What Alberta’s municipalities need is a strategy to build cooperative relationships, not a heavy-handed approach designed to bind reluctant partners together through shotgun marriages.
Last May, the provincial government took steps to modernize Alberta’s Municipal Government Act.
One of the major changes was a call for forced inter-municipal cooperation, where arbitration would bind municipalities through shotgun marriages with the goal of squeezing out efficiencies in service production. Forced cooperation of this nature, however, has been shown to be harmful elsewhere in Canada.
The provincial government should instead look towards a more flexible model for enhancing inter-municipal cooperation, such as British Columbia’s regional districts.
Inter-municipal cooperation can be an effective means of providing services while not sacrificing economies of scale and scope. Municipalities may voluntarily enter in to a range of agreements to contract or share the costs of service production and delivery, potentially saving money and enhancing service quality without sacrificing local autonomy.
It is encouraging that the province of Alberta sees the benefits of inter-municipal cooperation.
Unfortunately, provincial officials have chosen a heavy-handed method of achieving such cooperation. The revisions to the Municipal Government Act would require all municipalities outside the Edmonton and Calgary areas to adopt “inter-municipal collaboration frameworks”. If cities cannot agree on such a framework for cooperation and service sharing, the province will have the authority to appoint a mediator who may impose one.
The province could force municipalities into a service sharing relationship with neighbouring governments. The province might order such arrangements regardless of the desire of local communities to work together or without thorough examination of the benefits of such arrangements. Municipalities might need to work together without agreements on – or even examining – cost sharing, potentially disadvantaging taxpayers within a certain municipality.
We only need to look to Ontario to see the result of forced inter-municipal cooperation.
In 1998, the province of Ontario introduced the Consolidated Municipal Service Manager system. That plan downloaded the responsibility for delivery and partial funding for a range of social services to municipalities. The province gave some municipalities broad discretion to figure out financing agreements with neighbouring municipalities. If they could not strike a deal, they faced the threat of binding arbitration.
Many municipalities found themselves with arrangements imposed upon them. As a result, many inter-municipal relationships soured and communication essentially halted for years.
Inter-municipal cooperation can be a valuable tool for municipalities. But, when cities are forced into service sharing arrangements, they may react negatively, damaging the prospects of future cooperation. As a result, forced cooperation may very well result in a net loss of regional cooperative arrangements.
The province should instead focus on establishing the type of conditions that facilitate inter-municipal cooperation.
Effective inter-municipal relationships require information. The province should consider providing resources on establishing inter-municipal agreements. For example, the government should set up a database of existing agreements across the province. The province could make staff available to help negotiate agreements. The province could also provide a forum for dispute resolution if cities encounter challenges in establishing or maintaining agreements. Provincial officials should also make available data on potential cost-savings and strategies for overcoming the costs of setting up agreements.
Municipal staff and politicians recognize the value of cooperation. What they need are the resources to complete these arrangements on their own terms. Alberta needs to only look to British Columbia, where a flexible regional district system gives municipalities a forum to discuss and introduce new shared services.
Provincial support can build more inter-municipal service sharing relationships than provincial edict. What Alberta’s municipalities need is a strategy to build cooperative relationships, not a heavy-handed approach designed to bind reluctant partners together through shotgun marriages.
Zachary Spicer is an assistant professor in Brock University’s department of political science. He recently co-authored a C.D Howe Institute report with Adam Found entitled Thinking Regionally: How to Improve Service Delivery in Canada’s Cities.
Published in the Edmonton Journal.
