Edmonton Mayor Don Iveson has said metro region municipalities have been getting a free ride on the backs of big-city residents, but that knife cuts both ways.
On Friday, Iveson declared the “free ride” was over and decried the low projected tax rate in municipalities such as St. Albert. The premise of his argument was that if non-Edmontonians use Edmonton’s facilities, their municipalities should share the cost of those facilities, too.
In particular, Iveson was referencing Edmonton’s zoo, which the city is looking to expand. Iveson was clearly frustrated by Edmonton’s long list of capital funding needs at a time when taxpayers don’t want to see increases.
But despite the off-putting tone of his remarks, the idea itself isn’t a bad one – if it were executed properly and if Edmonton reciprocated funding to other municipalities. Such funding would have to be agreed upon by all involved municipalities in order to avoid the spectre of taxation without representation. St. Albert might actually benefit from such an arrangement more than Edmonton would. We could undoubtedly use that financial help as we move forward with pool space, ice rinks or recreation facilities in the coming years.
The metro region is already well on the road to cost-sharing. In July, St. Albert set up a committee with Sturgeon County to look at a framework for collaborating on future recreation needs. The city has to do one with Edmonton, as well. But recreational collaboration is a far cry from taxing other municipalities – something St. Albert Mayor Cathy Heron told the Gazette is not on the table.
This is an immensely complicated issue that has widespread implications, and reciprocation would likely not give Iveson the revenue bump he’s looking for if Edmonton has to shell out to other municipalities as well.
Regional collaboration is the way of the future, but the type of heavy-handed rhetoric displayed by Iveson hurts more than it helps – although he did follow up Monday by admitting he got “very passionate” when making his comments Friday.
Heron deserves kudos for taking the high road in responding to Iveson’s initial comments, which she said she thinks are the product of a “rough night.”
Iveson’s comments stemmed in part from a frustration with the 3.3-per-cent tax increase Edmonton is facing, compared to the 0.4-per-cent increase St. Albert is looking at. But tax discrepancies will always exist when one municipality seeks to build a facility or a large capital project. St. Albert has had its fair share of those discrepancies over the years – and will have more in the future.
Aside from the absence of major capital spending, the other factor that helped keep our tax increase low was the introduction of an electrical franchise fee.
It’s likely this topic is more a Pandora’s Box than a panacea for all budgetary ills, and it carries the risk of breeding more distrust and resentment among metro region municipalities as each municipality argues for the money it thinks it is owed.
