The Trust of Transparency

Residents elect a government for a reason. They have families, work and a myriad of personal obligations. They do not have the time or information needed to govern by plebiscite.

Our democracy is based on electing knowledgeable people of high moral and ethical principles. We then entrust them to run our municipality, province and nation in our best interests.


Transparency is recognized as a valuable tool to hold elected officials responsible and accountable to those who elect them. There has been a lot of talk in the media and government circles about transparency.


“Be open and honest with your citizens”; “Shine the light on secrecy.” Is it motherhood and apple pie rhetoric with elected officials running to the social media and TV interviews in an attempt to prove how very transparent they are? Are we just shouting clichés at each other?


What does transparency and openness mean in the real world? I have a very simple definition and code that I live by personally and am committed to professionally.


Transparency to me means: if there is no legal reason for information to be held private, then that information should be made public, available to all.


I believe that without transparency, there can be no trust.


I believe that the public does have a right to information that does not infringe on the rights of others.


The Municipal Government Act and the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act direct that: matters of commercial (land dealings), legal (contractual matters) and labour relations are confidential and must not be put in the public realm.


These acts were created to protect the public interest.


In order to be truly open and transparent, in order for there to be public assurance that elected officials are not using the system for their own benefit, information must be accessible, whenever legally possible.

Meetings must be open to the public and media. Bylaws and budgets must be open to public scrutiny and

discussion.


Decisions must not stand in isolation — the public must have access to the path that led to that decision.
I have championed the webcasting and archiving of public council meetings. The acceptance by council is an example of how council has cracked open a window to transparency.


It is now time to open the door. Let’s look at our council workshops. These meetings are, I’m told, “technically” open to the public, and yet, strangely, we do not advertise them to the public.


I see this as an opportunity to engage the public. I welcome residents watching councillors filter through the onerous amounts of information and studies to make decisions on building a better community.


So many residents ask for more information. They want to understand and support the decision makers — they want to be a part of the process.


Residents should be made to feel welcome at council workshops.


Now let’s talk about these private or “in-camera” meetings, which are held before every public meeting and last about four hours.


There has been a fair amount of discussion lately in local social media on what issues should be private and what should be held in public.


If there is no legal reason for information to be held private, then comfortable or not comfortable, that information should be made public.


Did you know that our municipality will not even release the subject of issues that we discuss in our private meetings?
Other governments, including the City of Edmonton publicise an agenda for their private meetings so that taxpayers can at least know what topic is being discussed behind closed doors.


Because I believe strongly in the value and necessity of transparency, I have found myself conflicted over a number of topics discussed in private meetings by this council — but that is a discussion for another time.

Council Meeting Highlights - Jan. 10, 2012

Council Meeting Highlights

Tuesday’s meeting included a review of the Capital Region Boards activities in the past year, and presentation of reports and requests from several departments. Information on all of the background reports and minutes

Webcast

To obtain the rationale behind decisions made by your elected representatives tune into the webcast. The webcast is timed and titled so that you can refer immediately to your topic of interest. Videos are stored for six months. 

Community Social Services Grant Program 2012

A total of $225,000 in grants has been approved by Council. Partnership grants of $141,000 were allocated to: Strathcona Youth Justice, Strathcona County (SC) Mediation Society, Boys & Girls Club, Linking Generations and Parents Empowering Parents. Operating grants of 84,000 were allocated to Robin Hood, Big Brothers Big Sisters, altView Foundation, SafePlace Shelter, Saffron Sexual Assault Centre, SC Overacting Imaginations Youth Theatre Society.

Applications for this funding are reviewed by an Advisory Committee and serve to expand the scope of social services programming to fill identified gaps in our community.

Economic Development & Tourism Committee

The Economic Development brought forward an update indicating an upward trending of retail sales and industrial leasing. Both office leasing and housing prices are holding steady. Housing starts are lower than 2010. The department is working on baseline statistics to provide meaningful comparables for more detailed reporting of business attraction, retention, expansion and growth in the future. Current initiatives include a business ambassador program and a new business mentorship program. Report available here.  

Traffic Bylaw 13-2011 Passed Third Reading

Nine bylaws on traffic regulations have been repealed and rolled into one more comprehensive bylaw. Council passed third reading of this bylaw which includes weight restrictions, transportation of dangerous goods, special roadway events, construction activity, and parking. More information will be available through local media advertisements.

