report attachment - for edmonton regional governance...

Attachment 1

Problems/Issues as Identified by Departments

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PROVISION OF SERVICES AND INFRASTRUCTURE TO NON-RESIDENTS Cost of Major Recreation, Cultural and Sport Facilities...................................................3Landlord and Tenant Issues.............................................................................................4Subsidized Recreation Facility Use for Non-Residents....................................................5Policing Services..............................................................................................................6Fire/EMS – Mutual Aid.....................................................................................................7Impact of Regional Users on Transportation Infrastructure.............................................8

PROVISION OF SERVICES THAT ARE NOT GENERALLY AVAILABLE ELSEWHERE IN THE REGION Need for Additional Low-Income and Special Needs (Social) Housing Units..................9Serving Many High Needs Citizens................................................................................10Homelessness................................................................................................................11Movement of Low-Income Citizens to City of Edmonton...............................................13Housing Stock and Shortage of Rental Housing............................................................15Need to Serve Diverse Population.................................................................................17

DUPLICATION OR INEFFICIENCIES RELATED TO SERVICE PROVISION Bundling of Water, Wastewater and Solid Waste Services............................................19Service Equity – Waste Services...................................................................................20New Landfill....................................................................................................................21Regional Sanitary Servicing...........................................................................................22Consolidate Fleet Management Services......................................................................23Assessment....................................................................................................................24Communication Services...............................................................................................25Insurance Premiums......................................................................................................26Coordination of Police Services.....................................................................................27Snow and Ice Control.....................................................................................................28Roadway and Bridge Infrastructure................................................................................29Cross-Municipal Boundary Travel..................................................................................30Delivery of Fire Services................................................................................................31

Attachment 1 - of 46

Attachment 1


Delivery of Emergency Medical Services.......................................................................32

LACK OF INTEGRATION IN THE PROVISION OF SERVICES Lodges for Senior Citizens.............................................................................................33Regional Pest Management...........................................................................................34Environmental Liability – Waste Disposal Sites.............................................................35Private Sector Consolidation – Waste Services.............................................................36Watershed Management (Overland Flow).....................................................................37Regional Service Delivery – Transit...............................................................................38

INABILITY TO MAKE PLANNING DECISIONS ON A REGIONAL BASIS Institutionalization of Thinking and Acting Regionally....................................................39Management of Regional Assets – The Economy.........................................................40Management of Regional Assets – North Saskatchewan River Valley and Ravine System and Other Environmentally Sensitive Areas................................41Management of Regional Assets – Transportation, Utility and Pipeline Corridors.........42Management of Regional Assets – Air Transportation...................................................43Land Use – Regional Development Strategy.................................................................44Land Use – Risk Management for Heavy Industry.........................................................45Consistency of Information.............................................................................................46


Attachment 1


PROVISION OF SERVICES AND INFRASTRUCTURE TO NON-RESIDENTS

COST OF MAJOR RECREATION, CULTURAL AND SPORT FACILITIES

Description:Edmonton has been able to develop major recreational (e.g. Commonwealth Stadium, Skyreach Centre) and cultural facilities (e.g. Edmonton Art Gallery, Provincial Museum of Alberta) partially because of the size of the City of Edmonton and the Edmonton region. Without the combined population of the region and city some of these facilities and attractions (e.g. Edmonton Oilers professional hockey and Edmonton Eskimos professional football teams) would not be viable. The City of Edmonton contributes toward these facilities through infrastructure development and other financial means.

Service Implications:A decline in the population and/or tax base of City of Edmonton would hinder the maintenance of major facilities and attractions and ultimately the quality of life of the region. All municipalities in the region have a stake in ensuring that Edmonton is viable and that the recreational, cultural and social infrastructure is strong.

Financial Implications:The viability of the City of Edmonton tax base needs to be preserved to ensure that the quality of life in the City of Edmonton and the Edmonton region can be maintained.

Alternatives:Joint, regional, planning of major facilities and attractions be considered. Surrounding municipalities contribute toward a fund to support a “regional” infrastructure.

For more info, contact:Joyce Tustian, Community Services Department, 496-5804Linda Cochrane, Recreation Facilities Branch, 496-5829


Attachment 1


LANDLORD AND TENANT ISSUES

Description:Approximately 10% (3,400 of 34,000) of requests for service to the Landlord and Tenant Advisory Board’s dispute resolution service had to be refused primarily because they were made by non-residents of the City of Edmonton. Calls to the automatic information system are not monitored for residency and it is believed that calls by non-residents are similar in proportion to the other service. As the stock of rental accommodation continues to decline and rents continue to increase, conflicts between landlords and tenants can be expected to rise with a corresponding increase in demand for landlord and tenant services.

(note: 31.7% (51,770) of families in the City of Edmonton rent accommodation in contrast to only 12.3% (8,025) in the balance of the region and the percent of unattached individuals who rent is higher).

Service Implications:Demand for landlord and tenant services will continue to rise in Edmonton as rents continue to rise and the rental stock continues to decline. Demand for service will also increase from the balance of the region.

Financial Implications:The City of Edmonton continues to subsidize the automated landlord and tenant information line which is used by residents of the City of Edmonton as well as by residents of the balance of the region.

Alternatives: Edmonton continue to subsidize the automated landlord and tenant information line and

keep it available to non residents as a way to help non residents remain in their own communities and not apply additional pressure on Edmonton’s rental housing stock.

Explorations be undertaken to charge non-residents for the service, either as individuals or through their municipality.

The Province of Alberta be approached for a subsidy for providing service to the entire region.

For more info, contact:Joyce Tustian, Community Services Department, 496-5804Kathy Barnhart, City-Wide Services Branch, 496-5838


Attachment 1


SUBSIDIZED RECREATION FACILITY USE FOR NON-RESIDENTS

Description:Provision of recreation facilities for non-residents of Edmonton: both Commonwealth Stadium and Kinsmen Sports Centre provide significant subsidies to minor sport groups in Edmonton. Often the membership of these groups contain significant numbers of children who live outside the City. In effect City taxpayers are subsidizing the costs of non-resident use of these facilities.

Service Implications:Scheduling of bookings and maintaining these facilities is time-consuming and costly. Increased numbers of participants increases both the maintenance requirements and operational costs in order to provide facility space. Use of facilities by non-residents could pose limits to use by City of Edmonton residents

Financial Implications:Some minor sports organizations have upwards of 50% of their membership from outside the City; the number of non-resident participants is estimated at 500.

