Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Chamber President brings up amalgamation

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Chamber President brings up amalgamation

    Here we go again. Lather, Rinse, Repeat.

    Originally posted by Edmonton Journal


    Time for Edmonton to consider amalgamating its neighbours, says Chamber of Commerce president

    By Bill Mah, Edmonton Journal

    EDMONTON - It’s time for Edmonton to consider amalgamating its neighbouring communities, says the head of the city’s chamber of commerce.

    President and CEO James Cumming raised the contentious idea Wednesday in a speech at the Realtors Association of Edmonton conference at the Expo Centre.

    “We need to have a grown-up conversation and review about amalgamation. We should have that conversation now and we should be ready to make decisions about amalgamation by 2015.”

    Rising taxes and public-service costs pose a threat to the region’s competitiveness and its capacity to attract companies. In addition, the patchwork way things are done now in the region don’t make economic sense, he said.

    “Rising taxes are impacted further by a question of fairness — fairness, in which one municipality bears the cost.”

    He gave the example of an interchange under construction at the Queen Elizabeth 2 Highway and 41st Avenue SW, which he called a critical regional transportation project.

    “The project costs $205 million. The feds kicked in $75 million, the province ponied up $57.5 million and the City of Edmonton ponied up $72.5 million.

    “Leduc contributed 7,000 bucks for a study. Nisku and Leduc businesses are going to grow because of better access from that exchange but the municipality didn’t contribute.”

    Link to the full article.

    http://www.edmontonjournal.com/busin...159/story.html
    President and CEO - Airshow.

  • #2
    All this amalgamation talk is a red herring. The Chamber should be banging a drum for the province to get its act together with regard to the big city charter.

    Comment


    • #3
      ^ means to justify an end?!

      Someone had to bring it up, someone had to throw it on the table.... Why? If the region doesn't get it together it a very real possibility. These are grown up discussions that have to happen and as a result maybe we can drive some very KEY points home.

      Thank god Edmonton is finally learning how to push the hand of the provincial gov't and the region.
      Last edited by edmonton daily photo; 09-01-2014, 09:17 AM.
      "Do you give people who already use transit a better service, or do you build it where they don't use it in the hopes they might start to use it?" Nenshi

      Comment


      • #4
        ...what do you mean "finally?"
        President and CEO - Airshow.

        Comment


        • #5
          ^ not gonna take he bate Richard. I am aware of your feelings, I respect them but I feel a heavier hand is required than what exists today.
          "Do you give people who already use transit a better service, or do you build it where they don't use it in the hopes they might start to use it?" Nenshi

          Comment


          • #6
            OK,

            define heavier hand....

            ...just trying to get an understanding of what you feel hasn't been done for some time. There have been some pretty heavy hands. Plus, I don't think you really are aware of my feelings...

            To add, I fail to understand how me asking for you to clarify your opinion on the lack of a heavy handed or grown up approach to date as being asking you to take "he bate" (sic)...I'm assuming the bait is what you meant. But that aside, you offered the position that nothing grown up has happened, that this is not on the table (hint, it never left it), and that things like Chris Sheard's exercise did not discuss these issues and make some things clear...

            In short, it has for several years...from Strathcona to Jasper Place, to the current discussion of today.


            Saying that Edmonton has finally learned to push the hand...well...that disrespects the past 9 years, also disrespects others who did (aka Decore, Reimer, and even Smith).
            Last edited by RichardS; 09-01-2014, 01:58 PM. Reason: add
            President and CEO - Airshow.

            Comment


            • #7
              What has Edmonton been able to accomplish regarding amalgamation in its recent history?

              Comment


              • #8
                If you haven't, read up on the exercise under Sheard. It accomplishes a lot, even with that silly veto.

                ...amalgamation is only one solution. Asking what Edmonton has accomplished on amalgamation in its recent history is like asking someone why they haven't accomplished marrying 6 wives, negotiating the requisite divorces, and dealt will all those meddling mothers-in-law - all within a couple of years...

                ....plus, since I've been integrated into other municipalities with my work, I have a greater appreciation on why they are apprehensive...if not flat out hostile (hint, it is not as much of a fiefdom issue as I thought)...

                President and CEO - Airshow.

                Comment


                • #9
                  The regional board outweighs any reason for amalgamation, I like the fact that you have different cities you can choose to live. Some people are willing to have higher taxes for higher levels of city services, some are not.

