Lacombe with Scott Dallas

05/12/2026

The May 11, 2026 Council meeting had a few takeaways: Firehalls good - Gas stations bad!

There was hint of "take your medicine" to the public with the decision regarding the Firehall location. As expected, the Woodland Drive (Ball Diamond) location was selected. Sometimes as a Councillor you have to do what you believe to be best for the community, even when the community doesn't agree with you. Hundreds of residents, Lacombe Minor Softball Association members, Kinsmen Association members, and community members all said no thank you to this location. The reason I highlight this is that, just a month before, Council was seen as appeasing a NIMBY group of around 40 who opposed the conversion of a greenspace into a commercial lot (I have more thoughts on this below and this ties into Councillor Span's Notice of Motion at the end of this meeting too). So I asked myself how they would justify this decision a month later when the number of people opposing this firehall location was far greater. They justified it by saying concerns were disproven and unfounded. Medicine swallowed.

Three locations were previously shortlisted and evaluated. In the end, the chosen Woodland Drive location will be fine. It's always been the right choice based on data and I voted in favour of it in the past. A month ago, Councillor Span had made a motion to include a 4th site on the other side of the tracks. It was defeated (this is a recurring theme), not because he was wrong, but because he should have requested it months before when they previously narrowed down the best locations, ran tests, and did site evaluations.

Now let's go back a month to that Municipal Reserve to Commercial Zoning change discussion. That is the only logical reason I can see for Councillor Span's odd Notice of Motions that came on May 11. Council seemed reluctant to make the decision on leaving the green space beside Wilson's Funeral home alone instead of transitioning it into a commercial lot. Councillor Span voted in favour of the change but was defeated 6-1 (recurring theme). Councillor Contenti said he campaigned on development (hinting he should be saying yes to commercial zoning just because) but would listen to the people in this case. Councillor Dykslag said she was content with how it is for now. I appreciated the "for now" comment because I am on the record saying neighbourhoods, playgrounds, greenspaces, and community needs change with time and our views can't be stagnant when change is needed. This is not the time though and additionally it could set a precedent that Municipal Reserves are open game which results in erosion of protected public lands.

Here's why Span and Contenti are both wrong in their mindsets, despite Contenti voting in a way that best suited my interests (I live beside this lot). Just making commercial lots does not spur development. As you drive through the City, you will notice undeveloped lots and vacant units that need tenants already. These are in the industrial area, along highway 2A, in the downtown core, and most obviously at Midway on highway 12. Adding one blank lot does nothing for these existing spaces except devalue all of them. It also shows a lack of understanding and commitment to existing developments that are properly zoned and serviced. The second reason why they misrepresented their development campaign promises is the donation of the City-owned lot beside the Police station to the Lacombe Fish and Game Society (absolutely nothing against LFGS - they asked and they received which is an incredible get for them). Giving away an industrial lot (with discretionary Commercial zoning) that could have potentially been worth up to $400,000 plus the future tax revenue of a building that would likely exceed $1 million should have been seen as blasphemy for these "Development First" Councillors. You can't tell people you are pro-development while actively making decisions that result in no land-sale revenue, reduce development opportunities, and provide no increase to the tax base.

Back to May 11, 2026
Councillor Span:
Be it resolved that Council direct Administration to prepare an amending bylaw for first reading to change Cannabis Retail Sales in the C4 District from a Permitted Use to a Discretionary Use.
Councillor Span:
Be it resolved that Council direct Administration to prepare an amending bylaw for first reading to change Gas Station in the C4 District from a Permitted Use to a Discretionary Use.

Both of these businesses types were specifically identified by the public feedback portion of the meeting a month ago. So, it sounds like he heard that the public would have been okay with the zoning change had there been less risk of the lot turning into either of these two business types. He is very wrong, people didn't want any commercial there. This type of zoning use change is short sighted, unnecessary, and would add additional red tape for no reason. Again, you can't claim to be pro-development while simultaneously making development harder. Anyways, he received very little support for these Notice of Motions and they were defeated (here is that theme again) with many suggestions recommending to bring these ideas to Strategic Planning (the right path).

