Like so many issues in Cochrane, the approval of a new aquatic/curling facility has not and will not happily ride off into the sunset like Gary Cooper and Grace Kelly in High Noon.
Much like with the transit initiative a few years ago, some in the community, spear-headed by Cochrane councillor Morgan Nagel, are gunning for a plebiscite (or at least the threat of one) on this $45-million project, saying the town has more pressing needs at the moment and the approval of what some say is nothing more than a ‘want’ is reckless and should be brought to a public vote.
Without getting into the reasons to support the new pool/curling facility (read last week’s editorial for thoughts on this matter), there remains a need to put things into perspective for a moment.
If one were to look at the public feedback on council’s 6-1 approval of the pool/curing centre by perusing social media and letters to the editor, concluding that the community clearly does not want this new facility would be totally justified.
But as many are aware, voices of public dissatisfaction are always far more vociferous than those of contentment.
Cochranites who are currently expressing their displeasure with spending $45 million on a new aquatic/curling facility at this time are not the lone example of how opposition can drown out gratification. When transit was brought to the table and approved by the former council, public outcry forced then-mayor Truper McBride to bring the issue to a plebiscite, and now that all is said and done, the Town of Cochrane is still trying to iron out a plan that would have a chance at not only being approved by council but by the public at large.
A public vote on transit never actually happened, as what the service would look like remained unclear and a single question that would accurately address the issue at hand could not be established, so there was never any precise indication on whether the majority of Cochranites wanted a transit system or not.
Many who are now publicly voicing concern over the new pool are making claims that only a small percentage of Cochrane residents support the project – a claim that very much could be true, but who is really to know for sure without a public vote?
That being said, during last year’s municipal election, Mayor Ivan Brooker and councillor Jeff Toews both declared their full support and a plan for building a new aquatic/curling centre in Cochrane, and not only did each come out victorious, Toews received the most votes of any council candidate.
Joann Churchill, who placed second in the mayoral race, also supported the pool, provided it didn’t bring on a lot of debt. Keep in mind, the contention that it is solely the pool that is bringing the town’s debt limit to 95 per cent is not entirely true…it is a combination of four projects (see page 7 for full details).
So does all this mean that the majority of Cochrane residents support the new pool? Not necessarily, but it certainly doesn’t point to the alternative, that most do not, which many would have you believe now that the project has been given the green light.
What is certain, however, is the fact that Coun. Nagel has assured that his future efforts on council will be far more challenging.
Whether you agree with Nagel or simply commend him for his firm stance on the aquatic/curling centre issue, all politicians need help from their fellow coworkers from time to time.
The manner in which Nagel chose to go about his ‘rock the roads’ campaign – calling out other members of council and blindsiding them with an online petition and social media blitz in an effort to prove his point – will likely not entice some other councillors to take his side when he needs it most.
Being solid in your convictions is one thing – and a noble thing – but there is a right way and a wrong way to go about it. It may win you some points/votes in the public eye, but it gets you nowhere when it comes to getting the job done you were elected for. Just ask any successful political leader how they managed to get so much accomplished…they knew how to work with those who disagree with them most.