                  The regional board helps (or will help) integrate some shared services or services that affect multiple cities (transit, sewage, garbage disposal) as well as planning which could affect the bordering region.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    ^ I applaud you for trying to find a collaborative model. You have post on it with varios ides on how to resolve teh regional issues or at least create a better frame work. I personally feel that certain partners need to be removed from the process and a more definitive structure put in place.

                    Ed's quotes in the journal regarding the matter "It may take 15-20 years" I am sorry that is unacceptable. The fact that we can't even come up with utility and pipeline maps because of bit players in the region is not acceptable..... many things about the current regional set up are not acceptable and making nicey nicey isn't going to fix it.

                    Time for a bad guy. Time for a stick. Time to move on... and not in 15-20 years.
                    "Do you give people who already use transit a better service, or do you build it where they don't use it in the hopes they might start to use it?" Nenshi

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by sundance View Post
                      The regional board outweighs any reason for amalgamation, I like the fact that you have different cities you can choose to live. Some people are willing to have higher taxes for higher levels of city services, some are not.
                      Yeah, it's great. For instance, you can live in Beaumont in a less expensive home and then travel to Edmonton whenever you please and receive the benefits of its goods, services, infrastructure, jobs - all without paying Edmonton taxes. Small town living with big city amenities at low cost. Of course, you spend a little extra on gas but unfortunately that doesn't directly go to the city.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        thanks edp, but here's ...but here is the point...

                        look at 1981/82. Edmonton did play the role of the bad guy...and allegedly with provincial support...and look at where that got us...

                        If it is utilities, pipelines, transit, etc - amalgamation is not the only way to make this happen.

                        Don't get me wrong. There are still some serious issues with the framework as is, but it is better than no framework at all. Outside of a couple of misplaced vetos, it is working alright and could use a review...

                        ...but it will take 15-20 years for any kind of amalgamation...unless some things drastically change...


                        ...and sundance actually hits a strong point with...

                        Some people are willing to have higher taxes for higher levels of city services, some are not.
                        ...that is more real that many think, or I thought at one time...I know differently now...
                        President and CEO - Airshow.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Edmonton can't be the bad guy.. it needs to be the province. The Alberta gov't needs to be the stick.

                          It's time for our govt to be a leader.. for something other than oil and Gas.
                          "Do you give people who already use transit a better service, or do you build it where they don't use it in the hopes they might start to use it?" Nenshi

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by River Valley Green View Post

                            Yeah, it's great. For instance, you can live in Beaumont in a less expensive home and then travel to Edmonton whenever you please and receive the benefits of its goods, services, infrastructure, jobs - all without paying Edmonton taxes. Small town living with big city amenities at low cost. Of course, you spend a little extra on gas but unfortunately that doesn't directly go to the city.

                            so...

                            when I am out west at the ranch, I use Stony Plain (especially now that it and the Grove have pretty much all the necessities of life I need)....

                            ...does that mean that my ranch is up for amalgamation? Same premise, and the ranch is in another county to boot!

                            Stony Grove is about 45K people, with about a similar amount in the overall catchment area that is not within their limits...

                            ...and they intentionally built the retail infrastructure to capture the Darwell, Calahoo, Blueberry, Wabamun, etc traffic. So, good on them...I shop there on my way out of downtown Edmonton and sometimes even on my way back in! I often buy gas out in Spruce or Stony, depending on the route I take.

                            ...and should Edmonton be mad that it is missing out on my taxes?

                            I know, accuse me of hyperbole, but given the scale, the example works..

                            ...if anything, the next amalgamation is Spruce Plain or Stony Grove, or make Spruce and Stony districts of a new combined municipality of Parkland (or whatever)...
                            President and CEO - Airshow.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by edmonton daily photo View Post
                              Edmonton can't be the bad guy..

                              here's where the logic fails edp...just based on history...

                              there is little net benefit to outright amalgamation as far as the province is concerned, and a lot more to lose. If there was a benefit, it would have happened in 1982. I can't give away the source(s), but that exercise was more provincially backed (allegedly) than it was Cecil empire building...

                              no matter what, Edmonton will be the bad guy...unless it is willing to give a few things up as well...it cannot be seen as a total Edmonton victory because (and I can agree with the municipalities on some points), Edmonton is not the holy grail of civic administration or the shining light of efficiency...
                              Last edited by RichardS; 09-01-2014, 03:19 PM. Reason: add
                              President and CEO - Airshow.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X