The proportion of tax subsidy received by non-residents using these two facilities is estimated at $70,000 to $80,000 annually. It is difficult to quantify this value precisely because non-resident use is integrated with resident use.

Alternatives: Charge higher rates to minor sports groups based on percentage of non-resident

participants. Restrict facility use by minor sports groups to those with City resident participants only. Maintain status quo.

For more info, contact:Joyce Tustian, Community Services 496-5804Linda Cochrane, Recreation Facilities Branch, 496-5829


Attachment 1


POLICING SERVICES

Description:The Edmonton Police Service (EPS) provides policing services to the City of Edmonton. Because the City is in close proximity to other centres, the EPS often provides services to, or deals with incidents requiring police action involving persons who live within the Edmonton Census Metropolitan Area (CMA) but outside the City limits. These “regional” service costs are borne by the residents of Edmonton.

Service Implications: In 1997, there were 11,676 files generated from those residing within Edmonton CMA but

outside the City limits. The EPS laid 3,236 charges to those residing outside the City limits. Residents in the Edmonton CMA, but outside in City limits, had some contact with EPS

members as complainants, witnesses, subjects or drivers in a total of 5,734 occasions. In 1997, the EPS assisted the R.C.M.P. in responding to 262 calls. In total, the EPS have responded to approximately 16,355 (files generated plus Mobile

Data Terminal concluded). This equates to 1,363 calls per month or 45 cases per day involving residents from outside the City limits but within the CMA.

Financial Implications:Assuming that the calls for service were routed through EPS Communications Section, 16,355 occurrences at $207.70 per call (KPMG costing) would equate to $3,396,933.50 or the equivalent of 52 full time police positions.

Alternatives:The EPS would support opportunities for improving policing in the region where all parties obtain increased efficiency and effectiveness.

For more info, contact:S/Sgt. Joe Rodgers, i/c Planning & Evaluation Services Section – 421-2848


Attachment 1


FIRE/EMS – MUTUAL AID

Description:A mutual aid structure currently exists in the Edmonton region. The structure is unilateral in that Edmonton provides service without reciprocation.

Service Implications:Multilateral operating protocols and authorities are required to ensure seamless and timely responses.

Financial Implications:Time and expert resources required to develop system.

Alternatives:

For more info, contact:Jim Penrod, General Manager, ERD, 496-3803


Attachment 1


IMPACT OF REGIONAL USERS ON TRANSPORTATION INFRASTRUCTURE

Description:Edmonton’s MDP (p. 51), Transportation Master Plan (TMP) and transportation system improvements account for Edmonton as a destination or a through route for a considerable amount of trips generated outside its boundary. A significant proposition of passenger vehicle and trucking activity from outside Edmonton makes use of Edmonton infrastructure, and contributes to both congestion and particularly in the case of truck movements on facility requirements contributes to the deterioration of roadway infrastructure.

Regional users have different impacts depending on the population and employment balance. In some cases (Sherwood Park, St. Albert, Parkland) passenger trips from region to Edmonton are three times those from Edmonton out. In other cases (Fort Saskatchewan, Leduc) passenger trips from the region to Edmonton are almost the same as from Edmonton to the region.

No mechanism exists currently to address these impacts on the funding of transportation improvements.

Service Implications:

Transportation system users from outside Edmonton impact the operation of the system and no mechanism exists to address the impacts of these users on Transportation infrastructure.

Financial Implications:A key question to address is whether transportation systems are being fairly funded, based on considerations of who is being served and who pays.

Alternatives:Regional approach to funding transportation priorities.

For more info, contact:Brice Stephenson, Transportation and Streets, 496-2897


Attachment 1


PROVISION OF SERVICES THAT ARE NOT GENERALLY AVAILABLE ELSEWHERE IN THE REGION

NEED FOR ADDITIONAL LOW-INCOME ANDSPECIAL NEEDS (SOCIAL) HOUSING UNITS

Description:Growth has triggered a substantial increase in low-income rental housing demand. Rising market rents have reduced appropriate housing opportunities for many low and fixed income households and those with additional health, mental health and social support needs. In mid-1997, when the City’s average rental housing vacancy rate was 4.6%, the Capital Region Housing Corporation (CHRC), the City’s largest social housing provider, had zero applications on its waiting list. However, by February 1999, when the City’s vacancy rate had fallen to 1.8%, the CRHC had over 700 approved applications. In the past six months, the CHRC waiting list has increased by several hundred additional approved applications.

CHRC has no administered units in the municipalities surrounding Edmonton and over 90% of the 873 private landlord “rent supplement” program units are located in the City of Edmonton.

Service Implications:A 1997 Edmonton Joint Planning Committee on Housing study observed an immediate demand for an additional 2,600 subsidized rental housing units in Edmonton by a range of emergency, transitional and long-term housing need target groups.

Financial Implications:Assuming an average capital cost of $60,000 per unit, cost of 2,600 units could cost $52 million. Municipal funding of subsidy for operation of these units would be approximately $3.4 million per year.

Alternatives:Edmonton continue to provide funds to pay the operating subsidy for community housing for families.The operating subsidy be apportioned to Edmonton region municipalities based on a formula related to population size and income.



Attachment 1


S ERVING MANY HIGH NEEDS CITIZENS

Description:The City of Edmonton provides services to a population with a higher percent of citizens with special problems/needs than do other jurisdictions in the region1. Citizens with high needs are less able to provide services for themselves or may require subsidization for services which other citizens are able to pay for. Citizens with high needs include: low-income residents:10% (16,400) of Edmonton families have incomes in the lowest

income quintile in contrast to 4.6% (3,185) for the rest of the region, lone parent families: 11.1% (18,055) of Edmonton families are lone parent families in

contrast to 6.4% (4,390) for the rest of the region. Aboriginal ancestry: 4% (24,110) of Edmonton residents have an Aboriginal heritage in

contrast to 2% (4,760) for the balance of the region as well, in the City of Edmonton 61.5% (14,845) of Aboriginal people have incomes below the Statistics Canada LICO while only 17.3% (825) of Aboriginal people in the balance of the region have incomes below LICO.

people with activity limitations (disabilities): 11.2% (67,645) of Edmonton residents have activity limitations in contrast to only 7.7% (18,660) for the rest of the region.

Service Implications:Edmonton requires more services, and these of a more diverse nature, to meet the needs of citizens with special needs. Some of these services include: public housing for low income families, counselling programs, safe housing inspections, community development, out-of-school care, spousal violence follow-up teams.

