How Medicine Hat is Shaping Its Future: An Interview with Councillor Chris Hellman

Today on Bring Back The Porch newly elected Councillor Chris Hellman shares insights on city projects, budget strategies, community engagement, and upcoming initiatives in Medicine Hat. Discover how local government navigates community concerns, budget constraints, and development plans.

The Riverside Corridor Enhancement project is stirring up a lot of conversations, especially about traffic calming measures like bump outs. While intended to slow down drivers, many locals are concerned about how these changes will affect parking and road width. 

Feedback is pouring in! Some community members want to keep the wide road as is, while others suggest reducing speed limits to enhance safety. It's crucial to engage everyone in this discussion, after all, this is their neighbourhood, and they should have a say in its future. 


Chapters

00:00 Introduction
01:00 Community Concerns on Riverside Traffic Calming Measures
01:46 Overview of City Budget and Photo Radar Revenue
03:21 Public Feedback on Traffic and Budget Issues
04:53 Council's Approach to Budget and Tax Rate Adjustments
07:01 Formation of Budget Review Committee and Efficiency Goals
09:16 Riverside Project: Community Feedback and Adjustments
11:52 Traffic Safety, Speed Limits, and Community Engagement
13:03 Division Avenue and Third Street Community Comparisons
14:02 Emergency Access and Community Safety Concerns
15:14 Upcoming Engagement Events and Public Surveys
16:23 Urban Chicken Bylaw Pilot Project and Community Impact
18:23 Council Dynamics and Collaboration After Six Months
19:49 Future City Projects: Recreation, South Side Center, and Strategic Planning
22:28 Potential Development of Key Properties and Downtown Revitalization
25:28 Reflections on Transition from Candidate to Councillor and Future Outlook

What Are Traffic Calming Measures?
Traffic calming measures are designed to improve safety for all road users, particularly pedestrians and cyclists. These measures can include speed bumps, road narrowing, and bump outs at intersections. The Riverside Project aims to implement several of these strategies along Third Street to enhance safety and encourage multi-use pathways.

Why Are These Measures Being Proposed?
- Safety Concerns: The primary goal of the Riverside Project is to address safety issues caused by speeding vehicles. By narrowing the road and adding bump outs, the city aims to slow down traffic and create a safer environment for pedestrians.
- Community Connectivity: The project includes plans for a multi-use pathway that connects various parts of the city, promoting walking and cycling as viable alternatives to driving.

Community Feedback: What Are Residents Saying?
The Riverside community has voiced significant concerns regarding the proposed measures.
 Key issues include:
1). Narrowing of the Road - Many residents are worried about how narrowing the road will affect parking and traffic flow. They feel the current width is necessary for both parking and safe navigation.
2). Bump Outs -  While intended to slow traffic, bump outs can complicate turning for drivers. Feedback indicates that this might lead to frustration and safety issues, especially for larger vehicles.

The Role of Community Engagement in Urban Planning
The city has emphasized the importance of community engagement in shaping the Riverside Project. Councillor Chris Hellman has been actively collecting feedback from residents to ensure that their concerns are addressed. Here’s how community engagement is being prioritized:
1). Surveys and Direct Feedback 0-  Residents are encouraged to fill out surveys and share their thoughts directly with city officials. This two-way communication helps gather quantitative data to gauge community sentiment.
2).Public Meetings - The city plans to hold public meetings, including the presence of emergency services, to discuss safety and traffic issues directly with residents.

Conclusion
The Riverside Corridor Enhancement project represents a critical step towards enhancing safety and community connectivity in the city. However, the feedback from residents serves as a reminder that urban planning must be a collaborative effort. As discussions continue, it will be vital for city officials to consider the voices of the community in shaping the final design of the project. To stay updated on this project and others like it, follow local discussions and participate in community engagement opportunities.

Resources

City of Medicine Hat - Shape Our City Engagement - https://shapeyourcity.medicinehat.ca/
Urban Chicken Pilot Program Details - https://www.medicinehat.ca/media/2juchbe1/4168.pdf

Keywords

City Council, Budget Planning, Community Engagement, Riverside Project, Recreation Center, Urban Chicken Bylaw, Local Development, Medicine Hat

Thank you for listening and sharing you are one in a million! We are excited to announce our community is growing and we couldn't do it with out you! 

