Dust control

[kpb]

kpb, it does get discouraging, but the only way to send messages to elected officials is to get involved and recruit people of integrity to run in elections then help get them elected.

[kpb]

cowman, linda etc. how much do your councillors get paid per km for travelling on county business.
The provincial government just raised the per km rate for employee use of private vehicles to .43 per km.
Most municipalities were at .45 long before the price of gasoline increased so I am betting they are around .50 by now.

[cakadu]

Last I heard it was 50 cents/km, but they have had that rate for at least 2 years and certainly long before any of the gas hikes we've seen recently.

So, I want to make sure that I have this abundantly clear....when the councillor in my division gets on the radio and says that HE is not in favor of an elected reeve, then he is doing his job?

I thought that the "job" of any elected official was to see to it that the wishes of constituents were brought forth to the table. When it comes to the good of the county as a whole, - personal ideas and/or agendas of an individual councillor do not and should not enter into the equation. If the majority of residents in the division are telling him that they want an elected reeve, then does it not behoove him to work to that effect and not go against the wishes of the people that he has been elected to serve?

How many more times are we going to have to tell this council that we wish to move towards an elected reeve, before they will get the message that it is what the county residents want?

Cowman, and others, in all your years when has going along to get along ever brought sustainable results? Is it really such a "scratch my back" world?

[cakadu]

It sounds as though that individual councillor needs to be replaced next election, if in fact, the majority of ratepayers voted for an elected Reeve.

An elected Reeve is not always the answer, it is still a popularity contest at election time so it is up to the voters to ensure that they know the candidates, know where they stand on important issues facing the county etc., and also be aware of any help they may be getting from special interest groups that may expect to have influence after the election !

[cowman]

Linda: Without a doubt! If you want to succeed in just about any business it is definitely "one hand washes the other"!
Sometimes it is very blatant and sometimes subtle? Lots of times I have "bought" jobs with a case of whiskey and one time even a pair of cowboy boots! That's just how it is. It's business.
In politics if a councillor is totally contrary and votes against the other guys when their pet project comes up it is unlikely to get any support? So in effect the councillor has become totally ineffective!
I too, was a little bit miffed when your councillor questioned the elected reeve thing in the papers. I guess he doesn't understand what democracy means either?
I see the elected reeve as a positive? He will be full time and hopefully will keep a check on the CAO? I believe the CAO takes his marching orders from council and not the other way around?
Emerald: When you say councillors are supposed to act for the overall county technically you are probably right, but in politics you get elected by what you do for the people who get you there? You take care of the home boys and they'll continue to put you back in!

[cakadu]

Sigh, emrald, we tried to replace him. Guess it will be up for grabs again next time.

The ratepayers in the county as a whole did vote to have the elected reeve issue go forward. This councillor has about 1800 ratepayers in his division - maybe a few more - and a grand total of 628 came out to vote in the last election - about 1/3. Do you think that the ratepayers in the division clearly stated they didn't want an elected reeve or is it a matter of the 300 odd that voted for him that count?

Cowman, I wish I could say that I am shocked by what you say, but sadly, I'm not. I do know what you say to be true and it just doesn't seem to be the way to do business to me - but clearly, that is what makes the world go round.

Doesn't it make you wonder where things are going to end up when even at the local level, things don't work?

[cowman]

Well Linda it is sad that 300 committed voters can decide a devision but it seems to be the way "democracy" is going? Perhaps the 300 see it the same way as the councillor and have no interest in changing the system? If his 300 remain committed I suspect he will have it in the bag when the next election rolls around? When we get down to 33% voting it isn't much of a democracy?
His contention that an elected reeve would cost a lot more because of a full time position and added divisions is sort of a red herring? The acting reeve recieves basically a full time salary now when you add up all his per diems and perks? I believe two years ago he was in the mid $90s? In reality it wouldn't be all that hard to eliminate one division instead of adding another?
I think the biggest fear about an elected reeve is that coucil might get some outsider in who wouldn't go along with the "old boys club"!
And in a way that could be a valid concern? Also the reeves position could be used for purposes other than the best interests of the county? Like a stepping stone to bigger things?

[cowman]

cowman, Linda, it will cost more to have an elected reeve because they do have more obligations and are expected to represent the county at considerably more functions for some reason.
In my view good governance does not cost it reaps benefits for the municipality if council and administration work as a team for the best interest of the electorate.

In all my years on council I did look at the big picture when making decisions and sometimes that cost me support in my own division, because some special interest groups were making demands for projects that were not in my opinion priorities eg: paving every local road before rebuilding roads in other divisions that were in extremely poor condition.

I know approximately 75% of elected officials in rural Alberta, and there are some excellent councils that are doing a very good job, but I am willing to bet that they have their detractors at home too. In my view the public often doesn't care about fairness or the big picture, they only think about their own little corner of the world and expect their councillor to do the same.
I will never forget the call I received from a lady that chose to live along a very busy resource road, she demanded that I vote in favor of banning ALL resource traffic from her road because they were ruining HER dust control !!!!!

She didn't like the answer I gave her and to this day will not speak to me if I meet her anywhere !!!

