Marks hopeful about impending agglo reform

The minority Liberal government is introducing an omnibus bill dealing with several issues affecting municipalities, including the much-criticized agglomeration councils.

Among the measures said to be included will be the simplification of the current municipal taxation system — which now involves three bills — to a single invoice covering local, agglomeration and school taxes.

"We've always said there should be a single municipal tax bill," said Marks. "It's not the fact of it that is necessarily the most important.

"While it is more efficient, what's going to be important is what's the total amount of that and what responsibilities will be agglo responsibilities and what responsibilities will be local. That's going to be very important to us."

Marks, who was among the municipal officials consulted by the municipal affairs ministry in preparation for the reform, said very little affecting the Montreal region is initially expected to be included in the draft bill.

However, by mid-June, when the final version is likely to be passed, more details should have been added. "Throughout the course of the next month, there will be lots added that will relate to Montreal, we've been told," Marks said. "The minister confirmed that."

After spending most of the past year boycotting monthly meetings of the Montreal Agglomeration Council, Marks and many of the other mayors of the island's 15 demerged cities finally decided to return to the council's latest session on April 26.

She admitted that advance knowledge of the government's decision to finally make good on promises to fix the agglomeration system — as well as intervention by the opposition Action Démocratique party — influenced the mayors into returning to the council.

"It was very much related to that," said Marks. "We said we wouldn't go back until there was a reason to do so …

"(Municipal Affairs Minister) Nathalie Normandeau said that the government intended to make major changes to the agglomeration and we had met with the ADQ who felt that there were major changes needed or the abolition of it — either one — and that they were willing to support those.

"And so we said, in good faith, we will go back because we believe that there are changes coming, not because we believe that the structure as it stands is any more valid than it was before."