Hey we need your support. Like and subscribe to Bring Back The Porch Podcast

Transcript

0:00

Hey, this is Brian again, and I'd like to ask you to do a favor. We can't do this work without people like you. So if you can, please like, share, subscribe, tell your friends about bring back the porch. You know, I understand the intent of it is traffic calming, and the other intent is to have multi-use pathway added to Riverside that connects the city. So both of those are our sound intentions, but we definitely have some some pushback from the Riverside community, especially about the bump outs. And it's the turning radius is the is the big thing there. And then the narrowing of the road. Now the road isn't the same width all the way down third Street northwest to northeast. It changes, it varies, but it is a wide road and people are used to that. And they they park on it. And so I think those are the two biggest concerns are the narrowing of the road and the bump outs. This episode will bring back the porch. Brought to you by Bernie Leahy, River Street Realty. Let's get you home. Very pleased to welcome to the porch for his first visit. Newly elected Councilor Chris Hellman. Welcome. Well thank you. Thanks for having me. I'm glad that you were able to get you. We didn't get you in the campaign because it was just so many candidates, as you know, because you were out there with them all in in the campaign last October. But I thought it'd be a good time to touch base with you about six months or a few more weeks into your first term and just to see how things have gone. And the one thing that caught my eye. You posted on social media about the $750,000 ticket deficit. That photo radar now can only be used in playground zones and school zones, which means now that money doesn't go into the city's coffers. And you ask people, you know, for some ideas, have you heard any feedback on that? I got lots of feedback on that. Yeah. So my intent was really just to show that number and, and just make people aware that there was sort of an offset a consequence, if you will, to getting rid of photo radar in all occasions and just restricting it to the playground zones. Noting also that that was under the purview of the province. So that was not a municipal decision, but it does ultimately have an impact on on budget and taxes, in a sense, because it's a big dollar amount. It's three quarters of $1 million. And and I wasn't my intent wasn't to to suggest that our property tax increase this time around could have been lower had we still had the photo radar. It was just a question with regards to what do people think about that? Is a revenue collecting mechanism versus taxes in the future? Because that would amount to about a .75 percent tax increase or reduction, however you want to look at it. So I just I just my question was more about that, not about our current budget, not about our, our current tax position. But what did people think about that. Did did they think that was a decent way of collecting revenue where everybody didn't have to pay into the pot? You were just just those speeding we're paying in and that was offsetting some taxes. Or is it better that we just restrict the photo radar strictly to the playgrounds and school zones? And I think something missed in a lot of that conversation was the safety. And and that's definitely the primary purpose of the photo radar. And I think if it's catching people, it's it's catching people that are speeding. Nobody gets a ticket that wasn't speeding. So if it is, if it is outside of a playground zone, but it's in a regular speeding zone or area and it's catching a lot of people, it's it's doing its job. So really what I wanted to just gauge and, and create a conversation on was that aspect of it was revenue. I did have a lot of feedback that said we shouldn't count on that as revenue. But the reality is, for a long time it was revenue and we have to use it for something and it was a good amount of revenue. So offsetting property taxes, whether it's that or whether it went to other projects, community projects, it has to be spent somewhere. And now we don't have that anymore. So that was really the intent of my post. And what did people think should be done? Well, a lot of the conversation surrounded the recent tax increase, and that we should be more prudent with the spending and figure out ways to lower that without having to rely on something like photo radar, which I completely understand. There was a lot of that. There was some feedback that thought, yeah, you know what I'm happy with? I'd be happy with that revenue coming in from photo radar if it lowers my property taxes a bit, and people that are speeding are the ones getting the ticket. Not everybody. So there was there was some of that, but most of this kind of went sideways from what I wanted. And really social media, that never happened. Yeah, if you can believe it. And went straight to the tax increase and, and the, the overall budget that we're spending for the year. And and my point was kind of it doesn't matter what that budget number is this. It could be 1 million or $100 million. It could be $80 million. This is still three quarters of $1 million that could offset that in some way. Yeah. So do you take that back now to the next budget deliberations and just say, hey, this is what the feedback was? Well, I think so. And the reality is we have no control over whether we have photo radar back or not. And I don't know that there's appetite with the province to change that. I know there was a lot of people happy that photo radar went away. And this was just kind of my way of saying there's an offset to that. But certainly we've got a lot of feedback on the budget and on the tax increase that we we have takeaways from as we work towards lowering tax increases for next year. I felt sorry for the first time, councilors having to go in in November and have this document in front of you that you know you have to approve in short order. You didn't have time really to go through it line by line, but you made a proposal and it eventually passed. That lowered the increase down to 4.9%. How did you come up with the 4.9? So what we looked at, and this goes back to even when we