Emergency Management Bylaw approved

Council approved an important piece of policy that brings the Strathcona County’s Management program in line with provincial legislation and industry best practises. Bylaw 1-2012 replaces a 1994 bylaw. The new policy is more inclusive and clearly outlines roles and responsibilities in the event that a state of local emergency is declared. In the 1994 bylaw the Disaster Services Committee consisted of two elected officials: the Mayor and Deputy Mayor. The new bylaw includes a change in that all of Council are on the new Emergency Advisory Committee. The implementation arm is the Emergency Management Agency. This internal operations group will liaise with the province and other nongovernmental groups in the preparation and implementation of a Municipal Emergency Plan to mitigate damage and protect the lives and property our citizens.

Budget Amendments

Two changes were approved by Council that will impact residents in positive ways.

The Biomass Demonstration facility  has exceeded cost project estimates but will be receiving a further $350,000 from the Federation of Municipalities Green Municipal Fund that is allocated to emissions monitoring projects. The remaining $40,000 will be drawn from Strathcona County Utilities Reserve.

The 2011 budget was amended to allow for $323,501 expenditure for twelve ‘Life Pac 15’ monitors. Ambulances and select front line fire trucks will carry this improved technology equipment that will provide a broader scope of patient assessment and treatment.

Repeal of Cellular Phone Bylaw 27-2009

With the passing of the provincial Distracted Driving Law, which came into effect on September 1^st. Driving Council repealed the municipal cellular phone bylaw.

Councillor Reports

I would like to acknowledge an initiative of staff and the Seniors Advisory Committee who assembled and found sponsors for our first Strathcona County Seniors Calendar. It has timely safety, fire and crime prevention tips in it. Residents who would like one of these free calendars can contact 464.4044 or visit this site.

Residents often express interest in the Priority Fund policy and requests which generally receive rubber stamp approval by council. At this council meeting,  I voted against a $4,500 request to pay for the airfare for three cadets from the RCACS (Royal Canadian Air Cadet Squadron) to fly to the United Kingdom. 


This was presented as a written motion for $2,500 but amended verbally to $4,500. The supporting document from the RCAF Edmonton office requested $1,500 and did not indicate that the beneficiary would be a Strathcona County resident. Given that information,  I decided to not support the use of tax payers money for this endeavour.

At this point, Council has very broad and flexible guidelines on spending taxpayers money from the Priority Fund. I have a Building Strong Communities Committee that reviews most of the applications for my ward funding. One of their criteria is that the ward priority funds specifically benefit a number of residents within the ward and are spent within the ward. This is a good example of why I initially supported removing priority funds from the budget and have requested more rigid guidelines.

E News Bulletin

I send out an E News Bulletin about four times a month to residents. It is an opportunity for me to inform you of events and matters of interest to your family and neighbours in a timely manner. These electronic news flashes also help me to get your input and touch base with you. Contact me at carr@strathcona.ab.ca to receive your copy!

Coffee & Politics

Residents have been asking questions about the event coming up next Tuesday, December 20th at the Summerwood Second Cup at Lakeland Dr and Cloverbar Road.

I invited all nominees that have declared in the PC party race to come out to get together with residents.

Please understand my intent is not to promote a particular party, and will not use my political position to support any particular candidate or any specific party. I have no wish to influence my residents. I believe in the process - and that residents have minds of their own!!
My goal is to encourage participation in all levels of government and thus I hope encourage a greater turn out at elections of all levels and parties.

Next Tuesday is organized as a fireside chat - an opportunity for residents to have one on one conversation with candidates. We will seat each candidate at separate tables to avoid a forum or debate enviornment. - You see this is not a forum or a debate - this is a way for residents to come and ask their own questions in person.

Some residents have said they want an opportunity to visit with representatives from other parties - so be it. If you like this idea - I certainly will be pleased to organize another one in the New Year when an election is called - so that people can come and chat in person with candidates from other parties.

In the mean time come out on the Dec. 20, 2011 to raise your issues with the canditates who are trying to represent you.

County’s 2012-2014 Business Plan & 2012 Budget

The budget passed in this weeks Council meeting generally maintains
municipal, utility and library service levels at the 2011 standard. The
municipal tax rate required to support the municipal operating budget of
239.9 million dollars and consolidated capital budget of 101 million
dollars is 4.84%. However, your final total on your tax bill will include
seniors services plus library services plus school taxes.

