Wednesday, November 6, 2013

Myth 1 North Van is just like Halifax, Ottawa or (gasp) Toronto

Mayor Mussatto likes to create the analogy that all municipal amalgamations are the same and we would be doomed to walk the same steps to a more expensive local government.  In his words from a North Shore News article;

"But, Mussatto cautioned, while the thought of amalgamations of like-municipalities may "feel good," they rarely, if ever, result in the cost savings the local governments were hoping to see.


The evidence is pretty clear if you do any research that if you do it for financial reasons, you're not going to save any money," he said.


Mussatto pointed to the 1996 amalgamation of Halifax, Darmouth and Bedford as an example. Post-amalgamation, the city piled on millions more in debt in the ensuing years.


The reason, he stated, is that amalgamations come with nasty growing pains, as taxpayers in neither municipality are eager to see their services go down to match their neighbours' service levels, so servicing and costs go up for both former neighbours.


Differences in delivery of services between private sector and union city staff that have evolved in two local governments are also notoriously difficult to marry together, he added, citing garbage collection for multi-family residences and business as an example."


Of course, it was the resulting Council that voted to spend more money and the realities of the specific union contracts in their area that increased spending, Councils unfriendly to the Liberal Government implemented the amalgamation in such a way so there would be no savings. The Liberal Government campaigned against a merger to defeat the PC Government but once elected forced an amalgamation process. (Gasp - shades of the HST).

The mergers or rather annexations had been going on in Halifax and Dartmouth for over a decade as they swallowed most of their suburbs.

A report done by the former PC Government predicted that the amalgamation would save over $20 million a year in a resulting Halifax that merged core urban rather depressed areas, suburban areas and large rural areas. In effect they took a BC style regional area (our fourth level of government) and made it the only local government of 350,000.

What situation caused this amalgamation to provide savings and are effected by the same challenges in North Van? The employees in smaller areas demanded that they receive the same (higher) pay as the urban counterparts.  In fact as one muncipality was formed they also formed one bargaining unit and a single contract would have to neogiated with their unions.

The North Van situation is entirely different.  CUPE 389 represents both the City and the District. Each has a contract that expired on 31 Dec 2011 and we have a wait for an update. 

The city contract is here www.metrovancouver.org/services/labour/Agreements/North_Vancouver_City_Inside-Ourside-CUPE_389-2007-11.pdf and article 10.2 refers to amalgamation directly. 
"10.2 Amalgamation 

 In the event of a vote in favour of amalgamation in both the City and District of North 
Vancouver there will be established, within thirty (30) days of the execution of the City 
and District uniting agreement, a joint committee of Management and labour consisting 
of one (1) to be appointed by each of the two Councils and two (2) to be appointed by 
the Union to consider and make recommendations with respect to matters dealing with 
the integration of employees whose positions are affected by the amalgamation. "

The District contract is here www.metrovancouver.org/services/labour/Agreements/NVD_CUPE_389_2007-11.pdf and Article 9.2 refers to amalgamation directly.
"9.2 In Event of City and District Amalgamation 

 In the event of a vote in favour of amalgamation in both the City and District of North 
Vancouver, there will be established, within thirty (30) days of the execution of the City 
and District uniting agreement, a joint committee of Management and Labour 
consisting of one to be appointed by each of the two Councils and two to be appointed 
by the Union to consider and make recommendations with respect to matters dealing 
with the integration of employees whose positions are affected by the amalgamation"

Of it is exactly the same as is most of the contract as is most 50 job categories and pay.  Of course the city does not have a golf course attendant category but the differences are easily merged together.  Despite the expiry of the contracts almost two years ago, new contracts have not been signed.

Mayor Mussatto claims that "taxpayers in neither municipality are eager to see their services go down to match their neighbours' service levels". It is not taxpayers that increase taxes but Councillors. I'd like to see North Van examples of specific services thta would cost us more or that a new Council would be forced by rampaging mobs to boost up, let's say, recycling as an example, oh bad example since both municipalities in fact are part of a North Shore wide recycling program.

Mayor Mussatto also cites the example of garbage collection and privatized services. In the City now, we have different standards of collection and recycling.  If you are renter in an apartment building or an owner in a strata condo, close to half of the City residents, a private company under contract with building or strata council does the collection.  In you are in a private residence, they City does your collection.  The District has the same situation but the ratio is vastly different. 

