- Ms Kaye is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- Mary Carlisle is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- Prem Gill is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- Nancy Flight is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- Justin Everett is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- John Westover is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- Nora Etches is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- Edward Henderson is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- Bharadwaj Chandramouli is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- Dean Chatterson is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- Marius Scurtescu is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- Robert Parkes is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- James Murton is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- Susan Doyle is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- Vincent Strgar is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- Helen Spiegelman is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- Subir Guin is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- Kimball Finigan is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- Joanne Manley is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- David Leach is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
What Can Local Politicians Really Change?
Elections create promises, but city hall can tackle some issues far more powerfully than others.
Political leverage at the local level: strength to make change depends on the issue.
[Editor's note: Today begins an occasional series during this municipal election season in B.C. focusing on the power of local and candidates who are running on hot-button issues in their cities around the province.]
In a climate where municipalities are expected to provide more services with a tiny fraction of tax dollars at their disposal, on top of slashing carbon emissions, mayoral and council candidates are limited in the kinds of things they can promise and realistically deliver at election time.
Municipalities do have considerable regulatory power when it comes to things like land use planning, zoning, and bylaws, says Mark Heyck, a Yellowknife councillor who sits on the Green Municipal Fund council of the Federation of Canadian Municipalities (FCM) -- especially when it comes to sustainability.
There's a whole range of on-the-ground instances where municipalities are the major driving force in advancing sustainable principles and progress. And B.C. municipalities, says Heyck, "are at the forefront of thinking sustainably."
B.C. municipalities were given more regulatory power in 2008 with the provincial government's Bill 10. It changed the local government act to give municipalities the authority to create energy and water saving bylaws.
The City of Vancouver's green homes program, for example, includes building bylaw amendments to make homes more energy efficient.
In 2009, the FCM compiled a list of green municipal bylaws.
Zoning bylaws are another important regulatory power of local governments, says Heyck. Zoning is the primary means to shape development at a neighbourhood scale (and also prevent development in other areas.)
Densification, or turning single-family homes into apartment buildings and townhouses, is a way to gain more tax revenues with relatively little outlay for local services, like water or sewer.
While increasing density is no doubt controversial, especially in Vancouver, where the city's eco-density policy has been criticized for making housing even less affordable, it's an important "carrot" to encourage green building.
In 2009, Langdale was recognized by the FCM for its affordable housing policy, which requires developers to build one in 10 houses as an affordable unit. In exchange, the city offers density bonuses and streamlined approval processes.
Show voters the money
When it comes to boosting revenues, says Alan Durning of the Sightline Institute (a Seattle-based non-profit focused on sustainable communities in the Northwest), municipalities have a "relatively short list of opportunities handed down by the province."
He points to waste services as one place where municipalities can save money, if they can cut garbage pick-up and boost recycling and composting rates.
In 2010, Port Coquitlam became the first city in Metro Vancouver to move to biweekly garbage collection, made possible because of an expanded kitchen waste and recycling program. "This isn't about reducing service levels, it's about doing a better job of diverting more garbage into recycling and green waste," said Mayor Greg Moore at the time.
The city forecasted reduced waste disposal costs of between $35,000 to $45,000 per year, and reduced fuel and maintenance costs for the city truck fleet of $73,000 per year.
Port Moody boosted waste diversion rates, and related expenses after de-privatizing its waste services in 2009.
In 2010, it diverted 63 per cent of household waste away from the landfill, thanks to the introduction of alternate week garbage collection, food scraps recycling and financial incentives for the use of smaller garbage carts.
Political energy
District energy is another way municipalities can reduce greenhouse gas emissions and costs.
In 2010, Vancouver became the first municipality in North America to recover heat from city sewers. The hot water that courses through sewers every day (in the morning when the city showers, sewer water can reach 22 degrees Celsius) is a huge amount of energy that is typically wasted.
The Southeast False Creek Neighbourhood Energy Utility captures this heat and uses it for hot water and space heating within a 12-block radius.
The utility was built with $9.5-million grant from a federal gasoline-tax fund, administered through the Union of B.C. Municipalities. The city contributed $15 million up front and borrowed another $5 million from the Federation of Canadian Municipalities. Residents in the Southeast False Creek buildings will pay the same as they would if they were using a conventional electric heating system, and the city will pocket the difference, recovering the capital costs in 25 years.
