Tensions rose to new heights Monday night during the regular meeting of City Council when a resolution was brought forward to rescind the letter of understanding between the City and Vale about the new Grant In Lieu.

 

The debated started at a fever pitch with Councillor Ron Matechuk, who brought forward the resolution. He said that the GIL wasn’t negotiated because the committee didn’t do their job.

 

He added that Councillor Byer said that she was in over her head, trying to push his point that he thinks the committee didn’t know what they were doing.

 

Councillor Byer responded later to his comments, saying that her words were taken out of context and abused by Councillor Matechuk. She added that no GIL has ever been truly negotiated, as Vale has an agreement with the Province as to how much they are obligated to pay.

 

Read: "Fenske: Grant In Lieu Never Has Been, Never Will Be A Negotiation"

 

The minimum amount the company is required to pay is based on the number of employees in Thompson, which makes the amount close to $1M. The amount, which Vale put on the table, would see $4.8M come in year one, a base of $3M in year two, and a flat $3M in years three and four.

 

Councillors Matechuk and Wong had to be warned by Mayor Fenske multiple times to be careful as the resolution to rescind the GIL with Vale was debated. The warnings came as the Mayor said that they were close to breaching the code of conduct that all City Councillors are held to. Councillor Wong was on the verge of being asked to leave Council Chambers after saying that City leadership had abused and manipulated the entire process.

 

Most of what was said by Councillors Wong and Matechuk was spoken to the public instead of the rest of council. The content of their comments was directed at the members of the GIL committee, Councillors Valentino, Smook and Byer, and was attacking the work that they did.

 

Read: "City Council Approves New Grant In Lieu With Vale"

 

Councillor Judy Kolada said that the early GIL's were more substantial even though Inco wasn't making a profit in Thompson at the time. Councillor Byer countered Councillor Kolada's remarks, saying that it's an attempt to delude people by saying that City always came ahead in previous GILs. She mentioned that she wrote the press release in 1999 for Inco, trying to spin the GIL where the City took a bigger hit than they are taking now.

 

Councillor Ellis said that by bringing this resolution forward, Councillor Matechuk, as well as Councillor Wong, are asking council to enter a “high stakes poker game” where they could lose the offer Vale has put on the table.

 

Councillor Foley echoed the thoughts of Councillor Ellis, saying that he hopes that the motion to rescind, as well as the debate, doesn’t “come back to bite the City”.

 

The resolution was defeated 6-3.

 

The Vale board of directors still has to approve the GIL before it becomes official.