[cowman]

I talked to the county guy yesterday who oversees the private contracts for maintaining the roads in the eastern portion of the county. He said the way it looks now is the county will lose one division. Naturally it will be a rural division and in all probability the elected reeve will come out of a "urbanite" area?
Now that scenario is a little bit unsettling? We are fast becoming a county of "urbanites" and agriculture is losing its influence. Who knows what goofy restrictions or laws a largely urban type council might come up with?
In a way it has already been happening? The roads around the more populated areas get a lot more attention than out in the sticks and a majority of the tax dollars are going for infrastructure in the area around Red Deer. Which is right I guess but it is frustrating to live on roads that haven't seen any gravel for years?

[farmers_son]

Re: an elected Reeve. The disadvantage of having an elected reeve is that presumably 2 or 3 top people will run for the job but only one gets in. The other 2 cannot also run for council so the community looses the benefit of their direct input. If the reeve is chosen from amongst the councilors whoever does not get chosen for reeve still remains on council. I think that is an important point.

As was pointed out the reeve has no real power on his/her own but does choose who sits on the various committees. Most ratepayers will never sit in on a council meeting and will not know who does a good job of chairing meetings or works well with administration and would not really be knowledgeable voters when it came to electing a reeve.

Good governance is not guaranteed by having an elected reeve but rather by attracting good people to do the job whether that job is sit on council or act as reeve. I think if the reeve is chosen from amongst the councilors that there would a different dynamic on council, more cooperative. There is always the possibility that an elected reeve may not have the respect of council.

Re fewer councilors. On many councils three or so councilors may take the lead role, sit on the most committees and take the most interest in council affairs. However that does not mean that there should only be three councilors. I prefer to see more councilors rather than less as it simply provides more oversight of council affairs. I know one municipality near me has all councilors sitting on all committees as that way committee recommendations do not have to be reviewed again later.

[farmers_son]

farmers_son the Reeve may or may not vote on who sits on committees of council depending on how the Reeve;s duties are decided upon. This decision is up to council as a whole as is the decision about how committee appointments are made.
Urban Mayors often delegate committee postitions but rural councils are bound by the Municipal Government Act to vote on this matter at the annual organizational meeting. In municipalities where the Reeve is elected by council this process also is part of the annual organizational meeting. An elected Reeve will be in place for the entire three year term.
Dirty politics can play a part in the reeve election amongst council and the main reason for municipalities even considering an elected reeve is because of the gong shows that have gone on in numerous counties !

[farmers_son]

cowman the contract grader operator likely knows as much about how the divisions are going to be restructured as my donkeys !
This has to be done by way of by-law and all electors in the county will have input.

[farmers_son]

farmers_son it is impossible for all councillors to sit on all committees. The Municipal Government Act clearly states that members at large must be appointed to either the Municpal Planning Commission or the Subdivision and Development Appeal Board. The same councillors cannot sit on both.

Some counties have all council as members of their Agricultural Service Board and this goes back to the days when Counties and Municipal Districts had different requirements regarding membership on the ASB under the old Ag Service Board Act.

Counties at that time had all members of council on the ASB where MD's were required to have a combination of members of council and members of the public .

I have always been very strongly in favor of having members of the public on the planning commission, intermunicipal planning commission and also the ASB.

Actually the Reeve's main role is to chair the council meeting and attend functions but any good reeve will delegate the latter amongst council members. Being a good public speaker helps but lord knows there are few reeves that are stellar speakers !!

[cakadu]

Farmers_son, your points about the Eeeve being elected at large or by council members are valid and do make sense. In counties where the councillors have not changed in years, sometimes even decades, electing the Reeve just from the councillors can be a huge problem. Add to that the fact that there is always some new blood coming in, which you need as far as I'm concerned, and the new councillors will not know enough about the incumbents/other councillors to make an informed decision as to who will make the best choice for Reeve.

As the Reeve is chosen as soon after the election as possible, if you have councillors who do not have the knowledge and/or backbone to go against the flow, then it more or less becomes a popularity contest, or more likely whom that councillor is told will make the best choice.

Cowman, if the councillors are supposed to have the interests of the entire county in mind, then pet projects shouldn't enter into it and decisions should be made on the merits of what is being proposed, not on who will vote with you next time.

Quite frankly, the choice for Reeve should be made by more than just those that sit on the council. The Reeve is there at the whim of the other councillors, which like him or not, one councillor in our municipality proved. You don't necessarily get the independent thought that should be going into decisions.

It is not an easy issue to decide, but it seems to me that there is a reason why most municipalities go the elected at large route.

[cakadu]

Linda there is less than 15% of counties currently electing their Reeve at Large.

Sturgeon County;Parkland County;Strathcona County;Yellowhead County; Brazeau County;Lesser Slave River and perhaps a couple more.

Leduc County is considering electing the Reeve at large next election as I gather is Red Deer County. I don't know of any in the south that elect the Reeve at large at this time.

I have always felt it unfortunate when politics enters into the selection of reeve by council. I have seen some excellent Reeve's who really were leaders on council be turfed as Reeve due to some backroom politics.

Our County voted by a huge margin to go to an elected reeve mainly to get rid of what we had, but I would be willing to bet that in a few years time the citizens would be willing to change back if they saw good leadership amongst all members of council. The cost of council is way way up here, going from five to seven .