If the nuts and bolts become overwhelmly to you, think it a certain way.  The core of the task is a merger of the two budgets. There's an old saying "How do you eat an elephant?" The answer of course is "One bite at a time". Each bite is a cost center to be addressed to figure out how we will save taxpayer money.  Over the next month or so, I shall publish several separate articles that each looks at one spending area as this is already very long.

Monday, November 4, 2013

Board members needed in both City and District orgs

Now that we have launched our new political party, it's time to recruit members and Board Members.  The Party will have three components, a Society Board and two Electoral Organization as they are called by the Local Government Act. It is these two Boards where the work needs to be done to build both arms of the political party.

The City Board, chaired by George Pringle and the District Board chaired by Bruce Gilmour both need a Vice-Chair, a Secretary-Treasurer, a Membership Chair, a Fundraising Chair and up to 4 Directors at Large.  Each position is a task that needs to be done. Gathering memberships and donations are paramount.

Our website is unitenorthvan.ca and the City Board can be contacted at unite.northvan@gmail.com and the District Board can be contacted at nsalmagamation@gmail.com if you wish to be a member or more active as a Board member.

Thursday, October 3, 2013

Why not include West Van?

The amalgamation of the two North Vans are like cross breeding two similar horses, a couple of spirited Mustangs for instance.  West Van is like a  Gypsy Vanner or Friesian Horse. It's possible to breed them to a normal horse but the upkeep would be extremely expensive.

West Van funds many items like the Blue Bus system and as we can see from the current strike aside from being a provincial responsibility, it brings labour problems of its own. Since the Provincial Law mandates a referendum in each of the municipalities, the Amalgamation Plan of the new city would have to cut the spending on unique items or extent the service to the whole new city.


The point of the amalgamation is unite North Van and to reduce the expensive governments in North Vancouver, not to increase it. It makes the referendum more complex, there are people in North Vancouver who would oppose the inclusion of West Van and vote against it and stop the merger of North Vancouver. Also, if the referendum failed in West Van and passed in both North Vans, the whole exercise would fail. 


We should just fix the problem created by the division of an united North Van. 



Wednesday, September 18, 2013

The process part 2

The legal mechanism to amalgamation was rewritten when the Provincial Government passed the Community Charter Act.  It prevented the Provincial Government from acting like Mike Harris in Ontario and forcing an amalgamation in British Columbia.

To unite the City and District of North Vancouver, the two Councils must pass an motion directing that an amalgamation plan is to devised.  That plan would be put to the voters of each municipality in a referendum.

Since the process of writing a plan would be a negotiation, there should be a joint committee where the details are hammered out.  Provincial law states that a municipality of the size of a combined City and District should have a Mayor and 8 Councillors.

Many in the City are worried that the District would take over with their larger population and it has been suggested that there would be two wards of 3 or 4 Councillors elected in the old boundaries or even 8 wards of equal population size electing a Councillor.  

This "us and them" mentality is one the politicians suffer, mostly ones in a panic that amalgamation removes their jobs and status if one Mayor and 4 Councillor positions were removed. Actual people don't think that way.

It may be that it is just easier to have the first two elections that the City elect four Councillors and the District elect four in their old boundaries and of course one Mayor elected by the whole new municipality. There is more work to do than worry about politicians.


It has been suggested a Citizen's Assembly be stuck to develop the Amalgamation Plan to stick the main goal, to do this in way that saves serious cash. This way would remove politicians and civic staff from the process of developing the plan but at the end of the day, the two Councils would have approve the plan and put it a referendum of the voters.


In the most optimistic scenario we will not see an united North Vancouver until 2020.






Tuesday, July 23, 2013

The Process

As I mentioned in the prior article, the Community Charter of 2002 ensured that any municipal amalgamations in BC would be grassroots driven and could not be forced on an area like in Toronto, Ottawa or Halifax.

Step 1.  All involved Councils must pass a motion directing their staff to develop a plan for amalgamation. In our case, it is just the Councils of the City and the District.  A amalgamation committee is struck to guide the staff and to do public consultation.  The province will commit funds to develop the amalgamation plan and for the transition.

Step 2. Once the plan is done, the Councils ratify the plan.  Only a simple majority vote is required in the City and the District.

