Municipal jurisdiction
Published July 18, 2008
Last week's article focused on the resentment folks often feel about the complexity of rules and regulations that marks the increase in size and population of this municipality. Today, I would like to ponder the obverse of that coin: jurisdiction and the fact that the municipality does not intervene in certain areas that some residents believe it should. Provincial legislation through the Municipal Government Act outlines quite precisely the extent to which a municipality may meddle in the lives of its citizens. The other orders of government, Federal and Provincial, guard their own powers jealously. Very often there are grey areas, particularly in provincial matters. In these cases, municipalities and the provincial departments attempt to work together constructively to solve problems.
When residents are unhappy, the first call they make is usually to the County. We know more about local conditions and County officials tend to be easier to track down. A difficulty arises when residents are unaware of the municipality's jurisdictional limits. While Strathcona County departments are very good at assisting callers to find the right place for help or even facilitating the process, there are nevertheless some things that we simply do not have the legal power to remedy. When we point this out, we are sometimes accused of "passing the buck" an inaccurate characterisation of what is nothing more than an acknowledgement that as much as we may wish to resolve a problem, it may not be within our power to do so.
There is a slightly different problem when no rule exists to cover a particular issue. This arises often particularly during the lush summer growing season when lawns and gardens are on the minds of many. Both the municipality and the Province have a legal obligation to control the spread of noxious weeds either by destroying them or by insisting that the landowner do so. However, as annoying as it may be to their neighbours, landowners have a perfect right to long grass and dandelions, neither of which falls under the definition of noxious weed. No government has the moral right, to regulate aesthetic values, though some may try. Other examples abound ranging from the control of domestic animals to the storage of vehicles to sidewalk snow removal.
The municipality must tread a fine line between the desires of those who object to any interference in their lives and those who seek a rule-based society with every detail of life subject to minute scrutiny. Then there are those who seek rules for others and complete freedom for themselves. The only thing that we can predict with certainty is that the suite of rules that we settle on will not please everyone.
Alan Dunn
Councillor, Ward 6
780-464-8206
dunn@strathcona.ab.ca
Last updated: Wednesday, March 10, 2010
Page ID: 2072