03/28/2026

Over the last few months, I have received the same question a lot. What are you doing now? When I answer I’m usually self deprecating and that probably does me no favours. That being said, I have been up to a bit. I still work 40 hours a week as a Construction and Maintenance Coordinator for another municipality. After work hours I am still finding ways to stay involved in the Lacombe community.

𝐋𝐚𝐜𝐨𝐦𝐛𝐞 𝐃𝐚𝐲𝐬 - I have stayed on as a board member for the Lacombe Days committee and our group meets regularly to bring forward another July weekend full of great events! https://lacombedays.ca/

The next three things just kind of fell into place in one evening while I was attending the Lacombe Memorial Centre.

𝐀𝐥𝐛𝐞𝐫𝐭𝐚 𝐓𝐨𝐫𝐲 𝐏𝐚𝐫𝐭𝐲 – it should come as no surprise that politics interest me. So, when I saw the Alberta Tory Party was having their first meeting under the new name I made sure to attend. This wound up being the constituency’s foundation meeting and that feels pretty special. On Mach 30, 2026 there will be a gathering for relaxed conversation about thoughtful leadership and responsible government in Alberta. I encourage anyone who is interested in Alberta and our future to join in to share thoughts or even just listen. No party membership or requirement to buy one needed. I am attaching a poster for this meetup. https://www.albertatory.ca/

𝐃𝐞𝐦𝐨𝐜𝐫𝐚𝐜𝐲 𝐌𝐞𝐞𝐭𝐢𝐧𝐠 (𝐨𝐫𝐢𝐠𝐢𝐧𝐚𝐥 𝐬𝐢𝐠𝐧) -> 𝐄𝐧𝐠𝐚𝐠𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐢𝐧 𝐃𝐞𝐦𝐨𝐜𝐫𝐚𝐜𝐲 (𝐝𝐞𝐜𝐢𝐝𝐞𝐝 𝐮𝐩𝐨𝐧 𝐠𝐫𝐨𝐮𝐩 𝐧𝐚𝐦𝐞) – this group of people happened to be having their first meeting in the room beside the Alberta Tory Party. I boldly walked in and asked what they were doing and then ran in as soon as the other meeting was over. 20 people had gathered to just sit and have a non-partisan round table talk about Lacombe, Alberta, and Canada. It was beautiful and I am so grateful I stumbled across it. I just attended theirs and my third meeting. I have gone home after each meeting feeling positive and if you want to attend, please message me or comment and I’ll ensure you have the next date/time.

𝐋𝐚𝐜𝐨𝐦𝐛𝐞 𝐏𝐚𝐥𝐥𝐢𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐯𝐞 𝐂𝐚𝐫𝐞 𝐒𝐨𝐜𝐢𝐞𝐭𝐲 – the President of this board also happened to be the organizer of the Democracy Meeting, and she invited me to the upcoming Lacombe Palliative Care Society AGM. I attended and am now a member of this board as well. It is not something I had ever really thought about but understood what it was in simple terms. I’m looking forward to learning more and finding my fit in supporting this group. https://lacombepalliativecare.ca/

In addition to this I am completing my Project Management Extension Certificate through Mount Royal University. Hopefully by the end of April? Then there are family things like dance, softball, trips, house repairs, car repairs, and so on. So in short, I have stayed busy and it seems to be working. Thanks for checking in!