were campaigning, as there was forecast a 5.6% increase for this year and for future years for the foreseeable future. And one of the things I campaigned on was lower than that tax increases. So lower than 5.6 I didn't I don't consider 4.9 a win in that regard. And there's lots of work to be done there. But so it was 5.6 then by the time it came, I guess time to set the tax rate. It was 6.1% with some amendments that had happened is what we required for balance. So as a council, of course, we had mixed opinions on what that number should be. And if it's lower than 6.1 where that money would come from to offset that. So there was some negotiating amongst councilors. Some were okay with the 6.1% increase in, some wanted significantly less than 4.9. And I think ultimately we had to land on a number that was realistic that that covered our increased operating costs for the year, covered inflation, covered the costs, and and also provided some level of relief to the residents, to the, to the taxpayers that we didn't do the 6.1%. So the goal was to primarily look for budget savings, efficiencies where we could where we could draw back on noting that we had already planned for $2 million in efficiencies within the budget. So we were looking for more than that, about 1.1 million more. And if we couldn't find it, all the remainder would be offset by reserves. And and I think, you know, between the high end and the low end of the spectrum on council, we came together on a number that we thought was a reasonable attempt at providing some relief for residents while still being prudent and recognizing that we haven't even made our first budget yet. So we're in the process of working on that for next year, with the express intent of being lower than 4.9, and that process for the budget that you're working on now, I believe it also includes a review, and I think Councilor Cheryl Pfaff is looking at maybe streamlining things. She certainly is. So we've created a new committee with councilor Mohammed and Young on it. It's the budget review committee and their their purpose and goal will be looking into efficiencies like that, and it will be in conjunction with the rest of council. But they'll take the lead on that. Yeah. With the sole purpose of of coming back with a lower tax rate. But also recognizing we don't want to sacrifice services. We have a good level of service in Medicine Hat, you know, a high quality of service. And we don't want to we don't want to sacrifice that either. So really a dedicated team to looking at where we can save some money and the makeup of that committee, it just struck me that they're all newcomers, first timers. So a fresh set of eyes on the books. Fresh set of eyes for sure. Yeah. And that's a good thing, I think. Yeah. The Riverside project is one that's generating a lot of talk on social media, and sometimes you have to go, oh, you kind of have to take it with a big grain of salt. But there is a 3D flyby that has been posted, and I watched it myself, and I thought myself, this doesn't look all that bad. I think what, from my point of view, the flyby, what struck me about those bump outs, I think they have met the intersections is that probably slows people down as they come to those intersections. But if you haven't making a turn around that bump out, that's maybe where the issue is. Have you been getting any feedback on that from people? I'm sure you have. I certainly have been getting feedback. Lots of feedback on that one. You know, I understand the intent of it is traffic calming, and the other intent is to have multi-use pathway added to Riverside that connects the city. So both of those are our sound intentions, but we definitely have some some pushback from the Riverside community, especially about the bump outs. And it's the turning radius is the is the big thing there. And then the narrowing of the road. Now the road isn't the same width all the way down third Street northwest to northeast. It changes, it varies, but it is a wide road and people are used to that. And they they park on it. And so I think those are the two biggest concerns are the narrowing of the road and the bump outs. I know administration has made some changes to the initial plan. There was at one point a traffic circle included in there that has been removed. A couple of the bump outs have been removed. I know from the Riverside community's perspective, their concerns, other than the road narrowing and the bumps are also speed and and I know a lot of them would be in favor of a lower speed limit on that road of 40km an hour, if that would help mitigate some a speeders going to speed, but that might mitigate some of the speed issues. And it's interesting. We followed the photo radar topic directly with traffic calming measures, because there's a potential traffic calming measure right there. But I think from my perspective is we are in an engagement process right now. I think some of the public is a little ahead of where we're at on this. The city is definitely looking to engage, get feedback, especially from that community, what they want. And I think we need to let that engagement process cycle through so we can collect all of that data. I very much encourage people. I give my email out on social media all the time, you know, fill out the surveys, send me your your concerns or your support, and we can collect, you know, quantitative data that shows. Yay or nay. But from my perspective, this has to be what the community wants at the end of the day. And they're the ones that live there. They're the ones that that interact, live and play there. Right? I mean, that's their community. We all use Third Street to different degrees, but it's their community. And and I'm fairly engaged with that group. I hear from them a lot. And mostly what I'm hearing is they don't want the road narrowed and the bump outs. So at the end of the day, I think we have to land on something that fits for that community. And I think everybody's referencing Division Avenue as an example of what happened when maybe people didn't get their voices heard correct. And of course, I wasn't around on council when that happened, but I, I used Division Avenue every day on my way to the college. And, and I think