The signs are everywhere in Alberta. This is not a metaphor. Take a walk in any residential neighbourhood in Calgary or Edmonton, or even smaller cities, and you will see the signs. The many, many signs. Defend Alberta Parks! Hands of our health care! Something angry about Trudeau! Oh, and of course, something linked to the municipal elections in October. The signs are numerous. One person tweeted that they have nine signs on their lawn at the moment.
Alberta has a lot to say about a lot of things this summer, which is probably not a surprise given the state of provincial politics and politicians, the pandemic, as well as the coming October elections and theatrical referendum on equalization. The abundance of signage reflects the political grievance salad that is Alberta in 2021. But what are the politics of the signs themselves? We thought we’d take a little dive.
Signs of Inequality: Landowners Have a Bigger Voice
The owner of a private property has the right to display election signs, even if people who live at said property as tenants disagree, and don’t have the right to post their own signs. Why? The rules on election signs are extremely vague (and therefore liberal, as long as you own property)—except when it comes to what is and is not allowed near provincial roadways.
As I’ve suggested, election signs planted on the front lawn of multi-family buildings where renters live are something we might want to discuss in future. Basically, the sign rules mean those with property get a bigger voice than those without:
Signs of Discontent
Municipal campaigns are largely confined to on the ground versus over the air battles (though there is definite potential for this to shift with political-action committee (PAC) money). What this means is door knocking and signs. And what it also means is a constant discussion of vandalized, stolen, destroyed or altered signs.
In Calgary, it’s already started:
Signs of Disinformation: ‘bLaNKeT dENsitY’
The fact most Albertans live in cities does not seem to matter when we talk about how those cities develop and redevelop. We don’t act, or talk, like we live in a city. Example: Density and redevelopment remain great wedge issues. Signs of this (sorry), in Calgary, are showing up on peoples’ door handles.
Changes to zoning do not mean blanket density is coming to a neighbourhood. Developers build neighbourhoods, and the market drives developers; zoning is just the framework that allows things to happen—if developers figure they can make it work. Until a majority of the market wants density, which it does not, we needn’t worry that detached-house neighbourhoods might have an additional duplex or even middle-density building. And blanket low density, which is what single-family residential zoning is, is known to be the most costly way to build a city. It results in poor, high-cost services.
People who don’t like property taxes should probably give density a thought. Or stop expecting a density of services without a density of payers for said services. Okay, I’ll end this little rant.
Signs of Fun
Let’s keep this positive. There are always signs of hope—or signs that people can have a sense of humour and creativity among the yelling and politicking. Even in the sign forest.