Let’s Talk! – Crowsnest Pass Taxpayers’ Association Member Meeting

January 23, 2025

Crowsnest Pass Municipal Government Continues to Disappoint! Voice Matters!

Carmen Roman, President, Crowsnest Pass Taxpayers’ Association

The Crowsnest Pass Taxpayers’ Association public forum in November and the recent January “table talk” acknowledged the importance of effective public participation and the benefits it poses for any organization. It was an opportunity to implement fair democratic principles which honors “citizens’ voice.” Our organization appreciates community engagement as an effective tool that informs and educates us about the things that matter most in our community. The Crowsnest Pass Taxpayers’ Association Board of Directors embraces “voice matters!” Our intention is to continue to offer events, which encourage the “to and fro” of perspective, opinion and dialogue, at our monthly member meetings.

Members at our recent Crowsnest Pass Taxpayers’ Association Meeting clearly demonstrated that the public participation process, practiced by the Municipality of Crowsnest Pass (MCNP) local government, is ineffective and non-existent. The lack of transparency and integrity in processes and procedures practiced is problematic. Under discussion was the MCNP Public Participation Policy 1302-01, as mandated by the Municipal Government Act (MGA). The policy embraces the promise that a “public’s contribution will influence a decision by seeking out and facilitating the involvement of those potentially affected by or interested in a decision.” This clearly was not the case for Dairy Road Park, archeological site DJPO-81, which was sold under market value and remains as a high interest HRV4a site with the Ministry of Culture, Arts and Status of Women. The Southmore Ski Village brings attention to an upcoming judicial review which regards unjust and unfair processes and procedures implemented by our council, Mayor and Chief Administrative Officer. Even more disturbing, a current “botched” pitiable community engagement process hinders our local government in their deficient decision-making skills to rezone the Sartoris Lands, NUTAR, in their effort to appeal to the extensive Charmed Resorts development.

READ ON:

The International Association for Public Participation (IAP2), which provides decades of research and practice in the field of public participation, guides us towards the reasons and purposes for this practice. Public participation is based on “the belief that those who are affected by a decision have a right to be involved in the decision-making process.” It advocates policy that promotes sustainable decisions by recognizing and communicating the needs and interests of all participants and stakeholders. The IAP2, as is affirmed by the MGA, states “participation provides participants with the information they need to participate in a meaningful way in a civic-engagement process” and “it can help community groups define and determine the public’s role in a democratic decision-making process.” In other words, an effective public participation process gives the “promise” of deliberative communication which increases with greater participant involvement, collaboration and empowerment.

At the recent Crowsnest Pass Taxpayers’ Association “Let’s Talk,” citizens’ voice validated perspectives and viewpoints which verified unfair and unjust decision-making by our local government. When asked “why is community engagement and public participation important in the decision-making process regarding capital projects,” responses included:

a) creative problem-solving: residents, as stakeholders with a vested interest in the community, often bring innovative and cost-effective ideas to the table. Their diverse perspectives can uncover solutions that municipal leaders or consultants may not have considered;

b) efficient resource use: engaging residents ensures that projects are designed to address real needs and priorities;

Member concerns were unanimous and consistent in their responses. Commentaries included continual lack of transparency by our local government; misgivings about integrity and a lack of trust for council representatives, Mayor and Chief Administrative Officer; ineffective communication pertaining to development and planning; poor community engagement involving long-term planning and vision of capital projects; and, a feeling that “Crowsnest Pass citizens’ don’t matter.”

To summarize, the IAP2 research and experiences regarding public participation, the following statement deserves attention:

“The goal of public participation is to provide the public with balanced and objective information to assist them in understanding the problem, alternatives, opportunities, and/or solutions. At its most effective and beneficial, the information shared with the public should be accurate and the informing process keeps the public apprised of the rationales motivating the decisions being made by leaders”.

The IAP2 further avows:

“The informing process can become problematic when leaders are not fully transparent and withhold important or essential information, or when they provide biased information for the purposes of misrepresenting an issue and manipulating public perception. In its most potentially harmful manifestation, an informing process can be used as a manipulative tactic for mollifying legitimate public concerns or deceiving the public into supporting a decision or policy that is not in their interest.”

Clearly, our municipal government and administration consistently fails to deploy an effective public participation or community engagement process which empowers citizens and is inclusive of all stakeholders’ voice. Processes utilized are manipulative and assuaging. This manner of governance quells trust and, integrity is questionable.