division is a little different because I don't think it had a lot of on street parking, if I recall, just two lanes in some places. Yeah, yeah. So it's a little different. Whereas Third Street, a lot of those people that live on Third Street rely on the parking there. So we have to be I know there the parking will still remain, but it will be condensed. Yeah. And emergency vehicle access is another thing that is, I think, key. Of course you don't want to have a fire truck not be able to get to your house if it's fully involved. So that's one of the things I did get a kick out of. I think somewhere I saw the mention that there will be police and fire and some of these neighborhood meetings, and somebody jumped to the conclusion that they're coming there to police us and to, you know, keep us in line. You kind of have to when you read that kind of stuff, that's got to be discouraging. It is discouraging. And I did myself. I commented that that that would be a great opportunity to engage with police and fire with your concerns on emergency response times. Those would be the experts to talk to. So I know they'll be at the Riverside Community Barbecue coming up next week, and I'll be there as well. It all encouraged people to talk to them about that, because those those are the people we want to hear from. Yeah. And again, there's a survey online too, that the city has right now shape our city. And it also has a very detailed explanation of everything that's happened to date, changes that have been made even has the funding model breakdown of of how the changes would be funded, which is 98% provincial and federal funding. So there's not a real cost to the tax base there. I'm not saying taking that money just because it's there, but that is something to consider. Yeah. When I saw that okay, 98%, that's good. But it is still taxpayers dollars. It is still taxpayers three levels of government. They've all got a hand in my pockets. That's right. Yeah that is good to know. What's the timeline for after they have their all the reviews done and all the feedback and well they're not planning on doing anything this year. So I think this year is just engagement. This spring is more engagement. I know administration has met with a group of community leaders they're in regular contact with. They plan to engage door to door. If they haven't already started in Riverside, they'll be at the barbecue coming up, but they'll also have some of their own engagement events at the Elks Lodge. I believe it's all on that shape. Our city page, so there's lots of engagement left to happen. Of course, you can always engage with your city councilors too, because they they'd love to hear about this. I did post email your counselor and they got a lot of emails, so they'd love to hear about it. And because they're going to ultimately have to make a decision. Yeah, yeah, I did love one of the means that I saw on social media of a bylaw officer on a bicycle, on the rendering of the Third Street, what they wanted to look like chasing down a chicken, carrying a can of beer. I mean, it incorporated all the things that the community is passionate about right now. It's a real risk. It is. Oh, yeah. But that's the next thing I wanted to talk about was the Urban chicken bylaw. We now have an opportunity to get our $0.02 in on that as well. Sure. So that has come to council. Council directed administration to prepare a pilot project for it. And that will be forthcoming. It will have a start and finish point and I believe it will have a number, a restricted number of licenses that will be available. And. I think that's a good way to gauge either the success or the failure of the program. If we do that for a year or two, whatever they come back with and see what community thinks about it. And I know, I know, there's a lot of opposition to it. I know there's people that have backyard chickens right now that that would just like to be legal doing it. And, and most people probably don't even know that. So I'd be curious to see how the pilot works out and if it really has the impacts negatively that people think it will. I don't think it will, and I'm just basing that off of some other communities that have rolled out pilots and then went ahead and made it official. I think there was one, I can't remember which one, but after a one year pilot or something, they had all of one complaint. So. Yeah, so I'd just be curious to see it. But I mean, there's there's there's certainly opportunity throughout this process and afterwards for public feedback. And I mean, if it's not for our community, again, that's what we'll consider. And we'll make the decision whether it's permanent or not. You're a lot of people on social media saying, well, they've already met up their minds, so it's no use for me to tell them what I think. Well, that the vote on the pilot project was five four. So I mean, maybe we made up our minds, but we didn't do it collectively. Yeah, I guess that leads into the next area of discussion how this council is working together after six months. Yeah, I'd say really good, cohesive. I think the mayor did a really good job of the committee assignments and board assignments she gave us. I mean, I know for me it was all stuff I was quite interested in. And just I would say there's a team dynamic, everybody working together, trying to help each other out, respectful of each other. That's a big one. And working with each other and also working with administration. So I would I would say if I was doing a report card, I would give us an A+ on the first six months. Yeah. How is that relationship with administration? Because again, on social media, people say, well, it's the tail wagging the dog. I think the relationship with administration is just fine. I mean, we have to ultimately the decisions come to council. We count on them to provide us with the information and allow us to make the best decision possible with the best information available. The public maybe doesn't always see it that way, but, you know, administration doesn't have a really easy job. And they they get a lot of flak and a lot of it's for sure on, you know, not sound. So the relationship I have anyway, working with administration is great. And I