In any democracy, the needs of the majority outweigh the needs of the minority, unless, of course, you happen to be a member of the Capital Region Board.
The CRB, which consists of 24 government bodies throughout the region, including the City of St. Albert, Sturgeon County and the Town of Morinville, has attracted the attention of the province because of its widely publicized infighting. If the folks sitting at the CRB board table don’t start playing nice, the province will step in and amalgamate some municipalities or redraw their boundaries.
The CRB’s self-stated goal is to provide a venue for the Capital Region municipalities to think strategically and to work together on priorities to ensure the region achieves its full economic potential and the highest quality of life possible for residents. The goal is laudable, but completely unrealistic.
It’s easy to point out the obvious flaw. The CRB’s problems are tied to the board’s governance structure, which is set up to allow politics to trump common sense. Created in 2008, the CRB was mandated to look at opportunities to strengthen the region, including intermunicipal transit, geographical information systems, affordable housing and land use planning. Unfortunately, the veto power given to the City of Edmonton makes it next to impossible for the board to be effective. Making any decision requires two-thirds majority in population and board votes. Because Edmonton makes up 70 per cent of the population, it has the unilateral ability to veto anything that comes across the board table. The CRB is a dictatorship, not a collaborative body that works in the best interests of the entire region.
The imbalance of power, however, is only part of the problem. The bigger issue is the essence of politics itself. The CRB is predicated on the notion of altruism; that the 24 politicians at the board table will act (and vote) in a selfless manner for the good of the region. That notion is completely counterintuitive to what these officials were elected to do – represent their own constituents.
Is Edmonton’s downtown arena good for the region? It may very well be, but to ask taxpayers in neighbouring municipalities to pony up when they had absolutely no say in a political decision made by Edmonton city councillors is absurd (especially when a billionaire named Katz stands to profit from the injection of taxpayer dollars).
Is the Acheson industrial park expansion good for the region? Absolutely, but Edmonton argues expansion will lure industrial development (and its tax base) away from the city.
Is the Villeneuve airport expansion good for the region? No question, but it was shot down because the proposal doesn’t follow the rule of spending money to improve current growth areas in the capital region. That “rule” is shortsighted and doesn’t take into account the economic impact the expansion would have on the region in future years.
It’s clear the CRB leadership must address fundamental structural problems. Is there a better voting formula that would encourage greater collaboration? Should the scope of the CRB mandate be narrowed? Somehow they must find a constructive way to make the CRB work in the best interests of the region, even when some decisions might not play well at home. If not, the province will step in and do it for them.
