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.
Showing posts with label Provincial Legislation. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Provincial Legislation. Show all posts
Thursday, October 14, 2010
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.
“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.
Monday, July 13, 2009
GGS Committee Agenda for July 13th
This is my first post after being out of the city for a while on a short summer vacation. I did manage to squeeze in the "council related activity" I mentioned and I'll be posting pictures soon.
Today is a "Council Monday" so we will have our full regular meeting tonight at 7pm. I was going to post the agenda for that but it doesn't seem to be online this morning. So, in it's place I'm getting a little head start on the week and posting the Agenda for the General Government Services committee meeting that will happen on Wednesday.
The names you see below the agenda items are the staff members who are presenting the report on that item. My quick comments are in italics.
1. Refund of Property Tax
S. Smith, Assessor
It doesn't happen very often but occasionally the city's tax assessment department does make mistakes. In this instance there was an error in the square footage calculation of a property that resulted in the owner being over billed. Since 2004 they've been paying more in taxes they they should have. City staff are recommending that we refund the total amount of the over billing, $10,542.15
2. Bill 202 Municipal Government Act
J. Ferguson, Legislative Services Manager
This bill from the province calls for the creation of a Municipal Auditor. Not a bad idea but 1) it has the potential to create a lot of additional work for municipalities and 2) the Minister of Municipal Affairs already had the power to order municipalities to under go an audit.
Along with Bill 203 I think it's an example of a private member's bill that addresses a perceived problem rather than an actual one. Both pieces of legislation have their good points but I think they went ahead without a lot of research being done. For example I don't think either AUMA or AAMD&C (the organizations representing Alberta municipalities) were consulted in the creation of these. Janette is bringing this bill to council's attention (I first heard of it this spring on Twitter) and I imagine that the committee will ask for a report on how this will impact the city. We may also take a position forward to AUMA asking them to lobby the province for changes. Looking on Twitter I just noticed that the Province is asking for public input on the Bill, I imagine we'll as staff to prepare a submission.
On a somewhat related note; I think it's odd the province wants to create more auditor positions when they don't even fund the one they already have.
3. Customer Satisfaction Survey
D. Olinger, Marketing Communications Manager
This report formalizes the process of doing Customer Satisfaction survey's in the city every 2 years. The next one would be in March of 2011. Having it then will allow the new council (elected in October of 2010) to use the input from residents as they build their strategic plan in the spring of that year and the 3 year budget in the fall. It's a great feedback loop that will ensure that the views of residents are reflected in the city's business planning process.
4. Correspondence
4.1. Alberta Sustainable Resource Development, re: Government of Alberta Response to FISC Recommendations on Forest Industry Competitiveness
4.2. R. Danyluk, Minister, Alberta Municipal Affairs re: Unconditional Municipal Grant
This is an annual grant, and it's one of the few that comes without strings attached, like saying it has to be used by a certain time, or for a certain type of project or service. The total amount of the grant this year is $592,188 or approximately 0.00422 % of our yearly budget.
4.3. Town of Grande Cache, re: Invitation to Grande Cache’s 40th Anniversary
Congratulations Grande Cache!
In this letter they are inviting the Mayor to attend to help celebrate at their Opening Ceremonies on Friday September 4th. The weekend of the 4th to the 7th the Town will be hosing a Homecoming celebration for everyone who ever lived in Grande Cache - mark it on your calendar!
5. Other Business
Today is a "Council Monday" so we will have our full regular meeting tonight at 7pm. I was going to post the agenda for that but it doesn't seem to be online this morning. So, in it's place I'm getting a little head start on the week and posting the Agenda for the General Government Services committee meeting that will happen on Wednesday.
The names you see below the agenda items are the staff members who are presenting the report on that item. My quick comments are in italics.
1. Refund of Property Tax
S. Smith, Assessor
It doesn't happen very often but occasionally the city's tax assessment department does make mistakes. In this instance there was an error in the square footage calculation of a property that resulted in the owner being over billed. Since 2004 they've been paying more in taxes they they should have. City staff are recommending that we refund the total amount of the over billing, $10,542.15
2. Bill 202 Municipal Government Act
J. Ferguson, Legislative Services Manager
This bill from the province calls for the creation of a Municipal Auditor. Not a bad idea but 1) it has the potential to create a lot of additional work for municipalities and 2) the Minister of Municipal Affairs already had the power to order municipalities to under go an audit.
