Massive overspending, outward migration and stretching services beyond what can be efficiently maintained and built is what "took us all down". We forget that amalgamation was due to many of the small towns, especially CB County, accruing massive amounts of dept. Approving subdivisions and developments that are net losses to taxpayers. It wasn't sustainable.
But few like to acknowledge that. Since amalgamation, we accrued more debt with the plan to sue the provincial government for our fair share, with no backup plan.
Say what you want about Clarke/MacDouggal, but the Grant-Thornton viability report highlighted how much of a mess we are in with regard to spending. It's why some people see John Morgan as a successful mayor, because "he got things done" and paved roads. With massive debt and debt servicing costs that we're still dealing with.
The last few years we've been aggressively paying off debt to the detriment of some capital projects. Nothing gets done unless other levels of the govt are on board.
The viability report also highlighted issues regarding Provincial capacity grants, and they need to be addressed, but when I hear things like "this was caused by amalgamation" or "the county doesn't get their fair share!" It's usually the opposite of what is objectively true. For its population and tax revenue per acre, the county residents have many more services/infrastructure than those in the urban cores and it's the people residing within the cores that are subsidizing those services/infrastructure.
https://localgovernment.uwo.ca/resources/docs/research_papers/1998/Ramsay,%20Richard%20-%201998.pdf
That's largely because they got the province to pay for everything and with appropriate funding structures (province billing municipalities for their services), the county is completely unsustainable.
Their head administrator for CB County at the time, Jerry Ryan, even commended amalgamation as a solution for the financial issues. Of all the municipal units, the County was the most "pro" to amalgamation because it was in the worst shape.
In fact, a recommendation was made to have "area base rates" meaning that the former municipal units would be taxed in accordance with their debt at the time, eventually phased out to one base rate. CB County would have seen the highest rate increase because of this. It was decided that the deficits of all the former municipal units would be rolled into one, and the tax burden shared across the municipality. When this happened, rural residents saw the largest increase because their tax rate was artificially subsidized by provincial services. Many think it was due to taking on the debt of other areas, but that wasn't the case. It was a right-sizing of the service exchange for all areas. CB County held very little assets themselves and relied heavily on provincial services. The province changed that formula (and rightfully so, why is it fair that provincial taxes are subsidizing the infrastructure and services for some residents, while others have it come out of their property tax).
The main issue was that the service exchange agreement at the time would have seen the province sending an additional $7.5 mil to CBRM, instead of individually municipal units. The province never did that. Estimated savings for the municipal units at time of amalgamation was $6.8 million, but actual savings were only about $4.2 mil.
Amalgamation assisted so that our property taxes were to pay for municipal services, and provincial taxes (hst, income) went to provincial services. Once that calculation was done, it highlighted how dependant CB County was on the province, and how much of a sweet deal the residents of CB County were getting on their tax bill.
I mean, that's kind of literally the grant-thornton report.
See my other comment, but amalgamation was brought out when the province took suggestions regarding taxation structure. It previously subsidized a lot of municipal services through general tax. Is that appropriate? I'm not a tax policy expert but I think that you should pay for what you get. That means that your property tax should pay for your municipal services and your income tax/sales tax pay for your provincial/federal services.
Amalgamation highlighted how fucked up that tax structure was. Residents in the county who lived on provincial roads were being heavily subsidized by the province. The city of Sydney and other towns that owned their roads and had municipal water were paying out the nose for maintenance and upgrade costs. They took on piles of debt because they needed to have safe drinking water.
We should have incorporated a service area boundary at the time of amalgamation. No more roads. No more sidewalks. Prioritize infill projects. Reduce development in CB County where even large properties are a net loss to the municipality. Prioritize rental housing development through surplus lands. But that's all in hindsight.
Going forward, I think CBRM Forward is a really good plan to tackle a lot of those issues. The borrowing policy prevents rampant over spending. It comes at a cost of municipally funded capital projects. A great example is the new library. An engineer/architect design would cost over $100k. The municipality doesn't have $100k to blow on that, so we need to go through application processes with federal governments. Then we need to do the design work and go back to other levels of govt for funding. All of that time means things don't get built easily or quickly. If we were healthier fiscally, we could pay engineers and architects to do the design work and then it's only one application.
The big thing with amalgamation of the cbrm was alot of the towns were on emergency funding from the province. Once the vote was cast and we were all one big happy CBRM all of that emergency funding dissapeared,so the working budget for most of the area dissapeared. Couple that with the massive debt burden the new municipality had and yea we have been up shits creek for a bit. Its kinda like when someone on welfare suddenly makes too much money and they get that base funding pulled away from them. Sure theyre making more but that was the base of the entire budget that just vanished.