Financial Implications:Services to meet special needs of the relatively large number of vulnerable people cost the City of Edmonton proportionately more than they would cost other municipalities in the region with much fewer vulnerable citizens.

Alternatives: The Province of Alberta be approached to support costs of expanding FCSS (Family and

Community Support Services) services for the City of Edmonton. FCSS funds for the region be pooled and priority services supported.

For more info, contact:Joyce Tustian, Community Services Department, 496-5804George Witt, Strategic Services Branch, 496-8301

1 For purposes of providing statistical/demographic/economic information, the region is considered to be the Edmonton Census Metropolitan Area (CMA.


Attachment 1


HOMELESSNESS

Description:Homelessness is caused by many factors including unemployment, family breakdown, mental health problems, poverty as well as other factors. Many of these factors strike regardless of social-economic strata or place of residence. Coupled with the short supply of affordable housing in communities surrounding the City of Edmonton, it becomes difficult for homeless people to remain in the communities making up the balance of the Edmonton region. Relatively lower cost housing, presence of shelters and support services makes the City of Edmonton a magnet for people faced with social problems, including homelessness.

On March 18, 1999 a count of homeless persons found 836 people considered either “sheltered” or “absolute” homeless in Edmonton. In addition, the “count” found that 50 people were turned away from shelters for lack of available space. However, it is not known how many of these people came from outside of the City of Edmonton.

Service Implications:The growing lack of low-income affordable housing is a major part of the problem. Few communities surrounding the City of Edmonton have rent-geared-to-income housing for low-income families or individuals. Concerted action by all orders of government – federal, provincial and municipal – is essential for effective solutions to homeless needs, Short-term solutions include provision of funding for additional short-term emergency shelter

spaces and Long-term solutions include development of additional affordable housing supply, support

services, leadership and community involvement, policy development and funding.

Financial Implications:An Administration report to City Council’s Community Services Committee on July 14, 1999 recommended consideration of the following to implement the recommendations of the Edmonton Homelessness Task Force, released on May 21, 1999: A $28,000 expenditure as the City’s portion of funding required to provide an additional 56

emergency shelter spaces for the balance of 1999; A commitment to support an estimated $56,000 annualized cost to provide these 56

additional emergency shelter spaces in 2000; Approval in principle to provide one-third of funds required to enable implementation of the

Task Force recommendations by the Edmonton Joint Planning Committee on Housing (estimated at $256,000 from 1999 to 2002); and

Inclusion in the 2000 City of Edmonton budget of forgiveness resulting from Provincial restructuring of Social Housing Debt (estimated at $1.3 million annually) for social housing


Attachment 1


initiatives.

Alternatives:Social problems including homeless must be understood as a regional problem demanding concerted solutions and involvement by all levels of government (Federal, Provincial and Municipal) and municipalities in the region.



Attachment 1


MOVEMENT OF LOW-INCOME CITIZENS TO CITY OF EDMONTON

Description:Only 2% (12,390) of the City of Edmonton population had moved to the City during the five years prior to the 1996 Census of Canada in contrast to 12.9% (31,100) of the population of the rest of the region who moved to different jurisdictions within the region. However, of those who did move to the City of Edmonton, 32.5% (4,025) had incomes below the Statistics Canada Low Income Cut Offs (LICO) while of those who moved within the rest of the region, only 10.2% (3,185) had incomes below the LICO. Also, 51.8% (12,000) of immigrants to the City of Edmonton within the five years prior to the 1996 Census of Canada had incomes below the LICO in contrast to only 14.6% (280) of recent immigrants who moved to the rest of the region.

Low-income people in the City of Edmonton are poorer than are low-income people in the rest of the region. Excluding transfer payments, it would take $15,082 to raise the income of the average low income Edmonton family to the level of the LICO whereas it would only take $11,661 (excluding transfer payments) to raise the income of low income families to the LICO level in the rest of the region.

Service Implications:The relatively high proportion of low-income movers to the City of Edmonton suggests that a large percent of the Edmonton population increase between 1996 and 1999, consists of low income people. Services to address the needs of low-income residents are relatively expensive and are not readily available (e.g. out-of-school care) in the balance of the region. Edmonton’s services should be oriented to help low income residents deal with the issues associated with of low income/poverty (e.g. education, health, nutrition).

Financial Implications: Increases in user fees for services should be kept to a minimum to help low-income

people to continue utilizing appropriate amounts of essential and important services. The movement of the regions’ low income and poor population to the City of Edmonton

requires additional support to help preserve services essential and important to the low income population.

The Federal government should be approached to provide additional support to the City of Edmonton to provide essential and important services to low income immigrants.


Attachment 1


Alternatives: The Province of Alberta and Government of Canada should be approached to provide

additional funding to support the City of Edmonton providing essential and important services for low income/poor citizens and immigrants.

Residency requirements could be implemented to maintain services for Edmonton residents.

Additional fees could be charged non-residents to support low income people utilizing Edmonton services.

The Federal government should be approached to provide additional support to the City of Edmonton to provide essential and important services to low income immigrants.



Attachment 1


H OUSING STOCK AND SHORTAGE OF RENTAL HOUSING

Description:The City of Edmonton has a much higher percent of rental housing accommodation than does the balance of the region. Low-income families and individuals will have difficulty raising necessary funds to purchase shelter and a higher proportion of low-income families and individuals rent accommodation than do non low-income families and individuals. A greater percent of families, including low-income families, pay 30% or more of their income for accommodation in the City of Edmonton than do families and individuals in the balance of the region. In addition, a greater percent of the Edmonton housing stock requires major repairs. Removal of some of the sub-standard units from the stock would further reduce rental accommodation in Edmonton and the region. The relatively low prevalence of rental accommodation in the surrounding region inhibits a proportionate number of low-income families and individuals from living in the surrounding communities. Percent of families which rent shelter: City of Edmonton 31.7% (51,770), balance of

region 12.3% (8,025) Percent of families paying 30% or more of income for shelter: City of Edmonton low-

income families 46.7% (16,250), all families 11.2% (18,360); balance of region low-income families 28.5% (1,570), all families 3.3% (2,230).

Percent of low-income (<LICO) families: City of Edmonton 21.3% (34,810); balance of region 8% (5,505).

Percent of families living in shelter needing major repair: City of Edmonton 6.4% (10,535); balance of region 5.8% (3,995).

Service Implications:Until 1999, the City of Edmonton has been required to pay 10% of the operating deficit for “community housing” for qualifying low-income families. With the increase in the Edmonton population and decline in number of rental units in Edmonton pressure on rental rates has been increasing and demand for community housing units has been increasing as witnessed by the increase in waiting list. The balance of the region contributes no part of the operating deficit for community housing for low-income families.