Along with Bill 203 I think it's an example of a private member's bill that addresses a perceived problem rather than an actual one. Both pieces of legislation have their good points but I think they went ahead without a lot of research being done. For example I don't think either AUMA or AAMD&C (the organizations representing Alberta municipalities) were consulted in the creation of these. Janette is bringing this bill to council's attention (I first heard of it this spring on Twitter) and I imagine that the committee will ask for a report on how this will impact the city. We may also take a position forward to AUMA asking them to lobby the province for changes. Looking on Twitter I just noticed that the Province is asking for public input on the Bill, I imagine we'll as staff to prepare a submission.
On a somewhat related note; I think it's odd the province wants to create more auditor positions when they don't even fund the one they already have.
3. Customer Satisfaction Survey
D. Olinger, Marketing Communications Manager
This report formalizes the process of doing Customer Satisfaction survey's in the city every 2 years. The next one would be in March of 2011. Having it then will allow the new council (elected in October of 2010) to use the input from residents as they build their strategic plan in the spring of that year and the 3 year budget in the fall. It's a great feedback loop that will ensure that the views of residents are reflected in the city's business planning process.
4. Correspondence
4.1. Alberta Sustainable Resource Development, re: Government of Alberta Response to FISC Recommendations on Forest Industry Competitiveness
4.2. R. Danyluk, Minister, Alberta Municipal Affairs re: Unconditional Municipal Grant
This is an annual grant, and it's one of the few that comes without strings attached, like saying it has to be used by a certain time, or for a certain type of project or service. The total amount of the grant this year is $592,188 or approximately 0.00422 % of our yearly budget.
4.3. Town of Grande Cache, re: Invitation to Grande Cache’s 40th Anniversary
Congratulations Grande Cache!
In this letter they are inviting the Mayor to attend to help celebrate at their Opening Ceremonies on Friday September 4th. The weekend of the 4th to the 7th the Town will be hosing a Homecoming celebration for everyone who ever lived in Grande Cache - mark it on your calendar!
5. Other Business
Tuesday, June 30, 2009
GGS Committee Agenda for June 30th
Because of the Canada Day holiday one of my regular city committee meetings has been bumped to Tuesday - the General Government Services (GGS) Committee. As I mentioned last time I posted an agenda from GGS, this committee meets every second week and generally deals with things like internal corporate services (IT, and Finance) as well as the administrative functions of the corporation.
Below is the agenda for today's meeting. The names you see below the agenda items are the staff members who are presenting the report on that item. My quick comments are in italics.
Delegations
1. Mr. B. Manz - 2008 Aquatera Annual Report (attached)
The city owns Aquatera (along with the County of GP and the Town of Sexsmith) and as part of that relationship we see them at meetings quite often. Presenting the annual report is kind of just an FYI thing as all council members receive it in our mail boxes.
2. Committee “In Camera” (land matter)
3. Grande Prairie Public Library 2008 Audited Financial Statements (attached)
S. Walker, Acting Corporate Services Director
The Library is one of two organizations who's year end financial statements are combined with the City's. The other is the Airport. The library ended the year with a surplus of $292,776 - mostly due to a number of smaller factors that added up; unexpected grants and higher than expected fundraising on the revenue side and lower than expected or deferred expenses. Any surplus is transferred to a reserve and will cover some of the increased expenses that come as the library grows in to the new building.
4. Branding Exercise RFP Award (attached)
D. Olinger, Manager Marketing and Communications
This will ensure that the city is effectively marketing itself in a coordinated manner. The most visible result of this for the public will likely be some kind of new logo for the city (Right now we are using the city Crest which really isn't a logo). I won't be surprised if there is some angry feedback on this expense ($36,000) but ultimately the city is a large corporation that needs to communicate effectively with the public and this will help.
