Inter-municipal collaboration and forced amalgamations

1
Inter-municipal collaboration and forced
amalgamations

• A summary of recent experiences in Toronto and
  Montreal

2
(No Transcript)
3
(No Transcript)
4
(No Transcript)
5
(No Transcript)
6
Toronto post-war

• Rapidly growing city and 12 suburbs in post-war
  era
• Toronto had run out of developable land to house
  growing workforce and industry
• Suburbs needed to ease growth pressures on city
• Suburbs lacked for infrastructure
• Water, sewage, roads, transit, schools, etc.
• Fragmented service delivery
• 163 separate municipal contracts
• Better coordination and cooperation desired

7
The Metro solution (1954)

• 1954 - creation of Regional Municipality of
  Metropolitan Toronto (Metro) by Province
• Toronto 12 suburbs Metro
• Two-tiered, federated structure
• Viewed as compromise between outright
  amalgamation and doing nothing
• Benefits to Toronto and suburbs
• Reduced complex fragmented services delivery
• New workers needed housing, transportation,
  water, schools, etc.
• Stronger region stronger Toronto economy

8
Cooperation and coordination under Metro system

• Metro councillors appointed from municipalities
• Metro responsible for water, sewage treatment,
  major regional roads, transit, social assistance,
  policing, ambulance, regional parks and regional
  planning
• Municipalities maintained autonomy responsible
  for local streets, local parks, recreation,
  community centres, garbage
• Other services shared with Metro (snow removal,
  seniors housing, childcare, street cleaning)

9
Effectiveness of the Metro government

• Generally viewed as successful model of
  inter-municipal coordination
• Achieved objectives of its mandate water and
  sewage issues dealt with, new schools built,
  transit and highway systems built and enhanced,
  equitable social services delivered throughout
  region, regional planning established
• Distanced from municipalities with creation of
  directly elected Metro Board 1988
• Resulted in less inter-muni cooperation
• Growth of Greater Toronto Area lessened Metros
  relevance

10
Municipal amalgamation

• Six independent municipalities of Metro merged
  into one new City of Toronto
• 2.4 million residents (was 650,000)
• Widely unpopular in all municipalities nobody
  asked for such a merger
• Accompanied by provincial cuts and downloading
• Stated rationale for amalgamation
• Less waste and duplication of services, more cost
  efficiencies, fewer bureaucrats
• Unstated reasons for amalgamation
• Political differences with Toronto councillors
• Blunt calls for creation of larger Metro within
  GTA

11
Assessment of Toronto amalgamation experience

• Provincial downloads cloud analysis
• Chaotic and costly process
• Social and environmental outcomes not an
  objective of process (social inclusion, regional
  sustainability, comprehensive planning, etc.)
• Cost savings have not materialized
• Staffing levels higher, budget deficits (575
  million in 2007)
• City government further removed from public
• Less accessible than before
• Citizen input funneled through Community Councils
• Community Councils only advise City Council
• Parochialism

12
Assessment of amalgamation (cont.)

• City Hall culture does not actively engage public
  and civil society
• Episodic consultations rather than sustained or
  institutionalized
• Limited opportunities to participate in
  activities or forums with city-wide focus for
  sustained period
• Still no mechanism to coordinate planning and
  services with broader GTA (5.5 million residents)
• Greater Toronto Services Board disbanded
• No region-wide growth management strategy
• Bedroom communities and sprawl
• Deterioration of municipal services

13
(No Transcript)
14
(No Transcript)
15
(No Transcript)
16
(No Transcript)
17
(No Transcript)
18
Montreal pre-2002

• Two-tiered municipal governance, similar to
  Toronto with Metro
• 28 independent municipalities Montreal Urban
  Community island-wide structure
• Large discrepancy in municipal services,
  standards and tax rates on Island of Montreal, as
  well as in greater region
• Montreal wanted greater share of suburban taxes
  lobbied Quebec govt for merger
• One island, one city Montreal
• Hands off! - Suburbs

