On Monday, Council will be debating the construction of an indoor sport field. The proposal is to build a 135,000 square foot dome in the Trader Ridge Area. It will artificial turf large enough to host a full-size, FIFA compliant 11v11 soccer game. However, it will have netting to allow the field to be divided into smaller configurations and markings to accommodate multiple sports. There are also plans for a secondary building containing locker rooms with showers, washrooms, reception, and storage. It is also hoped that a perimeter track can be included.

It is estimated that this will cost $16.4 million to build. The annual budget impact, including debt repayment, would be an estimated $660,000/year (equivalent to a tax increase of ~0.4%).

Some more information and thoughts:

It’s that time of year: BUDGET!

Next week, Council will be debating the 2025 Budget. I’d encourage you to take sometime to give the recommendations from Administration. You can find them in this draft budget book.

Five things to know as we get into these important discussions:

• Cost Control is always a priority. But heading into 2025, Administration has put renewed focus into reducing costs wherever possible without having a large impact on services.

• Despite efforts to reduce cost, there are still large upward pressures on the City’s Budget. The two big ones this year: the cancellation of a Stormwater Fee and Inflation. Additionally, headwinds from the last few years are still having a huge impact.

• Administration is recommending a tax increase of 4.75%. While this is higher than I like to see, it is lower increase than a lot of other Alberta cities are facing. It will also still mean that taxes have only gone up by about half the rate of inflation over 8 years.

• The Grande Prairie Police Service (GPPS) is is budgeted to cost municipal taxpayers less in 2025 than it would’ve cost to maintain the status quo RCMP contract.

• There are a variety of service enhancements, service cuts, and non-tax revenue strategies that Administration is recommending Council consider.

Below is an unpacking of these five subjects.

I'm seeing lots of conversation about this article coming out of the Alberta Municipalities conference this week. Speaking for me only, my personal opinion: while I disagree with this idea, I sure appreciated the conversation it was wrapped up in.

I’m seeing lots of conversation about how our taxes compare to other cities. Which is great! I love when people get interested in the work of Council. If you ever want to chat in depth: I’m always happy to meet for a coffee (or tea or other beverage of your choice).

But something I do want to contribute to the online discussion:

A reminder that tax RATE is very different than tax AMOUNT. And I’d suggest that RATE isn’t a great way to compare municipal finances since it is dependent on home values. To get math-classie:

Recently, downtown parking has been a topic of discussion at Council. This is always a touchy topic.

Some of my favourite spots to meet friends are in the City Centre and I make an effort to support our downtown businesses. I’m down there frequently. And I don’t find parking a huge issue. I’m almost always parking within a block of where I want to go. I often walk further to get from my car into Costco than I do to get into a downtown business.

But I also get that lots of people aren’t as comfortable with parking in tight spaces as I am. And many worry that they will have to walk far to get to a downtown business. Which leads to some customers choosing to shop, eat or drink elsewhere just because of parking concerns. This has an impact.

I don’t know if big changes are justified at this time. But there might be some tweaks that could be made, especially concerning enforcement in short term parking zones. And as our community grows, change will be needed eventually. It is worth doing some planning for that now.

Following is a bit more history and thinking on this conversation.

Important note: this is my personal blog. Any mistakes or opinions expressed here belong to me and me alone, not to City Council or Administration.

Both housing and affordability have been huge topics of conversation around the Council table. People already in Grande Prairie are having trouble finding places to live. And employers are reporting challenges attracting needed employees to our region due to a lack of housing options.

A great deal of effort has gone into attracting apartment building investment. Council has also changed rules to make townhouse development easier. In my mind, these kinds of built forms are the most promising ways to add housing stock into our community.

However, all solutions should be explored. Council has also been talking about the current rules around Secondary Suites. There is openness to re-considering the rules around Secondary Suites, but I don’t think anyone wants a repeat of certain neighbourhoods where past lax rules made for very challenging places to live.

Eight potential amendments to the Land Use Bylaw are coming to Council on Monday….

On Thursday, the Provincial Government introduced Bill 20 which amends the Municipal Government Act (MGA) and the Local Authorities Election Act (LAEA).

Those who pay attention to Alberta politics were expecting this Bill to contain a single major and deeply unpopular change: the introduction of political parties into municipal elections. At a recent Alberta Municipalities Convention, the Premier said parties are needed largely because of alleged problems with big money being spent in municipal politics.

However, instead of that one anticipated change, Bill 20 includes MANY changes not just to municipal elections but also to municipal governance. These DRASTICALLY weaken local democracy across Alberta. And if the Premier was worried about corporate and unions spending money in elections before, she should be terrified now: they are poised to be able to donate directly to candidates.

Bill 20 is an incredibly troubling piece of legislation. The most problematic part of it: by taking away power from voters and assigning it to the provincial Cabinet, it fundamentally weakens Council as local democratic bodies.

I’ve really appreciated the many conversations I’ve been having with residents about stormwater. Thank you to everyone who is taking the time to ask questions and share your thoughts. Especially if you have been willing to do so in person at the Open House or by meeting for coffee.

An observation: most of the concerns I’m hearing aren’t necessarily about the specifics on how we finance the expenses for stormwater. Instead, objections to a Stormwater Utility Model are often (but not always!) ACTUALLY about wider concerns with the City’s budget in general. Which is fair! I think more can be done to communicate it well. And there will always be lots of debate about where the right balance is between keeping things affordable and maintaining the levels of service residents need and expect.

Next week, I’m hoping to make a post with some thoughts on the City’s overall budget and approach to spending. I look forward to more conversation about that.

But here, I’m going to focus on stormwater alone.