Financial Implications:The City of Edmonton has paid the municipal portion of operating deficit for community housing for low-income families until this year. Demand for community housing is partly increased by the lack of rental accommodation in the balance of the region.


Attachment 1


Alternatives:The federal and provincial governments continue to pay the entire operating deficit for community housing for families.The municipalities in the balance of the region provide Edmonton with a portion of the operating deficit for community housing for low-income families and other vulnerable groups.



Attachment 1


N EED TO SERVE DIVERSE POPULATION

Description:Edmonton has an extremely diverse population in contrast to the population of the balance of the region. Services developed to meet the needs of the majority will in many cases be less useful or sometimes inappropriate for a segment of Edmonton’s population. Visible minorities: 18.1% (109,935) of the population of the City of Edmonton is of a visible

minority background in contrast to only 2.2% (5,220) for the balance of the region. Aboriginal ancestry: 4% (24,110) of the population of the City of Edmonton has Aboriginal

ancestry in contrast to only 2% (4,760) for the balance of the region. Immigrants: 4.3% (25,905) of the City of Edmonton population are recent immigrants

(immigrated between 1991 and 1996) in contrast to only 0.5% (1,310) for the balance of the region. People who have immigrated to Canada make up 22.5% (136,785) of the City of Edmonton population in contrast to only 8.8% (21,170) for the balance of the region.

Knowledge of either French or English: 2.2% (13,380) of the population of the City of Edmonton has no knowledge of either English or French; in contrast, those with no knowledge of either English or French make up only 0.14% (335) of the population of the balance of the region.

Service Implications:Edmonton services must be broad enough in scope to appeal to people from a diversity of backgrounds. City of Edmonton staff must be sensitive to the cultural differences of specific groups of residents; in many cases specific training is required.City of Edmonton has had to engage translators/interpreters to aid staff and residents in accessing services. Edmonton has developed ways to address the needs of specific groups (e.g., Catholic Social Services, Jewish Family Services, Ukrainian Canadian Social Services, Chinese Community Services; Mennonite Centre for Newcomers).

Financial Implications:Additional inputs (e.g. staff time, translation of materials) and thereby additional costs are incurred in providing services which must be culturally sensitive. Demands for services of a similar nature, provided by separate organizations, increase costs to the community as well as expectations or demands for civic grants and funding.


Attachment 1


Alternatives:Resources be allocated based on service type and divided based on numbers of specific population served. Specific ethnic/religious communities meet their own specific requirements.



Attachment 1


DUPLICATION OR INEFFICIENCIES RELATED TO SERVICE PROVISION

BUNDLING OF WATER, WASTEWATER AND SOLID WASTE SERVICES

Description:There may be some efficiencies in the “bundling” of water, wastewater and solid waste services to the region. This potential opportunity should be investigated further.

Service Implications:These three services are already regionalized to some degree. Water – in treatment and distribution. Wastewater – treatment is shared and there is some common piping. Solid Waste – landfill, household hazardous waste depots and recycle depots are open for regional use, and there is the potential for future use of Edmonton’s main processing facilities.

Financial Implications:There may be overall cost savings due to enhanced billing system efficiencies (one data base), strong bargaining positions (ownership leveraging), structural efficiencies, and a streamlined management structure.

Alternatives:Individual services may be regionalized, rather than the complete package (e.g. garbage collection for the entire region). The organizational structure under which these services are managed may be something other than a utility.

For more info, contact:Bill Burn 496-5656


Attachment 1


SERVICE EQUITY – WASTE SERVICES

Description: Regionalizing waste management services will inevitably generate the issue of service equity in the region. Edmontonians benefit from services and facilities, such as curbside collection of recyclables, others in the region would like to have. The provision of the same level of service to at least all “urban” areas in the region could translate into higher costs for Edmontonians with no appreciable increased level of service.

Service Implications:Provided that regionalizing waste management services is not predicated on reducing service levels to Edmontonians in order to fund improved levels to others, service implications should not emerge.

Financial Implications:A regional service to match Edmonton’s will, because of our population base, result in higher costs throughout the region. This could result from not only the provision of services but from upgrading of facilities.

Alternatives:None

For more info, contact:Roy Neehall


Attachment 1


NEW LANDFILL

Description: City controlled landfill capacity will be depleted in the next 10 to 13 years. Past experience shows the near impossible task of siting a City landfill within reasonable distance from Edmonton. However, the chance of siting a new regionally controlled landfill would be much improved.

Service Implications:Edmonton would be fully dependent on the private sector and possibly on a more remote jurisdiction for future landfill capacity for non-recyclable and non-compostable waste with associated loss of cost control.

Financial Implications:Increasing landfill disposal costs would be the outcome if the City or a majority of regional municipalities do not control long term landfill capacity.

Alternatives:The City, independently or as part of a regionalized system, would have access to Ryley’s landfill under Ryley’s terms on closure of municipally controlled landfills in the region. The ability of the Ryley Landfill to meet the regions long - term needs would be solely dependent on Ryley’s ability to successfully expand their landfill in the future. Some opposition to this exists.



Attachment 1


REGIONAL SANITARY SERVICING

Description:Sewage collection, treatment and disposal in Edmonton are provided by the City’s Drainage Services. Sewage collection in other surrounding municipalities is provided locally through the municipalities. The Capital Region Sewage Commission (CRSC) provides sewage treatment services to these municipalities and also transmission of sewage from the municipalities to the CRSC treatment plant. Currently, the City has agreements with both the Strathcona County and CRSC to share some of the services (including monitoring and laboratory services). A higher level of regional cooperation will optimize the use of these services.

Service Implications:Edmonton, its surrounding municipalities and Capital Region Sewage Commission will be able to optimize the use of their trunk sewers in conjunction with their treatment and disposal facilities. A co-ordinated approach to servicing and wastewater treatment strategies will better protect the North Saskatchewan River.

Financial Implications:Optimal use of the sanitary servicing facilities will delay construction of overlapping infrastructure and reduce capital expenditure for all municipalities. Jointly conducted studies will maximize understanding of North Saskatchewan River water quality issues.

Alternatives:The municipalities should jointly develop a regional sanitary transmission, treatment and disposal strategic plan that optimizes sanitary service provisions to the municipalities in the Capital Region. As a start, the current Heads of Agreement between the City and the CRSC will need to be updated. Progress towards a comprehensive long-term Master Agreement would be beneficial.

