How much lower would your taxes be if we received a fair deal in the region? How much more funding would we have for service delivery, creating a stronger, more vibrant Edmonton that in turn uplifts the whole region?

I’ve requested administration to provide a memo to the following:

Could Administration provide a memo outlining the potential impact of pooling and equitably distributing  industrial revenue across the region? What would the revenue impacts be per municipality? Additionally, could Administration provide a memo outlining the “regional subsidy” borne by Edmontonians for delivering services that the region benefits from?

Each of the 13 municipalities in the region are safer, more affordable, and more vibrant when we work together. For too long we have been trapped in a “race to the bottom”, competing amongst each other for the lucrative industrial tax base instead of adopting an approach where a rising tide lifts all boats. Of the 13, the tax base is not equitably distributed – 3 really hold an excess of the industrial share.

As I detailed last week in the “Raw Deal in the Region: Edmonton’s Free Rider Problem” post, Edmontonians are paying for social services, policing, events, attractions and many other services the rest of the region benefits from.

Sure, regional residents don’t want to pay more, but to the extent that they are even aware, neither do Edmontonians. While these may be uncomfortable conversations for some, we owe a fiduciary duty to Edmontonians and need to make sure that we are always honest and transparent about how their money is being spent and provide factual information.

Regional disparity is enabling poor urban planning in the region, especially with the provincial deletion of regional planning supports. Like living in a perpetual boom, when you can depend on plentiful non-residential revenue, you don’t face the same pressures to build smarter or more efficiently. But eventually the growth ponzi scheme presents its bill, however reduced by the contributions of Edmontonians. Everytime I drive out to Fort Saskatchewan, I’m shocked at the continued low-density developments sterilizing prime farmland. There have also been many historic disputes between regional municipalities with one another, another indictment of the outdated and broken operating system that is the municipal government.

There is a remedy to this: revenue sharing.

Revenue sharing is not unprecedented. In 1994, the Alberta government looked at school funding across Alberta and saw an inequity and moved to a per pupil funding model. It was generally agreed that a child should receive the same support whether in Lethbridge, Lamont, or Laurier Heights. This model held for decades. They saw that the property tax model was broken and made the case that Education property tax should not be locally collected and locally allocated.

Similarly, it is time that we look at a new model of industrial land taxation and figure out a better way. Readers sent me a lot of feedback and ideas to recoup costs after my last post: toll roads, annexation, and other creative solutions. We all agree that the status quo is no longer acceptable and is only becoming even more unsustainable. The simplest solution is a revenue sharing agreement amongst those in the region on an acceptable timeline. When Edmonton thrives, the region thrives and when the region thrives, Alberta thrives. 

Remember, the regional municipalities are very small in population, even the largest are smaller in population than one municipal ward in Edmonton. We would not tolerate this kind of an inequity between municipal wards within the city, so naturally, we should be questioning inequality within the region.

As Edmontonians wrestle with tax and service pressures, they need to have a true sense of these long-term structural challenges.

We aren’t asking for a special deal, just a fair deal.