Lack of Effective Public Engagement and the sale of an Archeological Site

Presentation Made to the Municipality of Crowsnest Pass Council and Chief Administrative Officer Regarding the lack of Effective Public Engagement and the sale of an Archeological Site (Lot 8, Block 12, Plan 6828E aka Dairy Road Park) to rezone Recreation and Open Space (R-0) to multi-dwelling (R-3) - June 14, 2022 by Carmen Roman.

“When the public is engaged, government can utilize its expertise to make quality decisions in which residents have a high level of confidence. A true willingness to engage the public is the cornerstone to engagement.”

Our Provincial Government appreciates Municipal Governments that offers and participates in an effective public engagement process, that ensures that constituents play a key role in the democratic process. Engagement of a community is a two-way process involving interaction and listening with the goal of generating mutual benefits beyond self- interest. It is a way of bringing citizens together to solve problems that affect people’s lives. It is a process that has commitment to the values of accountability, transparency, respect, and is inclusive and responsive to the needs and expectations of the residents.

With regards to Lot 8, Block 12, Plan 6828E0, located in Bellevue, the public engagement process between the residents and the Council of the Municipality of Crowsnest Pass has been less than stellar. There has been a loss of credibility or legitimacy with the residents for processes, ineffective, and which lacked buy-in from the voting constituency. Residents would have liked to have had more conversations about the decisions made and would have appreciated a partnership where people work together to achieve a goal. Instead, conversations and processes that needed to take place were neglected. Residents could not rely on leadership that was transparent but instead has had to rely on third party information, social media and even information generated by the CEO, Ashcroft Master Builder.

We would like to think about this valley as a whole, and not small, project-based decisions that are not taking into consideration the big effects that they can have. There is a need to get people talking to each other more and, especially, there is a need for the Municipality of Crowsnest Pass Council to collaborate and embrace people’s insights and expertise in the decision-making process. It is about enhancing communities where vision and growth are always at the forefront so that conversations can be inspired in positive ways. Instead, we are faced with acrimony and conflict. The outcome was a proposal for development not favored by the residents.

The Council and ineffectual directions from its Chief Administrative Officer (CAO), face the consequences of its many blunders, which generated much resistance from a public, non-supportive and disillusioned. From the onset of the proposed Bellevue development, residents were challenged by a lack of transparency to processes that were confusing and dissuaded truth and honesty. Appearances of one cover up encountered another cover up. The amendment of Bylaw 1178 was significantly flawed.

To have a developer publicly announce that he was “the purchaser of this land” and produce drawings for a multi-dwelling development prior to the amended bylaw gives every indication that there was no opportunity for a public offering to local developers or contractors. What was promised to the constituents, a green space with less development, evolved into a proposal of overused land and a development substandard of the Municipal Development Plan (MDP), Municipal Government Act (MGA), and disregarded the effective use of public engagement as outlined in the Municipality of Crowsnest Pass Public Participation Policy 1302-01.

The process for the proposal to approve development entailed a notice of application to the Oldman River Regional Services Commission (ORRSC) stating the owner as the Municipality of Crowsnest Pass; then, presenting this notice of application to the Municipality of Crowsnest Pass Planning Commission, which includes 2 council members as part of this board, by the ORRSC planner; in the process, a request was made by a council member that the proposal be presented to Council and that this request be put in writing; the proposal was approved by the planning commission and it was motioned that council be given the opportunity to deliberate (the proposal) when they had already made an agreement with the developer. The CAO presided throughout this presentation.

Where is the integrity in this process when it involves the same people? Was there ever going to be an opportunity for a fair public engagement process that would allow citizen participation of land rightfully owned by the taxpayers? Finally, the icing on the cake is a surprise article in a non-local newspaper regarding Council’s approval of a very substandard roadway for a project which had not been approved. The process, convoluted and confusing, lacked transparency. To propose a development of such magnitude impacts a community significantly and results in adverse effects without public engagement. The residents of Bellevue wanted more consultation on land rightfully owned by the people.

It is a local government’s obligation to share information, specifically, information that affects and impacts the lives of its citizens and its community. An effective, governance model values the voices of the people acknowledging the importance of a shared relationship, between its citizens and its government. We value trust, transparency, honesty and communication that, is receptive to open dialogue.

There is a need to advocate for responsible development in the valley of Crowsnest Pass. For these reasons, residents did not support this multi-dwelling development [Lot 8, Block 12, Plan 6828E0 (aka Dairy Road Park), ORRSC file no. 2022-057-0] and, will continue to oppose any decisions that eludes public engagement. This is a proposal that advocated long- term implications, which had negative impact and would change the social fabric of the community. Understanding public’s interests, concerns and priorities is important.

The relationship between Council and Bellevue constituents requires mending. What is needed is the implementation of fair and just procedural processes, for the MCNP Public Participation Policy 1302-01, that is consistent and instills trust and neutrality. Our local government is obliged to this commitment if reconciliation and confidence is to be restored with the constituents of Crowsnest Pass.

Important: A condition of the application for the proposed development required Historic Resources Act approval, by the Ministry of Culture, Arts and Status of Women. It was learned that the sale of this Recreation and Open Space land (R-0), was identified as in-perpetuity, archeological site DjPo-81 and requires archeological excavation. As a result, this development did not proceed.