I had difficulties with several areas of the budget this year and
wanted to explain to you why I voted against two of the budget
recommendations.

The budget theme brought forward by administration was presented as
responsibly delivering quality services while preparing for transition
to sustainability. The goal is balance: quality services with acceptable
taxes.

Council was told of a need for a solid and secure transition to
sustainability. Administration's desire is to develop a methodology in
budget process and mind set to get us there – to achieve a stable
practice of budget in an unstable world market.

Administration pointed out program efficiencies and ways they have
leveraged volume municipal purchases and technology to save tax payers
dollars.

So I had to pose this question to myself: has Council done the best we
can do to provide services that maintain our residents quality of life
while levying acceptable taxes? Is there any fat left in the budget? Is
there a business initiative in there that could be implemented in 2013
or 2014 – or phased in with less revenues allocated in 2012?

Yes there is – the branding initiative is an example of one of
those. Communications put forward a Business Initiative Request for 185,000 in
2012 with another 1.5 million in 2013 and 2014. But the actual branding initiative has not yet come before Council for final approval.

Oddly, during Council deliberations of the budget – Council itself
increased the money allocated to the branding advertising and marketing
budget by $600,000 (three times what administration requested) in the
first year of a program we have not even seen!

This does not fit into my definition of transition toward
sustainability – as administration has named this budget.

Speaking of return on investment and priorities – this Council turned
down my request to bring back a deferred Transit program of $348,000 to
expand and restructure specialized transportation to address inequities
in the current program.

Transition to sustainability requires proper prioritization and
rationale when allocating funds.

These are some of the reasons why I voted against two of the four
budget recommendations.

Other concerns I have with the budget involve the 4 million forecasted
surplus that has not been given back to the tax payer - but allocated to
reserves and capital expenditures. I am hopeful that Council will see
fit to seriously consider additional surpluses that may be found as
being put toward a tax decrease.

Further, given that our Organizational Review is due to be presented to
the public and Council in February, I saw no reason why we could not work
within a status quo budget until that time. We all understand that the
Municipal Price Inflation index at 3.4% has to be considered but I would
have liked to see more of a mind set that says we should work within the
budget until we see what efficiencies can be brought forward to cover
new business initiatives.

Generally, I think it is time economists and politicians talked a
little more - somebody has to start understanding that income and
salaries of the general population are not increasing in increments
large enough to create an unending pool of money for governments to
continue to dip into.

County News Release 

Council Meeting Highlights

Council had a busy month evaluating and discussing next year’s budget, which I will report on next week. The Nov. 29, 2011 Council meeting does have some interesting reports. Background reports and minutes.

Webcast

To get the full flavour of how decisions are made tune into the webcast. The webcast is timed and titled so that you can refer immediately to your topic of interest.

Advisory Committees & Boards

Thanks to all of you who took the time to apply for Strathcona County Advisory Committees and Boards. Twenty committees now have a tremendous pool of talent to draw from to continue to build our municipality. Two of those committees gave presentations: Economic Development & Tourism Committee, the Energy Exploration Report and the Accessibility Committee.

Economic Development & Tourism Committee

Vice Chair John Devin updated Council with the first year of accomplishments. This is a group of proactive professionals who have stepped forward to assist the County as it attempts to better attract new businesses and strengthen existing businesses. Next year’s initiatives include a business ambassador program. 

Accessibility Committee

Chair Tracy Zala and Bob Atcheson presented an overview of this new committee’s achievements. Members experienced in issues faced by persons with disabilities advise administration on identifying and resolving program and facility issues. This past year the group visited and evaluated ten municipal buildings. Recommendations ranged from minor to major with several changes made immediately under the existing maintenance budgets.

Energy Exploration Report

Chair Bernie Yakimyshyn reported on the committee’s activities of updating information and protocols on the County website and public brochures. Members will be at the Fort Saskatchewan Trade Fair 2012 to continue to provide information to landowners

Sherwood Park Primary Care Network

General Manager Dave Ludwig and Dr Jim Adams reported on the incredible progress made in four years by our own doctors in addressing wait times, improving resident health and saving health care dollars. Primary Care Network link.