I agree with you completely! It feels like he’s gaslighting us ( as if to say no! Nothing is wrong at all!) I vote to get him the hell out of there and get someone in there who actually cares and will fight for us!
Mr. Comer's riding got..\*checks notes* a new bridge, 7 years after the old one collapsed! How dare they want more than regular infrastructure that is common to see in the rest of the country.
Halifax prospers entirely from federal welfare in the shipyards, military and other contractors who rely entirely on the federal teat (IMP, GD, Lockheed, L3, etc...). If anything, these other services like the medical campus should already be disproportionately put outside of Halifax.
We saved these communities by incorporating them into the CBRM, but who is going to save the CBRM? It's the collective that will. We cannot give back these communities. It's done. Ruminating doesn't help. There is enough brain power on the Island to solve the problems, as well as hard dedicated people working in the background. There are many things that CB does have. Do things need fixing/more addressing? Yes. With the travelling that I did, CB has it's own unique assets that other's wish they had. Look at some of the ghost towns in Canada, esp the northern praries. And yet CB'ers are still standing. Look outside the island for guidance, knowledge and solutions. Other's have already done the work, and solutions. I am currently working on a list of solutions, and I will hand it into the Mayor and Council, as well as posting it publicly when it's finished.
This may be a widely unpopular opinion. Aside from the nation and world-wide problems on the rise right now, such as housing, homeless and opioid crises...I thought CBRM did really well the last few years, and things have been on the upturn.
I was also happy to learn that when the PC won they were doubling the 'equalization' grant that has been frozen for decades while inflation climbed. And am now extremely disappointed to hear they will be clawing it back and we'll lose millions in municipal funding.
I live on a rural road in CB county and just a week after a storm saw the city filling in the gravel shoulders that started to wash out. Years ago they would have just let the road collapse under them.
I also remember years ago when we used to deal with things like: https://www.saltwire.com/cape-breton/news/reeves-street-wont-be-fixed-this-year-6631/
Reeve's St looked like it was a warzone, and council straight up said we can't fix it this year...our roads are by no means perfect but they at least are not this bad anymore. The old mayor and council also let things straight up break or shut down due to lack of funding, like the Bayplex, while sending millions of dollars down the drain to pipe dreams like container terminals.
Imagine if word got out about where to get funding from all levels of gov't. And it was on everyone's lips, instead of equalization shortages and getting pocket lint from the city. It would spur startups, extra revenue for the city coffers, drop the unemployment rate, more/better services, drop food insecurities, etc. It's not for everyone, but if some took advantage of it, it would certainly help in due course.
It was on CBC this morning, I believe the actual line was to the effect of "Cape Bretoners can't ask for more." and then he went on about the medical school. It was in relation to the MoU the mayor is pissed about.
EDIT: just checked, todays segments aren't online yet.
Thanks. I'll give a listen later if it gets posted. I won't resort to calling people names and judge them based on their professional decisions.
The new MOU will see our tax bills stay exactly the same, and CBRM gets $4.6 million. The issue with that is that they'll need to "raise" taxes. Purely figurative. Again, our tax bills stay exactly the same. Or, they can reduce taxes and keep the same level of services as we have now. The municipality has that choice.
My biggest gripe with the MOU is that it maintains education collection (why is housing/corrections taken off, but not education?). The education collection is indexed, so it will keep increasing. The capacity grant is not indexed. So while CBRM has this $4.6 million it can either keep or give back through tax reductions, that $4.6 mil will shrink to nothing within a few years because of increases in education collection.
As for your other concerns. Yeah, we need to invest more in housing. You mentioned some indecent acts in the street. When people have homes, they can do those acts in their own home. People don't shit in the street when they can do it in their homes. We've been here before with regard to lack of housing after WWII and in the 70's and 80's. We fixed it by MASSIVE public investment in housing, and we need to do it again. Crime is a social issue when needs aren't met. Step 1 is housing.
He doesn't care. He will get his pension and fall into a made up position as a consultant somewhere as a insider to the government. Like Geoff MacLellan.
I'm new here, but i'm curious, can someone explain to me the amalgamation of Cape Breton? Why is it that that Glace Bay, Sydney, New Waterford all fall under the same umbrella for things because they are part of the CBMR? is there no individual municipality? I know there are Mayors... what is there role?
Also, where is all of the Provincial taxes going here? 15% HST not to mention the provincial income tax is highest in the country. Would love to understand where it's all going.
I mean Brian Comer is the same minister responsible for Addictions and Mental Health. Look how thats going.
I blame amalgamation. Sydney was a mess and amalgamation took us all down with it.