19
New Montreal megacity

• Quebec govt legislates municipal mergers across
  province
• 200 cities legislated out of existence - merged
• Not expected, not requested, not recommended
  (except by Montreal Mayor)
• Very unpopular in Montreal suburbs
• Less controversial in municipalities around
  province outside Montreal area
• Broader region-wide metropolitan governance body
  also established (Montreal Metropolitan
  Community)

20
(No Transcript)
21
Rationale for forcing municipal mergers

• Fiscal equity
• Those who benefit from proximity to city and its
  services should pay fair share
• More centralized decision-making for metropolitan
  area
• Less competition between municipalities
• Increased efficiencies less fragmentation
• Improve quality and consistency of services
• Unspoken reason merge English-speaking suburbs
  into Montreal megacity to prevent potential
  future secession from Quebec

22
De-merging process

• New Quebec Liberal govt campaign promise to allow
  merged munis to hold referendum to demerge
• 15 of 28 former Island municipalities voted to
  demerge regained some not all former powers
  and autonomy
• Montreal city government now consists of City
  Council, 19 boroughs and Agglomeration Council

23
(No Transcript)
24
Municipal Governance

• Montreal City Council
• Mayor and 64 members from each of the 19 borough
  councils
• Approves decisions made by borough councils
• Responsible for broader urban issues
• Borough councils
• Mayor and borough councillors elected by
  residents
• Sit on City Council and borough councils
• Boroughs manage local services roads, garbage,
  parks, recreation, culture, public consultation,
  local planning

25
Municipal Governance (cont.)

• Agglomeration Council - 2006
• Structure created to give representation to
  de-merged cities proportionate to size (13)
• Mayor of Montreal chairs, appoints 15 city
  councillors and 15 mayors of de-merged suburbs
• Responsible for island-wide services courts,
  social housing, homeless issues, transit, water,
  sewage treatment, etc.
• Suburban mayors frustrated by lack of power on
  council (13 percent of votes)

26
Regional inter-municipal collaboration

• Montreal Metropolitan Community (est. 2001)
• 82 municipalities, 3.6 million population
• Mayors and councillors from around region have
  weighted votes on council
• Responsibilities include regional planning,
  economic development, social housing, transit
  planning, regional road network, air quality,
  wastewater treatment
• Funded by contributions from member
  municipalities
• Over half of budget goes towards social and
  affordable housing programs

27
Assessment of Montreal amalgamation experience

• Still a work in progress
• Projected cost savings can not be substantiated
• City, borough and agglomeration council structure
  confusing
• De-merged municipalities dissatisfied with
  agglomeration council
• Ongoing tinkering with governance structures
• More equitable tax and service delivery across
  Island of Montreal
• Borough mayors and councillors close to their
  constituents and local issues

28
Assessment of Montreal amalgamation experience

• More holistic approach to city and region
• Responsibility for affordable and social housing
  spread across region
• Quantifiable progress being made
• Montreal policies emphasize strong commitment to
  citizen rights, including public consultation and
  engagement of civil society in decision-making
• Montreal Charter of Rights and Responsibilities
• Office of public consultation
• Office of ombudsman

29
Lessons from Toronto Montreal experiences

• Forcing municipal mergers not popular or
  productive
• Senior levels of government have different
  agendas than cities
• Public buy-in and participation in process of
  reforming governments would likely have improved
  the outcomes
• Clearly articulated vision, expectations and
  outcomes required
• Per capita costs tend to increase, not decrease
  after cities reach a certain size

30
Lessons (cont.)

• Big cities tend to be less accessible to citizens
• Less sense of ownership, less civic involvement
• Tendency towards parochialism in megacity
• Inter-municipal consortium model (like Metro)
  seems to promote more regional thinking, less
  parochialism
• Region-wide cooperation (and structures)
  essential for variety of reasons
• Regional inter-municipal governance structures
  are ignored and irrelevant without real power

31
Questions/Comments