Calgary, Edmonton sign agreement for big city charters

[Sonic Death Monkey]

http://www.globaltvedmonton.com/prov...430/story.html

The Government of Alberta, the City of Calgary and the City of Edmonton have signed a memorandum of understanding formalizing their commitment to develop a big city charter to help meet the challenges of growth.

“This charter will position our two largest cities for the future,” said Alison Redford, Premier of Alberta. “Our government needs to continue to build on our strong relationships that give municipalities the flexibility they need to meet local needs, not only four or five years from now, but 20 years from now.”

Read it on Global News: The Government of Alberta, the City of Calgary and the City of Edmonton have signed a memorandum of understanding formalizing their commitment to develop a big city charter to help meet the challenges of growth.

CBC story:
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgar...-charters.html

[IanO]

A good first step indeed.

[edmonton daily photo]

I think it should have been Edmonton First than Calgary

[kcantor]

my biggest concern on this one is the unmentioned elephant(s) in the room... calgary is to all intents and purposes a regional entity (including the fact it encompasses its airport) while edmonton is the key player in its region but doesn't control the region in the same fashion (and indeed often faces competition and criticism from other players). if there are requirements for unanimity or if things are dealt with on a per person basis, what should be a major step forward for both of our province's largest cities could turn out to be simply one more impediment for one of them.

as with most things in life, the devil will be in the details but as a first step i share the enthusiasm of both mayors and look forward to the province ultimately treating both cities fairly as equals in their relationships with the province instead of just creatures existing at the province's discretion.

[edmonton daily photo]

^ a properly worded/structured charter could give Edmonton the leg up on it's regional partners thought..

lets hope it also includes a shoestring annexation of the airport.

[kcantor]

Originally Posted by edmonton daily photo

^ a properly worded/structured charter could give Edmonton the leg up on it's regional partners thought..

lets hope it also includes a shoestring annexation of the airport.

i'm not sure that something that doesn't apply to an entire market is a leg up...

let's as one example assume that the city of edmonton decides within the structure of its new charter to assess a new tax (which is the whole idea behind a charter) that one of its neighboring municipalites doesn't impose on its citizens or businesses. that result is not necessarily advantageous for the city of edmonton.

alternatively, let's as another example assume that the province funds something for charter cities on a per capita basis, say to deal with inner city policing or housing costs or an arena or even lrt construction or transit operations. with a lesser population edmonton would get less money to deal with what is essentially an identical problem with identical costs to resolve.

[jagators63]

per capita basis could be a problem for Edmonton because of capital region which have over 15 towns involved in the planning.

[AShetsen]

I think the patchwork of municipalities is a much better model than further annexation.

Indeed, I think part of Edmonton's problem is that it's too far-flung. A smaller city geographically is better than a bigger one. I would favor de-annexation of everything outside the inner freeway loop (Whitemud=170th=CNR mainline=66/75). That way the majority of the industry already with city limits would be kept within city limits, but the non-urban suburbs could be the little separate villages or even small cities like Mill Woods that they aspire to be. Business tax revenues would be largely preserved, and the area over which the utilities would need to be maintained would become much smaller.

[Cal76]

A step in the right direction. Let us hope Mandel/Nenshi/Redford can move it forward!

[moahunter]

Originally Posted by kcantor

my biggest concern on this one is the unmentioned elephant(s) in the room... calgary is to all intents and purposes a regional entity (including the fact it encompasses its airport) while edmonton is the key player in its region but doesn't control the region in the same fashion (and indeed often faces competition and criticism from other players).

I don't think Calgary controls the region. Just look at Cross Iron Mills (right outside the Northern border of the city, that must have hurt, imagine if SEC had been built South of the Henday and the Edmonton border), and the dramatic growth in towns like Airdre (Melcor is major developer there), Cochrane and Okotoks.

[edmonton daily photo]

^ Calgary region is def growing.. and growing fast.

MD Rockey view also has a very healthy population

[edmonton daily photo]

Originally Posted by kcantor

i'm not sure that something that doesn't apply to an entire market is a leg up...

let's as one example assume that the city of edmonton decides within the structure of its new charter to assess a new tax (which is the whole idea behind a charter) that one of its neighboring municipalites doesn't impose on its citizens or businesses. that result is not necessarily advantageous for the city of Edmonton not just Edmonton residents.

I have been to numerous cities with Sales taxes and they are far from dying.

alternatively, let's as another example assume that the province funds something for charter cities on a per capita basis, say to deal with inner city policing or housing costs or an arena or even lrt construction or transit operations. with a lesser population edmonton would get less money to deal with what is essentially an identical problem with identical costs to resolve.

I see no issues on certain types of taxes being in our city an not on others.

Things like Hotel/rental car taxes.
a vehicle registration surcharge.
A 1 cent gas tax


Edmonton won't stop being the dominate player in the region and people will still move here regardless and if the money raising tactics are well chosen it will capture revenue from everyone who lives works and plays within Metro Edmonton.

[GreenSPACE]

Originally Posted by kcantor

i'm not sure that something that doesn't apply to an entire market is a leg up...

let's as one example assume that the city of edmonton decides within the structure of its new charter to assess a new tax (which is the whole idea behind a charter) that one of its neighboring municipalites doesn't impose on its citizens or businesses. that result is not necessarily advantageous for the city of edmonton.

alternatively, let's as another example assume that the province funds something for charter cities on a per capita basis, say to deal with inner city policing or housing costs or an arena or even lrt construction or transit operations. with a lesser population edmonton would get less money to deal with what is essentially an identical problem with identical costs to resolve.

That's why getting everyone on side at the Capital Region Board is so important...exactly what the mayor and councillors have been attempting to do. It might be per capita funding, but if everyone agrees to a transportation or other strategies, it's fine. Just takes quite a bit of negotiation on Edmonton's part. We still have counties around Edmonton playing cowboy. Thankfully Edmonton still has veto power.