Monday, February 8, 2021

IN THE NEWS

By Marianne Cole

CCTA Wrap and Survey Results 

As a result of comments we had heard about the lack of knowledge of the County’s Municipal Development Review process, the CCTA decided to put a “wrap” around the January 20th issue of the Western Star. In it we highlighted proposed changes to the current MDP, most notably increasing the number of allowable parcels out of a quarter, dropping the size restrictions on those parcels, and putting gravel extraction permit applications under a Direct Control District. We received very positive comments about our efforts to inform people. In addition to providing this information we also included a survey on people’s ideas of public engagement in this process. Amazingly, we received 124 responses before the January 31 deadline. From those responses the most notable results were:

78 people had not heard of the review process prior to publication of the wrap.

107 said they were not satisfied with either the amount of information they had received or the opportunity to have input.

98 thought in-person meetings were the best method of public engagement.

112 wanted the process delayed until meetings could be held.

The top three most noted comments focussed on the need to protect agricultural land, worries about increasing farmer/acreage owner conflict, and a questionable review process with heavy reliance on social media to provide/gather information.

The CCTA sincerely thanks everyone who took the time to complete the survey. The results will be published in the February 10th issue of the Western Star and we will also be sharing them with County Council.

County’s Virtual MDP Review Meetings 

In an effort to provide opportunity for public engagement on the Municipal Development Plan Review, the County hosted 8 “virtual” (on your computer) meetings between January 25th and Thursday, February 4th, with approximately 180 people joining in. Attendance averaged in the 20’s per meeting and went from a low of 12 to a high of 56 at the last meeting. (This compares to a total of 574 participants in 19 in-person meetings during the 2010 MDP Review. This certainly supports a common frustration we have heard regarding the fact that virtual meetings cannot be accessed by many in Clearwater County.)

Each meeting began with Craig Teal, a consultant from Parkland Community Planning Services in Red Deer giving a presentation on the key parts of the proposed plan followed by open discussions. There was absolutely great participation from several of our young farmers whose concerns focussed mainly on the negative impacts of farming by increasing subdivision opportunities. There was also significant concern/questions related to the process, along with a desire to delay matters until in-person meetings could be held. Certainly there was some support for the changes and they were voiced as well.

Going forward, the County’s Planning Department will prepare a summary of the information, present it to council, and then it will be up to Council to accept the document as is, make changes, or delay the process until in-person meetings can be held. We will keep you posted!!!

Regional Waste Management 

As many of you likely are aware, the Rocky Transfer Station has now been closed. According to a news release posted on the County’s website, “Clearwater County, the Town of Rocky Mountain House and the Village of Caroline have mutually agreed that the Rocky Mountain Regional Solid Waste Authority (RMRSWA) was not meeting the respective needs of each municipality. As a result, the RMRSWA is being dissolved and the Rocky Transfer Station will be permanently closed, effective January 31, 2021.”

As a replacement, a temporary transfer station has been set up on the County’s property near the airport north of town for county use and the town has its new Eco-Centre. All other rural transfer stations will continue operation as is.

At the Tuesday February 9th County Council meeting Council will be considering a fee structure for disposals at the Regional Landfill as well as at the Rural Transfer Stations. The proposal suggests no charge for bagged household waste less than a pick-up load in size, along with a minimum of $17.50 for a pick-up or trailer less than 8 ft. (based on an average of 250 kgs.) A more complete list of suggested fees will likely be available following Tuesday’s meeting.

First reading passed 

On Tuesday, January 26th Council passed 1st reading of a bylaw to include “Solar Farm” as a Discretionary Use in the Agriculture District A. The proposal was put forward by Blue Mountain Power Corp. and “would allow for Agriculture District A landowners a development opportunity to utilize a portion of land for electricity generation…rather than re-zoning parcels to industrial.” (Clearwater County agenda package, January 26, 2021)

Following the passing of 1st reading this will now proceed to a Public hearing before consideration of 2nd and 3rd reading. One might wonder what plans Blue Mtn. Power has.

Valentine Smiles  

What do you call two birds in love???  Tweet hearts!!

Do you think skunks celebrate Valentine’s Day??? Yes, they’re very scent-imental!!

Coming Events: 

NO REGULAR MEETING ON FEBRUARY 17, 2021 due to covid restrictions. We’ll see what March brings.

Thursday, February 4, 2021

THE RESULTS ARE IN….

Here are the results of the survey that was part of the information published in the Western Star two weeks ago. 124 responses were received in just 10 days

CLEARWATER COUNTY TAXPAYERS’ ASSOCIATION SURVEY RESULTS RE MDP REVIEW

1. Prior to this information were you aware of the MDP review process?

Yes 35  No 78

2. If yes, how did you find out about the potential changes to the MDP? (Check all that apply)

Local radio 1  Social media 3  County website 5  County Newsletter 21

Local Papers 24  Clearwater County Taxpayers’ Assoc. 26  Friends 29

3. Are you satisfied with the amount of information that has been available about the proposed MDP? 

Yes 10  No 107

4. Are you satisfied with the opportunities you have had for input into the MDP review?

Yes 7  No 107

5. How do you think residents could better gather information and provide input?

In person meetings 98  Mail out survey 79  Social media/virtual meetings 28

6. Would you like to see the process delayed until open in-person meetings could be held?

Yes 112  No 5  Undecided 1

Comments: (Listed in order from highest to lowest number of comments.)**concerns with protecting agricultural land, **possible negative impacts with increased subdivisions, **transparency issues/lack of information or public input in the review process,**problem with relying on social media/virtual meetings for input, **concern with Direct Control Districts.

HUGE THANKS TO ALL WHO TOOK THE TIME TO COMPLETE THE SURVEY AS WELL AS OUR VERY SPECIAL SUPPORTERS WHO MADE PUBLISHING ALL THIS INFORMATION POSSIBLE.

We will be sharing this information with County Council as we work together for the common good. 

Clearwater County Taxpayers’ Association.