02/03/2026

If you saw my last post, you saw that I am unhappy with local representatives pushing partisan rhetoric in their joint statement. This isn’t unique to them, nor is it out of character, and it certainly isn’t isolated to a few politicians. We see it across Canada at all levels of government.⁣

I want it to stop. I want us to remember that we have more in common than we don’t. I want us to expect better from our leaders and give them a clear mandate to work together.⁣
We have been conditioned to believe that those on the right, those on the left, and those in the middle cannot align with one another. This style of partisan politics is dysfunctional and fails to serve the best interests of our communities, our provinces, and our country. This conditioning has shut down conversation, hardened divisions, and made it harder to solve real problems that affect everyone. Disagreement is natural and needed, but it needs to be less toxic.⁣
Partisan politics cause real harm:⁣
𝟏. 𝐓𝐡𝐞𝐲 𝐭𝐮𝐫𝐧 𝐩𝐫𝐨𝐛𝐥𝐞𝐦 𝐬𝐨𝐥𝐯𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐢𝐧𝐭𝐨 𝐭𝐞𝐚𝐦 𝐬𝐩𝐨𝐫𝐭 𝐛𝐞𝐡𝐚𝐯𝐢𝐨𝐮𝐫.⁣
Our issues become “us vs. them” contests, where winning the argument matters more than fixing the problem. Good ideas are ignored or dismissed simply because they come from the other side.⁣
𝟐. 𝐓𝐡𝐞𝐲 𝐞𝐫𝐨𝐝𝐞 𝐭𝐫𝐮𝐬𝐭 𝐢𝐧 𝐨𝐮𝐫 𝐢𝐧𝐬𝐭𝐢𝐭𝐮𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐬 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐢𝐧 𝐞𝐚𝐜𝐡 𝐨𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐫.⁣
When political language consistently paints opponents as evil, corrupt, or illegitimate, people stop trusting not just politicians, but elections, experts, and even their neighbours. This loss of trust makes it harder to agree on basic facts or work together during crises.⁣
𝟑. 𝐓𝐡𝐞𝐲 𝐝𝐢𝐬𝐜𝐨𝐮𝐫𝐚𝐠𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐨𝐮𝐠𝐡𝐭𝐟𝐮𝐥 𝐩𝐚𝐫𝐭𝐢𝐜𝐢𝐩𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐝𝐫𝐢𝐯𝐞 𝐠𝐨𝐨𝐝 𝐩𝐞𝐨𝐩𝐥𝐞 𝐚𝐰𝐚𝐲.⁣
Extreme rhetoric pushes reasonable voices out of the conversation. Many people disengage because the tone feels hostile, dishonest, or exhausting. The result is a louder, angrier political space dominated by extremes, not a healthier democracy.⁣

So why should we demand that our leaders and parties work together on solutions? Let’s look at voter percentages, both federally and provincially from our last elections.⁣

𝐅𝐞𝐝𝐞𝐫𝐚𝐥: Liberal 43.8%, Conservative 41.3%, Others 15% (Elections Canada)⁣
𝐏𝐫𝐨𝐯𝐢𝐧𝐜𝐢𝐚𝐥: UCP 52.6%, NDP 44%, Others 3.4% (Elections Alberta)⁣

As these numbers show, there is no single mandate to represent one group exclusively. Our leaders represent people across the political spectrum, regardless of which party they belong to.⁣
This applies to us on a personal level as well. Our families and neighbours may not share our beliefs, but we all deserve representation. We all deserve safe, healthy, and affordable communities. Failure to work together has created trade barriers, driven talk of separation across provinces, and has allowed governments on the right and the left to use Notwithstanding Clause and Emergencies Act. We need to demand more collaboration and elect those who will do it.

I wrote this several days ago and since then, MLA Johnson and MP Calkins met with several agriculture groups and local governments. My criticism of their initial statement stands, but this meeting shows the collaboration and conduct we should expect going forward. I do hope they invited MP MacDonald - Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food and have engaged him in conversation about the Liberal governments decision to close the Lacombe Research and Development Centre.

01/23/2026

The announcement of the Lacombe Agriculture Research facility closing does not come as a surprise to me, but is still beyond disappointing. I had made suggestions that the city make plans to purchase this property should something like this come to fruition - even though it is unlikely that the federal government would sell the land.

