ATHABASCA – Athabasca County councillors are continuing to tinker with the dust control policy for the third year in a row, with changes being proposed to the amount of coverage residents can pay for, and possible obligations placed on commercial entities.
During the Feb. 11 regular council meeting, councillors narrowly approved a motion to revise the policy to include options to purchase additional treatment at cost, with councillors Gary Cromwell, Brian Hall, Natasha Kapitaniuk, Camille Wallach, and Ashtin Anderson voting in favour. Reeve Tracy Holland and councillors Rob Minns, Kelly Chamzuk, and Joe Gerlach were opposed.
While the actual changes are mostly procedural — councillors highlighted wording in the policy they wanted added or removed — the discussion focused around the potential cost to the county, as well as the need for extra dust control in general.
“Two-hundred metres isn’t enough for a lot of people. They live on straight stretches of road with a lot of traffic and that 200 metres doesn’t cover their yard, so their houses are still getting dusty,” said Wallach.
“Allowing them to purchase extra dust control isn’t that big of an issue.”
The topic came back to council after an early November delegation brought the often-discussed and frequently-changed policy back onto the agenda. The four councillors, including Minns, who were opposed to the changes cited fears over rapidly expanding costs, and a lack of need as reasons why they wanted it to remain in place.
“We spend a lot of money on dust control through the county and it just gets astronomical the amount of subsidizing that we do,” said Minns, who has been a staunch opponent for expanding the program over the past year.
“We made a dust control policy and we’ve only run it for a year before we’re already changing it. We just need to let it run as is for a little while.”
Before entering politics, Minns worked at the Athabasca County public works department, finishing his career there as the maintenance foreman. He told his fellow councillors that the extra 200 metres of coverage available for purchase wasn’t as small a task as it seemed.
“It costs more than just putting the product down. What if we need extra gravel? We’ve got the water truck up there, you’ve got everybody’s time. I don’t think anybody realizes how much time is put into dust control.”
Safety concerns swayed enough councillors to outweigh fiscal fears. As Anderson pointed out, dust control can be used for a variety of purposes, and if people are willing to pay and apply before the deadline, what’s the harm, he asked.
“There’s a safety issue; when people are coming up to a house, or big trucks are pulling into yards and there’s not enough dust control to see when they stop,” she said.
“This is a good thing for the community.”
Councillors have also grappled with the question of what role, if any, should businesses have when it comes to dust control for residents.
Until last year, campgrounds or other commercial ventures that increase traffic have been responsible for purchasing dust control for residents near their sites. One side has argued it's only fair for residents to be compensated for the disruptions to the peace and quiet rural living normally brings, but others have said it’s an unfair and unwelcoming imposition on would-be business owners.
“There are development permits out there that have a condition in them (to pay for dust control),” said Holland, who made a follow-up motion later in the meeting to bring back the policy with additions for commercial payment and stricter guidelines.
Councillors will next discuss the policy at the March committee of the whole meeting. They’ll be on a time crunch if they want the changes approved for the 2025 dust control season however — this year’s deadline is April 5, and services will start soon after, seasons depending.
