2012-09-10_Supplemental Agenda Packet--Dossier de l'ordre du jour supplémentaireCity of Saint John
Common Council Meeting
Monday, September 10, 2012
Location: Common Council Chamber
Supplemental to Agenda
12.5 City Manager: Nick Nicolle Community Centre Revitalization Phase 2 —
Professional Consulting Services Engagement (Revised)
12.7 City Manager: Upcoming Ward Meetings
12.8 City Manager: Construction of Mattro Street, Bally Desmond Subdivision Phase 3
12.9 City Manager: Contract No. 2012 -19: Duncraggan Court Watermain Renewal
13.5 Saint John Parking Commission: Feasibility of Text to Pay System for Payment of
Parking Fines
13.6 Saint John Parking Commission: Feasibility of Pay by Phone System for Parking
Meters
13.7 True Growth 2.0: Charting Our Renaissance
13.8 Committee of the Whole: Amateur MMA Events
13.9 Committee of the Whole: City's Position Paper on Municipal Reform 2012
13.10 Committee of the Whole: Bally Desmond Subdivision Phase 3
The City of Saint John
Seance du conseil communal
Lundi 10 septembre 2012
Lieu : Salle du conseil communal
Ordre du jour supplementaire
12.5 Directeur g6n&ral : Phase 2 de la revitalisation du Centre communautaire
Nick Nicolle — Recours a des services d'experts - conseils professionnels (r6vis6)
12.7 Directeur g6neral : R6unions de quartier a venir
12.8 Directeur g6neral : Construction de la rue Mattro, phase 3 du lotissement
Bally Desmond
12.9 Directeur g6neral : Contrat ri 2012 -19 : Renouvellement de 1'6gout sanitaire de la
cour Duncraggan
13.5 Commission sur le stationnement de Saint John: Faisabilit6 du systeme de
paiement par message texte pour les amendes de stationnement
13.6 Commission sur le stationnement de Saint John: Faisabilit6 du systeme de
paiement par t616phone pour les parcometres
13.7 Programme de croissance r6elle 2.0 : Bilan de notre renaissance
13.8 Comit6 pl6nier : Ev6nements d'arts martiaux mixtes amateurs
13.9 Comit6 pl6nier : Expos6 de position de la Ville de Saint John sur la r6forme
municipale de 2012
13.10 Comit6 pl6nier : Phase 3 du lotissement Bally Desmond
M &C 2412 -225
t4- 'r A
September 10 2012
His Worship Mel Norton
And Members of Common Council
The C`+tv of saint lohn
Your Worship and Councillors:
SUBJECT
Nick Nicolle Community Centre Revitalization Phase 2 — Professional Consulting Services Engagement (REVISED)
BACKGROUND
One of Common Council's goals is that
"we have revitalized neighbourhoods
that are safe, vibrant, and attractive,
with a priority to "improve access to
and investment in recreational
opportunities at Community Centres
and Parks ".
Common Council recognized the state
of the Nick Nicolle Community Centre
(formerly known as the North End
Community Centre) and, in 2010,
directed city staff to engage
professional consultants to complete
the necessary studies to determine the existing condition of the facility and what steps need to be taken in order to
make this facility safe, barrier -free accessible, building code complaint, user friendly, suitable for the needs of the public,
and welcoming to the community.
In 2010, the City of Saint John Facility Management Division engaged Stantec Consulting to complete a physical
condition assessment of the Nick Nicolle Community Centre (NNCC). Approximately $1,600,000 in capital costs were
identified in this study. Following this study, the community was engaged in two separate public consultation sessions
that were held in February and June of 2010. Based on feedback from the community during these sessions,
accessibility, safety, way- finding /identity, healthy environment, and flexibility of space /programming were identified as
things that needed improvement in the facility. These themes translated into physical building elements such as an
elevator, barrier -free washrooms, improved signage, ventilation upgrades, natural lighting, moveable partitions, exterior
gathering space, and much more.