For more info, contact:Kurt Sawatzky, P. Eng.Manager of Drainage Services, Phone; 496- 5593


Attachment 1


CONSOLIDATE FLEET MANAGEMENT SERVICES

Description:Fleet Management services can be consolidated regionally to streamline purchasing, leasing, renting, disposing, maintaining, and fleet safety services to gain efficiencies.

Service Implications:At present, each municipality and county maintains its own fleet management services. Edmonton has helped others in the region in many instances in engineering specifications, purchasing, renting, maintaining and fleet safety services. There exists an opportunity to achieve economies of scale in consolidating fleet management services. Duplication exists in the parallel fleet organizations (e.g. St. Albert Public Works and Transit maintenance operations, Strathcona Public Works and Transit maintenance operations). By consolidating the various fleet management services, there are efficiencies to be gained through economies of scale (e.g. better buying power with increased fleet size) and elimination of duplications. Since MES has developed many innovative and sophisticated programs (e.g. MESIS+), these can be shared with the smaller regional municipalities.

Financial Implications:Fleet costs can be reduced through economies of scale and the elimination of duplicated services because it has been proven through City ‘97 that by consolidating the Transit, ERD and MES fleets together, savings can be achieved.

Alternatives:1) Maintain the present system of separate organizations and service delivery.2) Maintain the present system of separate organizations, but take advantage of the

shared services model where common services that can be more economically delivered be contracted by the various municipalities and counties from MES.

For more info, contact:Alex Lee, P. Eng. Manager of Mobile Equipment Services Branch, Asset Management and Public Works Department, City of Edmonton (780) 496-6455


Attachment 1


ASSESSMENT

Description:The fundamental assessment issue is one of coordination among several assessment departments operating within one regional real estate market.

Two immediate problems are the lack of standard procedures for calculating equalized assessments and an inability to audit linear assessments prepared by the Province. Although these have regional implications, they are essentially province-wide problems.

Service Implications:The property valuation process is complex and without coordination throughout the Capital Region there will be inconsistencies in appraisal practices and policy interpretations. Property owners may be dealt with differently simply because of the municipality within which their properties are located. The assessment of rural residences is a prime example of such property.

Financial Implications:A common assessment and taxation database for all regional municipalities administered by the City would support more efficient assessment practices throughout the region. The cost of modifying and expanding the City’s GAMMA and TACS systems could be estimated by the Information Technology Branch. The Assessment Branch could offer advisory/consulting services to other assessment departments in the Region.

Alternatives:

For more info, contact:Paul M. Boutin, City Assessor, (780) 496-5001


Attachment 1


COMMUNICATION SERVICES

Description:← Communication Related Products – Rationalization and bulk purchasing of communication

related products, such as advertising or printing. Combining purchases of several municipalities would save significant dollars.

← Duplication of services – many of the initiatives undertaken by the Communications Branch are duplicated by most of the surrounding municipalities. Examples include communications on road closures, media relations, etc.

Service Implications:← None. This is a purchasing related savings that has minimal impact on how we do or

work.

← Extending the reach of communications initiatives can be done quite inexpensively, with little or no extra work.

Financial Implications:← Significant savings. We generated 50% savings on print through our block tender

programs. “The more you buy, the more (per unit) you save.”

← This could potentially save dollars in the areas of staffing, print and advertising costs.

Alternatives:← Status quo is an alternative.

← Keep status quo.

For more info, contact:David Schneider 496-8191


Attachment 1


INSURANCE PREMIUMS

Description:Potential opportunity to reduce insurance premiums if insurance coverage were acquired on a regional basis.

There maybe an issue of insurance liabilities where municipalities jointly provide a service

Service Implications:Nil

Financial Implications:Value of cost savings not determined.

Alternatives:Status Quo

For more info, contact:Anne Massing, City Solicitor, 496-7203


Attachment 1


COORDINATION OF POLICE SERVICES

Description:Police Service in the Edmonton Census Metropolitan Area (CMA) are provided by one municipal (EPS) police service, eight separate R.C.M.P. municipal detachments and four rural R.C.M.P. policing arrangements. Better coordination of police services in the Edmonton region would provide best value to all parties.

Service Implications: Duplication of services among neighbouring municipalities. Economic inefficiencies. Limited regional input/emphasis. Inconsistent service delivery across the region. Unfair costs and benefits across the region.

Financial Implications:Not calculated.

Alternatives:The EPS would support opportunities for improving policing in the region where all parties obtain increased efficiency and effectiveness.

For more info, contact:S/Sgt. Joe Rodgers, i/c Planning & Evaluation Services Section – 421-2848


Attachment 1


SNOW AND ICE CONTROLDescription:Snow and Ice Control

Service Implications:City of Edmonton has a bare pavement policy, specific standards by road class, using an environmental friendly approach (do not use 100% salt) while being proactive. With Alberta Transportation, City of St. Albert and County of Strathcona all have varying standards that reflect service levels and therefore road surface for winter driving. Regional users will see the difference especially at current boundary points.

Financial Implications:Claims would increase.

Expectations may reduce and or decrease spending of a one standard approach is agreed upon.

Alternatives:Develop a common policy that defines service levels based on road class ( traffic volume and speed). The roadway user should expect same driving conditions throughout region.

For more info, contact:Barry Belcourt, 496 – 4688


Attachment 1


ROADWAY AND BRIDGE INFRASTRUCTURE

Description:Roadway (highway and truck routes) and bridge infrastructure conditions can vary across the region, providing non-uniformity conditions level.

Highways and major truck routes are not rated with a goal of 6.0 – 6.5 P.Q.I., which impact when we rehabilitate. In addition, coordination of construction schedules and design standards does not currently exist.

Service Implications:The current responsibility for management of transportation infrastructure rests with the Province, the City, and the region’s towns and countries. Service levels and condition ratings vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, and are subject to varying priorities and funding capabilities. The desirable scenario would be to attain uniformity in condition levels and design standards.

Financial Implications:If the region’s jurisdictions developed rehabilitation programs to meet uniform and consistent infrastructure ratings, increased funding would be required by some areas. Coordination of construction schedules would benefit the region, but may require individual jurisdictions to advance funding for construction.

Alternatives:Irrespective of the jurisdictional responsibilities, there is regional benefit to applying consistent targets for infrastructure condition and design standard.

