Showing posts with label Lobbying. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Lobbying. Show all posts

Thursday, October 14, 2010

Finally, a GREAT Question! I vent a little, be prepared.

I had a great question on Facebook and when I started a response it went from being a comment to a full-fledged note to finally this post. The issue is big enough that it deserves a full discussion and this is the kind of thing that hasn't happened in our election.

I've been bursting with a desire to address this but it's been difficult in the context of our campaign where candidates aren't really getting in to the issues in depth. Other candidates seem to be going for the "quick win" of calling for lower taxes or taking credit for things others have done but this is the kind of discussion that really needs to happen... so Derek, thank you for asking the question!

Derek Hall - Bill, what are your thoughts on next year's provincial review of the Municipal Government Act? Crucial for all cities in Alberta - what's GP's position and what should our strategy be?

Hey Derek, the MGA is important for cities and in fact all municipalities in the province. The province has not done a full review of it in some time - although they have announced a few times that they were going to. The problem is that the bill hasn't been updated much since it was introduced in the mid 90's.

The province has been "tinkering around the edges" in a number of ways and there have been a few private member's bills that have attempted to make changes. Most recently I traveled to the Leg to speak against one such bill - in the end our presentation was worthwhile and the committee is recommending the gov't scrap the bill. The point is that there needs to a full review of the bill to ensure it's setting a foundation for Alberta municipalities to be successful.

So, the first thing I think the new council should do is support a resolution from the City of Calgary that will be up for discussion at the AUMA convention after the election. The resolution basically calls on the provincial government to actually start that review process. (View the resolution here )From there the city needs to take an active roll in the review process, both through our provincial association (AUMA) and by doing our own lobbying with the minister and provincial staff.

One issue I'd like to see raised is municipal financial sustainability... the current reliance on property tax is out dated and no longer appropriate for funding the modern needs of communities. In the past property tax did make sense because the services municipalities provided were mostly related to public works and directly tied to property (think of things like roads, sidewalks ect.) Today's municipalities are being asked to provide a much broader range of service including recreation, affordable housing, social services and economic development - most of these don't have any clear connection to the actual property owned in the municipality.

On top of the increased demand for services Alberta's syatem has an underlying inequity that creates municipalities that are "more equal" than others before any home owner or commercial property receives a tax bill. Two specific issues that I'd like to address are:

- INEQUITABLE FUNDING Munis under 5000 population or who are rural (like counties) DON'T PAY FOR RCMP - the province pays it for them.... while cities like GP pay 98% of the cost for our cops. (More info on that from a 2007 post on my blog here ) This is a huge chunk of our budget and if we didn't have to pay for it we could lower property taxes.

- LINEAR TAXES help some municipalities keep residential/commercial property taxes ARTIFICIALLY LOW. This is a complex issue but the verrrrrry simple version is that some rural municipalities in the province have a GIGANTIC source of revenue that really doesn't require services - it's basically free money. Linear taxes are property taxes on things that may cross municipal boarders... think of things like gas pipelines and other utilities. In 2007 the City of GP collected just 2% ($1.3 Million) of it's tax revenue from Linear taxes... Meanwhile linear taxes made up 37% ($17 Million) of the County of GP's tax revenue. The County actually collected more from linear properties than they did from residential properties. Click through the presentation below for the details:



Add those two together (the county doesn't have to pay for police + they have the benefit of $17 million in linear taxes) and it's clear that the city cannot compete with the county on an even basis. To be clear, I'm not saying that the County of GP is at fault - they just have a tremendous advantage that most people don't know about.

These types of inequities are the things I think the City of GP has to lobby to change in any future revision of the MGA. The first step will be in getting the province to agree to actually do the review, the second will be to maintain a more active and involved lobbying schedule, which I've proposed.

It's a shame that the other candidates for mayor aren't ready or willing to really get into the issues like this. It's easy to campaign on simplistic 3 point platforms or by taking credit for projects started by others. I've tried to run on working towards a community vision and I've always been ready to really talk about the issues but there just hasn't seemed to be an opportunity for that - until now. Thanks Derek for asking and giving me a chance to start a very important discussion.

Thursday, September 9, 2010

Building Relationships with Provincial Government

At the Grande Prairie airport this morning candidate for Mayor Bill Given announced that building relationships with the province would be a major focus for the city under his leadership.

“I believe that council needs to take an active role in lobbying the provincial government on behalf of our residents.” said Given. He noted that provincial government decisions can be positive in such areas as grants or can add additional expense to municipal budgets through increased regulations.

“When the province makes a decision we need them to know the impact it will have on our community.” stated Given. “I'm confident that we can do a better job of bringing our message to the provincial legislature.”