District energy systems or electric utilities are feasible for much smaller municipalities as well. In 2009, the District of Lake Country built a turbine to capture energy from water coursing through its existing waterworks infrastructure. Lake Country is now selling about 3,900 megawatt-hours of electricity per year to BC Hydro, generating $367,745 per year (of which its 11,000 residents receive a dividend.)
This project also got $2.8 million from the federal gas tax fund, and the ecoEnergy for Renewable Power initiative, and a $500,000 low-interest loan and $30,000 grant from the Federation of Canadian Municipalities Green Municipal Fund.
Limited by 'archaic' powers to tax
While community energy generation is something that former Vancouver mayor and B.C. premier Mike Harcourt has advocated strongly for, he warns against viewing them as revenue generators or a financial fix for municipalities.
"They're good ideas, if done appropriately," he says, "if you're looking at them as a revenue generation source, instead of as a way to bring about a more sustainable city, or reduce energy costs for your citizens, you're going to be disappointed."
Generally, he says, election arguments about how to cut costs or boost revenues are "wrongheaded."
"People are missing the point," Harcourt says. "We can't, in the 21st century, provide the service required in cities off the property tax. People get squeezed into the wrong questions about whether to chop here or chop there."
Harcourt speaks of a systemic problem in the "archaic" way Canada finances municipalities, which receive only eight per cent of all tax revenue collected in the country.
"You can't built the very extensive and expensive rapid transit, or finance the large water purification or sewage treatment or other large capital projects on your own," he says.
"Municipalities are pretty much providing the bread and butter services as it is. You can cut library hours, you can decrease police services, you can close fire halls, but do people really want that?"




6
Login or register to post comments
elmer kabush
29 weeks ago
I like this article and the
I like this article and the fact that some more ideas are coming
out during the municipal elections will give candidates more facts to help them discuss "things" at all candidate meetings across the
province. I am running for a regional seat and this type of article
will help me focus on some of my campaign items.
Cloudcroft
29 weeks ago
Local politicians can really mess you up
Here in the Comox Valley we have a couple of predatory jurisdictions, the City of Courtenay and the Town of Comox, that have manipulated matters, including the Regional Growth Strategy (RGS), so that they can take over surrounding neighbourhoods whether those residents want to join the larger entity or not.
The majority of us living in the regional district far prefer rural living, and would have bought a home in the city if we wanted to live there.
Historically, the outcome of these forced annexations is a doubling or tripling of property taxes for no increase in amenities or services, a litany of broken promises re water and sewer, and a great loss of freedom as to what one can do with one's own land. Many older residents are taxed out of their homes, and many younger ones are forced into subdividing.
Let me illustrate how overreaching this "Courtenay uber alles" scheme is. We live 12 kilometres from Courtenay City Hall, but under the new RGS can be taken in to the city at the whim of the mayor and council, people who we have no say in electing.
Draw a circle with a 12-kilometre radius centred upon Vancouver city hall, and it will include the entire city of Vancouver, most of North Van, much of West Van, UBC, YVR, and big chunks of Richmond and Burnaby -- home to about two million people. Courtenay's population is only 29, 000, but this mentality is permitted and encouraged by the BC government.
The result of this empire-building is a windfall for developers and realtors, at the cost of ugly, environmentally damaging urban sprawl, and a loss of control by citizens as to the way they want their community of evolve. Perhaps an NDP government in Victoria would restore the democratic rights of rural citizens. The Liberals show no sign of doing so.
pwlg
29 weeks ago
thanks
It's not often I agree with Mike Harcourt's ideas these days but I do agree that cities are not able to fund necessary infrastructure from property taxes.
A word of caution though, not everything planned by politicians and their staff may be the most effective or cost efficient way to approach a challenge. The cost of building expensive urban rail in an area with low population densities impacts and diverts tax dollars from other real infrastructure needs including conventional transit, bikeways or walkways.
The rapid increase in gas prices has been a tax windfall for the federal government. The federal government plays by casino rules. The house always wins. It adds another 5% tax on top of the price of fuel and the primary federal and provincial fuel taxes. The higher the price of fuel the more money the feds make. Perhaps the taxes collected in BC from fuel taxes should stay here to pay for local transportation infrastructure throughout the province (not just in metro Vancouver).