Multi Tenant Residential Waste Management Strategy

Council was updated on the implementation of the green routine in condos, apartments and other multi-family residential properties. As a follow through to the Waste Management Bylaw of 2008, all private collectors will conform to this bylaw in order to maximize waste diversion. This means that if you live in a condo or apartment style complex – you will be obligated to divert organics and recycling from the landfill by December 2012. Property managers and condo boards will be receiving letters of information in the first half of next year.  More information.

AUC Review & Stay

Council authorized a further $70,000 from reserves to be used in the application to the Alberta Utilities Commission (AUC) to review and vary its decision on the approving of power lines to be built above ground, and for a stay of that decision pending resolution of the application. Taxpayers dollars used to date in fighting this legal battle are about 540,000 dollars. 

Now is the time to pause and reflect. It is my hope members of the legislature will join us in looking at options to bury the lines in a cost effective manner.

Sidewalk Snow Clearing Bylaw

Thank you to the four presenters and 18 people who wrote e mails and letters. Council will be debating the merits of passing a bylaw on Dec. 13, 2011. If you have not voted on my CouncillorCarr.com website – please do so – and continue to send your comments to council 

Proposed Bylaw

E-News Bulletin

I send out an E-News Bulletins about four times a month to residents. It is an opportunity for me to inform you of events and matters of interest to your family and neighbours in a timely manner. These electronic news flashes also help me to get your input and touch base with you. You are welcome to sign up at carr@strathcona.ab.ca

Council Meeting Highlights

Information on  background reports and minutes

Webcast

To get the full flavour of how decisions are made tune into the webcast. The webcast is timed and titled so that you can refer immediately to your topic of interest.

Affordable Housing 

Strathcona County’s Affordable Housing Implementation Committee delivered its final report to Council on Nov. 8, 2011. This committee was made up of public stakeholders and staff and successfully allocated over 12 million dollars of provincial funding to three major housing gaps in our community: entry level ownership, affordable market rental and special needs.

Ten low income families now own their first homes thanks to Habitat for Humanity and this program. Pioneer Housing was able to construct 60 self contained units for seniors and they plan to build 69 housing units for older non seniors on AISH and single parent families. Strathcona Schizophrenia Foundation (two condo units) and the Robin Hood Association both met the criteria (38 housing units).

This process has been a example of public, non profits, the province and the County working together to utilize tax dollars in the most efficient way to ensure that our community cares for its own residents and has a diverse population.

The recommendations are thought provoking and merit further discussion and analysis. 

One recommendation requires more explanation. The committee urged Council to review their level of commitment to address future affordability. “The AHIC feels that although the responsibility for housing should remain the responsibility of the Province, where it makes sense to benefit Strathcona County, on the whole, affordable housing subsidization should be considered as an opportunity that needs to be explored”. Direct substitution with County residents’ tax payer dollars would be double dipping as our residents’ dollars are already being used through the provincial mandate to subsidize affordable housing. There is, after all, only one tax payer. However – there are ways for the County to support provincial leadership and leverage developer and nonprofit relationships. I look forward to a more detailed report from administration for discussion.

 Full news release

Advisory Housing Committee - Motion

I  made a motion requesting Council to direct administration to put forward the merits of an advisory committee to council that would examine current and future housing needs in both urban and rural Strathcona County. This would encompass all types and density of housing and supplement the only report we have to date which focuses on seniors affordable housing. Industry stakeholders and the public would work together to identify what the best type of housing development is for Strathcona County. Additionally, they would make recommendations to change standards of service delivery to ensure increased competitiveness with other municipalities. Issues of clarity and effectiveness of current bylaws would be reviewed and recommendations come to Council. An element of education and relationship building would be inherent in the committee process. Council tabled this until May.

Traffic Bylaw

Council passed first reading of the new traffic bylaw, with the proviso that much work needed to be done. this bylaw is an amassing of eight bylaws into one. Residents should be aware that there is a 36 hour parking limit for RVs on public roadways with a maximum of twice in a seven day period. RV’s parked on private property cannot extend over the top of the curb or sidewalk. I receive numerous complaints throughout the year because RV owners show a lack of respect for their neighbours and do not realize they create a safety hazard by blocking visibility.

The proposed bylaw requires rubber driveway mats to be removed by November 1 of each year.  I did request a date change to December 1, closer to actual road clearing times.