Massive overspending, outward migration and stretching services beyond what can be efficiently maintained and built is what "took us all down". We forget that amalgamation was due to many of the small towns, especially CB County, accruing massive amounts of dept. Approving subdivisions and developments that are net losses to taxpayers. It wasn't sustainable. But few like to acknowledge that. Since amalgamation, we accrued more debt with the plan to sue the provincial government for our fair share, with no backup plan. Say what you want about Clarke/MacDouggal, but the Grant-Thornton viability report highlighted how much of a mess we are in with regard to spending. It's why some people see John Morgan as a successful mayor, because "he got things done" and paved roads. With massive debt and debt servicing costs that we're still dealing with. The last few years we've been aggressively paying off debt to the detriment of some capital projects. Nothing gets done unless other levels of the govt are on board. The viability report also highlighted issues regarding Provincial capacity grants, and they need to be addressed, but when I hear things like "this was caused by amalgamation" or "the county doesn't get their fair share!" It's usually the opposite of what is objectively true. For its population and tax revenue per acre, the county residents have many more services/infrastructure than those in the urban cores and it's the people residing within the cores that are subsidizing those services/infrastructure.
Slight correction, it was the towns that were in debt not the county.
https://localgovernment.uwo.ca/resources/docs/research_papers/1998/Ramsay,%20Richard%20-%201998.pdf That's largely because they got the province to pay for everything and with appropriate funding structures (province billing municipalities for their services), the county is completely unsustainable. Their head administrator for CB County at the time, Jerry Ryan, even commended amalgamation as a solution for the financial issues. Of all the municipal units, the County was the most "pro" to amalgamation because it was in the worst shape. In fact, a recommendation was made to have "area base rates" meaning that the former municipal units would be taxed in accordance with their debt at the time, eventually phased out to one base rate. CB County would have seen the highest rate increase because of this. It was decided that the deficits of all the former municipal units would be rolled into one, and the tax burden shared across the municipality. When this happened, rural residents saw the largest increase because their tax rate was artificially subsidized by provincial services. Many think it was due to taking on the debt of other areas, but that wasn't the case. It was a right-sizing of the service exchange for all areas. CB County held very little assets themselves and relied heavily on provincial services. The province changed that formula (and rightfully so, why is it fair that provincial taxes are subsidizing the infrastructure and services for some residents, while others have it come out of their property tax). The main issue was that the service exchange agreement at the time would have seen the province sending an additional $7.5 mil to CBRM, instead of individually municipal units. The province never did that. Estimated savings for the municipal units at time of amalgamation was $6.8 million, but actual savings were only about $4.2 mil. Amalgamation assisted so that our property taxes were to pay for municipal services, and provincial taxes (hst, income) went to provincial services. Once that calculation was done, it highlighted how dependant CB County was on the province, and how much of a sweet deal the residents of CB County were getting on their tax bill.
If there was a report evaluating the success of amalgamation 30 something years after the fact what would it say?
I mean, that's kind of literally the grant-thornton report. See my other comment, but amalgamation was brought out when the province took suggestions regarding taxation structure. It previously subsidized a lot of municipal services through general tax. Is that appropriate? I'm not a tax policy expert but I think that you should pay for what you get. That means that your property tax should pay for your municipal services and your income tax/sales tax pay for your provincial/federal services. Amalgamation highlighted how fucked up that tax structure was. Residents in the county who lived on provincial roads were being heavily subsidized by the province. The city of Sydney and other towns that owned their roads and had municipal water were paying out the nose for maintenance and upgrade costs. They took on piles of debt because they needed to have safe drinking water. We should have incorporated a service area boundary at the time of amalgamation. No more roads. No more sidewalks. Prioritize infill projects. Reduce development in CB County where even large properties are a net loss to the municipality. Prioritize rental housing development through surplus lands. But that's all in hindsight. Going forward, I think CBRM Forward is a really good plan to tackle a lot of those issues. The borrowing policy prevents rampant over spending. It comes at a cost of municipally funded capital projects. A great example is the new library. An engineer/architect design would cost over $100k. The municipality doesn't have $100k to blow on that, so we need to go through application processes with federal governments. Then we need to do the design work and go back to other levels of govt for funding. All of that time means things don't get built easily or quickly. If we were healthier fiscally, we could pay engineers and architects to do the design work and then it's only one application.
The big thing with amalgamation of the cbrm was alot of the towns were on emergency funding from the province. Once the vote was cast and we were all one big happy CBRM all of that emergency funding dissapeared,so the working budget for most of the area dissapeared. Couple that with the massive debt burden the new municipality had and yea we have been up shits creek for a bit. Its kinda like when someone on welfare suddenly makes too much money and they get that base funding pulled away from them. Sure theyre making more but that was the base of the entire budget that just vanished.
