top of page
Shiny Abstract Texture

Every municipality—no matter its size—runs on a simple structure: Council sets the direction, and administration carries it out. When those roles stay clear, the community gets steady, reliable service. But when the lines blur, things get messy fast.


Here’s a situation that happens in almost every town.


A resident walks into the municipal office feeling frustrated. Maybe a bylaw ticket felt unfair. Maybe a service took longer than expected. Maybe a conversation with a staff member didn’t go well. Instead of speaking with the CAO or the staff member’s supervisor, the resident goes straight to a councillor. It makes sense on the surface—councillors are elected, visible, and easy to approach. Many people assume Council oversees every detail of municipal operations.


But here’s the part most people don’t realize: taking staff complaints to Council doesn’t fix the issue. In fact, it often makes things harder to resolve.


Council’s job is to set policy, not manage employees. Council decides what services the municipality provides, what the budget priorities are, and what policies guide the organization. But Council does not supervise staff. That responsibility belongs to the CAO, who is the only employee Council directly oversees. When residents ask Council to step into staff matters, they’re asking elected officials to take on a role they’re not meant to play. That leads to confusion, mixed messages, and even legal problems.


Staff also deserve a workplace free from political pressure. Imagine trying to do your job knowing that any interaction with the public might end up in front of elected officials. That’s not fair to staff, and it doesn’t help the community. When complaints go directly to Council, staff feel undermined, the CAO’s authority is weakened, and decisions can start to look political instead of professional. Municipalities function best when staff can do their work without worrying about political influence.


Municipal government is built on a clear structure: Council governs, the CAO manages, and staff deliver services. Staff need to make decisions based on bylaws, policy, safety, and professional standards—not on who complained to a councillor. When councillors start directing staff or weighing in on HR matters, staff may feel pressured to treat residents differently depending on who they know, change decisions to avoid upsetting elected officials, or worry that their job depends on politics rather than performance. That’s political interference, and it shifts with every election. When Council manages staff, decisions can become tied to personal relationships or political considerations, which is not a stable or ethical way to run a community.


There’s also a legal reality many people don’t know.  In Manitoba, Council has only one employee—the CAO. Everyone else reports to the CAO, not to Council. If councillors start telling staff what to do, approving or denying leaves, disciplining employees, interpreting HR policies, or investigating staff complaints, they are acting outside their legal role. That’s political interference because elected officials are inserting themselves into operational decisions, they have no authority to make.


Here’s the heart of it: bringing staff complaints to Council doesn’t solve the problem. It creates new ones. Council isn’t allowed to manage staff. Staff deserve a workplace free from politics. And the CAO is the person with the authority and responsibility to address staff concerns properly.


If something goes wrong, the CAO is the right person to contact. They can investigate the issue, follow the proper process, and make sure it’s handled fairly. A well‑run municipality depends on clear roles, respectful communication, and a structure that protects both staff and residents. When we follow that structure, the community gets better service and a more stable local government.

 
 
 

Accessibility isn't just about ramps and automatic doors—it's about ensuring that everyone in the community can fully participate in public life. For municipalities, having an up-to-date accessibility plan is more than a legal requirement—it's a smart, inclusive, and community-building move.

 

What Is an Accessibility Plan?

 

An accessibility plan is a document that outlines how a municipality will identify, remove, and prevent barriers for people with disabilities. These barriers can be physical, technological, or even attitudinal in nature. The plan covers everything from public buildings and sidewalks to websites and customer service.

 

Why Does It Matter?

 

It Benefits Everyone

 

Accessibility isn't just for people with long-term disabilities—it makes life easier for many people in the community. Older adults benefit from features such as clear signs, smooth sidewalks, and easy-to-use public washrooms. Parents pushing strollers appreciate ramps and automatic doors. People recovering from an injury or surgery may need temporary support, such as handrails or elevators. Even delivery drivers, service workers, and tourists find accessible spaces more convenient and safer to navigate. When public spaces are designed with everyone in mind, the whole community becomes more welcoming, inclusive, and functional.

 

When a community is accessible, it becomes easier for everyone to move around, use services, and feel welcome. That’s good for public health, safety, and overall quality of life.

 

It Builds Trust and Inclusion

 

When a municipality invests in accessibility, it sends a powerful message: we care about all our residents. This builds trust between the local government and the community. People are more likely to attend public meetings, volunteer, and participate in local events when they feel included and valued.

 

Inclusion also means listening to people with lived experience. Involving residents with disabilities in planning and decision-making helps ensure that changes are meaningful and effective. It’s not just about meeting standards—it’s about building relationships.

 

It’s the Law

 

In Manitoba, municipalities are legally required to have accessibility plans under The Accessibility for Manitobans Act. These plans must be reviewed and updated regularly to stay compliant.

 

In Saskatchewan, municipalities that are listed in Table 1, Section 3 of The Accessible Saskatchewan Act are required by law to have an accessibility plan in place by December 3, 2025.


It Supports Economic Development

 

Accessible communities are good for business. Tourists with mobility challenges will choose destinations where they can move around easily. Families and retirees may decide to settle in towns that offer inclusive public spaces and services.

 

Businesses also benefit when more people can access their storefronts, restaurants, and offices. Accessibility improvements—like better lighting, wider doorways, and clear signage—can increase foot traffic and customer satisfaction.