Step 3. Both municipalities have to submit this plan to ratified by referendum by their citizens.  A majority vote is required of both municipalities is required.

Step 4.  The Province issues one new "Letter of Patent" which is like the constitution of a municipality.  One North Vancouver is created.

The provincial government cannot force amalgamation, they or even the citizens cannot even force a binding referendum. Only a majority vote of both Councils can start the process so to achieve amalgamation we must get 4 Council votes in the City and 4 Council votes in the District.

The best and perhaps the only way to get those 4 votes is to elect Councillors who will vote for the amalgamation motion as in step 1.  United North Van will be running 2-4 candidates in the November 2014 and will choosing them in June of 2014.  In the City none of the elected Councillors support amalgamation, in the District most have publicly supported it but until a formal vote is taken, we don't know.  

At this point, it is likely that we need to run 4 candidates in the City and if one of profile steps forward, one of them should a Mayoral candidate.  We probably only need two candidates in the District. In October we shall be doing a delegation to both Councils and gauging support.

A letter from the then Minister explains the situation.

http://www.nsnews.com/opinion/letters/joint-services-always-an-option-1.369740#


Sunday, July 21, 2013

The 1981 referendum

All the "talks" of the prior decades led to a referendum on whether to do a study or not in November 1981.

It barely failed with a very low turnout.  The Mayor was acclaimed, driving the turnout down.  Many pro-amalgamation supporters saw the "talks" as a tactic used by anti-amalgamation forces to prevent any real progress.

In 2002, the province created the Community Charter which removed the Province's ability to order any amalgamation in BC's municipalities, ensuring that chances would be grassroots driven.  Like Unite North Van.

UPDATE:  I found the report that had the details of the 21 November 1981 referendum.

"Are you in favour of the City of North Vancouver participating with the District of North Vancouver in a study by professional consultants to provide information to evaluate the relative merits of amalgamation between the City of North Vancouver and the District of North Vancouver, which may subsequently be the subject of a referendum?"

2491 voters voted No and 2184 voters voted Yes

Wednesday, June 5, 2013

Signs of amalgamation?

This is the old sign in front of the city plaza.



The word city is the focal point of the sign. North Vancouver is a lot smaller.

These two new signs after the expansion of City Hall.






These pictures are used in media stories and the webpage.   No mention of the City or the District.

As it should be an United North Van!

Wednesday, February 6, 2013

Letter - Graham Hadfield

DNV's hobbits have little vision

Dear Editor:

District of North Vancouver councillors, can't see out of their own burrows, correction, borough.

Coun. Roger Bassam at least got one thing right: "the need for one municipal government on the North Shore."

The latest decision by the district not to fund a 50-metre pool jointly with the city clearly demonstrates this. Coun. Alan Nixon was the one lone voice of intelligence and common sense on council to question as nonsensical the funding of a 25-metre pool at the William Griffin Recreation Centre while the city funds a 25-metre pool at Harry Jerome two kilometres away.

You do not have to be an aquatic user residing on the North Shore to be angered by the district's decision. All tax-paying residents should be livid. Should the district's protection of its petty fiefdom triumph over simple common sense and economics? Or should we build a facility that would benefit the greater good of all residents on the North Shore irrespective of where they live, district or city, and cater to all user groups at a cheaper cost for us as taxpayers?

The reason and need for a 50-metre pool can be taken even further. Ron Andrews Recreation Centre on district land, although not slated for replacement, does have a limited lifespan, like all structures. With a 50-metre pool its replacement will not be necessary. Two for one or even three for one; lets do the math on that.

The only thing holding back a no-brainer solution is the location, basically being on the wrong side of the municipal street. The mindset of district council is reflected in comments like that of Coun. Lisa Muri: "I cannot recall us being asked for a contribution for a facility that's not within our municipality."

Coun. Bassam you hit the nail on the head: Yes, we do indeed need only one municipal government on the North Shore - and decisions like this will be easy.

Graham Hadfield North Vancouver



http://www.nsnews.com/news/hobbits+have+little+vision/7925280/story.html#ixzz2VTkPcPzR

Tuesday, February 5, 2013

Shaw TV - The Rush

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j1bVsvrsgMg&feature=youtu.be&t=6s

Mussatto hates amalgamation because the District is not left wing and dense enough.