Report to Common Council Page 2 of 5
Nick Nicolle Community Centre Revitalization Phase 2
Using the insight gained from the physical assessment and community engagement process, a four (4) phased approach
to the proposed revitalization project was developed in October of 2010 and presented to Common Council as follows:
Phase 1 (2011): Building Additions
■ Lobby addition
■ Elevator
■ Stairwell addition
EstimatedConstruction Cost — Phase 1 ......................................................... ............................... .......................$872,000
Phase 2 (2012): Interior Modifications, Mechanical /Electrical, Life Safety
■ Interior modifications
■ M &E upgrades
■ Life safety
Estimated Construction Cast —Phase 2 ........................................................ ............................... .....................$1,278,000
Phase 3 (2013): Exterior Cladding & Glazing
■ Window replacements
■ Install new windows
■ Replace roof
■ Cladding
Estimated Construction Cost— Phase 3...
Phase 4 (2014): Site Work
■ Plaza
■ Stage and movie screen
■ Terraces and sidewalks
■ Trail and landscaping
■ Playground
■ Parking lot
Estimated Construction Cost — Phase 4 ............
..................................................................... ............................... $350,000
... ............................... I .... I................... .......................... $470,000
GrandTotal ............................................................................................ ............................... .....................$2,970,000
In October 2010, Common Council resolved:
"that as recommended by the City Manager in the submitted report M &C 2010 -357: Revitalization of the North End
Community Center (NECC), Common Council:
1) Adopt the Stantec Consulting and ADI Limited Studies and refer the North End Community Centre
Revitalization project to the capital budget process for consideration of this four phased approach; and
2) Engage ADI Limited in the amount of $136,337.20 plus HST to complete the detailed design of Phase 1 of
this project with the objective of commencing Phase 1 of the construction in May of 2011."
Due to some unforeseen property issues that have only recently been resolved, Phase 1 of construction was delayed
until now, with the project only recently being tendered and construction slated for September 2012 through February
2013. A construction budget of $891,300 for Phase 1 of the revitalization project was approved by Common Council as a
Report to Common Council Page 3 of 5
Nick Nicolle Community Centre Revitalization Phase 2
carryover amount from 2011 during the 2012 capital budget process. Construction Phases 2, 3, and 4 are proposed for
2013, 2014, and 2015 respectively.
ANALYSIS
Investment into the future of the Nick Nicolle Community Centre is a tangible demonstration of the City of Saint John's
confidence in the vitality and long term viability of the North End as a sustainable community. In order to continue the
momentum of the proposed revitalization of the Nick Nicolle Community Centre, the next step will be to engage a
professional consultant to develop the detailed design for Phase 2 of this project.
The community engagement process as well as the design work associated with Phase 1 of this project was completed
by exp Architects inc. (formerly ADI Limited). It would be inefficient from a practical and cost standpoint to have design
consulting services for Phase 2 and future phases of this project completed by another firm who is not familiar with the
project. As such, staff recommends that exp Architects Inc. be directly engaged to undertake the design of Phase 2 of
the project. Base building drawings and information gathered during "pre- design" work completed by exp Architects
Inc. would not have to be regenerated as a result this direct engagement, and a cost savings will be realized by the City
of Saint John.
From the standpoint of public procurement, Section 5.11 (Non- Competitive Purchases — Sole Source) of the City of Saint
John's Policy for the Procurement of Goods, Services, and Construction provides for:
" aJ The requirement for competitive Bid Solicitation for Goods, Services and Construction may be
waived under the authority of the City Manager or Common Council and replaced with
negotiations by the Division Manager and Materials Management under the following
circumstances:
iv, in any of the circumstances listed as exemptions to competitive public purchasing in
Regulation 94 -157 under the Public Purchasing Act."
Furthermore, Article 27 of the New Brunswick Regulation 94 -157 under the Public Purchasing Act reads:
"Services that may, by legislation, be provided only by any of the following professionals are exempt
from the application of the Act:
(a) engineers;
QJ architects."
As indicated by the excerpts above, Common Council has the authority to allow the Division Manager and Materials
Management to negotiate and direct engage (i.e. sole source) the services of an engineer and /or architect, without
adhering to a competitive bidding process if it deems it beneficial to do so in a particular circumstance. Again, for the
reasons mentioned above, staff recommends that exp Architects Inc. be directly engaged to undertake the design of
Phase 2 of the project. Construction of Phase 2 is proposed for 2013, and the associated budgetary costs will be
submitted for consideration during the 2013 Capital Budget deliberations.
