that could be taken to attract young families. Consultations will be held with real estate agents to discover opinions of people wanting to move here. Comparative statistics for a West Island city (Beaconsfield perhaps) were also requested

September 11, 2000

A special edition of Westmount Explained, a volunteer-compiled e-mail newsletter.

Other than the annexation threat, the new valuation roll after a five-year freeze has the most potential impact on citizens this fall. A large increase is expected with a swing from the commercial to residential sectors.

How big: An increase of 21.5 per cent in the valuation of the average Westmount single-family home and the overall average of 16 per cent on all the properties in the city. These were forecast in a preliminary report by the MUC evaluation service in May, according the newspaper Les Affaires. Both increases were the highest on Montreal island. Local real estate guru Andy Dodge predicts they could be even higher. "There was a 27 per cent increase in the median of sales of single family homes between 1993 and the 1999, the reference years of the roll," he reports.

Unveiling: The true figures will be tabled on Wednesday (13th). The MUC will give journalists the overall trends at 1 p.m. and they could be on radio from 1.30 p.m. There will be a public presentation at 2 p.m. at the MUC head office. It will be addressed by Vera Danyluk (MUC executive president), Montréal Councillor

Jean Fortier and Mayor Peter Trent (chair and vice-chair of the MUC finance committee). (The MUC offices are at 1550 Metcalfe Street, 14th Floor; Peel Metro; those wishing to intervene should register between 1.45 and 2 p.m.).

Westmount's roll: The MUC will deliver both hard copies and computer-tape versions which will detail the changes to individual properties in the city. After each printed page has been covered in protective plastic, the complete roll is expected to be ready for public consultation at the city clerk's counter on Thursday morning. Another copy will be placed in the library by Friday afternoon.

On-line: The treasurer expects that the electronic version will be loaded on to Westmount computers this week. Individual records will be available on the terminals at the city clerk's counter and in the library by Monday (even possibly late Friday for weekend use).

Council meeting: Computer analysis and budget impacts will be prepared in time for the closed-door council meeting called for next Monday (18th).

Notification: The treasurer is required within 60 days to notify the new valuation to owners of properties valued at $1 million or more, but in fact Westmount will send a notice to all owners.

Valuation trends: It is clear from the forecast in Les Affaires, the increase in single-family properties has not been matched by commercial properties, apartments, duplexes, triplexes, etc. This will in turn lead to different tax shares.

Tax rates: Depending on council's budgeting, approximately the same amount for Westmount's needs will need to raised next year as this. However, the apportionment between sectors and among property owners will change due to the new evaluations. Additionally, because Westmount's valuation has risen more than most of the island, our share of MUC and other shared costs (police, public transit, sewage treatment, etc) will rise.

Reform: Municipal groups have asked the Quebec government for legislation to permit variable rates for different types of properties: commercial, apartments, duplexes, etc. This would enable a smaller share to be put on single-family dwellings.

Revision: Owners will have until April 30 to seek a revision to their assessment.

Council of August 7, 2000

Referendum: Westmount had abandoned its preferred date of October 22 in favour of November 19. Suburban mayors had agreed unanimously to hold referendums on this date and solidarity was all-important. Meantime, Westmount's preparation would continue with formation of yes and no committees, appointment of poll captains, etc.

Merger-threat: Some mayors had presented a case for concentrating on the creation the new Montreal Metropolitan Community (MMC) and asking the government to shelve merger proposals. But last week, the government negotiator, Louis Bernard, had come with a streamlined plan which would reduce the 27 suburbs to nine. "One island, one city, by the back door," our mayor dubbed it. This proposal had "broken the log-jam" and brought all mayors on side for having a referendum.

Danger in delay: In public questions, Trent was asked about the danger that with the merger report due on September 30, the government could pass decrees before the referendums were held. He replied that it was inconceivable that a government which based its main policy on a referendum solution would ignore one involving the 758,000 people in the island suburbs.

Legal fight: Trent also indicated that Bill 124, which enabled to cabinet to issue merger decrees, might be illegal. "We will wage a political battle first," but if necessary a subsequent "legal battle might go on for years."

PR subsidy: Council later agreed to make available $50,000 for extra PR work and some legal fees in connection with the anti-amalgamation campaign. It will be reimbursed by other island cities.

Annexation: Coinciding with distribution of the mayor's letter last week (see below), volunteers had contacted more than 6,500 Westmounter homes by phone to draw attention to the forthcoming referendum, etc. 80 citizens had volunteered their support to the hot line (989-5236) that had been set up.