Federal MP: Blaine Calkins and Provincial MLA: Jennifer Johnson, released a joint statement that reads as a performative liberal bash. They should both be embarrassed by the letter they signed off and the amount of decorum it shows. Both of these individuals could have been working to better represent our community and express the importance of this facility before today. I, as a former one term Councillor look at this facility closure as a failure on my part. These two damn sure should be recognizing the failure they played in it too and making sure they act in a way that can work towards a resolution and not a name calling fit.

This line might actually hit if it didn't display such cognitive dissonance by Jennifer Johnson - "A trailblazing organization in our community for 119-years, now closing because of this governments’ radical anti-rural agenda." - read The Liberal Government. Ok, well what's UCPs excuse then? As they underfund and allow closures of their own research facilities and rural colleges like Northwestern Polytechnic - Fairview Campus.

Some commenters on their post suggested that the province could take over the facility. Well, what a terrible idea that would be. Directly across the highway is a former Alberta Research facility that was handed over to Olds College by the provincial government and has since been transformed into Western Crop Innovations. That facility has had its own struggles and in no way succeeds because of the provincial government.

My hope is that a plan and actual co-operation between the Federal Conservatives, Federal Liberals, UCP, County of Lacombe, and City of Lacombe can happen to save this facility. Its legacy and vital role in our incredible agricultural landscape are part of what make Lacombe, Alberta, and Canada so great.

PS: Please check out the Lacombe Musuem Virtual Exhibit regarding the Lacombe Experimental Station (Lacombe Research and Development Centre)

Officially founded in 1907, the Lacombe Experimental Station is still used for both research and recreation. From weddings on the picturesque grounds, to evening visitors out for a walk, to cattle sales in the Pavilion, the grounds serve the local community of Lacombe on a regular basis. In a sense,...

12/17/2025

It was a pretty light agenda for the council meeting on Monday, December 15. There was a presentation for strategic planning and some follow up documents regarding the strategic plan. Item 6.2 on the agenda had some really great information from local boards and groups who filled out surveys. If you have interest in these boards, I would definitely browse through the responses.

Item 6.3 - Electoral Boundary Review was of interest to see for a couple reasons. This item is not necessarily anything the City can control, but it does greatly impact residents and communities around us. Another reason it is of interest, is because Mary sent a letter to the Electoral Boundary Review Commission and included Mayor Hibbs in her reply. The full letter will be posted below and I encourage others to either copy it or write your own and submit to the commission before December 19, 2025. Maybe it's coincidence or maybe Mary deserves credit for putting this before Council. Either way, thank you to Mayor Hibbs for requesting this topic be reviewed at Council and for them approving the motion
"𝘛𝘏𝘈𝘛 𝘊𝘰𝘶𝘯𝘤𝘪𝘭 𝘥𝘪𝘳𝘦𝘤𝘵 𝘈𝘥𝘮𝘪𝘯𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘳𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘵𝘰 𝘱𝘳𝘦𝘱𝘢𝘳𝘦 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘴𝘶𝘣𝘮𝘪𝘵 𝘢 𝘭𝘦𝘵𝘵𝘦𝘳 𝘰𝘶𝘵𝘭𝘪𝘯𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘊𝘰𝘶𝘯𝘤𝘪𝘭-𝘪𝘥𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘪𝘧𝘪𝘦𝘥 𝘤𝘰𝘮𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘴 𝘳𝘦𝘨𝘢𝘳𝘥𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘱𝘰𝘴𝘦𝘥 𝘓𝘢𝘤𝘰𝘮𝘣𝘦–𝘙𝘰𝘤𝘬𝘺 𝘔𝘰𝘶𝘯𝘵𝘢𝘪𝘯 𝘏𝘰𝘶𝘴𝘦 𝘦𝘭𝘦𝘤𝘵𝘰𝘳𝘢𝘭 𝘥𝘪𝘷𝘪𝘴𝘪𝘰𝘯."
Mayor Hibbs provided comments which echoed Mary's letter(this is not a dig, I know Mayor Hibbs to be attuned politically and able to see these things herself too). CAO Goudy referenced current intermunicipal agreements and the regional water/wastewater systems that tie our current riding together(great points). Councillor Contenti asked if the riding would still keep the MLA office in Lacombe should the electoral boundary change. No one knows - as it depends on who the elected official is. Jason Nixon has his main office in Sundre and a satellite office in Rocky (and I do believe he could replace Jennifer Johnson as the UCP candidate should the riding change - ugh).