Given outlined a focused effort on building relationships with government officials through regular missions to the provincial capital. Given proposed that council should travel to Edmonton as a group at least twice a year to meet with government representatives.

“I feel as though we've been waiting for the province to come to us,” said Given “ and I know a more proactive approach is required to ensure our community's voice is heard at the provincial level.”

At the conclusion of the media event Given boarded a flight for Edmonton to make a presentation on behalf of the City of Grande Prairie to the provincial government's Standing Committee on Community Services. The committee is conducting hearings on proposed changes to the Municipal Government Act. More information on the committee hearings can be found here, the list of scheduled presenters can be found here and audio of the presentations is here.

Thursday, December 13, 2007

Centre for Creative Arts

Council has been getting a lot of emails this week about the Centre for Creative Arts.

It's all in response to thisrequest for funding to cover an operating deficit.

I'm always really happy when people feel passionate enough about something that they are willing to get involved and speak up for it. There's been quite a bit of this lately which is great - we've seen in this term a lot more than in the past two, specifically with Crime Prevention and with the Aquatics Centre.

One thing that happens sometimes is that people write notes without recognizing all the facts. That's ok because it's the job of council members like me to know all the facts. You (the public) are supposed tell me what you think and what you believe in, that helps me base my decisions on the desires of the community. This is the kind of dialogue that we should be able to have with our elected officials.

For my part of that dialogue I also like to be able to inform people on what is currently happening that they might not have known all the details of. My hope is that after we've spoken I'll know how they feel and they'll know the facts of what is happening.

So in that vein here is a copy of the note I've sent to a couple of the people who have written in support of additional funding for the Centre:

"Thanks for your note,

I've been a supporter of the Centre for quite a while so I'm concerned about it's security and ability to continue to operate, just as you are. Two of the specific areas where I've supported the Centre at the council table are;

• The renovation that is currently under way. This project is currently budgeted at just under $1 Million to retrofit all the mechanical and electrical systems, plus add an elevator for improved access to the whole building. The funding for this is 100% city dollars.

• The increased operating grant to the Centre in the 2008 -10 budget. I was totally supportive of moving the grant up from about $47, 000 to just over $80, 000 per year.

Additionally of course the Centre pays no rent to the city for the use of the building. The concept of course is that if there's no rent they will have the ability to put any money earned back into the operations. The city also does this for a number of community groups like the Live Theater, which has received no other operating dollars from the city (that I'm aware of) before this year.

So, just to be clear I believe the city does support the Centre. Of course if there is additional information to consider in light of the move to the old RCMP building then I'm happy to have it come forward so Council can make a decision. I want to see the Centre for Creative Arts healthy and ready to fill the renovated building with all the activity and vibrancy it provided our community before.

Thanks again for taking the time to write and support the Centre!
I'll take your opinion into account when we get to vote on it.
Bill Given
"

Tuesday, April 3, 2007

A Little Traffic Relief?



Grande Prairie has been growing - lots of new people, lots of new businesses and all the traffic that goes along with both of those.

One of the biggest irritations has been what is known locally as The Bypass (you can see it in blue above). It's actually provincial highway #43 and the name "bypass" is a little bit of a throw back because it hasn't been a true bypass in years, the city has grown up around it. Truckers hate it, parents whose kids cross it to go to school hate it, shoppers hate it and if you own a small car (there are some in GP - honestly) it's kinda scary.

The province has a plan to build a new bypass that will really do the job. It would go from the overpass north of the city at the intersection of highways #43 and #2 and reconnect with #43 on the far side of the airport but it's a long ways off. They still have to buy all the land and the cost is going to be BIG.

So, locally we started promoting an interim solution which was to upgrade 116th Street (in red) to a four-lane standard. 116th runs out of the city's industrial area, north through the County of Grande Prairie and right into where the "ultimate" provincial bypass will go. Part of the job would be the City, part would be the County and the last bit would be the Province.

The City started construction in 2006 but the County wouldn't start until they got special "resource road" funding from the province.

The city started lobbying anyone we could to get the funding for the County. Every time we went to Edmonton or met with anyone from the department we would ask. We met with the new Minister of Infrastructure & Transportation in February and presented it to him. The Liberals took up the cause after their visit to the city early in March. I think they got a real picture of how bad it was when they had to travel it so Liberal leader Kevin Taft asked Premier Stelmach about it in question period on March 13th.

And... finally, today the County is announcing that they got funding for it! Great news, but if you live here you want to know when it's going to be built.

Well, the city portion should be done this summer but there hasn't been an announcement on the provincial portion yet and the county will have to tender the work for their bit. So I'm betting that it will miss the construction season of '07. That probably means an '08 construction and late '08 or '09 opening.

So, as for that relief from traffic - not just yet, but we're working on it.

LinkWithin

Related Posts with Thumbnails