A group in Langley has been pushing to amalgamate the two Langleys (Township and City) for a few months now. Their efforts appear to be in limbo, after their 6,700-name petition was presented to both councils and went nowhere.
But I had fun talking to various mayors around the region about why they think small municipalities (combined with a region that handles sewer and water, along with school boards and police forces that sometimes cover more than one municipalty) work. My story here.
5 responses so far ↓
1 spartikus // Feb 8, 2012 at 8:13 am
Toronto is setting such a glorious example, no wonder…
2 MB // Feb 8, 2012 at 10:41 am
@ Sparti … my thoughts entirely.
However, there is room, in my opinion, for amalgamation between some neighbouring municipalities that share geography and have similar economic foundations (the North Shore, the Coquitlams, the Langleys). One mayor does not speak for 21 cities, but could feasibly speak for two.
The Metro government should be strengthened too. There is a huge misbalance between the region and Vancouver when it comes to policies to decrease homelessness and assuming the costs of servicing regional centres, hosting large / international events, etc.
Vancouver has borne the majority of the responsibility and costs, and also the brundt of the flak for too long.
And why is Vancouver hosting PR conferences on its economy when the economy is spread over the Lower Mainland and farther? The local economy should be in the purview of the regional government, with participation by the province at least.
3 T Ian McLeod // Feb 8, 2012 at 1:15 pm
Thanks for posting that article, Frances. As Greg Moore said, if you’re not saving money, why amalgamate.
I have no strong feelings about these proposed local amalgamations, but the key fact is this: we have no evidence that larger municipal jurisdictions achieve economies of scale, at least from the point of view of the taxpayer. The City of Langley has the lowest residential taxes in the region. Pitt Meadows, with a population of 20,000, has lower property taxes than Surrey. Pitt Meadows shares policing, recreation and tourism services with Maple Ridge, which I suppose is partial amalgamation, but retains control over property development and streets. (For comparative statistics on property taxation, see http://bit.ly/sDK1SV).
@MB, re strengthening Metro government: The first step is to turn up the volume on Metro meetings and processes and hope that media and public pay attention. The new chair says he is committed to doing this. We can’t expand the powers of regional government if the public doesn’t understand or support Metro’s current activities.
4 Bill Lee // Feb 8, 2012 at 6:44 pm
Long live the Republic of Westmount!
5 Bill McCreery // Feb 9, 2012 at 12:08 pm
A crucial component of amalgamation at the regional scale is the political reality that the Provincial Government does not want to have to deal with a competing governing body now representing more than 50% of the population of the Province. Comments have been made over the years that that is why Van der Zalm cut back GVRD planning authority, and why the Campbell Government split Translink away from the GVRD/Metro.
Leave a Comment