5. Strategic Priorities Chart Update (attached)
A. Cerny, Acting Legislative Services Manager
6. Correspondence
6.1 Mr. W. Drysdale, MLA, re: 2009 Municipal Sustainability Initiative allocation (attached)
This is in response to a letter we sent outlining the negative impact that the province's decision to reduce MSI funding had on our city. The province chopped about $2.4 million out of grant funding we were supposed to receive this year - money that was going to the construction of the multiplex.
6.2 AUMA Mayors’ Caucus, re: Bill 203 Local Authorities Election Act Amendment (attached)
This new provincial bill (view as a pdf)came from an MLA's private member motion late this spring. It sets out rules for how municipal election campaigns are financed and reported. I don't think anyone has too much of a problem with having fair guidelines in place that ensure transparency (I don't) the issue is that this was sprung on municipalities without any consultation. Because of that there are a number of holes in the proposed legislation that could have negative impacts. Hopefully we'll be able to correct these things by working through AUMA before this becomes law.
7. Other Business
Below is the agenda for today's meeting. The names you see below the agenda items are the staff members who are presenting the report on that item. My quick comments are in italics.
Delegations
1. Mr. B. Manz - 2008 Aquatera Annual Report (attached)
The city owns Aquatera (along with the County of GP and the Town of Sexsmith) and as part of that relationship we see them at meetings quite often. Presenting the annual report is kind of just an FYI thing as all council members receive it in our mail boxes.
2. Committee “In Camera” (land matter)
3. Grande Prairie Public Library 2008 Audited Financial Statements (attached)
S. Walker, Acting Corporate Services Director
The Library is one of two organizations who's year end financial statements are combined with the City's. The other is the Airport. The library ended the year with a surplus of $292,776 - mostly due to a number of smaller factors that added up; unexpected grants and higher than expected fundraising on the revenue side and lower than expected or deferred expenses. Any surplus is transferred to a reserve and will cover some of the increased expenses that come as the library grows in to the new building.
4. Branding Exercise RFP Award (attached)
D. Olinger, Manager Marketing and Communications
This will ensure that the city is effectively marketing itself in a coordinated manner. The most visible result of this for the public will likely be some kind of new logo for the city (Right now we are using the city Crest which really isn't a logo). I won't be surprised if there is some angry feedback on this expense ($36,000) but ultimately the city is a large corporation that needs to communicate effectively with the public and this will help.
5. Strategic Priorities Chart Update (attached)
A. Cerny, Acting Legislative Services Manager
6. Correspondence
6.1 Mr. W. Drysdale, MLA, re: 2009 Municipal Sustainability Initiative allocation (attached)
This is in response to a letter we sent outlining the negative impact that the province's decision to reduce MSI funding had on our city. The province chopped about $2.4 million out of grant funding we were supposed to receive this year - money that was going to the construction of the multiplex.
6.2 AUMA Mayors’ Caucus, re: Bill 203 Local Authorities Election Act Amendment (attached)
This new provincial bill (view as a pdf)came from an MLA's private member motion late this spring. It sets out rules for how municipal election campaigns are financed and reported. I don't think anyone has too much of a problem with having fair guidelines in place that ensure transparency (I don't) the issue is that this was sprung on municipalities without any consultation. Because of that there are a number of holes in the proposed legislation that could have negative impacts. Hopefully we'll be able to correct these things by working through AUMA before this becomes law.
7. Other Business
Wednesday, April 29, 2009
Quick Trip to Red Deer
I'm hitting the road shortly for a quick trip to Red Deer. AUMA is hosting a President's Summit on the future of Local Governance and I'll be representing the City of Grande Prairie.
The name "President's Summit" adds a lot of gravitas to and event, and in this case at least it's well deserved as we'll be discussing some very important issues that have the potential to shape the future of local government in Alberta. Here's the description from the AUMA website:
"This two-day event is designed to help municipally elected officials, senior administration, community leaders and other stakeholders explore the future of local governance. Participants will learn from speakers and experts, from both inside and outside the province, about Alberta municipal governance (Alberta municipalities), with a goal of building AUMA’s 2009 Policy Options Report on the Future of Local Governance."
