It should go without saying that city council is entrusted to ensure tax dollars are spent wisely and for the benefit of the citizens of St. Albert.
That’s why we’re scratching our heads over Tim Osborne’s motion Monday to spend an extra $184,000 to get the city’s proposed Healing Garden built this year. Council decided last December to spend $119,100 to get the project built as a part of Founder’s Walk. As fate would have it, which more and more seems to be the case when city projects get considered (remember Project 9?), the actual cost to build the garden is now $320,800.
Instead of debating whether or not to spend the extra money, council should be demanding some answers from its administration. Council was informed that the cost escalation was because a geotechnical study revealed that the garden’s concrete path would need underground pilings due to the area’s high water table. Shouldn’t council have known that before it set the $119,100 amount?
It shouldn’t be a surprise to anyone at city hall that pilings would be required to build any structure in that area along the Sturgeon River. St. Albert Place itself was built on pilings, along with the court house and the seniors lodge. If proper planning was done when the healing garden was first being contemplated, council wouldn’t be facing sticker shock.
The project is laudable. The Healing Garden site was selected because of its proximity to the Sturgeon River, Youville Home and a former residential school. It is intended to be a healing place that would connect aboriginal and non-aboriginal people. The site also has significance as it was blessed by garden advisory committee elder Tony Arcand. All of these facts played into Osborne’s motion to blow the budget, and Mayor Nolan Crouse and Coun. Wes Brodhead agreed. It could be reasoned that spending an extra $184,000 is small potatoes when the city’s operating budget is $140 million, but council is the trusted keeper of the public purse and tripling a budget in the name of expediency is irresponsible.
Gwen Crouse, who is the mayor’s wife, is the chair of the garden’s advisory committee and has done a lot of good work and it would now appear she and her committee face a lot more work. We note, however, that the mayor, who is usually a fiscal hawk, voted in favour of Osborne’s motion to spend the unbudgeted money. Whether or not that is a conflict of interest is up for debate, but no one can argue the poor optics.
There’s no question the Healing Garden would add to the overall downtown experience. Its significance is without question, but its current costs certainly are.
