Like many people, I’ve always felt that politics at the municipal level is not only the most civil, but it’s where the public’s interests are most likely to get a fair shake. It would be a shame if that were to change in this province.
Alberta’s UCP government has been making noises recently about introducing party politics to the local level, having conducted two surveys last fall that contemplate changes to the Local Authorities Election Act and Municipal Government Act.
The results of these surveys have yet to be made public, but the last thing we need at the local level is the rancor of provincial and federal politics, where the goal is ostensibly for one side to demonize the other. The us-against-them mentality pervasive in politics at the highest levels has no place around the local council or school board table.
The refreshing part of governing at the municipal level is that politicians can vote as they see fit; they’re not beholden to a particular party or ideology, but remain unencumbered, able to approach each issue with an open mind.
It's not uncommon to see two councillors vote in sync on one agenda item only to take opposite sides on the next one, which is their prerogative and the beauty of municipal politics.
As the idea of party politics at the local level tries to gain traction, I can’t help but wonder what that might mean in terms of the ability to speak your mind and how issues might be treated differently if mayors and councillors were effectively turned into farm teams for the big league up north.
Take the Local Government Fiscal Framework for example. Most local governments, including Okotoks, believe that the provincial government is shortchanging them when it comes to funding municipal infrastructure projects like fire halls, recreational facilities and roads.
For the past decade, Okotoks has received, on average, $5.805 million annually from the Province for these kinds of projects, however it will only get $3.438 million in 2024 and $3.968 million in 2025, which means the $193 in per capita funding over the past decade will drop to $105 this year and $119 in 2025. Put another way, provincial government spending on local infrastructure has declined from 3.7 per cent of its total spending a decade ago to just one per cent today.
Local politicians are free to point this out, and loudly lobby to try and rectify the situation, even if it might embarrass the provincial government, but what if that wasn’t the case, what if they were on the same team as their provincial counterparts and unable to raise such objections?
What’s worse, what if it wasn’t just lobbying efforts that were compromised, but also decisions made at local tables? What if the outcomes of those votes had more to do with serving outside masters than doing what’s best for the community’s interests?
That’s not to suggest all decisions made at local council tables are the right ones or that all constituents agree with those outcomes, but I think we’re better off in the long run when council members aren’t told how to vote.
