A Quebec judge has dismissed the arguments of the Municipality of Alleyn-et-Cawood in its fight over payment of its 2024 shares to MRC Pontiac. 

The municipality has not paid its 2024 municipal shares, arguing they were calculated using a flawed system, but in a decision delivered on July 13, the judge concluded their arguments were “legally unfounded.” The decision can be found online at citoyens.soquij.qc.ca (French only). 

The conflict between the MRC and the municipality came to a head in 2024. Following the sale of a number of lots in the municipality for over their assessed value, the municipality saw its projected property evaluations jump significantly, causing its municipal shares to jump by more than 150 per cent between 2023 and 2024, from $112,539 to $289,148. Shares are the money,  determined by property values, that municipalities pay to the MRC for services. Residents and elected officials from the municipality contested the amount, arguing the method used for calculating them was flawed, and filed a petition in 2024 with the ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing (MAMH) to intervene. In the meantime, the municipality refused to pay the shares they deemed incorrect. 

The municipality requested that the MRC remove the comparative factor from the calculation of shares. The comparative factor is a number determined by the difference between the year one property values and the standardized property values produced in the following two years of evaluations. This number is meant to give a general sense of the taxable value of properties in a given municipality, and it’s this number the MRC has historically used to calculate municipal shares. 

In December 2024, council adjusted its share formula so that comparative factor was only considered for 50 per cent of the share calculation. However, the revised share formula contained a clause that stated two per cent interest per month would be charged on any outstanding 2024 shares not paid by Dec. 31, 2024, as Alleyn-et-Cawood had not paid any of their portion.

In January 2025, the MRC Pontiac council of mayors voted to hire the law firm Deveau Dufour Mottet Avocats for the purposes of recovering the shares from the municipality, along with interest and costs, at a price tag of roughly $200/hour.

In the July 13 decision, Judge Stéphane D. Tremblay’s analysis states that the municipality’s witness, appraiser Charles Lepoutre, had produced a report arguing that the MRC assessor “made methodological errors that led to an unreasonable result.”

Judge Tremblay wrote that regardless of whether or not the process is flawed, it remains the law.

“The MRC argues that even if, at the end of a full trial, Alleyn-et-Cawood were to demonstrate that its assessor’s approach was flawed, or even unreasonable, the median proportion and the presumed comparative factor established by the Minister would still remain valid,” he wrote in French. “Therefore, the law requires the MRC to use these values ​​to calculate the shares of its expenses to be allocated among the local municipalities. This claim by the MRC is correct. Indeed, the MRC did not make the decision establishing the comparative factor and the median proportion. The Municipal Finance Act explicitly states that these figures are deemed to have been established by the Minister.”

He wrote that allowing one municipality out of 18 to dispute its shares after the fact would impact the rest of the MRC. 

“Allowing one [municipality] to contest its share by retroactively challenging the assessor’s method could disrupt the MRC’s budgetary balance,” he wrote. “Indeed, any reduction granted to a local municipality would result in an increased tax burden for the others or a budget deficit for the MRC. While the strict application of the parameters established by the Minister may seem rigid, it is nevertheless justified by the need to maintain the financial stability of the MRC and its constituent local municipalities.”

He wrote that the municipality’s arguments were “legally unfounded” and accepted the MRC’s motion to dismiss the case, adding that Lepoutre’s report was “manifestly irrelevant to the resolution of this dispute.” 

“Although case law dictates exercising the utmost caution before rejecting a defense at the preliminary stage, the current dispute raises a purely legal question,” he wrote. “The facts alleged by Alleyn-et-Cawood, even if they were accepted as true regarding the alleged errors of the assessor, cannot legally override the MRC’s mandatory obligation to collect its share of expenses based on the deemed values ​​established by the Minister. Consequently, Alleyn-et-Cawood’s defense is legally unfounded.”

Alleyn-et-Cawood mayor Sidney Squitti and director general Isabelle Cardinal met with MRC Pontiac warden Jane Toller and director general Kim Lesage on Aug. 27 to discuss the case, and the options going forward. 

Cardinal declined to comment on the situation when reached on Friday. 

“Right now, I won’t comment on it because we’re still in discussion with the MRC. We’re in communication right now. Once everything is done, we have a clear decision and everything is resolved, I won’t mind having an interview,” she said. “We’re just right now looking at all our options, and we’ll go from there.”

Toller declined to comment on what was discussed at the meeting  but said that there were discussions with the council of mayors over how to move forward.

She said that while the situation was unfortunate, the council didn’t have a choice. 

“Personally, I do feel badly for Alleyn-et-Cawood. I know that we were being criticized for taking them to court, but we had no choice, legally, that’s what we had to do,” she said. “Municipalities have to pay their shares. They have to pay within the given time and that’s all I can say.”