As previously mentioned, construction of Phases 3 and 4 of the proposed revitalization of the Nick Nicolle Community
Centre are proposed for 2014 and 2015 respectively. Since we are two years away from these phases of the project, and
Report to Common Council Page 4 of S
Nick Nicolle Community Centre Revitalization Phase 2
due to the sometimes volatile and unpredictable nature of construction costs, staff is not in a position to recommend a
consultant to complete the associated design work with Phases 3 and 4.
FINANCIAL CONSIDERATIONS
Based on an estimated construction budget of $1,278,000 for Phase 2 of the revitalization of the Nick Nicolle Community
Centre, the professional fees proposed by exp Architects Inc. for design, tendering, and construction contract
administration and site review services are summarized as follows:
Professional Fees: 14.75% of construction cost, totaling $188,505.00 plus HST
Internal Expenses: 6.00% of professional fees, totaling $11,310.30 plus HST
Total: $199,815.30 plus HST = $225,791.29 ($218,940.02 factoring in HST rebate)
Staff of the Facility Management Division have reviewed the proposed fees, and believe that they are appropriate for
the scope of the project given that it is the renovation of an existing building, there is limited information (e.g. drawings)
on the as -built conditions, and will involve a unique design approach to deal with current building code requirements
applied to an older building. in fact, the proposed fees are actually lower than that recommended in "A Guide to
Determining Appropriate Fees for the Services of an Architect" as published by The Royal Architectural institute of
Canada. As mentioned, exp Architects Inc. were involved in earlier phases of the work, so some level of efficiency is
expected. Common Council approved $235,000 for the design work associated with Phase 2 of the revitalization of the
Nick Nicolle Community Centre in the 2012 capital budget, and the total professional fees and expenses proposed by exp
Architects Inc. are within this budget envelope.
For the information of Common Council, if this and future phases of the design work associated with the proposed
revitalization of the Nick Nicolle Community Centre were directly awarded to exp Architects Inc., the total professional
fees are estimated to be in the range of $468,200 plus HST, including Phases 1 through 4. This figure is based on the
costs associated with Phases 1 and 2 plus the estimated fees for Phases 3 and 4 (i.e. assumed 14.75% of estimated
construction costs plus 6% of professional fees plus 3% inflation per year).
INPUT FROM OTHER SOURCE
Input from both the Materials Management and Legal Departments of the City of Saint John were solicited during the
preparation of this report, and staff support the recommendations contained herein.
RECOMMENDATION
Your City Manager recommends:
1) That the City direct engage exp Architects Inc. at the cost of $199,815.30 plus HST to complete the detailed
design of Phase 2 of the revitalization of the Nick Nicolle Community Centre; and
2) That the Mayor and Common Clerk be authorized to execute the necessary documents.
Report to Common Council
Nick Nicolle Community Centre Revitalization Phase 2
Respectfully subm' ed,
Trevor Gamblin, M.Sc.E, P.Eng.
Manager, Facility Manageme
Gregory J. Yea ns CG , MBA
Commissioner, Fi n and Administrative Services
L 'ti
CGA
(� City Manager
r
Page 5 of 5
REPORT TO COMMON COUNCIL
September 10, 2012
His Worship Mayor Mel Norton
and Members of Common Council
Your Worship and Members of Common Council:
SUBJECT: Upcoming Ward Meetings
BACKGROUND
1T
The City orso" john
On September 4t' Common Council requested further information bexrovided on the upcoming
ward based public meetings planned for September 11, 12, 19 and 20 to support the budget
process and Council priorities.
ANALYSIS
On Monday evening staff intend to provide further information to Council on the upcoming ward
meetings and also introduce the consultants, Performance Concepts Consulting Inc., who will be
leading the workshops. The consultants are prepared to provide Council with a brief
presentation on the format and approach to the workshops.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
None.
RECOMMENDATIONS
It is recommended that Common Council receive a briefing on the format and approach to
the upcoming ward based public meetings.