think the rest of the council does. Okay. Well looking forward now to the next six months. What do you see happening? I see we've probably rolling out the pilot project for the chickens. More engagement on the Riverside corridor, I see hopefully some movement towards a new shelter and that, you know, that's something that's going to take some time to work through. That's not an overnight fix, but something that way. I know the province and the premier really would like to see us get that moving with the navigation center. So something that way I see our strategic planning being finalized and coming out, and some of our key priorities being made public. And and also that creates dialog within our group to where do we align on things. What, you know, what was Chris's crazy priority that we just need to throw in the garbage because nobody else is on board with that. And but where where do we see a whole bunch of collaboration on that similarities, where we let's get to work on that, and we might see some of that within recreation, planning, recreation facilities and, and then also working with our partners in the county and, and Redcliff on things like recreation plans and, and I think I think there's lots of opportunity for growth in that regard in our community and our greater region that can have big tourism impacts. And so I think some of those conversations we might the public might see, especially the strategic plan, I think roll out in the coming months. You mentioned recreation, and of course, the one that the elephant in the room is the South Side event or recreation center that was talked about in the campaign. And then just sort of slowly has gone into the back. We did put a pause on some planning costs for that, just so we could sort of get our feet under us and and determine what is priority with regards to recreation, what are our needs, what are those costs going to look like? And we're also at the same time juggling big tax increase coming in when we made that decision to put a pause on that. So trying to reduce a tax increase while adding a big expense in a project like that didn't really fit together at the time, but it is something that will be coming. Coming up, those discussions about recreation and a big part of that recreation discussion will be a water park in the South, so we'll see where that goes. Anything in the next six months. So we might see about the same a solar park, I think. We haven't had much discussion about that since we passed that we obviously had that caveat on it that we had to find that power purchaser for a large percentage of the electricity before we in a long term purchaser for a large percentage of the electricity before we put a shovel in the ground. So I think that's kind of where we're sitting, is we won't do anything until we find that customer, but we would be actively looking for that customer. And once we once we land somebody that's ready to come to Medicine Hat and, and, and hire some locals and pay some property tax and buy some electricity from us, then I think we'll move forward with it. There's one other project that has been, I guess, on the city books since about 1979. That's the old Glanvill Ford property, the Reedy Ford property, Kitty corner to City Hall. They put up those canopies as a part of, I think, some Covid related money, just to try and see if they could create a community space. But is that do you see that property ever coming on the market? I would personally love to see it come on the market. That's not a discussion we've had yet in any of the committees that I'm on anyway, but that would be something I'd be interested in pursuing. I think developing anything downtown and in that area should be a top priority. And if I look at if I look at our riverfront there from the library all the way to Athletic Park, that's all government property that pays no property tax and that's primary estate. So the property you're referring to, I'd like to see development there. I'd like to see the city work with the developer to to do whatever it takes to sort of make that attractive enough to do it. I know underground parking and parking in general has been an issue there, so we'd have to work through that. We also have on sort of a related topic, is the arena sitting there. And that's right in that prime property that doesn't pay any taxes. So I personally would like to see us tear the arena down at the city cost, because I don't think we can expect a developer to do that. The disposal with the asbestos and stuff is is a big cost. So I would like to see us remove that and put that property up for sale at market price and get a developer in there that builds something, perhaps both commercially and residential, that that paid premium property taxes. And there's another nice little piece of property there, too, on First Street and Maple Avenue there with the old Why Employment Center was that would be a great one too. I look at that one and say, that would be a neat little hotel that could have underground parking from River road. There is a gas well on that property that, that they just they need to sort out, they need to cap and they've been having some trouble with that. But I think once that's done, that is another piece of city owned property that is riverfront. That would be great for that. From being a campaign, I guess, a candidate to being elected now in six months and have your perceptions of the way city functions changed, not not wholesale, I'd say. I think I had a pretty good idea of what it would be like. I mean, I've followed it pretty closely. For a number of years. I've been involved in organizations that worked closely with the city over that time. And of course, I've been good friends with Councilor Cluxton for a very long time, so I think I had a pretty good understanding of it. I'm not suggesting for any second that I didn't have a huge learning curve once elected, and still an ongoing one for sure, but I think for the most part it's what I expected. Okay, good. Well, I am glad that we were able to sit down and have a little conversation here about what is happening at City Council and within City Hall. And Chris Hillman, thanks for the visit. Thank you very much for having me. Take care.