Court decision on motion to end homelessness to be released same day that Regina budget debate begins

A Court of King's Bench judge says he will issue his decision Wednesday after hearing arguments Tuesday on a rare lawsuit brought by a sitting Regina councillor against the current city manager.

Hanging in the balance is a proposal that would fund attempts to end homelessness throughout the city by boosting the municipal property tax "mill rate" by 21.7 per cent in 2023 and another 4.24 per cent in 2024.

The additional funding would help the city pay for the estimated $125 million needed to implement a housing-first model to address homelessness.

Council had directed city administration to include the cost in its proposed budget for the next two years. Instead, administration left it out of the budget estimation, and instead included a separate section laying out the expected costs and explaining why it hadn't included them in the budget.

On one side of the lawsuit is Coun. Andrew Stevens (Ward 3) and Regina resident Florence Stratton, who are being represented by Coun. Dan LeBlanc, (Ward 6), who is also a lawyer. 

LeBlanc is seeking a judicial order from Court of King's Bench Justice John Morrall that would force city administration to include an estimated $24.9 million in the proposed budget to end homelessness. The figure is based on what councillors were told in preliminary estimates, LeBlanc says.

On the other side of the legal battlefield is city manager Niki Anderson, who is being represented by Milad Alishahi. 

On Tuesday, Alishahi argued that the issue in front of the court was purely political and does not call for any legal remedies.

"The judiciary should not be used as a weapon by politicians or their supporters to compel municipal staff in the name of progress," he said.

Here is how the City of Regina got to this moment. 

A lawsuit over process

In June, council unanimously voted to direct city administration to figure out how much it would cost to end homelessness in the city and have that "clearly demarcated in a line item of its own" in the city's proposed 2023 budget, according to meeting minutes published on the city's website. 

In the preliminary budget, city administration provided the initial estimates on increasing the mill rate, but did not include a recommendation to move forward on the project, citing its high cost to the city property owners. 

The increase would translate to an average of $40.59 a month ($487.08 annually) per homeowner in 2023 and $11.90 a month ($142.80 annually) in 2024, administration said.

The lawsuit against Anderson was filed with the court on Nov. 22, a day after the proposed budget was revealed to the public.

'About the principle, not the politics'

Throughout his arguments on Tuesday, LeBlanc stressed that his clients are not attempting to target Anderson, who became the first woman to serve as city manager in Regina's history after starting the the job in November.

He said the court application is not even about the policy of addressing homelessness, it's about process and whether the city manager's office followed the directions of city council. 

"This application is about the principle, not the politics," said LeBlanc. "If unelected officials can choose to not implement the decision of elected bodies then the system simply falls apart."

He argued that the motion made on June 15 was the sole direction provided by council to Anderson and that it was only partially followed — something she did not have the discretion to do on her own. 

Alishahi pointed to a meeting of the city's executive council in September where council received an information update on the budget.

He said some councillors at that meeting made it clear that they shared the view the motion would be an option in the proposed budget and not automatically calculated in there.

LeBlanc said the meeting minutes don't reflect that, and pointed out that during that same meeting interim city manager Jim Nicol said the motion to end homelessness would be included in the budget. 

He added that the only way to rescind a motion from council is to follow the bylaw that outlines the procedure.

That didn't happen in this case, he said.

Alishahi said that there is no reason for the court to issue an order. Council members could simply move to include the motion in the finalized budget.

LeBlanc disagreed, saying his client's application is meant to specifically address the preliminary budget.

The motion council passed unanimously in June does not contemplate the finalized budget and neither should the judge's ruling, he said.

If the homelessness funding was to be included in the proposed 2023-2024 municipal budget, there is no guarantee it would pass council. 

Mayor Sandra Masters has made it clear she would not vote for it, while at least three other councillors have publicly expressed concern over even a minor increase to the mill rate. 

However, LeBlanc has said the inclusion of the motion in the preliminary budget would require councillors to vote to remove it — essentially forcing them to explain why they believe ending homelessness is not worth addressing. 

It is a political gamble that is now in the hands of Morall, who said he'll release his decision sometime on Wednesday, the same day council will begin finalizing the budget.