Charity organization permit denied

By John Watson Local Journalism Initiative Reporter

A local registered charity organization is debating with the Wheatland County regarding a development permit application which was denied at the March 14 meeting of the Municipal Planning Commission.

The permit application was submitted by Janneane Madill for a home-based business, in order to obtain a development permit for the sanctuary and to mitigate concerns raised by her neighbours regarding vehicle traffic generated on her property. 

Her application was first presented to the Municipal Planning Commission on Feb. 14. Information regarding the initial presentation was provided regarding the sanctuary’s activities and processes, animal health for incoming animals, how deceased animals are dealt with, type of animal shelters used, types of animals accommodated, weed control, manure management, fundraising, traffic parking and signage.

“The original application that we had sent in was based on us having a handful of tours out here … with very minimal people from the months of July to September, and we host a Mother’s Day event … and then a pumpkin drop-off after Halloween,” said Madill.

County administration recommended approving the permit for a two-year term, subject to conditions, as presented in the report to the Municipal Planning Commission.

If the application was approved, the subject property would be designated ag general, meaning permits will not be required for an ag operation. The subject property would have also been designated ag general, meaning permits will not be required for an ag operation. 

In the original presentation of the permit on Feb. 14, the concern of the neighbouring properties regarding the application was dust generated by incoming and outgoing traffic, to which a dust control condition was applied to the prospective permit.

Madill said she was extremely displeased with the county’s process that she was not granted an opportunity to speak to her application.

“They did not even ask for clarity … they did not obviously acknowledge the fact that I was even in the room prepared with my information,” she said. 

“There were a few things that we were hoping to correct. For instance, police officers said there had been multiple complaints held against us, which, when we (looked into it), we had only been connected to one complaint over the course of the (indicated) period, which was a parking complaint.”

Madill added one of the complaints noted against her was made in 2014, prior to when she occupied the property.

Scott Klassen expressed concerns regarding the application during the March 14 meeting of the Municipal Planning Commission.

“The problem with this business is, it is not really a business. It is a fundraising activity. The ag side of it … they are allowed to do what they are doing. The business side of it is what has had problems with the neighbours,” he said. “This was a business that was not approved to start with, it was caught, so to speak, and we have to deal with it as such.”

He suggested there would continue to be concerns regarding traffic moving to and from the sanctuary site, and how it would impact the adjacent landowners.

Klassen motioned to deny the application as proposed, which was approved by the Commission, 3-2. 

Madill said she would be looking to appeal the commission’s decision, though said she was unaware of when the issue would next be addressed.