It’s municipal election time in Alberta, and Albertans will be choosing the people who will govern their communities for the next four years. The mayoral race in Edmonton is already heating up, with candidates like Kerry Diotte and Karen Leibovici facing off against each other. Karen Leibovici talks about how Edmonton should continue to expand and be a ‘world-class city’, and that it should not settle for just being ‘good enough’. Her critics, on the other hand, accuse her of wanting to continue racking up the city’s property taxes and debts. Kerry Diotte has focused on this, talking about Edmonton’s crumbling infrastructure and property taxes, and the need to take care of both. His critics accuse him of lacking any vision, and wanting to move Edmonton backwards.
A similar debate is taking place in St. Albert. Some of us have advocated various new spending projects, such as an ‘art gym’ or an LRT line. They are accused by their critics of not caring about how much they spend to pay for these projects. Others have opposed this, saying that St. Albert’s taxpayers are already tapped out and saying that we should refocus our spending on infrastructure like roads and sewers. Their critics accuse them of thinking small and only caring about their own needs. In the worst cases, they’re accused of wanting to ‘destroy the spirit of the community’.
Often, what this does is create ill will within our community, as we end up talking past one another. People get frustrated when their viewpoints are insulted and ignored. Residents who say we should hold the line on spending and oppose new projects frequently do so because they feel that, in pursuing new projects, we’re neglecting the essentials like roads and sewers, not to mention ensuring that property taxes remain low enough that lower-income people, including seniors, can still afford to live here.
In Edmonton, it’s been said that the people who support Kerry Diotte would do so largely because they’re frustrated with what they see as an endless wish list of new projects and spending. They don’t see the benefits of many of these projects, and wonder when enough is enough. The same thing applies in St. Albert – when do we decide that we have enough public art? When do we have enough heritage or recreation sites? When we do we hold the line on spending? Instead of answering these questions, the supporters of new projects have often insulted the questioners, which leads to the frustration and anger we see now.
On the other hand, the supporters of limited spending are often criticized for thinking small. When I was on the St. Albert Taxpayers’ Association’s board of directors, for instance, SATA’s critics claimed that the association did not offer a positive vision of what the city could actually be. In response, I helped develop SATA’s vision of what the City could be, based on feedback from our members.
The supporters of new projects like the LRT and Servus Place have laid out a vision of how St. Albert should change to meet the new challenges our community is facing as the Capital Region grows. How and when do we meet them, if we don’t build now? Is the rest of the Capital Region going to pass us by if we don’t?
As a community, we need to answer all of the questions raised here. Hopefully, from there we can also start to discuss what kind of St. Albert we want and actively work towards it.
St. Albert deserves no less.
Jared Milne is a St. Albert resident with a passion for Canadian history and politics.
