Shattering municipality myths
Re: “Parties agree it’s time to build Alberta’s cities,” David Staples, April 27 Investment in large urban centres has become an election priority for all of Alberta’s political parties, but a crucial question left unaddressed is how best to fund this development.
Several parties have stated they support redistributing industrial taxation revenues collected in rural municipalities and providing it to major cities. Their justification? Few people live in rural Alberta.
Although this argument may be politically convenient, it’s poor policy and flawed on several levels.
First, redistributing the same amount of money among municipalities does nothing to address provincewide deficits in infrastructure and community services. Cities need upgrades to their LRT system, but rural municipalities also need safe roads and bridges to accommodate the industrial traffic that powers Alberta’s economy.
Second, the perceived “wealth” in rural municipalities is based solely on the revenues collected. It fails to recognize the costs to maintain the extensive transportation network in rural municipalities, which includes 75 per cent of Alberta’s roads and 60 per cent of its bridges.
Third, rural municipalities are already sharing this revenue with urban municipalities to the tune of $130 million a year (2013) through voluntary agreements.
Lastly, not all rural municipalities are wealthy. This perception is skewed by a few outlier municipalities with very high resource revenues. But even there, extensive resource development equals extensive strain on municipal infrastructure and very high construction and maintenance costs, not to mention major impacts on environmental and land-use planning.
These revenues are currently being spent to maintain and repair core infrastructure, which benefits all Albertans. Redistributing this revenue is akin to robbing Peter to pay Paul. Al Kemmere, president of the Alberta Association of Municipal Districts and Counties