THE MEGACITY QUESTION

Article 3

From The Vancouver Sun

Wednesday January 10, 2001

Last of a series by Scott Simpson

Provinces hold keys to amalgamation

Municipalities in Canada "have no free-standing independence"

The British Columbia government can force amalgamation on the Greater Vancouver regional district - or any of the seven other regional districts in B.C. - anytime it likes.

That's because Canadian municipalities are creatures of the provincial governments and thus have no control over their own fate.

That is why more than 200 Ontario municipalities have been eliminated by megacity mergers in the last four years.

Conversely, it is extremely rare for the state of federal government in the United States to tamper on such a massive scale with local government.

University of Alberta political scientist Jim Lightbody says that's because the rights of municipal governments are enshrined in the U.S. constitution.

Urban areas in the U.S. tend to operate on a model similar to that of the Greater Vancouver regional district - an affiliation of autonomous cities that try to work together in areas of mutual interest, such as providing water or removing sewage.

The GVRD model is popular in the United States - primarily because it is virtually impossible to consolidate municipal governments in American metropolitan areas: Their independence is protected by the constitution.

"There were about 14 amalgamations in the U.S. in the last 30 years," Lightbody says, and the circumstances must be compelling.

"You need a set of circumstances where dead people vote. You have to have the school system decertified, the water contaminated, corruption in the sheriff's office and half the council indicated for being on the take.

"A combination of those kinds of small things encourages the electors to maybe look for an alternative."

In Canada, the constitutional standing of municipalities is scarcely considered.

Section 92.8 of the Canadian Constitution gives provinces the power to establish municipal institutions in the province.

"What it means, "Lightbody says, "is that municipalities have no autonomous constitutional position, no independent, free-standing independence. It also means that the provinces can do with them as they wish."

In the Canadian field of local government there are two schools of thought.

One advocates "public choice," holding that multiple municipalities are more competitive and provide the widest set of alternatives for people looking to move into, or move around in, a region.

Lightbody admits he is in the minority, at least in the academic world, by opposing that model.

His preference is to consolidate municipalities, arguing that megacities offer the best means of smoothing out local inequities in services and taxes, and ensure that local political decisions are made in the best interest of the region as a whole.

Three arguments for consolidation always crop up.

•	Coordination of policy:	Situations in which municipalities make decision for their own benefit without regard for the negative impact on their neighbours.

Some policy issues have wide implications - air quality, regional transportation routes, bridges, public transit and need regional coordination.

•	Equity of services and taxation:

In a typical metropolitan area, Lightbody says, middle and upper middle class groups live in the suburbs but work in the core urban area, use basic services there, but pay their taxes elsewhere.

Those who live in the core may be less affluent and less mobile - they don't use services in the suburbs, but their tax dollars are paying for services used by the suburban commuters. "Those who are not mobile ... have to stay where housing is substandard and where the social support is, "Lightbody says.

That issue has arisen on Montreal Island - particularly in the wealthy, mostly anglophone enclave of Westmount, which does not want to be part of the new Montreal megacity.

"It has average family incomes which are 350 per cent of the family incomes of the rest of the island," Light body says.

"They talk about local identity and language, but the reality is that they are an enclave of upper income and they want to stay that way.

Accountability:

In a fragmented metropolitan area, " Light body asks, "who do you applaud if decisions are well made, or to whom to you complain if air quality is sub-par?

"People might say, "Let the municipalities work it out themselves." Certainly the politicians will say that. But the reality is that the province has the constitutional obligation and the moral imperative to apply a solution. It's their baby."

But to academics such as Robert Bish, professor emeritus at the University of Victoria's Local Government Institute, the GVRD represents the best model.

He is the author of a recent provincial review of regional districts and notes that nearly all the recommendations he put forward have been enacted into law - with the endorsement of the Union of B.C. Municipalities.

"There is no model that's perfect. People say, for instance, that economic development would be better if there is a regional structure." Bish says.

"But when we look closely, we can find no correlation between that structure and economic development in a region.

"When you go look at large samples - Seattle, Boston, the Texas areas - there is no regional governance. Seattle is one of the most fragmented governmental areas in North America."

"PoCoMo" merger study blocked

When two Coquitlam residents asked their neighbours about amalgamation, they got a response that showed ordinary citizens are more open to change then some local politicians.

Brian Cole and Dave Binder decided to raise the issue in the Tri-Cities of Coquitlam, Port Coquitlam and Port Moody after watching the cities spend millions of taxpayers' dollars on an apparent duplication of services.

Cole, a professional pollster, surveyed residents of the three cities and found a majority would welcome amalgamation. That was 1996 and the timing of their effort felt good.

Residents in the Fraser Valley municipalities of Abbotsford and Matsqui had just voted strongly in favour of merging their services.

The Ontario government was priming its megacity machine to remodel the province's municipal landscape.

But locally, the city of Coquitlam was preparing to spend $17.5 million on a new city hall complex, almost simultaneously with the construction of a $12 million city hall in Port Moody - just two kilometers and a left-hand turn away.

Cole and Binder took their idea to the three local councils with a request that, at the very least, they ask their municipal staffs to give it some thought.

They hoped to see a referendum question on the ballot in upcoming municipal elections in all three cities.

As representatives of the largest municipality of the trio, Coquitlam city council members were sufficiently comfortable with the idea to agree to ask staff to investigate it.

Council in Port Moody, the smallest municipality in the northeast, was polite but ultimately rejected the idea.

Port Coquitlam council, on the other hand, went parochial.

Mayor Len Traboulay humiliated the men - who had the endorsement of the local chamber of commence as well as area residents -with a hose of accusations that seemed to run the gamut from arrogance to treason.

Traboulay, who died last year after 28 years in public office, was proud of his city's unique heritage and did not welcome any suggestion that it be consumed by a larger municipality.

Cole and Binder came away with their egos bruised but their convictions intact.

"All we wanted was to have a study done. We were not saying amalgamation is the be-all and the end-
all. We were saying, "Let's take a look at it because of the duplication of services, cross-border issues, " Binder said.

Cole and Binder won't provide any details about plans to follow up their earlier efforts, but concede their enthusiasm about the idea has not waned.

"I think we learned that the smaller communities have their fear of being swallowed up," Cole said recently.

"You've either got to have councillors who are onside or you've got to have people with open minds who are willing to take a look at it."

Scott Simpson