The word is that the Provincial government is looking at updating the Municipal Government Act, but is waiting for input from this AUMA process and the 2009 Policy Options Report mentioned above.
Like any good event it comes with some homework so over the last couple of nights I've been digesting the background discussion papers.
If you want to read a pretty reasonable look at some of the most important issues facing Alberta communities today I really recommend the Discussion Paper (link to pdf) in particular.
So, I'm driving down today so I can be there for the morning start tomorrow. If the event was in Edmonton I might have flown and gone Thursday morning but with no direct GP to Red Deer flights that's pretty tough. On top of that I'll be heading home right after things wrap up on Friday afternoon - I need to be back to go to the Rotary Greenathon on Saturday morning. I'm glad I have satellite radio!
The name "President's Summit" adds a lot of gravitas to and event, and in this case at least it's well deserved as we'll be discussing some very important issues that have the potential to shape the future of local government in Alberta. Here's the description from the AUMA website:
"This two-day event is designed to help municipally elected officials, senior administration, community leaders and other stakeholders explore the future of local governance. Participants will learn from speakers and experts, from both inside and outside the province, about Alberta municipal governance (Alberta municipalities), with a goal of building AUMA’s 2009 Policy Options Report on the Future of Local Governance."
The word is that the Provincial government is looking at updating the Municipal Government Act, but is waiting for input from this AUMA process and the 2009 Policy Options Report mentioned above.
Like any good event it comes with some homework so over the last couple of nights I've been digesting the background discussion papers.
If you want to read a pretty reasonable look at some of the most important issues facing Alberta communities today I really recommend the Discussion Paper (link to pdf) in particular.
So, I'm driving down today so I can be there for the morning start tomorrow. If the event was in Edmonton I might have flown and gone Thursday morning but with no direct GP to Red Deer flights that's pretty tough. On top of that I'll be heading home right after things wrap up on Friday afternoon - I need to be back to go to the Rotary Greenathon on Saturday morning. I'm glad I have satellite radio!
Friday, May 16, 2008
Super Board for Health, Will it Affect GP?
The province has decided to do do away with Alberta's 9 health regions and amalgamate them in to one, governed by a "super board". That means that as of yesterday Peace Country Health doesn't exist.
I'm sure the DHT will have something on this but if you are looking for the story you can read about at the following sites:
Edmonton Journal, news
Edmonton Journal, opinion
daveberta, opinion
AGRDT, opinion
In general I don't have to much of a problem with the new super board concept. I particularly like the integration of Cancer, Mental Health and AADAC under one banner. There will be rocky periods for all the organizations during the integration process but in the end it's positive that they are all being recognized as part of "Health Care". This is a natural evolution of what the province did when they took over ambulance service from peace country municipalities. We used to run it through GPREMS but now it's totally integrated with Peace Country Health - there are advantages to having "health care" start from the moment you are picked up in an ambulance.
The concerning thing for the regions outside of the Edmonton & Calgary heartland is the risk of all the resources being sucked back in to those two centres.
I can tell you that people in Grande Prairie are very concerned about what impact this will have on the plans for a new hospital here. It appeared as though our regional board was having a tough time getting support for it in the capital (even though the project had been trotted out quite a few time prior to and during the election by the Conservatives trying to show that they were investing in infrastructure)
As far as I know only about $250m of the funding has actually been approved at the provincial level. My personal bet is that the total cost of the construction will be close to $1B ... there's a pretty wide gap there and I am worried that first thing we hear from the new super board will either be:
A) 3P (Public Private Partnership)
or
B) WOOSH!!!! (That's the sound of the money being sucked back into Edmonton and Calgary)
It is totally possible that the new super board will speed up the process and that our desperately needed hospital will happen just as soon as if there had been no change - but, on balance I think the to alternatives above are just as likely.
So in the end I think the super board can be a positive change but I'm also wary of what the possible impact might be on people up here.
Somewhat related topic.... I find it interesting that the provincial government sees value in taking action on forced amalgamation in healthcare (and in the past education) but they have shown no appetite for it in municipalities.
