By Marianne Cole
Generally this has been a difficult year to maintain and promote our organization due to Covid 19 restrictions. As a result we were only able to hold 4 meetings (March, June, September, and October) before this AGM. In spite of these limited meetings we continued to make an impact in our county. The most notable have been:
Western Star Wrap, January 20, 2021 This very visible, informative wrap gave Clearwater County residents valuable information on the MDP review that many were completely unaware was even taking place. As a result we received:
· 124 written responses in just 10 days, compared to the 62 received by the County during their August-September 2020 input “campaign”.
· Phone calls of concern with the review as well as words of appreciation for our efforts.
· Copies of additional letters written to the County Council expressing concerns with the proposed MDP.
Participation in Virtual MDP Review Meetings in January/February From my records there were 188 County residents that participated in the 8 meeting for an average of 23.5 per meeting. (Compared to the total of 574 that participated in the 2008-2010 MDP Review meetings.) During those virtual meetings it was clear that there were serious concerns with the new proposed plan.
Attendance at the In-Person/Town Hall MDP Review Meetings in June At least one member of the CCTA was at each one of those meetings and verified a most dismal attendance at each one. Again we witnessed general strong opposition to the proposed MDP draft, most notably with the increase in sub-divisions to be allowed per quarter.
CCTA Board Meeting with Murray Hagan and Christopher Read This meeting was held to address our concerns re the following issues noted in our May 30th and June 17th letters to Council. The following issues were discussed:
· MDP Review Process Our concern (supported by the significant requests for such) was the need for more opportunities for public engagement. In our discussion we were told that it is Council’s decision as to how they would like to proceed with the review process. As such it would be up to Council to decide on the value of a survey that we have repeatedly asked for.
· Broadband Our letters had expressed concerns over the accuracy of information being given publicly, the lack of a business plan, and the perceived unwillingness to accept valid information from local ISP’s. In response, during the meeting the following highlights were noted:
Administration has tried to gather helpful information from the ISP’s and while local ones wanted a joint meeting, the larger “big guys” didn’t.
The high quality of fibre optic cable purchased by the County will last 50 years and it is better to use quality material as the County needs to be good stewards of taxpayer dollar
The current backbone project will allow for increased use in the future.
The fibre to Nordegg project was originally planned for the last phase of the backbone project but has been promoted due to an increase in demand.
Connectivity to Olds was justified in order to provide more secure service in case of system failure with the two current connectivity providers (Telus and the Supernet/Shaw).
The business plan is a work in progress and it is extremely important to Administration. They are currently working to gather accurate information, but there does seemed to be a bit of a conflict between Council and Administration on how to proceed.
The MDP Review and Broadband continue to be very important matters that this new Council will have to deal with. As such it is absolutely crucial that:
Council receives the most accurate, unbiased information on all matters.
A variety of methods of gathering information are undertaken with the understanding that many County residents don’t have adequate connectivity and/or are not technologically savvy. It is, however, very important that all County residents be given equal opportunity for input into matters that will ultimately affect them.
The authority given to Council through the Municipal Government Act must be recognized and accepted. Council has duties “to consider the welfare and interests of the municipality as a whole…” (MGA, Section 153.a) and they are “responsible for making sure that the powers, duties, and functions of the municipality are appropriately carried out.” (MGA Section 201.1.b)
We are most thankful to the past Council members for their participation in our meetings along with their helpful information and support. As the next year unfolds, we trust that this spirit of cooperation will continue as we all “work together for the common good.”
