Dear Editor,
Re: the former Mayor’s editorial comments last week.
Additional perspective is needed for a community to weigh full pros and cons of a community choice about its future: 1) Local water solutions are at the mercy of provincial policy, and that takes time to resolve. The local watershed can accommodate more population if we had more futuristic provincial perspective on urban versus irrigation water rights in the Sheep River watershed, if the Province would consider return flow credits for the vast majority of water supply we put back into the river, or if the new water market system was tossed because water should be a right as opposed to a commodity that holds communities ransom. 2) Population growth does not pay for itself; it’s a mortgage. Today’s tax challenge is a product of past population growth. Tomorrow’s revenue from new growth becomes a drug that’s needed to feed catch-up with service demand created by yesterday’s growth. That doesn’t mean it’s a good way to do business. Commercial and industrial expansion generates fiscal sustainability, and there’s enough zoned land to achieve that. 3) A financial sustainability study completed by the Town a few years ago indicated the community was financially sustainable at a build out population. That conclusion doesn’t say the community is in peril if it doesn’t continue to grow. 4) Any pipeline solution that exceeds local carrying capacity is a double digit million dollar expense. To date, there’s no indication Okotoks taxpayers will avoid a significant immediate (capital) or enduring (higher utility rates) expense. 5) Any pipeline debate must include careful negotiation to preserve autonomy that has helped make Okotoks a magnet for people tired of things they don’t like about other communities.
What’s great about Okotoks is it’s a leader that embraces new ideas and innovation. Just because common Canadian view is that bigger is better doesn’t mean Okotoks has to be a follower. A decision to grow should be for all the right reasons, not because we think entrenched business models elsewhere are right business models for our context. We’re also missing a point. For 13 years, Sustainable Okotoks has been driven by a desire to be “better” than it already is. I would, therefore, reframe the question we should ask councillors: what are we actively working on to deliver “better?” Perhaps growth is part of the answer. Perhaps it’s not.
Chris Fields
Okotoks
