Archive for

Central Springbank Task Force takes on Rocky View Weekly newspaper

The following email message was sent out to members of the Central Springbank Task Force:

We hope you have all taken some time to bask in the summer glory of rural Springbank and are more resolute than ever to protect this beautiful land we call home from ravaging urbanization.

1. Keeping informed:
Unfortunately, the Reeve and Councillors have a different view of Rocky View’s future and they have been racing forward with their plans for massive development over our rural landscape.  Members of the task force have been busy attending Public Hearings, writing letters to Council and our local papers, and trying to keep abreast of all development activity. One of most disturbing activities, was the recent vote by our Council to approve the Watermark Development in Bearspaw. This development extends high density sprawl of the city into the heart of Bearspaw and was opposed by most residents and the City of Calgary. Waste water treatment plans were not finalized and, according to Council’s own studies, the development will serve as a net loss to tax payers; still our Council approved it 7-2. The only Councillors with sufficient common sense to vote against it were Councillors Branson and Buckley.
There are many changes proposed for Springbank, most of which are being discussed without public input. These include a commercial corridor from the city to Highway 22 and a major north-south Calgary bypass along Range Road 34 that will transect Harmony. Residents have discovered that community opinion does not seem to matter to our Councillors, or to some media. In response, we have updated our website so you have a means to stay informed. News items and public contributions will now appear on the front page and we have added a blogging facility so you can comment on the latest issues.  We encourage you to continue checking in and reviewing the updates at http://www.ourspringbank.ca and do all you can to help us in the battle that lies ahead.

Importantly, http://www.ourspringbank.ca is not-for-profit and we do not accept advertising dollars from developers.

2. Special Note about the Rocky View Weekly:
Until recently, members of the community have succeeded in expressing their views in the Rocky View Weekly but about the time when the Rocky View County (yep, our council has changed the name of the MD to attract US investment) advertising contract was renewed, the paper fired Enrique Massot, adopted a pro-development stance and stopped publishing letters from concerned residents about development issues.

Is it coincidence that “Rocky View County” signed their new advertising contract with the Rocky View Weekly about the same time Lynn Thurlow’s “Anti Nimby” letter appeared?  (Lynn is a Springbank resident and investor in the proposed Pradera Springs development.)  Other “anti-nimby” editorials have followed.  We see this remarkable change of stance as a further indication of the degree to which commercial interests will go to gain profit at our expense.

We are planning to add a section to our website containing letters to the Editor that residents have submitted that have not been printed, or have been heavily edited.  Please let us know if you send a letter to the Editor that is not published and we will post the letter on our website.

3. Expanding the network:

The Central Springbank Task Force has recently joined with other sensible development groups in the area and formed a coalition called “Albertans for Responsible Land Use” http://www.ab-land-use.ca. Springbank is not the only community being railroaded by council:  other areas in “Rocky View County” are experiencing the same treatment.
Please stay tuned!

Here is the letter that was sent to the Rocky View Weekly newspaper:

As a reader, patron and past advertiser, I felt it was extremely unfortunate that the Editor of the Rocky View Weekly chose to inject his obvious disdain for some of the residents of Rocky View.
Regardless of where our neighbours live, we will find those who have contributed much to their workplaces and communities. Yes, some of our neighbours have earned a good living – some live in Bearspaw, some near Airdrie, while others are in Chestermere. All however, should be encouraged to express their aspirations for the communities in which they live. Governments and responsible media need to give intelligent and respectful consideration to all such expressions.

The most unfortunate part of last week’s editorial however, was that  the editor completely failed to comprehend the real issue in these debates.

Issue: While our Councillors claim to represent the constituents and  the interests of Rocky View, there is growing evidence they have abdicated all planning responsibility, accountability to residents, and even respect for the very voters they were entrusted to represent.
Example A: As president of the Social Credit Party, Earl Solberg complains that the Provincial Government “and its bureaucracy have succumbed to the ‘Big Brother’ complex evidenced by their lack of consultation while developing new legislation”. The same Earl Solberg dismisses Rocky View residents’ input as not “legitimate public comments”, stating “it doesn’t have an effect of causing us (Council) to change”.

Example B: Hopeton Loudon told residents to find accommodation with developers (Inland) because the Province will step in to impose and approve an application if the MD refuses to re-designate land.
Nothing could be further from the truth, and these are but two of many ways in which MD Council has squandered the trust of taxpayers in favour of representing THEIR “privileged few”, the developers.

While Council makes noises about consultation for ASP renewal, they have in fact become the partner, spokesperson and approver for the vision and financial interests of developers through numerous bylaw amendments. Watermark is just the latest example. The creation of the MD’s Growth Management Strategy – created by 2 Edmonton firms– afforded the public virtually no input. Add to all this the  Provincial Government’s withdrawal of constituents’ right to hold plebiscites on any matters relating to land re-designation, development and financial matters, the actions of the current Councillors are nothing short of criminal.

Responsible and informed media organizations would focus on the public’s need for fair, transparent and responsive government, and not attempt to vilify those constituents who have chosen to speak out against a Council that clearly no longer represents those who
voted for them. A responsible media organization would sense the community’s need to find members of the public who better represent the aspirations of voters. Let the search for those representatives, start now.

David McKeand