If the economies of scale are so good in both of these other two areas why is it that municipalities are left to duke it out across the province?
** Update **
The Daily Herald Tribune website now has the local reaction stories up. Not surprisingly there is a lot of concern. It sounds very bad for our new hospital but on the good side we actually have someone from GP on the Super Board.
DHT Stories:
HERE
HERE
&
HERE, Editorial
(Great editorial title by the way; "Wheel Reinvented Again?"
I'm sure the DHT will have something on this but if you are looking for the story you can read about at the following sites:
Edmonton Journal, news
Edmonton Journal, opinion
daveberta, opinion
AGRDT, opinion
In general I don't have to much of a problem with the new super board concept. I particularly like the integration of Cancer, Mental Health and AADAC under one banner. There will be rocky periods for all the organizations during the integration process but in the end it's positive that they are all being recognized as part of "Health Care". This is a natural evolution of what the province did when they took over ambulance service from peace country municipalities. We used to run it through GPREMS but now it's totally integrated with Peace Country Health - there are advantages to having "health care" start from the moment you are picked up in an ambulance.
The concerning thing for the regions outside of the Edmonton & Calgary heartland is the risk of all the resources being sucked back in to those two centres.
I can tell you that people in Grande Prairie are very concerned about what impact this will have on the plans for a new hospital here. It appeared as though our regional board was having a tough time getting support for it in the capital (even though the project had been trotted out quite a few time prior to and during the election by the Conservatives trying to show that they were investing in infrastructure)
As far as I know only about $250m of the funding has actually been approved at the provincial level. My personal bet is that the total cost of the construction will be close to $1B ... there's a pretty wide gap there and I am worried that first thing we hear from the new super board will either be:
A) 3P (Public Private Partnership)
or
B) WOOSH!!!! (That's the sound of the money being sucked back into Edmonton and Calgary)
It is totally possible that the new super board will speed up the process and that our desperately needed hospital will happen just as soon as if there had been no change - but, on balance I think the to alternatives above are just as likely.
So in the end I think the super board can be a positive change but I'm also wary of what the possible impact might be on people up here.
Somewhat related topic.... I find it interesting that the provincial government sees value in taking action on forced amalgamation in healthcare (and in the past education) but they have shown no appetite for it in municipalities.
If the economies of scale are so good in both of these other two areas why is it that municipalities are left to duke it out across the province?
** Update **
The Daily Herald Tribune website now has the local reaction stories up. Not surprisingly there is a lot of concern. It sounds very bad for our new hospital but on the good side we actually have someone from GP on the Super Board.
DHT Stories:
HERE
HERE
&
HERE, Editorial
(Great editorial title by the way; "Wheel Reinvented Again?"
Sunday, August 26, 2007
Smoking Bans Coming Jan 1st
I've mentioned before that the Province of Alberta is finally looking like it will enact a province wide smoking ban.
The most recent news, says that it looks like January 1st of 2008 will be the day. On top of the ban on smoking in public places the province will also reduce the places that tobacco can be sold and how it can be displayed is stores.
From the Edmonton Journal:
"The bill was introduced in June without any implementation dates. Hancock's ministry has now proposed bringing Alberta's tobacco-use rules in line with nearly every other province on New Year's Day.
But the government will give businesses more time to prepare for other anti-smoking measures in the Smoke-Free Places Amendment Act, which awaits third reading in the legislature this fall.
The ban on visible store tobacco displays, or "power walls," is planned for July 1, while the rules blocking all post-secondary campuses and pharmacies -- even supermarkets containing pharmacies -- from selling the cancer-causing products would take effect at the start of 2009."
Full Story
I think this is good news, it's about time Alberta had uniform legislation rather than the patchwork of different rules in different municipalities.
The most recent news, says that it looks like January 1st of 2008 will be the day. On top of the ban on smoking in public places the province will also reduce the places that tobacco can be sold and how it can be displayed is stores.
From the Edmonton Journal:
"The bill was introduced in June without any implementation dates. Hancock's ministry has now proposed bringing Alberta's tobacco-use rules in line with nearly every other province on New Year's Day.
