Another take on controversy in Crowsnest Pass

An open letter to our community of Crowsnest Pass, Councillors, Media and Provincial Officials

We are a group that have given calm contemplation to the discord embroiling our community and wish to represent our views through this letter to express our concern regarding what appears to be a lack of confidence in our current elected body of municipal councilors.

A vibrant community is made up of a number of opinions, the job of our elected officials is to consider as many of those opinions as possible and make decisions through due process within the parameters of the Municipal Act, and the requirements of Provincial and Federal law. We may not necessarily agree with those decisions, however we appreciate that we could never have all the details that led to that decision unless we ourselves were on council.

We are confident we all share a common goal in seeing our community prosper and move forward. The processes and procedures to accomplish this are obviously complex and involve multiple issues of history, legacy, legal and liability concerns and much, much more. We have charged our elected officials with the mandate to move our community into the 21st century while at the same time respecting the generations that came before us. This is a tall order. It will only be accomplished through an endorsement of support of the process of our duly elected officials and their compliance with good governance.

Our group wishes to provide our portion of that endorsement and confirm that there are members of this community who agree changes are necessary and changes are not always easy.

We request however full disclosure and transparency of the process. We understand full details cannot always be made public due to privacy act legislation and confidentiality protocols. However, we do expect a standard of professionalism and accountability by both our elected officials and the administration they oversee. Some have called for an external review of council and administration. We would support such a review with the goal to reinstate confidence by the majority of the community.

We wish to see a focus on good old fashioned dialog. Conversations with all stakeholders consisting of well thought-out, reasonable and pragmatic opinions and the decisions to match.  

Our future depends on it.

We are:

Scott Warris, Deb McKinlay, Vern Harrison, Bern Sawatzky, Elaine Beaudoin, Andrew Fairhurst, Tim Grier, Sheila Juhlin, George Machum, Pat Pichurski, Charli Martens-Carpenter, Heather O’Bear, Erin Fairhurst, Becky Pichurski, Penny Warris

Petition fails in the Crowsnest Pass

Well the results are in the petition to Municipal Affairs failed, 1150 valid signatures were required the Representative from the "Citizens to save the Crowsnest Pass" claimed they had 1201 signatures so somewhere between 51 or more signatures were determined to be invalid.

Will we ever know how many signatures for sure were thrown out? No the ministry only rules wether the petition was valid or invalid. So in theory there is somewhere between one and 1149 valid signatures on the petition, I'm sure either side of this debate will argue in the direction that works for them.

Some questions that were asked of myself regarding this petition, my answers are purely my opinion.

What started this petition? Some very vocal members of the public who disagree with the position of the majority of council.

Who was behind the petition? A group called the "Citizens to save the Crowsnest Pass"

If these people were so concerned why did they not run in the last election?
Maybe they did, or maybe they are laying the ground work for the next election

Did I believe that 20% of the taxpayers felt council was heading in the wrong direction?
No and obviously neither did the Minister of Municipal Affairs

Did I believe that some people felt they were misled into signing the petition? told that to clean up the river run mess, or to save the Blairmore arena they should sign the petition for example?
I have a tough time believing those statements that would be dishonest and misleading!

Should council be concerned about a large group of taxpayers signing a petition?
Of course we should, that is why the majority of council dealt with issues that were raised by the "Citizens to save the Crowsnest Pass" and many other taxpayers.

What issues were raised by this group that the majority of council as recognized?
Corporate review, taxes last year over 11% increase this year 3.8%. We preserved our reserves by not moving forward on the Coleman Shop and yes we should be building them. Services we had some minor reductions but the vast majority of our core services remain in tact.

Was I has a councilor concerned about a municipal review? not one bit the issue here in the Crowsnest Pass is not that democracy is not working, of course its working just not the way some people would like it to be.

The other reason I was not concerned about the review, prior to this petition being started the majority of council took the position that we should have a review of the municipality, that we need to determine where the strengths and weaknesses are.

The Minister's letter stated the following:
"However, I suggest that the municipality consider engaging a third party to conduct a review of the administrative and governance processes in place. The review presents an opportunity to evaluate the municipality's strengths and identify potentials for improvement."
Does that not sound like a corporate review?

Do I respect the opinions of the people that signed that petition? of course I do 99% of those people are good people but lets move forward now, lets recognize that some people are using the tools they have at hand to promote their future political ambitions.

Elections are a great part of the democratic process, I would encourage anybody that as the interest to step forward in October of 2010.