Anyways, please read Mary's letter below. She is brilliant, knows how things work, and can get her message across. Maybe the City should just use it and add in their points regarding intermunicipal agreements/partnerships?

October 30, 2025
TO:
Chair and Members
Alberta Electoral Boundaries Commission
Suite 500, 11510 Kingsway NW T5G 2Y5
Edmonton, Alberta
Dear Chair and Members of the Commission:
𝐑𝐞: 𝐂𝐨𝐧𝐜𝐞𝐫𝐧𝐬 𝐫𝐞𝐠𝐚𝐫𝐝𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐩𝐫𝐨𝐩𝐨𝐬𝐞𝐝 𝐧𝐞𝐰 𝐞𝐥𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐨𝐫𝐚𝐥 𝐝𝐢𝐯𝐢𝐬𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐨𝐟 𝐋𝐚𝐜𝐨𝐦𝐛𝐞 – 𝐑𝐨𝐜𝐤𝐲 𝐌𝐨𝐮𝐧𝐭𝐚𝐢𝐧 𝐇𝐨𝐮𝐬𝐞
I am writing as a concerned Albertan to provide feedback on the proposed electoral boundaries advanced in the 2025 Interim Report and to express my strong concerns about the proposed riding combining the Lacombe region and the Rocky Mountain House region. I strongly urge the Commission to reconsider this change for the following reasons:
𝟏. 𝐆𝐞𝐨𝐠𝐫𝐚𝐩𝐡𝐢𝐜 𝐂𝐨𝐡𝐞𝐫𝐞𝐧𝐜𝐞
An electoral division that joins the Lacombe area with the Rocky Mountain House area covers two very distinct regions with 𝐬𝐢𝐠𝐧𝐢𝐟𝐢𝐜𝐚𝐧𝐭𝐥𝐲 different community profiles, service-access patterns and economic bases. While the Commission’s report emphasizes that “effective representation” is supported by boundaries that respect communities of interest as well as manageable geographies, I believe this proposed riding 𝐟𝐚𝐢𝐥𝐬 both criteria. For example, residents in the Lacombe region tend to be oriented toward the Red Deer / Central Alberta corridor, with commuting patterns, service-centres and economic relationships aligned accordingly. In contrast, the Rocky Mountain House region is far more rural, far more dispersed, and faces hugely different logistical challenges (for example, access to health care, transportation, and support services) than the Lacombe/QE2 corridor. When a riding spans these very different zones, it will dilute representation for both. The Interim Report itself notes that geography, travel time, and size of electoral divisions matter for accessibility and effective engagement by constituents. While I recognize rural ridings inevitably cover large areas, combining two large and disparate zones increases that burden.
𝟐. 𝐈𝐦𝐩𝐚𝐜𝐭 𝐨𝐧 𝐫𝐞𝐬𝐢𝐝𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐬
Economic opportunity, employment-training, transit, childcare issues, and alike in the Lacombe-Ponoka area differ markedly from challenges in the Rocky Mountain House area (where lower population density, longer travel distances, and fewer service hubs are available). A single MLA covering this broad and diverse riding will struggle to engage meaningfully with both sets of needs. The report’s discussion of representation underlines that a Member of the Legislative Assembly must be able to connect with constituents across the riding, but overly large or heterogeneous ridings will impede that connection.
𝟑. 𝐀𝐜𝐜𝐞𝐬𝐬𝐢𝐛𝐢𝐥𝐢𝐭𝐲
The physical size and travel burden of a riding matter for constituents, especially those in more remote or disadvantaged situations. If the riding stretches across the Lacombe region and climbs into the Rocky Mountain House area, the distances and terrain covered may make it difficult for constituents to access their MLA’s office, attend community meetings or feel they are being heard. The Interim Report highlights that in rural areas, “the condition of roads, terrain, extreme weather and distance from major service centres” are among the factors that can hamper effective representation. In this proposed riding, many road-users, especially those in smaller communities and remote locations, may face significant logistical obstacles, meaning their voices risk being under-represented.
𝟒. 𝐖𝐞𝐚𝐤𝐞𝐫 𝐫𝐞𝐩𝐫𝐞𝐬𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐑𝐮𝐫𝐚𝐥 𝐀𝐥𝐛𝐞𝐫𝐭𝐚
When a riding encompasses two dominant zones (Lacombe corridor and another region like Rocky Mountain House) plus the many small communities in between, there is a risk that smaller towns or unincorporated areas become marginalized. Their local concerns (e.g., workforce training for people re-entering employment, small-town childcare, transport access) may not receive sufficient focus if the riding is dominated by the larger centres or by the dominant needs of one zone. Given the Commission’s principle of supporting “fair and effective representation” for all electors, saddling many small, diverse communities under a broad riding will reduce the capacity for local voices to be heard.
𝟓. 𝐃𝐞𝐬𝐢𝐫𝐞𝐝 𝐅𝐮𝐭𝐮𝐫𝐞
In light of the above, I suggest the Commission consider instead:
· Keeping the Lacombe region aligned with the Central Alberta corridor/QE2 communities (with similar commuting/service orientations) in a more compact riding, and
· Keeping the Rocky Mountain House region (and its neighbouring rural/mountain-foothill communities) in a distinct riding that reflects its geographies, service-centres and challenges.
Such a configuration would better align with the criteria of community-of-interest, manageable geography, and accessibility of representation.
𝐂𝐨𝐧𝐜𝐥𝐮𝐬𝐢𝐨𝐧
While I understand the difficult work of drawing electoral boundaries in a province with large rural areas and shifting populations and thank you for your work, I strongly believe that the proposed Lacombe - Rocky Mountain House riding would undermine several of the Commission’s own guiding principles: effective representation, communities of interest, manageable geography and accessibility.
I respectfully request that you reconsider this boundary change recommendation and instead adopt a structure that gives smaller communities, and their specific representation needs a stronger voice, rather than combining two very different regions into a single riding.
Thank you for the opportunity to provide input on this important matter. I trust the Commission will give full weight to this submission and the voices of all concerned Albertans who may otherwise find themselves under-represented. I would welcome the opportunity to provide more detail or attend a public hearing in the future, if possible.
Sincerely,

