While Rocky View County (RVC) council approved a base budget for 2015 that includes $32 million in Municipal Sustainability Initiative (MSI) funding for a new municipal building, the item will be open to further public engagement before the budget is finalized in April 2015.
According to Kent Robinson, general manager of corporate services with RVC, when the Government of Alberta’s MSI program was introduced in 2007, $156 million was available to RVC. Of that initial amount, approximately $30 million remains unallocated and $32 million has been allocated to the construction of a new municipal facility.
Robinson said land near Balzac was purchased for the future construction of the new facility and a master site development plan for the land was approved at a public hearing in 2009.
“This has been in planning for some time,” Robinson said.
“The initial approval of the grant was in 2012, the actual approval for the building in July 2014 was a culmination of that and people have been welcomed to comment on that.”
However, according to Councillor Jerry Arshinoff, public engagement to discuss the potential new facility was not effective enough, stating he felt people weren’t sure what was being proposed.
“In the survey, there were ten areas identified (for budget consideration) but there was nothing at all about the single biggest expenditure,” Arshinoff said.
Robinson said RVC’s budget survey didn’t “specifically” ask about the municipal building for a number of reasons.
“It wasn’t in the budget at the time we went out for public input, it was added after the fact in July 2014,” he said.
“But that didn’t stop folks from commenting on it. I don’t know anyone who has gone out to the public to ask about a new municipal building who had a landslide of folks saying yes.”
Members of the public voiced their disagreement with this usage of MSI money at the RVC council meeting on Dec. 9, and in emails to councillors and the Rocky View Weekly. Christine Pennell, board president of the Springbank Park For All Seasons, said she doesn’t want to see a new municipal building “at the expense of recreation.”
“MSI money, that’s what it’s supposed to be used for – to help build and sustain strong communities,” she said. “We have high demand for our recreational facilities, and currently have no room for growth or expansions. Right now, we are barely maintaining our life-cycle.”
RVC resident Sarah McFarlane sent an email to the Rocky View Weekly stating she felt with the limited MSI funding available, to use it for a new municipal facility would be “unconscionable.”
“These funds could be leveraged for much more important, impactful projects like fire protection, policing, recreation, parks, roads, and road maintenance,” she said.
“Future access to these funds will be needed for many issues the county will encounter, not to get new digs for councillors.”
However, Robinson said the need for a new municipal facility is a priority for the County. In 2006, RVC commissioned reports on the health of the current municipal building, which was initially designed to have a second storey.
“We wanted to determine if that was still a feasible option, and to look at what else we could do for our space needs,” he said.
“This led to additional studies, and eventually council and administration decided our current location (within the City of Calgary) was just not something we supported staying in.”
Councillor Al Sacuta said he felt the argument against renovating the existing building is a “straw man argument,” used to “make the other option look better.”
He moved to remove the item from the budget entirely, which failed 3-6. Councillors Bruce Kendall, Greg Boehlke, Earl Solberg, Rolly Ashdown, Liz Breakey and Deputy Reeve Lois Habberfield opposed the motion.
Ashdown clarified with RVC administration that approval of the budget with the $32 million included would not mean the County is committed to the construction of the new facility.
A motion by Reeve Margaret Bahcheli to engage the public further regarding the new facility prior to budget finalization in April was carried 7-2, with Habberfield and Boehlke voting in opposition.
A date has not been set for public engagement opportunities at this time.