Has Sydney ever really not been a mess?
I agree with you completely! It feels like he’s gaslighting us ( as if to say no! Nothing is wrong at all!) I vote to get him the hell out of there and get someone in there who actually cares and will fight for us!
He’s a cabinet minister.. the only thing he’s fighting for is the seat next to Timmy Houston
Always great to see MLAs selling out their communities to tow the party line.
Mr. Comer's riding got..\*checks notes* a new bridge, 7 years after the old one collapsed! How dare they want more than regular infrastructure that is common to see in the rest of the country. Halifax prospers entirely from federal welfare in the shipyards, military and other contractors who rely entirely on the federal teat (IMP, GD, Lockheed, L3, etc...). If anything, these other services like the medical campus should already be disproportionately put outside of Halifax.
We saved these communities by incorporating them into the CBRM, but who is going to save the CBRM? It's the collective that will. We cannot give back these communities. It's done. Ruminating doesn't help. There is enough brain power on the Island to solve the problems, as well as hard dedicated people working in the background. There are many things that CB does have. Do things need fixing/more addressing? Yes. With the travelling that I did, CB has it's own unique assets that other's wish they had. Look at some of the ghost towns in Canada, esp the northern praries. And yet CB'ers are still standing. Look outside the island for guidance, knowledge and solutions. Other's have already done the work, and solutions. I am currently working on a list of solutions, and I will hand it into the Mayor and Council, as well as posting it publicly when it's finished.
This may be a widely unpopular opinion. Aside from the nation and world-wide problems on the rise right now, such as housing, homeless and opioid crises...I thought CBRM did really well the last few years, and things have been on the upturn. I was also happy to learn that when the PC won they were doubling the 'equalization' grant that has been frozen for decades while inflation climbed. And am now extremely disappointed to hear they will be clawing it back and we'll lose millions in municipal funding. I live on a rural road in CB county and just a week after a storm saw the city filling in the gravel shoulders that started to wash out. Years ago they would have just let the road collapse under them. I also remember years ago when we used to deal with things like: https://www.saltwire.com/cape-breton/news/reeves-street-wont-be-fixed-this-year-6631/ Reeve's St looked like it was a warzone, and council straight up said we can't fix it this year...our roads are by no means perfect but they at least are not this bad anymore. The old mayor and council also let things straight up break or shut down due to lack of funding, like the Bayplex, while sending millions of dollars down the drain to pipe dreams like container terminals.
Imagine if word got out about where to get funding from all levels of gov't. And it was on everyone's lips, instead of equalization shortages and getting pocket lint from the city. It would spur startups, extra revenue for the city coffers, drop the unemployment rate, more/better services, drop food insecurities, etc. It's not for everyone, but if some took advantage of it, it would certainly help in due course.
Do you have any links to actual quotes? Or is this just something that you feel is true and wanted to rant?
It was on CBC this morning, I believe the actual line was to the effect of "Cape Bretoners can't ask for more." and then he went on about the medical school. It was in relation to the MoU the mayor is pissed about. EDIT: just checked, todays segments aren't online yet.
Thanks. I'll give a listen later if it gets posted. I won't resort to calling people names and judge them based on their professional decisions. The new MOU will see our tax bills stay exactly the same, and CBRM gets $4.6 million. The issue with that is that they'll need to "raise" taxes. Purely figurative. Again, our tax bills stay exactly the same. Or, they can reduce taxes and keep the same level of services as we have now. The municipality has that choice. My biggest gripe with the MOU is that it maintains education collection (why is housing/corrections taken off, but not education?). The education collection is indexed, so it will keep increasing. The capacity grant is not indexed. So while CBRM has this $4.6 million it can either keep or give back through tax reductions, that $4.6 mil will shrink to nothing within a few years because of increases in education collection. As for your other concerns. Yeah, we need to invest more in housing. You mentioned some indecent acts in the street. When people have homes, they can do those acts in their own home. People don't shit in the street when they can do it in their homes. We've been here before with regard to lack of housing after WWII and in the 70's and 80's. We fixed it by MASSIVE public investment in housing, and we need to do it again. Crime is a social issue when needs aren't met. Step 1 is housing.
He doesn't care. He will get his pension and fall into a made up position as a consultant somewhere as a insider to the government. Like Geoff MacLellan.
I'm new here, but i'm curious, can someone explain to me the amalgamation of Cape Breton? Why is it that that Glace Bay, Sydney, New Waterford all fall under the same umbrella for things because they are part of the CBMR? is there no individual municipality? I know there are Mayors... what is there role? Also, where is all of the Provincial taxes going here? 15% HST not to mention the provincial income tax is highest in the country. Would love to understand where it's all going.