Mary Dallas

11/26/2025

The budget looks pretty decent, and I would say Council did a good job considering only two of them have worked through a City budget before. I did a quick read-through and watched part of the meeting at 2× speed, so this isn't in-depth and may lack accuracy. This is an opinion piece, not a media release.
A 1.3% property tax increase and a 1% special paving tax were approved. This aligns with previous Councils’ recommendations to keep the rate at 2.3%. Originally, the budget was set at 2.3% with the removal of the 1% special paving tax. However, an amendment was made to that motion, resulting in the rates we have now. Councillor de Bresser was opposed to this change—presumably because he ran on removing the special paving tax. Realistically, this just moves money from one pile to another and calls it something different. I might be mistaken, but if your assessed property value doesn't increase, you will pay less in property tax than last year—the same as last year.

Only one comment from the discussion bothered me. The request was to inflate a revenue line item to say the City would have more income than projected, which would reduce the necessary tax increase to meet expense line items. There is a chance that the City could meet this revenue target, but if it doesn’t, then you need to use reserves or hope for surpluses in other areas to cover the shortfall. I feel it is better to be safe than wrong. I don’t think it was malicious, but it can be interpreted as disingenuous. The other reason this bothers me is because the Police Department did this for multiple years in a row. They would over-value their revenue from fines and criminal record checks so they didn’t have to reduce their expense line items (staffing, equipment, fleet, training). Inevitably, they missed those inflated revenue targets every year, and the money to make up for it had to come from somewhere else.

