Breakups are tough, especially when it’s not mutual. When one party leaves a relationship the other is often left with hurt feelings, recounting missed warning signs of what went wrong. Getting over it takes time, but eventually both parties have to face the fact that the relationship is over.
St. Albert and Sturgeon County might not be quarrelling lovers, but both municipalities certainly are entering the next phase of their relationship. Sturgeon precipitated the breakup when county council decided to repeal the intermunicipal development plan (IDP) that, for nine years, governed growth and future annexations in a swath of land north and east of St. Albert. It was a planning bylaw both entered in good faith but only one left willingly. When things went awry, the city did what anyone desperate to avoid a breakup would do — attempt a last-minute reconciliation with an open, honest letter. Sturgeon didn’t waver, signalling, ‘it’s not you, it’s me.’
Even before the latest sting of rejection the city displayed the messiest breakup trait — denial. Not only did city council opt against following Sturgeon’s lead and repealing the IDP locally, St. Albert plans to continuing referring to the document as if nothing happened. That means when a new development is proposed near St. Albert’s boundary, city council will continue to object, citing sections of the IDP. The only natural response for Sturgeon is to point out the IDP no longer applies. You see where this is headed.
Despite talk of finding new forms of co-operation post-IDP, it’s unclear if St. Albert and Sturgeon can remain just friends or whether we’re about to see a return to intermunicipal conflicts. Both sides will do whatever they feel is right for local taxpayers. For St. Albert, that means stonewalling any development on the fringe that could mess up future annexations and where property taxes don’t benefit the city. For Sturgeon, that means diversifying the tax base by pushing for new industrial, commercial and residential development.
The first test of the new relationship isn’t far off. Two developments, Quail Ridge and Northern Lights, are acreage subdivisions proposed near St. Albert in areas the city wants to annex one day. Alternatively, St. Albert wants to create a new industrial park in the northwest, an area annexed from Sturgeon County under the pretence of building mostly residential development.
Neither municipality is likely to soften its stance, which raises the question of what’s going to give. Part of Sturgeon’s rationale for scrapping the IDP was the advent of a new regional growth plan endorsed by the premier, however as the city points out that doesn’t drill down to specific land uses. Taking away the IDP also takes away an agreed upon dispute resolution process. It remains to be seen how well the Capital Region Board can resolve intermunicipal disputes or whether St. Albert and Sturgeon will once again face off across a mediator’s table, at the Municipal Government Board or even in Court of Queen’s Bench.
Of course it is possible that co-operation and consensus will win the day, saving this relationship. It’s certainly a good sign that both parties show a willingness to work together, even if the process has changed. However, even an amicable separation can turn sour once old arguments start to creep into the equation. Only time will tell if reconciliation is possible.