Following the mayor's letter, it was suggested that no possible benefits could accrue to Westmounters - only severe losses. The term "merger" indicated some possible mutual benefit and therefore should not be used in future - "annexation" being the likely threat in our case.

June 27, 2000

Subject: The battle against annexation: a report from the front

Dear Fellow Citizen,

Last year Westmount celebrated its 125th anniversary with parties, parades and performances throughout the year. We came to realise how unique a place Westmount really is, and how it's taken 125 years of evolution to become this homey city so beloved of its residents. Westmount, with its quirks, its traditions, its neighbourliness - and its responsive administration - could serve as an international example of just how close one can come to being a perfect city.

This idyllic state of affairs could be a thing of the past if the threatened annexation with the City of Montreal goes through. In fact, the whole people-friendly patchwork quilt of Island municipalities could become one big homogenous banality carrying the name "Montreal". We'd have Montreal-style mismanagement, and Montreal-style taxes. Oh, and Montreal-style democracy. All this would be thanks to the grandiosity of Mayor Bourque, who, along with Quebec bureaucrats and politicians who play at civic engineering, finds our natural municipal variety repellant and "inefficient". You, my dear citizen, apparently don't know what's good for you. It has been decided that there are "too many" cities on the Island. I coined the word "urbicide" to describe this meaningless destruction of our civic heritage.

Before I tell you what we have done so far, and what you can do in the future, let's run through the claims usually trotted out in favour of mergers in general, and one-island-one-city in particular:

Mergers lead to economies of scale. This old and most persistent canard was very popular in the 60s, when big government was equated with good government. Just about all the more recent academic literature shows that there are diseconomies of scale: the bigger the city, the more it spends. We don't have to look far for proof: the City of Montreal itself spends 35% more per capita than the rest of the Island cities, without offering nearly as many services. And imagine this recipe for cost increases: One Island. One City. One Union.

Mergers will reduce taxes. For Westmounters, a merger with Montreal would result in a huge tax hike. Consider: our tax rate is $1.35; Montreal's is $1.99. Even if we're not forced to pay for Montreal's massive debt and pension-fund deficits, our taxes would still skyrocket. A higher price for poorer services: no first responder unit, no Public Security, no architectural design review, shorter library hours, no free tennis or swimming. And we would get snow removal techniques that sometimes depend on just letting the snow melt.

Mergers are an international trend. Knowing this oft-repeated assertion was false, the City of Westmount recently commissioned a book that studied worldwide municipal merger trends. Written by Professor Andrew Sancton, Merger Mania: the Assault on Local Government [Available from Double Hook bookstore for $25.], arrives at the conclusion that the only place in the world where mergers are currently taking place is in Ontario. For example, the last real merger in the U.S. was over 100 years ago.

Mergers are needed to compete internationally. This is a variant of the last claim. M. Bourque cites Boston as an example for Montreal to emulate in order to become "world-class city". He neglects to mention there are 282 cities in the Boston region. Atlanta has 102. Having a lot of cities certainly hasn't stopped these urban regions from competing.

That's what Toronto did. This is what I call lemming logic. (Or is it urbis envy?) As Merger Mania points out, the merging of six Toronto-area cities (along with their version of the MUC) into one megacity was supposed to save $300 million. In the end, it's likely to cost money. Services have been cut and user-fees implemented. And the commercial tax rate is now over four times the residential rate. In the brave new megacity, 2,000-page Council agendas are not uncommon.

Mergers get rid of politicians. True. Is that necessarily good? Westmount has one councillor for 2,500 citizens now. One city on the Island of Montreal would mean one councillor for 30,000 citizens. (In Toronto, it's one per 55,000!) Will it save money? Well, the total cost of Westmount's Mayor and Council amounts to 0.5% of our budget. Montreal spends 1.4% of their budget on elected officials. And that's not all. If Montreal wants to change zoning or go out and borrow money, they can do so unfettered by a citizen approval process. In Westmount, citizens can require such things be ratified or rejected by referendum. I prefer our notion of democracy.

Mergers mean fiscal equity. The most plausible of all the claims. But Westmount already contributes to Montreal via the MUC. In fact, the Island suburbs pay $150 million more to the MUC than they get in services, with Montreal as the beneficiary. The average Westmounter pays $1020 per year to the MUC, the average Montrealer, $444. If we are not paying our fair share of the cost of Montreal's services that we use, then tax us. You don't have to merge to do that. Besides, with the creation of the new Montreal Metropolitan Community, all cities, both on and off the Island, will be helping to pay for Montreal infrastructure such as the Botanical Gardens.