I noted concern over issues that condo associations have been experiencing with parking and asked for clarification on sign standards and support in parking enforcement.

Sidewalk Snow Clearing Bylaw

Please comment to Council before or at the Nov. 29, 2011 public input session.

Budget

I urge residents to go to this link to look up the webcasts of our budget meetings. Council will meet to review administration recommendations on November 25, 30 and December 2. I am concerned with annual requests for dozens of new hires, the number and type of new Business Initiatives when I see over 180 capital projects from years past. I focused on this last year and will be highlighting the merits of a catch up year again this Council session. Your comments would be greatly appreciated.

Council Meeting Highlights

After most Council meetings, I pick out specific issues that I want to comment on – especially to give residents a little behind the scenes insight as to why I vote the way I do. Information on the background reports and minutes  

Webcast

To get the full flavour of how decisions are made tune into the webcast. The webcast is timed and titled so that you can refer immediately to your topic of interest.

Organizational Meeting

On  Oct. 25, 2011 Council started with an organizational meeting that left some Councillors wanting to see the Mayor move forward with her promised change in committee selection. Currently the Mayor picks Councillors to serve on the dozen or so committees and boards. Immediately after the election, the Mayor indicated that her preference would be to have Council’s input. This did not occur. I for one look to aligning the interview process with the one the public goes through. I would like to see Council examine one another’s resumes and past experiences to determine who the best fit is for each committee. An open and honest discussion would be a relationship builder.

I also requested discussion on whether or not elected officials should take the position of Chair or Vice Chair on a public Advisory Committee to Council. I do not mind Councillors being on the committee, but do not see the need for them to be in a position of influence on a public committee which acts in an advisory capacity - it defeats the purpose. 

As to changes: I was disappointed to see Councillor Brian Botterill removed from the Capital Region Board Transit Committee after he proved himself as a clear thinking, mature member who brought issues back to Council where warranted and always gave excellent reports. 

Perimeter Fencing Along Arterial Roads

As residents and visitors travel into and through the urban area of Strathcona County they are greeted with a welcoming landscape of trees, shrubs and flowers with a background fence on major arteries. The fence creates a consistent and orderly backdrop, as well as providing some sound and visual protection for homeowners. If benefits accrue to both the community and homeowner - who should pay for the repair, replacement and upkeep of these fences?

Historically, on County property, arterial road fences are maintained and replaced by the County. These fences are not the issue. At a certain point in our urban history, developers were told to put fences on private property. The fence became the property of the owner to maintain and replace.

Most residents I have talked to bring forward the good neighbour policy. It is the responsibility of land owners to maintain fences on their own property; having said that, a good neighbour will contribute to upkeep. As a balance between fiscal accountability to the taxpayers on the whole – and as a contribution to upkeep – I made a recommendation that the County look at the possibility of staining or painting the public side of the fence. This will be considered by Council in the budget process. Council did approve a motion to enforce the Nuisance and Unsightly Premises bylaw under which property owners along arterial roads must maintain, repair and replace those fences.

Has Council fully addressed the issue? Not in my opinion. The track record of developers/builders in putting up high standard durable fences is not impressive. Anyone having bought a new home on Lakeland Drive can attest to this. Why are we getting flimsy single board fences on major arterial roadways? Because our County standards and regulations do not ask for double boarded or cement sound attenuation fences. This needs to be addressed by administration and Council.

Canadian National Railway Crossing at Range Rd 221 north of Hwy 16

CN and Transport Canada has funded the majority of a $316,400 capital project required on the ‘at grade’ railway crossing warning system that the Canadian Transport Commission ordered upgraded. As the road authority, Strathcona County was responsible for a portion of $70,914 – which Council approved to come from the Future Municipal Operating Reserve.

Social Inclusion

Council passed a new municipal policy that will reduce barriers to community participation and ensure that residents are able to engage in the social, economic and cultural life of our community to a greater extent. Social inclusion is fostered by this policy and will be promoted in municipal services, programs and facilities. The Policy is ground breaking in that it uses a baseline of LICO (Statscan low income threshold) plus 10% in many of its subsidy guidelines. We are the first municipality in Alberta to adopt the higher threshold in recognition of the higher cost of living in our area.

I send out an E-News Bulletin to residents on community information and issues. It gives me an opportunity to ‘touch base’ with you on a regular basis. You can obtain your copy by sending me your e mail address.