Calgary regional growth plan lacking

By Sharon McLeay Times Contributor

Special circumstances require special meetings and Wheatland County council held a special meeting on Oct. 2, regardless of the stormy weather.
Council reviewed the Calgary Regional Growth Management preliminary plan. The public and councillors had only 14 days to review the plan from its issue date and for a reply to be sent by 4:30 p.m., Oct. 2.
According to Wheatland County’s legal counsel, Joanne Klauer, the document lacked aspects and needed more clarification. The plan is considered interim, but municipalities were not given operational direction for the three years until it becomes permanent.
One initial change noted is that the whole of Wheatland County is referenced in the plan, while only a portion is within the plan’s designated area.
“It is not realistic for ratepayers on the eastern side, down through Bassano and through Hussar up to Dalum, to pay for services they will very likely never use. That is why you have to define it to that specific area,” said Councillor Ben Armstrong.
Recreation corridors were limited to trail areas and considered too narrow in scope.
“From a planning standpoint, staff has concerns with this definition and it should include other forms of recreation, allow for recreation nodes and expand beyond merely trail activity,” said Alan Parkin, Wheatland County chief administrative officer.
There was also a request to clarify energy transmission corridors and for regional or inter-municipal transportation to be included in the plan.
A serious and perplexing deviation from normal democratic operations was included, assuming a non-attending member’s vote constitutes a supportive vote for any issue under discussion.
“This is undemocratic and not a traditional voting structure for democratic governance model,” stated Klauer.
Speculation was that it might be a method of enforcing attendance.
“It is not consistent… just be consistent. I have never heard of that before in Canada,” said Parkin. “The municipal governance is quite clear on how it works (voting systems) in municipalities, so why should this be any different?”
Forcing attendance also constitutes cost and time management issues for members, when issues don’t pertain to their area.
“It forces the representative of Wheatland County to attend 40 to 50 meetings a year at a huge cost, over and above the other costs,” said Parkin.
Wheatland County staff along with councillor Rex Harrison made the point that it may be prudent to always attend, to protect Wheatland County ratepayers’ interests and give support to other rural members, under the given parameters listed in the plan. It was suggested that electronic participation be allowed to save travel time, and allow for inclement weather and conflicting schedule demands.
Klauer stated that the plan was unclear in promotion of long-term sustainability, economic well-being and competitiveness of the Calgary metropolitan region.
“These are very broad statements with no definitions of sustainability and economic well-being. Furthermore, it notes competitiveness. It is unclear with whom the Calgary Metropolitan board competes,” said Klauer.
There was confusion about whether members were competing within the partnership with each other, or whether the document meant other parties outside the regional area. There has been some indication that provincial directives encourage competitiveness over collaboration between regions within the province.
Cost-sharing of regional projects is mandated in the document, without parameters to how the cost sharing will be conducted. The county would like to know if population and/or land base is the criteria. Separating Wheatland County’s population not covered in the plan from the cost formula will be challenging. It was noted that the board has the ability to requisition additional costs at any time for projects. Council wanted to ensure that it only pay for things that benefit the county’s ratepayers covered under the region. There was some fear there could be a strain on a municipality’s budget, especially in overrun and servicing issues.
“The province of Alberta has clearly stated, in a couple meetings that I have been in, that in five years they want to pay nothing towards this,” said Parkin. “A comment was made at a meeting a couple of months ago that costs would be split 10 ways and I don’t believe that is fair.”
No public consultation or appeal processes are included in the plan. The county considered this unacceptable and asked due process as per the Municipal Governance Act be included. Councillor Brenda Knight said she would like to see agricultural land excluded from the plan. She gave the example of the farms around Cheadle. All bylaws and land development issues, such as ASPs and MDPs made by the county, have to adhere to the specifications set out in the plan and receive approval by the regional board. It effectively adds another level of ambiguous red tape for citizens to negotiate, not to mention how decision-making may delay business as usual. It may extend the processes by an extra month or more, which costs money for developers and contractors.
The strongest disagreement is still the disproportionate voting system, which gives Calgary and those it influences greater clout. Klauer suggested there could be a different voting structure considered on issues that don’t have a clear regional scope. Wheatland County council wants to see municipalities given the last right to veto actions that might have detrimental effects on the municipality and its ratepayers.
“In close votes, where Wheatland County plays a decisive role, it will only be discounted by Calgary. It doesn’t matter how close the vote is, if Calgary doesn’t agree with it, it is not going to happen,” said Armstrong.
Armstrong referred to the recent blockade Edmonton played in the Capital Regional board denial for expansion by the County of Beaumont, because Edmonton held the majority population base and veto vote. Eighteen of the 24 members supported Beaumont’s request for annexation and development plans without winning the vote.
“In Alberta, the democratic vote is based on the population and you aren’t given an extra vote because you have more land, more money or prestige. You are given a vote because you are one person,” said reeve Glenn Koester.
The process will be ongoing and many delicate negotiations will be necessary to bring benefits to all the members in the Calgary region.
“If we are in, we are going to be in and participate as every councillor participates at this table,” said Koester. “We keep that as our goal and mission statement. We are in there for Wheatland County’s benefit and we will pay our share for that benefit. We are in there for the greater good and we believe those who are receiving the services should pay for the services, and those receiving benefit for the board will pay for the board.”