 

Municipalities that prioritize accessibility are more attractive to investors, developers, and new residents. It’s a smart way to grow your local economy.

 

It Helps with Planning and Budgeting

 

An up-to-date accessibility plan acts like a roadmap. It helps municipalities identify which barriers need to be addressed first, estimate costs, and set realistic timelines. This makes it easier to apply for grants, coordinate with departments, and avoid last-minute fixes.

 

Instead of reacting to complaints or emergencies, municipalities can plan and make steady progress. This saves money in the long run and ensures that improvements are thoughtful and sustainable.

 

Final Thoughts

 

Accessibility isn’t something a municipality can check off a list and forget. It’s a continuous process of listening, learning, and improving. Communities change, technologies evolve, and residents’ needs shift over time. That’s why keeping your accessibility plan up to date is so important—it ensures your municipality stays responsive and relevant.

 

By maintaining and updating your plan, your municipality shows:

  • Leadership: You’re setting an example for other communities by prioritizing inclusion and equity.

  • Compassion: You recognize and value the diverse needs of your residents, including those who are often overlooked.

  • Foresight: You’re planning for a future where everyone can participate fully in community life, regardless of ability.

 

An up-to-date accessibility plan is more than a document—it’s a reflection of your municipality’s values. It’s about creating a place where people feel safe, respected, and empowered. When accessibility is woven into the fabric of your community, everyone benefits.

 
 
 

We just got home from the UMAAS conference, and something troubled me on the drive and late into the night. It still bothers me today, and so I write.

I was delighted to see many of the administrators we work with on everything from strategic planning to impromptu phone calls. But I heard a common theme at this conference, that niggles at me.

Being a municipal administrator is one of the most challenging jobs around. Every day, they are in front of the population, expecting to balance community needs, tight budgets, and constant pressure from their Council, who do not understand the difference between their election promises and the legislation. Add in the select few residents who think that paying taxes gives them the right to act like an ass in the municipal office, and you have a lot of pressure on one pair of shoulders.

The legislation and the rules that are supposed to protect the administrators are so weak and vague that they are useless to those who ran for Council based on their egos. When councillors ignore these rules, they make the administrator's job hard. The training administrators get does not equip them to deal with the abuse and harassment that is often viewed as an occupational hazard.

A System That Doesn't Help

A Council can go from a functioning Council to a disaster with one election. All it takes is one loud-mouthed shnook (if you heard that in Foghorn Leghorn's voice, you are my people), and the system goes into chaos. I know of some councils that spend so much time with legal issues that one wonders if they get any actual work done. It costs money, the village knows where its idiot is, and people lose faith in the local government. And when the administrator goes…." hey, waitaminnit…you can't do that!" the Council threatens their jobs, or they are fired.

They reach out for help. They call everyone they can think of, even me. The administrators are told that councils are autonomous and encouraged to get a lawyer at their own expense and to duke it out in the courts. Most often, administrators don't. Because in our small population communities, everyone knows your business, some councillors have no class and blurt only their side of the story on Coffee Row, and lots of those administrators need their jobs. There is nowhere to go because they get the same BS answer everywhere. There is legislation, but little you can do with a Council that won't follow it.

Autonomous Should Not Mean Above the Law

Where did we get the idea that having rules means you cannot be autonomous within your scope? I am autonomous, but I still get a ticket if I speed. (ask me how I know). Yet nobody who writes the legislation is interested in adding enforcement, leaving it up to Councils to police themselves. They all have a Code of Conduct, Ethics policy, and bylaws. They don't care to enforce it. If they don't police themselves, the administrator bears the brunt. (To those councils who follow the rules, your administrator loves you, and I do too.)

Having a standard that doesn't get pitched around every time there is an election means administrators are free to do their jobs.

Oh, But if We Make the Councillors Accountable, They Won't Run Again

Say that again, slowly. Now show me why that is a problem. So what if they don't? Is our only alternative crap leadership over no leadership? How do we know that will happen? A 2022 study from MIT's Sloan School of Management demonstrated that people leave their jobs due to toxic workplace culture. Isn't it possible that if Councils resumed their once prestigious roles, people who care about the community might be interested in running?

Will those people run if we make training mandatory? I'm not saying that all Councillors need it; many are capable, love their community, and do a better job than I ever could. But making training mandatory would weed out the ones whose sole purpose for running for election was to fire the foreman. And who needs him? (or her?).

Better training doesn't hurt anyone. I'll go one step further. Being a Councillor should be a paid position requiring qualifications like those found everywhere in government, except "municipal." At the very least, councillors should understand that their authority comes from the province, not the people who elected them. They can serve those who elected them better if they know and follow the legislation.

Moving Forward

Our communities need better laws that protect administrators and hold councillors accountable. Enforceable laws that don't depend on the person being abused to come up with the funds for the lawyer are needed.

If local governments adopted strong, clear policies and offered the appropriate training, municipal administrators might be easier to find and certainly easier to keep.

Final Thoughts

I would love to hear from anyone with ideas about how we can support the administrators in pushing for change or how we can change this system. Our economic well-being is at stake when small populations are at risk. Their best chance at survival is not to deal with things that could easily be prevented if we just figured it out.

 
 
 
bottom of page