As for the budget decisions that allowed for these rates, here are a few standout reductions:
• $500k deferred to next year for old operations building demolition
• $30k to cancel Alberta Counsel contract
• $193k for curling club upgrades
• Reduced contributions to reserves

Funds I would have liked to see reduced:
• Police: $150k (I could do a whole other post on the police and why we aren't getting the best bang for our buck. But people really seem to think this is an untouchable line item, and whatever they want, they get. I wanted to reduce this budget for multiple years, but there was never any appetite.)
• Playground replacements: $50k (Almost all are replaced. We need to evaluate whether like-for-like replacements are necessary, and whether all park spaces need to remain playgrounds or if there are alternatives that better meet the needs of the current community.)
• Snow removal: $40k (City-wide snow removal is a waste of money. We pay for storm pipes and curbs, and then we pay more money to remove the frozen water so it doesn’t use this infrastructure.)

These three items alone would have reduced 1.3% of the property tax increase—something to think about for next year's budget.

Two loans totaling $900k were paid off early. There were penalties for paying them off early, but there are still interest savings. Conversely, had that money been left in reserves or invested, it would have earned the same amount in interest. So it’s essentially a wash, with no real benefit other than having the debt off the books and only a minor risk of reducing cash in the bank account.

I’d be interested to know if anything caught your eye. Anything you’re happy to see or disappointed by?

11/19/2025

Affordability, affordability, affordability - it was all we heard during the election campaign, and certain councillors campaigned almost exclusively on this principle. So, you can understand my confusion when the first item voted on that financially impacts Lacombe was unanimously approved, resulting in increased expenses for residents and businesses.

Council recently approved a motion to increase Natural Gas Franchise Fees to 31% from 29.25% (the provincially regulated maximum allowable rate is 35%). These fees are set at the discretion of council, and there is no driving factor to warrant this increase. They are not affected by inflation or external costs, nor will they result in better service delivery or an improved product. In this case, the fees are simply being used as a dial to turn up revenue.

Does increasing the average gas utility bill by $0.91 per month, or $11 per year, break the bank? Probably not - though these fees are consumption-based, meaning high-use accounts will pay more than the average user. But even small increases erode other aspects of affordability and weaken our community’s competitive justification. For example, Blackfalds’ franchise fees for electricity and natural gas are set at the maximum allowable percentage. This means the average utility account holder in Blackfalds pays roughly $6 per month, or $72 per year, more on their utility bills than a Lacombe resident. That difference isn’t always obvious when comparing affordability between communities, but it matters. Lacombe residents already pay more in property taxes, but other pieces of their cost of living have been lower, creating a hidden balance. If we continue to increase every baseline revenue source from citizens, that balance disappears, and other communities gain a clear affordability advantage. Yes, what makes Lacombe desirable is more than just the cost of living - but cost does play a role.

This franchise fee did not need to be increased, and the policy guiding both Electric and Natural Gas Franchise Fees could be changed to reflect that we should no longer follow the comparator median when setting these rates. In its current form, these policies will become irrelevant anyway as the median trends upward toward the maximum allowable rate. These fees should not be treated as a magic piggy bank to dial up revenue in the city budget. I look forward to the upcoming budget approval to see how else Lacombe will become more “affordable”.

10/21/2025

Congratulations to all the successful candidates. You have an exciting and rewarding four year adventure ahead.

It's not easy waking up and knowing you didn't meet the expectations of your community. That said, I am proud of what I got to be a part of and grateful my family got to be involved in so many wonderful experiences over these last four years. Thank you to everyone who shared kind words with me, who taught me, guided me, and who showed me support.

The biggest thank you goes to Mary and Emerson….. and Olive🦮.They were honorary Councillors representing our community at events, volunteering, providing insight and acting as sounding boards for all things Lacombe. I'm so grateful everyday for their love and support and none of this could have happened without them.