The M.D. of Lesser Slave River council discussed the first reading of a proposed tourism-focused facility in Smith during its May 27 council meeting, drawing mixed reactions from residents during a public hearing.
The proposal sparked considerable discussion from both council members and the public, with residents sharing concerns about the potential impacts of the development while others argued the project could create new opportunities for the community.
The public hearing was held as part of the reading process for the proposed development.
More than 10 residents spoke during the hearing, with the majority expressing support for the project.
At least eight people spoke in favour of the proposal, while three residents voiced opposition.
Resident Tammy Colborne raised concerns about how the development could affect nearby properties and residents.
“This development disturbs our property,” said Colborne during the hearing.
Ann Holden, the M.D.’s planning and development officer, acknowledged that the proposed facility could bring challenges to the community, including increased traffic and disturbances in the area.
Several residents opposing the proposal agreed with Holden’s concerns and questioned whether the project would benefit Smith in the long term.
Karen Plourde from Smith also submitted a letter to the council opposing the proposal.
In her letter, she argued that Smith’s priority should be housing development rather than tourism-focused facilities.
“Prioritizing additional recreational or public-use land over desperately needed residential land is, in my view, short-sighted and contrary to the long-term needs of Smith,” Plourde wrote in her submitted letter to the M.D.
Another resident who spoke during the hearing said many of the people supporting the development are not residents of Smith and may not fully understand the current needs of the community.
Despite the opposition, several residents strongly supported the project and said it could help bring growth and new opportunities at Smith.
“But it’s time,” one supporter said during the hearing.
Supporters described the project as an opportunity to increase tourism, create jobs, and provide more activities for both residents and visitors.
“I think this is a tremendous opportunity for the community. There will also be additional activities,” said Sheila Willis from Smith. “You have my 100 per cent support.”
Petra De Vaan of Smith also supported the proposal.
“There will be more jobs for our students in Smith,” said De Vaan.
Other residents supporting the development said tourism-related projects could help attract more visitors to the area while also benefiting local businesses and community initiatives.
Some speakers also noted that the proposed facility could have positive environmental impacts, particularly for biodiversity and outdoor recreational uses.
One resident who spoke in favour of the project said they personally know the developer and argued the proposal is intended to help improve Smith rather than getting a profit.
“They are not doing this for the money, but for the development of Smith,” the resident said.
“It’s foolish to stop the development,” another supporter added.
Council members also shared differing opinions during the discussion.
Councillor Sandra Melzer voiced support for the proposal, although she said she hopes existing trees and natural areas will be preserved as much as possible if the project moves forward.
Councillor Richard Colbourne, however, remained opposed to the proposal.
He expressed concern about the lack of detailed information currently available about the project.
“I just want to see what the development will be. I don’t even know the guy who’s building it,” said Colbourne.
The discussion became heated as residents continued debating the issue during the hearing.
Chief Administrative Officer Kevin Gannon stepped in during the discussion and reminded attendees to follow the council’s meeting procedures and protocols.
“We don’t want to limit what you will all say, but let’s follow the protocols,” said Gannon.
Holden later explained that the exact details of the proposed facility are still not fully determined and will depend on future municipal approvals and planning decisions.
She said several possible uses are currently being considered for the site, including campgrounds, community gardens, dine-in restaurants, agriculture, security personnel, and other community-related resources.
Holden clarified that a farmers’ market would not be permitted under the current proposed land-use designation.
She also noted that the M.D. has been in contact with Alberta Transportation regarding the proposal and any potential transportation-related considerations connected to the project.
Councillor Brad Pearson asked administration when the council and residents could expect to receive more information regarding the proposal.
CAO Gannon responded that further discussion and public input would take place during the second and third readings of the proposed bylaw.
CAO Gannon explained that the process is still in its early stages and that the council will continue reviewing information before making a final decision.
Council ultimately voted to move the proposal forward to a second hearing for additional discussion and consideration.
“It’s just sad that the communications did not work out,” said Councillor Colbourne following the discussion.
“There will be risks in building the new facility, but far more risk in denying it,” said Councillor Norm Seatter.
Council will continue discussing the proposed development during future meetings as the application moves through the approval process.
Julia Magsombol
Lakeside Leader