If you’re looking for a ‘get out and vote’ lecture, look elsewhere. This isn’t a sermon. Most of you won’t vote on Monday — more than 60 per cent didn’t three years ago — and for varying reasons: too little time, inattentiveness, indifference, disillusionment, perhaps even laziness. If a sense of civic duty or concern about the issues can’t inspire you to vote, we probably can’t convince you.
What we can do is what this newspaper has always done: shed light on the issues and provide insight into each candidate’s point of view. We’ve heard an earful about the 80/20 goal for a more balanced assessment split. Several candidates support creating a new industrial park in the northern lands, giving St. Albert the large industrial lots it currently cannot offer to prospective warehousing and light industrial businesses. However unlikely this target may seem, it is a goal that speaks to a desire to make St. Albert property taxes more sustainable over the long-term. Any new ideas to help achieve this would be welcome.
We heard plenty of comments at forums, in letters to the editor and even from candidates themselves about the deplorable state of the Sturgeon River. Few contenders, be it newcomers or incumbents, gave St. Albertans any answers or even hope that something will change aside from a study that is under way. Has anyone stepped forward to say we need to build the 26 interceptors to keep sand and hydrocarbons out of the river, as recommended by a six-year-old plan gathering dust on a shelf at city hall? Would you even vote for the candidate that backed the $10-million (likely more today) purchase spread over a decade?
Plenty of numbers were thrown around during the campaign about fiscal oversight. We’ve seen candidates promise property tax caps months and years before even viewing the affected budgets. There’s been tough talk about the need for zero-based budgeting, and plenty of derision for council’s willingness to channel money into the arts and heritage sectors, most recently for five aboriginal stone sculptures. Some defended these expenses as supporting the rich history and public art that makes St. Albert unique in the region. Others see it all as a waste of money we can’t afford, with promises of cutting the fat. The true test will be at budget time in November.
We heard plenty about LRT to and through St. Albert, but very few solutions to the lack of parking at the Village Landing park and ride. City hall seems at a loss with no answers other than waiting until 2011 when the ring road is built to start work on a new park and ride next to the Henday. Little else was said about the role of bus rapid transit, smaller city buses for new routes or even regionalization of transit.
Arlington Drive has been, for a small but vocal segment of the population, a burning issue this campaign. We’ve read plenty of letters that have done their best to paint incumbents as uncaring for allowing a development on an empty lot next to a park. The furore has even led to fear mongering ads that ask is your neighbourhood next?, taking the discussion to new lows. It’s up to voters to distinguish whether moving from 63 units to 30 while looking at the big picture constitutes listening or whether to back candidates with easy but misleading promises of saving ‘green space.’
Tied into the Arlington debate and even development of the annexed lands and downtown redevelopment is how St. Albert should grow into the future. Densification will occur, we know, due to new regional guidelines, but where and how could be determined in the next term if the municipal development plan is overhauled. St. Albert has had success with its model of suburban homes on large lots, and voters have to ask whether plans like DARP compliment a growing city or threaten what some view only as a bedroom community.
These are just some of the issues at stake on Monday. They alone should provide the most compelling argument on whether to mark a ballot.
