Saint John must sell regionalization
Published Tuesday June 23rd, 2009
In its quest for new revenues, Saint John council is considering ways to tax the residents of neighbouring communities. If these measures are adopted, the results would be predictable and devastating.
Council cannot levy payroll or sales taxes on commuters without producing an exodus of jobs. The communities of greater Saint John need to move in a mutually productive direction, toward regionalization. That's where this council must focus its efforts.
The underlying problem isn't the number of people using Saint John's streets, but a governance structure that keeps residents with a common economy politically divided. In terms of work, shopping, entertainment, sports and public services such as health care, greater Saint John is a single metropolitan area. If more services were managed regionally, the overall cost to residents would be reduced - but getting there is going to require leadership.
There can be no regional governance without political accountability. If Saint John's mayor and councillors want valley residents to recognize the importance of rebuilding regional infrastructure, they need to start managing the city's operations for the benefit of taxpayers.
It's not just residents of outlying towns who believe Saint John has failed to do so. The evidence is there for all to see: in the city's annual budget, where wages and benefits eat up nearly 60 per cent of the resources; in the complaints of citizens who live in poorly serviced districts; and in comparisons of per capita service costs between municipalities.
Homeowners in Rothesay, Quispamsis and Grand Bay-Westfield have no interest in paying taxes to the City of Saint John today because they see no value in it. They fear that regionalization would be no more than a tax grab. It's up to Saint John's council to prove them wrong, by demonstrating that regional services would be well run and serve common interests.
Perhaps the best way to achieve regional goals, fairly managed, is through amalgamation. A regional consensus is possible. To achieve it, city councillors must first demonstrate they are fiscally responsible, politically accountable and prepared to treat suburbanites as equal citizens.
Disabled
Search Articles
More CE Network Sites & Partners:
Comments (9)
All comments are subject to the site Terms of Use. For a full commenting tutorial click here.
Our editorial team relies on filtering technology and our visitor community to identify inappropriate comments. In the event that a site user has submitted offensive content that has evaded our filter, please select the option to Flag As Inappropriate presented within the comment. Thank you for helping to keep this site clean.
However to build on your 5% idea, why not look to see if there are areas where regionalized services could be put in place now. Perhaps regional policing, fire protection, water services, or others could help reduce costs and begin to bring the region together.
Owen Meaney makes sense on terms of amalgamation, but Saint John could not meet such criteria in 50 years. Instead, the city council snd the councils of Rothesay and Grand Bay-Westfield, should be dissolved and the new amalgamated city conducted from what is now the Town of Quispamsis. Councillors could be elsected from the whole area, but the change of base would force a fresh start. Most people qualified to run a city already live in the KV, and if hordes of them did not drive in to work daily, Saint John would soon be as chaotic as Mogadishu. (Come to think of it, the role of War Lord would probably suit Ivan Court better than that of Mayor.)
nb is not a large province in terms of population. Moncton, Fredericton and Saint John are at worst an hour and a half commute. Mirimichi, Fredericton and Moncton can claim the same. Add high speed internet acccess to the equation. There can be shared services to the betterment of all - high level service and lower costs while retention of identity.
But SJ is a pariah right now.. it has a pile of debt, incompetent management, and makes decisions based on the old boys club and ignores the current economic reality. No one wants to be part of that.
SJ needs to start making wiser decisions and put a plan in place to alleviate the debt it has before anyone wpould want to even talk about shared services.
I wouldn't want to become partners in a business with my sister who is constantly in debt, can't manage money and has repeatedly shown that she doesn't have a fiscal clue! Same goes for SJ!
Please try to keep the debate on topic. I'm all for intelligent discusion, and have an open mind, however I do not feel calling the discussion participants jerks and liars is constructive or relevant. You are right in that people shop close to home. As far as bills for fire trucks, etc, it may be worth investigating. I would suggest the firefighters from Saint John be paid a fair compensation for any efforts made outside their own area of responsibility. That may not compute to the amount they are paid in Saint John, but perhaps in the area where they lend assistance. It may happen already, I don't know. The line about using services and going home is a bit hollow. I pay for my parking, I shop downtown, do banking, and even pay property taxes on buiness (including "developement" surtaxes). I have no claim to the support srvices you refer to, but do help to fund them.
SJ is needed to provide the big box store shopping experience.
While folks ffrom the valley do some to town to shop, pay bills, work and eat, it is the residents of SJ who pay the majority of the costs of keeping the city running. It is however, a bit of a brain f*rt on the part of city hall to believe for a second that charging a user fee for non residents is the answer to its financial woes. Good management and wiser decisions are!