The elite and special interest groups that have been able to run this city without much interference in the past decade (and more) now has an independent group questioning their actions.
This group is saying that what these folks have done in the past isn't in the best interests of the regular everyday taxpayer in St. Albert. It has provided information about rapidly increasing taxes and spending decisions that have not gone well. The St. Albert Taxpayers Association (SATA) is also saying in the upcoming election you have a chance to change things, should you choose. This is a healthy debate that should be welcomed as part of being engaged in community. Yet SATA has been the victim of rumour and attacks in the local papers and in local online blogs (usually by members or supporters of these special interest groups). SATA members are labelled as whiners and complainers by those who would like to see continued high spending on what the elite wants. If you don't like it then move is their mantra. Yet SATA was instrumental in having council change its mind about loading the taxpayer with $95 million in off-site levies for the annexed lands. The less than three per cent property tax raise this year was probably also influenced by them and the upcoming municipal election. Maybe the “squeaking” is because it’s felt they are becoming a threat to the status quo.
Then comes the Akinsdale boondoggle. Anyone who knows anything about change (and with all the staff in the city, there has to be someone) knows that when you are surprised by change and believe you have no opportunity to influence it, then you are unlikely to accept it. The residents of the area, including those who back on the green space and stand to lose $30,000 to $50,000 in property value, stood up and fought the proposal. They are forced into suing city council and the school board. I have yet to see any neighbourhood with green space in St. Albert stand up and say, “Come take our green space, we'd welcome that high density development over here.” Yet Akinsdale residents were attacked as mean-spirited, “not-in-my-backyard” complainers. So much for tolerance of difference of opinion in St. Albert.
Most recently comes a clever ad in the paper showing a heavy boot descending on an unsuspecting taxpayer. It asks council to stop being out of touch and indifferent regarding issues of concerns to residents. It cites three: downtown area redevelopment plan, high taxes, and 70 Arlington Dr. But with the lack of tolerance for debate by some in this community, the supporters of this ad now get attacked by letter writers as cowardly ... because they didn't sign it. Since when does one have to sign an ad?
My request to the everyday St. Albertan is to vote this election. Look at what has happened in this city and ask, “Do you want it to continue or do you want it to stop.” And if you want it to stop, then vote for those candidates who will bring change.
Emile Royer, St. Albert