For more info, contact:Brice Stephenson, 496-2897Michael Chibuk, 944-7672


Attachment 1


CROSS-MUNICIPAL BOUNDARY TRAVEL

Description:Regionalization of health care (i.e. Capital Health Authority) has created new travel demand for cross-municipal boundary travel; for example a DATS registrant residing in Castle Downs may be directed to Sturgeon Hospital in St. Albert.

Service Implications:Specialized transit services in St. Albert, Strathcona County and Edmonton provide services for their respective citizens, and eligibility is confirmed to residents of their increasing demand for cross-boundary or inter-municipal specialized transit service will result in less efficient service and increased costs through increased travel time and distances, and inability to achieve cost efficiencies through grouping of trips.

Financial Implications:Capital Health Authority does not have any data to provide an estimate for trip demand. Program staff have indicated, however, they would design programs for patients, etc. to take advantage of available inter-municipal transportation.

Alternatives:The estimated cost for a travel demand study is $25,000 - $50,000. Cost sharing model for this study, involving participation of Provincial Government and the municipalities of St. Albert, Strathcona County and Edmonton, would enable a thorough analysis of the impact of regionalization and potential transportation models to address these needs.

For more info, contact:Dennis Nowicki at 496-4553.


Attachment 1


DELIVERY OF FIRE SERVICES

Description:Each municipality in the region provides its own fire service. Mutual aid and service agreements exist, but for the most part, service is delivered independently. This results in duplication of dispatch systems, operating protocols and procedures, service structures, vehicles and equipment (purchase, replacement and maintenance), administrative staff, management, training and medical direction.

Service Implications:Economies of scale in each of the areas noted above are available. Regional service delivery does not necessitate standardizing service levels or the financing of the service. Service level expectations will be difficult to manage in the long term. Requires the establishment of a regional dispatch protocol acceptable to all parties. Union jurisdictional disputes would have to be dealt with. Requires coordination of regional deployment/unit movement protocols and equipment purchase.

Difficult to merge systems with a mix of professional and volunteer resources.

Financial Implications:Significant up-front costs for dispatch, establishment of operating procedures, severance, apparatus (including depreciation), information technology and training.

Alternatives:

For more info, contact:Jim Penrod, General Manager, ERD, 496-3803


Attachment 1


DELIVERY OF EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES

Description:Each municipality in the region provides its own ambulance service. Mutual aid and service agreements exist, but for the most part, service is delivered independently. This results in duplication of dispatch systems, operating protocols and procedures, service structures, vehicles and equipment (purchase, replacement and maintenance), administrative staff, management, training and medical direction.

Service Implications:Economies of scale in each of the areas noted above are available. Regional service delivery does not necessitate standardizing service levels nor the financing of the service. However, it would be difficult to merge systems that are based on varied service structures. For example, Edmonton has tiered EMS service separate from Fire while other jurisdictions have integrated Fire and EMS response. Issues related to union jurisdiction and merging professional and volunteer resources would have to be dealt with.

Financial Implications:Significant up-front costs for dispatch, establishment of operating procedures, severance, equipment (including depreciation), information technology and training.

There would be costs associated with breaking existing contracts with private couriers.

Alternatives:

For more info, contact:


Attachment 1


LACK OF INTEGRATION IN THE PROVISION OF SERVICES

LODGES FOR SENIOR CITIZENS

Description:It is projected that the number of persons 65 years and over in the City of Edmonton will increase to 83,800 by the year 2004 from the current 75,000. The 65 years and over age group will grow by over 4,600 people, to 23,640 during the same time period in the balance of the region.Some families moving to Edmonton from the surrounding communities are bringing their older relatives to live near them in the City. There is no length of residency requirement to access Lodge accommodation. This is increasing pressure on demand for Senior Citizen Lodges in Edmonton. Edmonton lodges are full and have waiting lists while Lodges in the balance of the region have vacancies. Also, Lodges in communities surrounding Edmonton receive a higher per diem rate from the Province of Alberta than do Lodges operated by the Greater Edmonton Foundation in the City of Edmonton ($3.60 per day in contrast to $4.80 per day).

Service Implications:Lodge accommodation rates are determined by the Government of Alberta. Residents pay $725 per month for Lodge accommodation. Currently, the difference in per diem rates from the Province total approximately a $350,000 difference, which contributes to a deficit financial state for the Greater Edmonton Foundation.

Financial Implications:The differential in per diem rate from the Province of Alberta amounts to approximately $350,000 per year. In 1998 the Greater Edmonton Foundation had a deficit for operation of Lodges amounting to approximately $187,000. A deficit of approximately the same is projected for the year 2000. If the per diem rate were the same as for communities surrounding Edmonton, the Greater Edmonton Foundation would have a surplus rather than a deficit. Deficits are currently being paid from the Greater Edmonton Foundation accumulated surplus. However, deficits cannot continue to be run without increased funding from the Province or the City of Edmonton.

Alternatives: The City of Edmonton and the Greater Edmonton Foundation approach the Government

of Alberta for an increase in the per diem rate for Lodges in Edmonton. That surrounding communities contribute to the rate differential for recent residents of

these communities who are accessing Lodges in Edmonton.

For more info, contact:Joyce Tustian, Community Service Department, 496-5804Kathy Barnhart, City-Wide Services Branch, 496-5838


Attachment 1


REGIONAL PEST MANAGEMENT

Description:Recent cost-based program reductions in mosquito management in the Capital region will increase the area’s vulnerability to mosquito biting problems. Historically the City of Edmonton has been the major player in the area’s efforts to manage mosquito outbreaks. The high mobility of mosquitoes causes Edmonton’s program to extend beyond the city’s boundary, reducing mosquitoes and mosquito biting in surrounding jurisdictions. Withdrawal of independent mosquito control programs in surrounding municipalities as well as a reduction in Edmonton’s mosquito control program, contributes to reduced quality of life generally in the Capital region. A plan for a regional approach to mosquito and other special pest management programs offers an integrated approach, improved cost effectiveness and best use of available resources.

Service Implications:Currently Edmonton provides reduced mosquito activity to its residents by monitoring weather factors, determining areas of high mosquito production and treating these sites in priority order to control the development of adult mosquitoes. The success of the program in summertime is affected by weather conditions as well as migrant mosquitoes from beyond treatment areas. The very nature of dealing with highly dispersive insects causes the City’s program to subsidize the reduction of mosquitoes in neighbouring county lands. A regionally coordinated effort with sufficient resource contribution by surrounding municipalities would allow: expansion of treatment areas to improve overall management of mosquitoes in the Capital

region and alleviate growing barriers to requesting permission of county land owners caused by

Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy rules.