Montreal is losing population to off-island cities. This is true, but how on earth would amalgamating all the Island cities help stop this urban sprawl? It would exacerbate the trend, as citizens who used to live in small cities on the Island would decamp to off-Island cities in order to find the same services and sense of community they had before. Does M. Bourque seriously think that a bigger, fatter Montreal would attract people back to the Island? And why do our governments abhor monopolies in the private sector yet quite happily create them in the public sector? Why, if you want to live on the Island of Montreal, should you have only one choice of city?

Mergers won't lead to a loss of bilingual status. "Oh yeah?" said Minister Louise Beaudoin….

Mergers would rid the Island of "enclaves".Another irritant to the bureaucratic aesthetic is the existence of geographic enclaves such as Westmount. It's almost as if Montreal were a jigsaw puzzle and Westmount, the Town of Mount Royal, or Outremont were simply missing pieces. Many urban regions around the world have enclaves. So what's the problem?

I have been making these arguments in dozens of speeches, debates, editorials, and opinion pieces, ever since the outbreak of the merger threat more than a year ago. As well as commissioning Merger Mania, Westmount also commissioned a study of the implications and costs of Island mergers by the firm Municonsult.

In addition to developing what one can call the intellectual arguments against amalgamation, we have also been applying political pressure. Westmount was the first city to adopt a budget to fight mergers. The Union of Island Suburban Municipalities has also been active in media campaigns and coordinating individual cities' local campaigns. And I have met with Municipal Affairs Minister Harel many times.

Westmount is also funding and directing extensive research into the possibility of a legal challenge to a forced merger.

What we are faced with, concretely, is a law: Bill 124. This law, which has just been adopted, gives the cabinet - not the National Assembly - discretionary power to force mergers without any public consultation. A diktat from behind closed doors. By September 30, an advisory committee is supposed to recommend to Minister Harel what mergers should take place in the Montreal region. If mergers are recommended, you can bet we'll be on the list.

Cities were the cradle of democracy. We believe that the final say in any annexation must rest with the citizens of the municipality targeted. This is the way it works in the U.S. and now in Europe. Democracy must be respected. Otherwise it's a clear abuse of power by the provincial government.

This is why we are organising a city-wide formal referendum in October. Now is the time for all Westmount citizens to get involved. Send Quebec a message. Don't allow our city to be swallowed up by a soulless bureaucratic construct. Help us fight against any hostile takeover.

Please call the hot line 989-5236 to volunteer for work on the referendum.

Yours truly,

Peter F. Trent

Mayor

PFT:mja

16 July 2001 letter 11 Feb 2001 Gazette Editorial

L'économie de Montréal (pdf, 66 Ko)

Go Mayor Peter F. Trent Stories and Pan Photos in the park

Wednesday 5 July 2000 Merger votes open rift Suburban mayors split over timing of referendums DARREN BECKER ...Suburban mayors should wait until the provincial government unveils its recommendations on municipal mergers in the fall before calling referendums, said Georges Bosse, chairman of the union and mayor of Verdun.

"It would be wise for the mayors to stop because no one wants to start a war just for the sake of starting a war," Bosse said. ...Outremont Mayor Jerome Unterberg said mayors have to act now. T.M.R. Mayor Ricardo Hrtschan said the decision to hold a referendum was the result of a lack of "good faith" on the part of the provincial government. [better to be ready than not have enough time to prepare .. We know the answer and the only we we could lose is if not enough turn out to vote DTN]

Thursday 29 June 2000 Quebec, Montreal to ignore merger referendum By: MICHAEL MAINVILLE, SEAN GORDON of The Gazette Quebec contributed to this report The Gazette Quebec and Montreal officials say they have no intention of respecting the results of a referendum on forced mergers the city of Westmount is planning to hold in October. "Cities are not republics that can decide their fate," Municipal Affairs Minister Louise Harel said in Quebec yesterday. "These are internal borders that change according to the way the territory is occupied."


Westmount Council of July 4, 2000 .

Council chair: For only the second time in his nine years in office, Mayor Trent missed a monthly council meeting. Pro-Mayor Barbara Moore took his place. (Trent is attending a Making Cities Livable conference in Vienna and will afterwards vacation in Europe).