It’s encouraging that city council has taken the next step toward bringing on more light industrial development in St. Albert, but the amount of resistance displayed by some councillors highlights the need for residents and business leaders to keep up the pressure for a proper follow-through.
City council agreed Monday to have administration come up with ideas for siting a chunk of light industrial land ranging from 260 to 300 hectares (642 to 741 acres), which is more than four times the size of Campbell Business Park North.
However, led by Coun. Wes Brodhead, several councillors opined that this much light industrial land would change the face of sleepy St. Albert. Brodhead openly questioned the conclusions of an expert report calling for the setting aside of 700 to 900 acres of light industrial land to ensure adequate supply over the next 25 years. Commissioned by the city’s business and tourism development department, the report was completed by hired experts from Ontario whose core business is analysis of this type.
Brodhead’s opinion was that St. Albert is a gem that needn’t be disturbed. His main backup was a June article in Today’s Parent magazine that tagged St. Albert as the best place in Canada to raise a family. That superficial article described St. Albert as a high-income community with clean air, low crime and relatively low taxes. It obviously missed the fact that St. Albert is the province’s second-highest taxed community.
And that’s really what this industrial land issue is about — taxes.
Judging from letters to the editor and a regular flow of speakers to council chambers, this city is alive with the desire for council to get residential taxes under control. As cited by all the councillors when they were running last fall, light industrial development is the key to getting a handle on residential taxes.
Now several councillors are resisting, which is perhaps reflective of a less visible contingent of residents who are content to pay the taxes and commute to work in Edmonton, a small price to pay for the privilege of laying their heads in a place that remains unsullied by trucks and warehouses.
What Brodhead and others are missing is the fact that light industrial development, if properly buffered from residential neighbourhoods, can fit naturally within a city without detracting from residents’ lifestyle. In fact, industrial development enhances life by providing local opportunities for entrepreneurs and good quality local employment at wages higher than retail.
Does Brodhead think the lifestyle in Pineview and Kingswood is less than desirable because these neighbourhoods are located across the street from Campbell Business Park, which is home to such “industrial eyesores” as the city’s multi-million dollar leisure centre, transit barn, a tire warehouse, a fitness club and a casino?
Brodhead is worried that developing a large amount of industrial land would put St. Albert at greater risk of annexation by Edmonton but the exact opposite is true. If taxes continue on their current trend, residents in this high-tax dormitory will demand annexation by Edmonton just to get some relief.
The city is at a crossroads: does it try to be a true city or just a bedroom community? If it’s the latter, the city will have to stop funding services like transit and heritage sites or watch as rising taxes continue to price out entry level and fixed-income homeowners. Talk about changing the face of St. Albert.
If, on the other hand, St. Albert wants to be a true city, it needs to broaden its tax base by getting serious about grabbing a slice of the growing regional industrial pie.
After all their hand-wringing Monday night, councillors made the right decision and deserve credit for that. But let’s not kid ourselves — the really hard decisions are still to come. It’s up to residents and business leaders to make themselves heard so this council doesn’t take the easy way out.
The city’s future depends on it.
