|
Local: Failure to plan is. . .
Commentary by Jeff Burgar
for South Peace News
Planning for the future isn’t a big deal in local government circles, or for that matter, in most of rural Alberta.
It’s like the tragic death of a 10-year-old on a First Nations reserve in Saskatchewan. Dogs are a problem here in our own M.D. of Big Lakes. It wasn’t all that long ago roving packs were also an issue in High Prairie.
And why?
Surprisingly, clean up efforts met with resistance. It wasn’t, and probably still isn’t, unusual for some dense dog owner to threaten dog catchers and local officials with violence, “if you dare touch my dog.’’
So far, saner heads look at the future, decide the community they want, and prevail in most districts. Sadly, not everywhere.
Planning cottage lots, an acreage subdivision or an industrial park falls in the same category of thinking. Most people don’t know, and don’t care. That is, until they get mixed up in the middle of something. In other words, the dog bites them or their kid.
A concentrated farm operation next door. A campground. A gas plant. A new road. These things can creep right up on landowners. Arguing “you ain’t gonna dare touch my property’’ makes no difference if that new development follows all the rules.
So, here we have the M.D. of Big Lakes holding open houses for a new Municipal Development Plan.
When High Prairie held their meetings two years ago, perhaps five people showed up. Today, some don’t like the new seed cleaning plant or industrial park. The proposed group home and the highways maintenance yard riled citizens, few of whom came to any meetings. This is a problem. But outside of paid officials, not everybody can make every meeting either.
The bottom line is still the same. If you don’t come to the meetings, don’t count on your neighbour or the business halfway across the province to look after your interests.
Second, don’t count on your elected officials to do what you might think is the right thing either, even if you think the right thing is obvious. They certainly didn’t in Saskatchewan.
Oops!
Last week, we made a case in this column for the idea of cutting the number of High Prairie town councillors to five from seven would barely save $16,000 per year.
Unfortunately, we omitted the $350 per month paid to councillors no matter what. Times two councillors, this amounts to an extra $8,400 per year. This brings the total amount that could be saved to $24,400 per year. We apologize for the oversight.
< Previous
Home
Next >
|