Fish-counter
29 weeks ago
To be free is nothing. To become free is everything
The people of Nanaimo seem to agree in spades. Only 27% of them bothered to vote in the last election. Most of them are so narcissistic that they think they are above voting like common people. Others are too preoccupied with planning their next trip to Mexico or Hawaii. They go away every year and they don't give a toss about their home town.
Municipalities are run by the indigenous bureaucrats, a special breed who are generally under-acheivers and are generously overpaid. Hardly surprising, sin ce they set their own wages.
That said, local politics are the most important of the future. How do we ignite public interest? I suggest that anyone who fails to vote in three consecutive elections should be struck from the voters list forever. It costs money to maintain those lists, and if people on it don't want to be there, why should they be?
Another and more colourful approach would be to refuse re-admittance to to Canada to anyone who goes abroad unless they are on their voter list. Their homes could be requisitioned for use by the homeless. You can tell how much I like the rich and wealthy hogs who aren't really even Canadian anyway.
Time to oil the jackboots and the horsewhips. I have a cure for apathy. It is called pain.
Eduard Hiebert
29 weeks ago
Adding bite to Colleen Kimmet’s "What Can Local Politicians" do
By way of contrast to municipal candidates, at the federal level, regardless of how many thousands of Canadians might endorse a candidate, such will not be listed on the ballot as a party candidate unless and until the nomination paper is "signed by the leader of the party". How does this effect the candidate's nose? Or ability to do what is promised? For supporting details about the ring around the collar of every fed MP please see item 3, page 3 of the federal election Nomination Paper (form EC 20010).
Our provincial mla’s are similarly smitten by a similar ring around the collar syndrome.
In Winnipeg, Sam Katz’s “executive cabinet” or some such malarkey is close to bringing about the same anti-democratic sham to municipal politics. Whether BC so far is immune to such gerrymandering I leave to another to ferret out the reality.
However, in the interim two matters. I see Colleen's observations regarding municipal politics as a place to make changes justifiably realistic compared to fed and provincial "elected". Lastly, might you consider adding your voice as to whether in the
Angus Reid Poll: Is Stephen Harper doing a good job as Prime Minister?
http://rm2.angusreidforum.com/LP/820f82b16aa44d398812f49c919dc577/a.aspx?rm_state=b$82836848dacb4fb0b76560278b81ce8c|e$0|l$0|u$&gclid=CIysuJb1lKwCFeUEQAod3zxrqQ
Aperalta
29 weeks ago
Limited funds?
First and foremost, before we even speak of the money with which elected municipal officials operate our communities, we should consider the abysmal record of participation by the public. If we don't have the voices of the people at election time then the amount of money is really a moot point.
Secondly, campaign funds should be distributed EQUALLY to people running for office and should come from the level of government running the election. No more of this donating by Unions that represent civic employees to candidates running for office or developers with a vested interest in future zoning decisions pre-buying future decisions! This is SO wrong.
Thirdly, in a democracy the TAX PAYER should vote - not just the Canadian resident! If you're putting money in government coffers you should have a say on how that money is invested back into the community and that is worth one vote in my opinion.
As for finding efficiencies in municipal coffers perhaps the first place would be putting civic employees on par with private sector employees within their communities including wages & benefits such as pensions, sick days and work life balance schemes that allow for a four day work week every third week. Not only would this be FAIR but it would also reduce the tax burden as on average about 70% of these perks are paid for by the tax payer. As payroll are a huge component of municipal spending (over 70% in BC I believe) this is the obvious place to look for savings.
I disagree with Mr. Harcourt that we should not have to decide what programs to cut or how to boost revenue. What does he suppose we pay our municipalities to do? If we don't continually look on how to be more efficient and/or decide how to invest in the future of our communities and review our municipal infrastructure how are who will make these decisions for us? Our needs change and decisions continually have to be made to address that change. What we need is stakeholder participation so that we have sustainable and equitable decisions made in our communities.
In closing, the best investment in making YOUR municipality sustainable is each and every tax payer getting involved enough to make an informed decision on voting day and VOTE!