But the government will give businesses more time to prepare for other anti-smoking measures in the Smoke-Free Places Amendment Act, which awaits third reading in the legislature this fall.
The ban on visible store tobacco displays, or "power walls," is planned for July 1, while the rules blocking all post-secondary campuses and pharmacies -- even supermarkets containing pharmacies -- from selling the cancer-causing products would take effect at the start of 2009."
Full Story
I think this is good news, it's about time Alberta had uniform legislation rather than the patchwork of different rules in different municipalities.
Monday, June 11, 2007
Online Voting
I bank online. I shop online. I read the newspaper online. I vote online... that is, I would if I lived in Markham.
I've been excited about the possibility of online voting over the internet since I saw it at an FCM trade show a few years ago. I've brought the idea forwardto committee to see what we could do to make this available here in Grande Prairie. Unfortunately the Province of Alberta act that governs municipalities (the Municipal Government Act or MGA) doesn't allow online voting yet. There was a review of the act which recommended adding that ability but not until after the 2007 municipal elections.
Markham, Ontario had internet voting in their 2006 municipal election. The city even set up a special website that helped residents understand internet voting and explained the "how-to's". After people voted they were asked to complete a short survey about the experience, some of the key findings from the post vote survey:
"- 91 per cent of those who voted online said they would be "very likely" to vote online in the future.
- One in five (21 per cent) Markham online voters said they did not vote at all in the 2003 municipal election.
- 88 per cent of online voters in 2006 cite "convenience" as their primary reason for voting online
- Markham saw online voting jump 48 per cent from 7,210 in 2003 to 10,639 online ballots cast in 2006.
- This contributed to an overall 2006 voter turnout of 37.6 per cent, well above the typical turnout of 28 per cent for a municipal election.".
So until Alberta catches up, residents here can only read media releases like this one and wonder if it would improve voter turn out in our local elections.
Thursday, May 31, 2007
Province Going Non-Smoking
I just did a quick interview with the Daily Herald, responding to the news that the provincial government appears set to enact no-smoking legislation that would apply to all workplaces across Alberta.
Blogger Ken Chapman has been following this for quite a while and has the goods.
As for the media, the Edmonton Journal seems to have the most up to date information:
"Health Minister Dave Hancock said he hopes to introduce legislation in June, although it's unclear when the rules will take effect. When they do, Alberta will move from being Canada's most smoker-friendly province to one of its most stringently anti-tobacco.
The plan will even prohibit smoking within a to-be-determined distance from windows and doorways, to shield people from the toxins of second-hand smoke." full story
A while ago council asked administration to put together a draft bylaw meeting the Gold Standard that most other cities in the province have gone to. A gold stadard bylaw prohibit smoking in all public places, including restaurants, bars, billiard halls, bingo halls, bowling alleys, and casinos/slots (where applicable). There is no allowance for Designated Smoking Rooms in Gold Standard by-laws. If the province comes in with thier own legislation that meets that standard then it wouldn't make sense for us to have a bylaw that duplicates it. I'm looking forward to finding out more details about this, when they will bring it to the legislature for a vote, if it passes when would it come in to force?
Still many details to be filled in but I think it's great news and long overdue.
Thursday, May 17, 2007
Quick Round Up
A few quick hits for your reading pleasure
Province Consulting Municipalities on TILMA
The Alberta Government is running a series of events across the province to consult with municipalities on TILMA.
schedule
My Comment:I've mentioned TILMA a few times before. AUMA is urging member municipalities to read TILMA and attend the sessions. I think I'll have this added a committee agenda so we have someone look at the issue and present our concerns at the GP meeting.
City of Edmonton and Home Builders Team Up on Litter
story
My Comment: I seem to see quite a bit of stuff blowing around from all the construction sites in the city. I know litter is one of the things that people say gets under their skin here in GP, maybe some team work like this would help.
Canada West Foundation Releases Western Cities Sourcebook
Detailed info on the West's largest cities; Vancouver, Calgary, Edmonton, Regina, Saskatoon and Winnipeg. You can purchase the book from the foundation. Check the story link for details on what info is in there.
story
My Comment: We are always comparing ourselves to other comunities to see if we are doing similar things or if there are areas we can improve. Having detailed data like this would be helpful - if only there was another soucebook focusing on the mid-sized cities.