He informs us that talks are ongoing about different models of North Shore policing.

Update

The City has a paper hidden in secret on some kind of joint North Shore Fire Services.

Wednesday, January 30, 2013

Letter NSN Dorothy Chala

Let's keep pushing for a vote on amalgamation

Dear Editor:
I was happy to see the "A word" on the front page of the North Shore News.
Mayor Darrell Mussatto's comments on why it wouldn't be a good idea seem pretty lame. 

Surely operating just one municipal hall, and all the salaries that go along with it, would save money to start with. Obviously the mayors do not want to lose their jobs, but the taxpayers are tired of paying such huge taxes each year, and usually always with an increase.

Let's keep some pressure on the governments in North and West Vancouver to at least put it to a vote. I'm sure the residents of the North Shore would welcome it.

Dorothy Chala North Vancouver




http://www.nsnews.com/business/keep+pushing+vote+amalgamation/7892435/story.html#ixzz2VTfoplQA

Sunday, January 27, 2013

Biz community quizzes NV mayors

Biz community quizzes NV mayors

Amalgamation remains a hot topic

MAYORS Richard Walton and Darrell Mussatto listen to questions from the business community at a North Vancouver Chamber of Commerce luncheon meeting moderated by Mike Watson on Thursday.

Photograph by: NEWS photo , Mike Wakefield



IT was a fine luncheon until someone had to go and utter the "A-word."

The perennial amalgamation question came up for a captivated crowd of North Vancouver Chamber of Commerce members who leaned forward in their seats as the two North Vancouver mayors explained why the municipalities ought, or ought never, become one.

City Mayor Darrell Mussatto and district Mayor Richard Walton were guests of a chamber luncheon Thursday, to take questions from the business community.

The larger, yet less cash-flush district is perceived to have the most to gain from a hypothetical union, from the perspective of district council and taxpayers, Walton said.

 "I think, in the last 50 years, it's almost automatic with the district," Walton said. "I've never worked with a councilor who didn't support amalgamation."

The assertion drew laughs from the crowd when it was suggested city Coun. Don Bell, formerly the mayor of DNV, was a sleeper agent sent to bring about amalgamation from within the city.

But, Mussatto cautioned, while the thought of amalgamations of like-municipalities may "feel good," they rarely, if ever, result in the cost savings the local governments were hoping to see.

"The evidence is pretty clear if you do any research that if you do it for financial reasons, you're not going to save any money," he said.

Mussatto pointed to the 1996 amalgamation of Halifax, Dartmouth and Bedford as an example. Post-amalgamation, the city piled on millions more in debt in the ensuing years.

The reason, he stated, is that amalgamations come with nasty growing pains, as taxpayers in neither municipality are eager to see their services go down to match their neighbours' service levels, so servicing and costs go up for both former neighbours.

Differences in delivery of services between private sector and unionized city staff that have evolved in two local governments are also notoriously difficult to marry together, he added, citing garbage collection for multi-family residences and business as an example.

Instead, Mussatto suggested regional governance and financing for services like water, sewer and land use planning, exactly as Metro Vancouver operates, as a much better model.

Roughly half of those in attendance applauded. As for the notion of regional policing, it would likely come at the expense of local priority setting, Mussatto said, but added it would be West Vancouver that would stand to benefit most as its policing infrastructure and costs could be absorbed by a single North Shore police force, but would not lose any noticeable level of service.

While there appears to be no sign of a budge on the amalgamation issue, the two mayors were "joined at the hip" according to moderator Mike Watson on some other broader issues including philosophy on development and attraction of business to their respective jurisdictions.

In his opening remarks, Walton quoted from an American urban studies academic who found that cities that prosper today are ones that can attract the 20 to 40 demographic, which sadly, the district has been failing to do.

But hopefully, Walton said, the seeds of a more prosperous district lie in its new official community plan, which calls for denser, walkable urban centres, which tend to be more attractive and affordable for that demographic.

The city meanwhile is also trying to make itself equally desirable for businesses and a mix of younger residents, Mussatto said. While the development proposal for the Safeway site has been stalled and sent back to another public hearing, it is the type of development he would like to see in the city's core.



http://www.nsnews.com/news/community+quizzes+mayors/7878882/story.html#ixzz2VTZTnI9g