Financial Implications:Costs and extent of program expansion would be determined by extent of support by surrounding municipalities.

Alternatives:Edmonton continues to provide it’s city-based mosquito abatement program.

For more info, contact:Joyce Tustian, Community Services, 496-5804


Attachment 1


Barry Anderson, Parkland Services, 496-4834

ENVIRONMENTAL LIABILITY – WASTE DISPOSAL SITES

Description: A regional responsibility for existing and potential future environmental liability comes with regionalizing waste disposal sites. In the final analysis, the costs for mitigating adverse environmental impacts will be shared by all including those communities that have not contributed to the problem.

Service Implications:None

Financial Implications:With a past corporate directive to eliminate the Clover Bar Post Closure Reserve now resulting in the need to replenish it in the amount of $15 million, regionalization of this site spreads this burden to the benefit of Edmontonians. However, the environmental liability of other sites in the region is unknown to the City and this may more than offset the preceding benefit, resulting in added financial burden to Edmontonians.

Alternatives:None



Attachment 1


PRIVATE SECTOR CONSOLIDATION – WASTE SERVICES

Description: Recent consolidation in the waste management industry raises concerns about long term competitive prices for services provided to municipalities in the region. With half of Edmonton’s residential collection contracted and up to 100% in some smaller jurisdictions, the region would be better served on a long-term basis with a coordinated approach to securing these services.

Service Implications:Should municipalities get too dependent on services from an industry that is becoming more centralized in ownership, their ability to affect efficient change through piloting new services significantly diminishes. A larger municipal operating base would counter this.

Financial Implications:The absence of a regional approach would not prevent but would make it harder for Edmonton to manage the long-term cost of contracted services .

Alternatives:None



Attachment 1


WATERSHED MANAGEMENT (OVERLAND FLOW)

Description:Overland, creek and river flows cross the boundaries of municipalities and counties and have an effect on flooding, water quality and erosion in their respective watersheds. Regional cooperation is required to effectively manage the watershed and ensure its long-term sustainability.

Service Implications:Comprehensive watershed management plans will better define the use of regional watersheds, establish objectives and standards for servicing, control cross-boundary flows, and identify plans to rectify deficiencies including flood control, water quality and erosion.

Financial Implications:Municipalities and counties could pool their financial resources to protect targeted watersheds. With a united voice, the municipalities and counties will also be more effective in asking the Province to assist financially to address these issues.

Alternatives:The municipalities and counties will jointly ask the Province to assist in developing watershed plans for the different basins within the Capital Region, and also to provide financial assistance for any capital projects.

For more info, contact:Kurt Sawatzky, P. Eng.Manager of Drainage Services, Phone; 496- 5593


Attachment 1


REGIONAL SERVICE DELIVERY – TRANSIT

Description:Several municipalities in the region operate a transit system. Those external to Edmonton have certain agreements in place with ETS regarding the use of bus stops, etc.

The feasibility of expanding a transit system within the region will be influenced by the urban form and densities which develop. A regional development strategy could be instructive in regards to long range planning for transit systems.

Relevant MDP strategies include: Strategy 4.3.1 which identifies public transit as a component of an integrated transportation system; and Strategy 1.2.1, part of which speaks to a “transit first” policy for trips to and from Downtown.

Further information should be supplied by ETS.


Financial Implications:

Alternatives:

For more info, contact:Lorne McMaster, Planning and Development Department, 496-6080


Attachment 1


INABILITY TO MAKE PLANNING DECISIONS ON A REGIONAL BASIS

INSTITUTIONALIZATION OF THINKING AND ACTING REGIONALLY

Description:Taking a regional approach needs to become a routine matter, part of the regional culture, when dealing with major issues affecting the broader interests. A regional approach will remain inefficient if it is always motivated by a specific problem or crisis situation.

Building an effective regional framework into the operations of the region will allow for the development of cooperative, coordinated or collaborative strategies on many of the issues that are described in the following pages.

See MDP Strategies 2.8.1 and 6.3.2 Service Implications:Strong long term regional strategies will produce efficiencies at the regional or intermunicipal level inasmuch as many issues could be addressed in a regional forum rather than repeatedly in a multitude of bi- or tri-lateral forums. This would also result in greater contextual certainty and consistency for local planning purposes. Cumulative effects of growth and change in the region can be more accurately measured and better understood.

A united team voice addressing the provincial and federal governments is likely to represent a stronger lobby effect in the quest for programs and funds to meet identified needs in the region.

Financial Implications:Some expenditures would undoubtedly be involved in funding a regional forum. The precise amounts would depend on how such a forum would be structured and what its mandate would be.

Alternatives:Regional planning commissions, Council of Governments, Capital Region Alliance, LAFCOs (local agency formation commissions in California), regional government.



Attachment 1


MANAGEMENT OF REGIONAL ASSETS – THE ECONOMY

Description:One of Plan Edmonton’s priorities is to “Build strong economic ties within the Region.” The 5 related strategies (2.6.1 through 2.6.5) address such matters as: promoting a common image and message; strengthening relationships with a diverse range of partners, especially regional municipalities; identifying some elements that should be included in preparing a regional economic strategy jointly with other municipalities; and building strong operational and information systems. Strategy 2.1.8 addresses promoting the strategic advantages of the capital region, Strategy 2.1.9 seeks to promote “Edmonton and area as a major tourism destination” and Strategy 5.1.3 outlines our “cooperate to compete” philosophy.

Achieving these strategies depends on more than the unilateral actions of the City of Edmonton. It requires a sustained collaborative effort. Some comments have been made that the business community’s interest in the “Smart City” program would be enhanced if the program had more regional players – Smart City, Smarter Region?

Service Implications:Success in this area would be very good customer relations with the rest of the world with whom we do business as a region. The roles of existing agencies (EDE, MEEDT, individual economic development departments) and possibly the objectives of specific programs would have to be examined and rationalized.

Financial Implications:It may be that current funding levels are about adequate, but that some reallocation would be required.

Alternatives:Very limited possibilities if the City and Region want to remain competitive in the global scheme of things.



Attachment 1


MANAGEMENT OF REGIONAL ASSETS – NORTH SASKATCHEWAN RIVER VALLEY AND RAVINE SYSTEM AND OTHER ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE

AREAS

Description:As part of the City’s stated priority to protect the natural environment (MDP, page 52), we propose developing an integrated, environmental protection strategy in partnership with the Province and our neighbouring municipalities. The North Saskatchewan River is clearly one element of importance, traversing several municipalities and providing most of us with our water supply. Equally clear is that the actions of one municipality that impact the river also impact other municipalities. As development impacts the environment, we need to be cognizant of the accumulating effects of that and monitoring the ability of the environment to sustain further development. Often, these effects can only be studied and addressed in a meaningful way at a geographic scale broader than a single municipality. Also refer to Strategies 6.5.1 through 6.5.4.