Province Consulting Municipalities on TILMA
The Alberta Government is running a series of events across the province to consult with municipalities on TILMA.
schedule
My Comment:I've mentioned TILMA a few times before. AUMA is urging member municipalities to read TILMA and attend the sessions. I think I'll have this added a committee agenda so we have someone look at the issue and present our concerns at the GP meeting.
City of Edmonton and Home Builders Team Up on Litter
story
My Comment: I seem to see quite a bit of stuff blowing around from all the construction sites in the city. I know litter is one of the things that people say gets under their skin here in GP, maybe some team work like this would help.
Canada West Foundation Releases Western Cities Sourcebook
Detailed info on the West's largest cities; Vancouver, Calgary, Edmonton, Regina, Saskatoon and Winnipeg. You can purchase the book from the foundation. Check the story link for details on what info is in there.
story
My Comment: We are always comparing ourselves to other comunities to see if we are doing similar things or if there are areas we can improve. Having detailed data like this would be helpful - if only there was another soucebook focusing on the mid-sized cities.
Tuesday, May 15, 2007
Looking Into TILMA
I mentioned the TILMA in a post last week. At that time I finished by saying:
"There are lots of immediate issues facing GP and they’ll get continue to get my full attention but the impacts of TILMA could be so far reaching that I wouldn’t be doing my job if I didn’t at the very least have a look at it."
I have done a little more "looking" tonight and I see that many municipalities are concerned about TILMA and the impacts it could have on local government. Just a little of the chatter out there:
SUMA - Saskatchewan Urban Municipalities Association,
President, Saskatchewan Federation of Labour - Larry Hubich'sBlog
BC Municipalities - From the Owls and Roosters Blog
Most relevant to Grande Prairie though is the position of the AUMA - Alberta Urban Municipalities Association. So, it looks like there might be something there. I'm glad to see that the association is paying attention and working to make sure that municipalities interests are protected. I'll keep up to date on the action they are taking and support them where it makes sense for GP.
Oh, and I found the report from Saskatoon.
"There are lots of immediate issues facing GP and they’ll get continue to get my full attention but the impacts of TILMA could be so far reaching that I wouldn’t be doing my job if I didn’t at the very least have a look at it."
I have done a little more "looking" tonight and I see that many municipalities are concerned about TILMA and the impacts it could have on local government. Just a little of the chatter out there:
SUMA - Saskatchewan Urban Municipalities Association,
President, Saskatchewan Federation of Labour - Larry Hubich'sBlog
BC Municipalities - From the Owls and Roosters Blog
Most relevant to Grande Prairie though is the position of the AUMA - Alberta Urban Municipalities Association. So, it looks like there might be something there. I'm glad to see that the association is paying attention and working to make sure that municipalities interests are protected. I'll keep up to date on the action they are taking and support them where it makes sense for GP.
Oh, and I found the report from Saskatoon.
Tuesday, May 8, 2007
Broad Issue, Big Impact?
During the flight to Calgary for the Affordable Housing Conference I had time to re-read a letter that I received at city hall a few weeks ago. It’s a letter from the Council of Canadians that refers to the new Trade Investment and Labour Mobility Agreement (TILMA) that recently came into effect between the provinces of Alberta & British Columbia.
You might not have heard much about TILMA (The acronym is kind of fun to say, but it doesn’t tell you much what the agreement actually does.) If you’ve heard anything about a “free-trade” agreement between AB & BC - that’s TILMA, it just came in to effect on April 1st.
Grande Prairie has lots of pressing issues right now; Affordable Housing, Road Improvements, the need for New Facilities, Relations with the County and even just general up keep and maintenance around the city. As an organization the city only has so much time and resources that it can dedicate to issues, and the same is true for the individuals that make up city council. We can only tackle so many things at once, so sometimes lower priority things have to take a back seat.
So it’s probably not surprise that before receiving this letter I hadn’t given the Alberta/B.C. “free-trade” agreement much thought.
