BANFF – An alleged conflict of interest against a Banff councillor from a previously anonymous complainant was dismissed by council during a marathon meeting.
Coun. Peter Poole was cleared of a conflict of interest, which had been launched July 5 and made by Adam Waterous – the proponent for the potential redevelopment of the train station lands – after his wife Jan Waterous disclosed him as the anonymous complainant.
The announcement grinded the remainder of the meeting to a crawl, led to a nearly 90-minute in camera session with legal counsel and ultimately saw much of the agenda being pushed back to the next meeting, including the motion to gain clarity on the scope of the train station project.
Poole, who brought forward the motion to remove the proposed gondola terminus from the train station area redevelopment plan (ARP), said the purpose was to ensure the Town of Banff does not overstep its footing in relation to the incorporated agreement with Parks Canada.
“The language of the incorporated agreements actually bonds, not just council members, but planners. If we fail to abide by the rules of Parks Canada and lose our planning authority, that won't be very good,” he said. “It might not happen the first time, it might be fifth time, but Jasper, by comparison, was not recorded the same planning authority that Banff was allowed.
“It seems among some people in Parks Canada that Banff sometimes goes too far. I think it's better for Banff residents to be represented by municipal government and uphold the goals of the park.”
Parks Canada rejected the original Liricon Capital proposal in 2020 after it had been submitted in 2018 for a gondola from the Banff townsite to the summit of Mount Norquay.
At the time, Parks Canada said the proposal did not meet with their policies “on limits to development and ski area management.”
However, the Waterous’ continued to explore the potential for a modified gondola to Norquay’s base, but nothing has been formally submitted to the Town of Banff or Parks Canada.
Jan Waterous, the managing partner of Liricon Capital, said in feedback from Parks Canada on their first proposal, they learned a summit gondola was not permitted.
However, she said they had been told a gondola terminus that is not above the ski run would first have to be approved by the Town of Banff, followed by Parks Canada deciding if it was acceptable, and then proceed with a potential second proposal.
She said it is a “chicken and egg situation,” where one has to come prior to the other, though no formal application has yet been made.
Town of Banff CAO Kelly Gibson said they had seen correspondence with Parks Canada, but nothing in regards to the second proposed gondola. Dave Michaels, the manager of development services, also told council there had not been any formal correspondence with the ARP.
Poole also said he had not seen a public communication from Parks Canada to the Town of Banff a second proposed gondola is under consideration in the public record.
“The evidence I have to receive as an elected representative is evidence from Parks Canada and of what Parks Canada decisions are. It puts me in a bind. … I hope you acknowledge the duty I have for transparency to the public is slightly different interest and duty that the interest of a developer, which I’ve worn that hat,” Poole said. “It’s a different type of duty. We’ll work out, we’ll pay attention to your interests, we’ll treat them honourably and with respect and we will follow the law that is before us.”
Waterous said they are continuing to proceed through the public engagement process and will likely bring forward the ARP to council in December or January.
“This gondola proposal does not exist yet. It is not sitting on anyone’s desk waiting to be reviewed. It exists only as an idea,” she said, adding they had been told Parks Canada would be open to approving a smaller two station gondola if a terminus was granted. ‘This is what we plan to pursue and Parks Canada is very well aware of our intentions.”
Liricon owns the Mount Norquay ski hill and has a longterm lease from CP Railway for the train station and the surrounding lands on either side of the tracks. They have expressed a vision for a passenger rail line between Banff and Calgary, which has been gaining potential investment in recent weeks.
Invest Alberta and the Canada Infrastructure Bank signed a detailed memorandum of understanding in July to potentially help financially fund the estimated $1 billion project.
The long discussed project is part of a vision for a car-free Banff – similar to Zermatt, Switzerland and its multi-modal transit system beneath Matterhorn Mountain – and the redevelopment of the 17.4-hectare train station lands, Waterous said.
She said they have met with 35 local businesses, community leaders and Indigenous groups since the spring to discuss the draft ARP for the lands.
Town council would adopt the ARP, if passed, while Parks Canada would need to sign off as part of the incorporation agreement with the Town and the federal government.
However, under the incorporation agreement, the Town of Banff has to conform to the Banff National Park Management Plan.
Following Waterous naming her husband as the complainant, members of staff and some councillors were visibly surprised by the public declaration. Gibson made a point of order and a discussion on the process of what could and could not be publicly discussed ultimately gave way to council going in camera.
While Waterous was prevented from expressing the reasons for the complaint in the public meeting after staff expressed concerns under the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act, she clarified them in an interview with the Outlook. She said she and her husband were disappointed in the complaint being dismissed, but respected council’s decision.
She said it stemmed from Poole’s longterm lease of the Juniper Hotel on the lower slopes of Mount Norquay, particularly in relation to the longterm improvement of the Cascade Wildlife Corridor.
If a gondola terminus were approved by the Town of Banff and given the OK by Parks Canada, she said it could lead to the closure of the Norquay guest traffic on the access road leaving only the Juniper Hotel as a potential structural barrier in the corridor.
"We believe it's reasonable to assume that should a gondola remove all Norquay guest traffic, which it will, there'll be mounting pressure to remove the last and remaining private operation: The Juniper Hotel. And this outcome would be unwelcome by Councillor Poole,” she said.
Poole told the Outlook when he acquired the lease of the Juniper Hotel, they spent three years of wildlife monitoring that was authorized by Parks Canada, received a report by noted biologist Dr. Carolyn Callaghan and continues to work with Parks Canada.
“A wildlife corridor is a very worthwhile discussion, apart from the railway land area redevelopment plan. I'm more than happy to engage in a discussion or learned debate with the Waterous’ about how to improve wildlife corridor,” he said. "I think we probably have a common interest. And if we want to talk about wildlife movement in the Bow Valley, we probably should do it from somewhere up near Castle junction, all the way through to Seebe, and maybe Morley. And we should think through a variety of things along the way, including the Cascade Wildlife Corridor.”
Groups such as the Bow Valley Naturalists and the Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society have been vocal in the past in restricting access to the ski hill access road to further protect the wildlife corridor instead of a gondola.
Waterous said they were recommended to keep the complaint confidential – but was unable to say by who – to encourage the ability to speak freely without “personal attack, intimidation or retribution.”
She pointed to Poole’s comments at the July 12 meeting, to the Outlook and on a personal blog as “ridiculing the process” and potentially bullying.
Waterous also said they believe a July 20 email to the Banff Centre’s general counsel David Cox by Poole’s assistant to contact the board of governors – which has Adam Waterous as the chair – should have been disclosed to council.
However, Poole told the Outlook he and his wife – who has taught at the Banff Centre – have had a long connection with the centre and were reaching out to learn the next time the board of directors are in Banff, either in September or November, to host them at their home.
“That’s a separate thing from a gondola,” he said. “If there’s any connections in Ms. Waterous mind there’s a connection wit the Banff Centre and the gondola, that’s part of the development package we’ve not heard. … I don’t think many other people in the public meeting would be interested in hearing who goes to whose dinner party.”
Banff council unanimously dismissed the complaint and directed staff to review the process of withholding the name of complainants who make a formal complaint. Council also elected to keep the briefing and attachments from the closed meeting confidential, with Poole and Coun. Ted Christensen voting against.
A motion was also approved – with Couns. Grant Canning and Brian Standish opposed – for staff to seek legal opinion before the next meeting to see if the complaint can be publicly released.