Service Implications:Municipalities may work at cross-purposes on some environmental issues if their efforts are not coordinated. A regional strategy would provide a consistent and agreed-upon operating framework for individual municipal decision-making.

Financial Implications:Probably limited, but some opportunity costs.

Alternatives:The current fragmented approach overlain by initiatives such as the River Valley Alliance and Big Lake Special Places.



Attachment 1


MANAGEMENT OF REGIONAL ASSETS – TRANSPORTATION, UTILITY AND PIPELINE CORRIDORS

Description:Edmonton’s intermunicipal planning strategy recognizes the need to plan for and protect regional corridors (including transportation, environmental and recreational corridors). The Transportation and Utility Corridor (TUC), part of which is located in Strathcona County, and the alignment and extensions of its penetrators continue to be of critical importance to the transportation system of the city, the region and indeed the province. See Strategies 6.2.2, 6.5.7 and 6.5.8.

Edmonton’s MDP (p. 51), Transportation Master Plan (TMP) and transportation system improvements account for Edmonton as a destination or a through route for a considerable amount of trips generated outside its boundary. Of importance also is the North – South Trade Corridor that passes through Edmonton.

Pipelines are referenced in Strategy 1.1.14, and are an integral part of the transportation system as a mover of goods. As pipelines carrying various products, some of which may be hazardous, traverse different municipalities, their development needs to be integrated with land use along the way and across boundaries.

Planning for future corridor development in a growing urban region should be done long in advance of need before incremental development erodes opportunities. The linear nature of these facilities means, almost by definition, that comprehensive regional considerations should drive the planning and protection processes.


Financial Implications:A key question to address is whether transportation systems are being fairly funded, based on considerations of who is being served and who pays.

Alternatives:Regional transportation authority.



Attachment 1



Attachment 1


MANAGEMENT OF REGIONAL ASSETS – AIR TRANSPORTATION

Description:The Edmonton International Airport is the key facility in a system of several regional airports, each of which has its own functional niche. The air transportation system is an integral part of an integrated regional transportation system that needs to facilitate business development, investment and tourism. Management of the airport system is already regionalized, which is appropriate given the market it serves. Plan Edmonton regards the Edmonton International Airport as one of the key regional assets for which we seek involvement in the decision-making processes that affect its future viability and operation (Strategies 6.5.5 and 6.5.6).

Service Implications:As one of several regional authorities in the Capital Region, a broad question needs to be addressed: how many regional authorities are needed to effectively provide the necessary or intended service? Should some regional authorities be single purpose while others may have multiple functions?

Financial Implications:

Alternatives:Calgary.



Attachment 1


LAND USE – REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY

Description:In an urban region such as ours, many systems exist and activities take place to serve a broad metropolitan market or customer base, rather than a single jurisdiction. The region, the province and individual municipalities would benefit by having a regional development strategy, jointly prepared and endorsed, that addresses the broader elements of transportation and servicing networks, urban form, location of industry, employment centres and residential areas, population growth, environmental issues, and so on.

This would provide an effective framework for local decision-making as well as a sound rationale for funding from provincial and federal governments and capital budgeting. Such a strategy could also build consensus on locations for long term urban expansion and relieve some of the tensions and expense associated with municipal boundary changes.

Service Implications:This sort of regional strategy would greatly simplify the intermunicipal planning processes in which Edmonton must necessarily engage with 7 different adjacent municipalities. It would facilitate implementation of the provincial Land Use Policies.

Financial Implications:For Edmonton, the primary immediate implication might take the form of a reallocation of resources. For the longer term, municipalities might hope to have their regional strategy recognized as a basis for senior government funding decisions – likely a positive step for everyone.

Alternatives:Regional planning authority, Council of Governments, Capital Region Alliance, LAFCOs (local agency formation commissions in California), regional government.



Attachment 1


LAND USE – RISK MANAGEMENT FOR HEAVY INDUSTRY

Description:The Capital Region has a sizeable concentration of heavy industrial development, located predominantly in 4 municipalities, much of it in near border areas. The City of Edmonton is preparing guidelines for risk reduction and effective transition between heavy industry and other uses through a risk management approach. This approach includes the principles of risk reduction at source and through land use controls, emergency preparedness and emergency response measures. While implementation of protective measures must account for variations in local circumstances, at present each municipality has a different approach and its own standards.

Some coordination and consistency in application of a flexible risk management system would be beneficial to the public, to industry and the municipalities. Working together would allow municipalities planning new heavy industrial areas to learn from past decisions. Emergency response in case of need would be more effective if municipalities who provide backup to each other have a shared understanding of the situation.

See Strategies 1.1.6 and 5.1.2.

Service Implications:There will be increased levels of public safety in Edmonton’s border areas and better long term planning of future heavy industrial areas.

Financial Implications:There may be less expenditure on emergency preparedness and response with better risk management. Staff will still need to coordinate with industry and adjacent municipalities, although this may be simplified if greater consistency in approaches results.

Alternatives:



Attachment 1


CONSISTENCY OF INFORMATION

Description:Many of the planning, promotion and service delivery functions referred to in these pages would benefit from a consistent and comprehensive information base. It might include, for example, population, housing, land use, employment, building and development activity, tax rates, utility costs, shopping patterns, growth modelling, etc. Both existing and forecasted values would be required on many items. At present, several information systems are operating. Municipalities are able to collect and maintain essentially the data they see a need for. Even when consistent data are available for all municipalities, from the federal census for example, there is no “clearing house” able to supply the full array of comparative data from a single source to a given consumer. A potential investor may have to make the same inquiry numerous times to secure comparable data for the locations he may be considering.

A related point is that we consistently receive mis-directed inquiries about lands that are located outside our boundary because there is no centralized point where a person can obtain information on development in the region.

Service Implications:A superior one-stop interface with prospective clients, be they municipalities, investors, or citizens. Better overall quality and more comparable data for decision-making.

Financial Implications:Substantial costs could be associated with addressing the above issues but expenditures may be recovered downstream through investments in development.

Alternatives:Regional census; regional data centre.



report attachment - for edmonton regional governance...

Documents