As I understood it the agreement was going to harmonize lots of provincial regulations that stood in the way of businesses and people moving between the two. A trucking company would need to meet only one set of standards to work in both provinces or trades people could be certified to work on either side of the border. That makes a lot of sense when you live in Grande Prairie. We are, after all, only about an hour from B.C. - many businesses and people work on both sides of that line.
The letter from the Council of Canadians (which I imagine was sent to elected officials all over the province) brought up a prospect that I hadn’t heard about: that municipalities might be forced to change local regulations. Here’s the paragraph that got me interested:
“Research by the Council of Canadians shows that TILMA will dramatically impact a municipality’s ability to draft or maintain any regulations that are deemed by a corporation or private individual to “impair or restrict” their investment. Through TILMA such “investors” are granted the right to launch lawsuits for up to $5-million in compensation for an regulation that they feel hurts their bottom line. Since all regulations can be seen in this light, TILMA throws the whole definition of local government in to question, threatening to seriously undermine municipal autonomy and hand considerable power over to the private sector.”
That’s pretty heavy stuff. The basic gist of it is this: if a corporation thought that a local bylaw impaired their ability to make money they could sue the city.
The letter goes on to add additional information and references a report by the the city of Saskatoon which looked at the issue (*link not working*) as well as further information on the Council of Canadians website. I haven’t read the further information yet but I’m interested enough that I’m going to have a look. I recognize that there are always two sides to a story so I’m going to have to do some research and find out exactly what the facts are.
There are lots of immediate issues facing GP and they’ll get continue to get my full attention but the impacts of TILMA could be so far reaching that I wouldn’t be doing my job if I didn’t at the very least have a look at it.
You might not have heard much about TILMA (The acronym is kind of fun to say, but it doesn’t tell you much what the agreement actually does.) If you’ve heard anything about a “free-trade” agreement between AB & BC - that’s TILMA, it just came in to effect on April 1st.
Grande Prairie has lots of pressing issues right now; Affordable Housing, Road Improvements, the need for New Facilities, Relations with the County and even just general up keep and maintenance around the city. As an organization the city only has so much time and resources that it can dedicate to issues, and the same is true for the individuals that make up city council. We can only tackle so many things at once, so sometimes lower priority things have to take a back seat.
So it’s probably not surprise that before receiving this letter I hadn’t given the Alberta/B.C. “free-trade” agreement much thought.
As I understood it the agreement was going to harmonize lots of provincial regulations that stood in the way of businesses and people moving between the two. A trucking company would need to meet only one set of standards to work in both provinces or trades people could be certified to work on either side of the border. That makes a lot of sense when you live in Grande Prairie. We are, after all, only about an hour from B.C. - many businesses and people work on both sides of that line.
The letter from the Council of Canadians (which I imagine was sent to elected officials all over the province) brought up a prospect that I hadn’t heard about: that municipalities might be forced to change local regulations. Here’s the paragraph that got me interested:
“Research by the Council of Canadians shows that TILMA will dramatically impact a municipality’s ability to draft or maintain any regulations that are deemed by a corporation or private individual to “impair or restrict” their investment. Through TILMA such “investors” are granted the right to launch lawsuits for up to $5-million in compensation for an regulation that they feel hurts their bottom line. Since all regulations can be seen in this light, TILMA throws the whole definition of local government in to question, threatening to seriously undermine municipal autonomy and hand considerable power over to the private sector.”
That’s pretty heavy stuff. The basic gist of it is this: if a corporation thought that a local bylaw impaired their ability to make money they could sue the city.
The letter goes on to add additional information and references a report by the the city of Saskatoon which looked at the issue (*link not working*) as well as further information on the Council of Canadians website. I haven’t read the further information yet but I’m interested enough that I’m going to have a look. I recognize that there are always two sides to a story so I’m going to have to do some research and find out exactly what the facts are.
There are lots of immediate issues facing GP and they’ll get continue to get my full attention but the impacts of TILMA could be so far reaching that I wouldn’t be doing my job if I didn’t at the very least have a look at it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
LinkWithin
