Dear editor:
Re: ‘Rocky View County council addresses new municipal building; responds to councillor’s letter to the editor,’ July 23, 2015.
Rocky View County (RVC) council’s rebuttal letter was written to refute my claims that the new administration building is an absolute waste of your money. This is the case of defending the indefensible. A few examples:
- To date, RVC has “invested $800,000 in a master site design.” That may be true, but having wasted $800,000 is hardly a reason to waste an additional $42M;
- “This has not been a matter that has been rash…” It is and has been very rash and exceedingly irresponsible;
- An explanation of why RVC administration cannot function with far less costly satellite offices. Satellite offices would be preferable (if and when needed). The federal and provincial governments have dozens of satellite offices. So do the American, British, French, German, etc. governments;
- Voting in favour of the new building takes “political bravery.” It is the opposite case. It is noteworthy that Reeve Margaret Bahcheli signed council’s letter, yet she was one of the few councillors who spoke and voted against it, and she spoke strongly against it. So why did she sign their letter? The five council members who voted in favour (councillors Boehlke, Breakey, Habberfield, Kendall and Solberg) don’t want their names attached and thereby insisted it was Bahcheli’s function, as reeve, to sign on behalf of the council majority. I don’t know if it was her function to do so or not, but the relevant point is that the five don’t want their names attached and thereby insisted on hiding behind Bahcheli. So much for the courage of their convictions.
- “We (council) will continue to work together…” No we won’t. If the majority of council insists on wasting your money and delaying or omitting your needed infrastructure projects, the responsible minority will continue to oppose them in every possible manner and at every possible opportunity.
- The cost estimate for the new administration building is $42M. RVC has rarely, if ever, not gone significantly over budget.
- The $42M excludes staff time. It took council, aided by administration, five days to write their rebuttal letter. I repeat…five days. That’s not as long as it may seem. It takes a lot of time and planning when you are trying to hide facts and fool the public.
- Council will tell you the new building is needed for the convenience of staff. Most RVC staff members live in Calgary, even south Calgary, so it will be a much further drive for them to go to Balzac. Besides, in a few years the new leg of the LRT will practically go to the door of the current administrative centre.
- Council will also tell you the current building is too small for the total number of RVC staff, yet it exceeds the recommended sq. ft/employee standards of either the provincial or federal governments. In addition, many RVC staff members (firefighters, road crews, etc.) never go to the administration building.
- Council has and will tell you that $32M of the $42M is guaranteed by the provincial MSI (Municipal Sustainability Initiative) program (intended for roads, drainage, bridges and other needed infrastructure) over the remaining five years of the program. Guaranteed? Provincial regulations highlight: “Please note, acceptance of a project on the basis of estimated future funding does not guarantee program continuance or the timing and amount of future funding. MSI funding is subject to program changes and the availability of provincial funding for the program.” What if the program is discontinued or cut back? Because of the oil price and generally weak economy this is a distinct possibility. Then your taxes would have to be raised to cover the difference (at the moment the cost of the new administration building is $4,500 for the average family of four, assuming there are no cost over runs).
Writing to the five councillors (named above) who are responsible for dissipating your money probably won’t get you very far, as they are not likely to answer you.
Jerry Arshinoff, RVC councillor
The Eagle does not normally look to publish letters to the editor from political figures, but do so when a matter, such as the approval of the RVC municipal building, becomes a highly contentious issue, and we feel our readers would be best served hearing from both sides of the matter and can make up their own minds based on the information provided.