Respectfully submitted,
AC e II ilton, MCIP RPP
issioner, Strategic Services
J. Patrick Woods, CGA
City Manager
Towards Service
Delivery Improvement
Performance Concepts
September 10, 2012
impartial, evidence based review of City service delivery
performance
- What lines of business should City be in /out of as we move
forward?
- Doing the work for less $ (but still generate planned results)
- Identify new service levels for City to become $sustainable
- Explore new models for doing the work beyond traditional
direct delivery by City staff
- Feed City budget decision making by Council
0-96r
Measurable 4 Public
Service Levels Service Working Specific Options to
Based g Improve Service and/or
& Performance Budgets Sessions
Indicators g on Tradeoffs Control Costs to taxpayers
Staff Building
the Foundation
For Evidence
Based Decisions
Public
Engagement
Can the Trade -offs
To Come
(Next 2 weeks)
Actually Generating Service
Delivery improvement
& Cost Control
(Next couple
Months)
SAINT 1011N
Quality of Services
& Community Benefits
$ of City Services (Price)
Amount of Service
Taxpayers Pay For
How Should the
Teeter - Totter
Be Balanced?
SAINT JOTIN
• Educate
—Core Service Review 101
—Core Service Highlights
• Discuss
• Decide
Core Service Review — Project Briefing
L�141
lift,
•,a,
1
SANT JOIN
1. Comfortable.
2. I've heard about it.
3. What the heck is it?
67%
z
S,INT,OH
Ward 1: Tuesday,
September 11
St. Mark's United Church
50 Dexter Drive, West
Ward 2: Wednesday,
September 12
Lorne Middle School
90 Newman Street, North
Core Service Review - Project Briefing
Ward 3: Wednesday,
September 19
The Boys & Girls Club of
Saint John
1 Paul Harris Street, Central
Ward 4: Thursday,
September 20 (ASL
interpretation provided)
Forest Hills Baptist Church
(gymnasium entrance)
�d
SAINT JOHN
-REPORT TG; COMMON COUNCIL
M &C -2012 233
September 6, 2012
His Worship Mayor Mel Norton and
Members of Common Council
Your Worship and Councillors:
SUBJECT: Construction of Mattro Street,
Bally Desmond Subdivision Phase 3
INTRODUCTION
ra,
City of Saint John
At the March 26, 2012 meeting of Common Council, the following resolution was
adopted:
"RESOLVED that as recommended by the City Manager in the
submitted report M &C 2012 -057: Bally Desmond Subdivision
Phase, The City of Saint John not accept any financial
responsibility for the construction of Mattro Street from the A.J.
Mallette & Sons (1985) Ltd. property line westward to connect to
Jadvo Street as illustrated on the attached sketch;
And Further, the City Solicitor be directed to prepare an
appropriate resolution for the consideration of Common Council
to establish a system of levies against those owners of property
that have frontage on that section of Mattro Street from the A.J.
Mallette & Sons (1985) Ltd. property line westward to Jadvo
Street and develop or improve those properties to recover the cost
of the street construction such that the proceeds of the levy can be
forwarded to A.J. Mallette & Sons (1985) Ltd. "
A.J. Mallette and Sons is developing another phase of a rural residential
subdivision in East Saint John. This subdivision involves the construction of new
public streets and large rural residential lots. In addition, the design of this
subdivision as well as the adjacent subdivision (already developed) was to
M & C-2012 — 233 - 2 - September 6, 20I2
provide a street inter - connection between the two residential developments. In
order to achieve this, Mattro Street has been planned to connect Jadvo Street to
Meredith Avenue. The developer of the adjacent subdivision was not required to
extend Mattro Street fully to the property line that is shared with A.J. Mallette and
Sons. This was the City's practice at the time and the tangible impact of this
historical practice (since discontinued) is that there is now 80 metres of
unconstructed street between this shared property line and the existing termination
of Mattro Street. Section 7(4) of the Subdivision Bylaw requires that this section
of street be constructed. The issue at hand is a financial one and involves
determining who should be responsible for the cost of constructing this portion of
street.
DISCUSSION
Common Council, at its meeting on March 26, 2012 adopted a resolution
directing the City Solicitor to prepare an appropriate resolution to establish a
system of levies against the owners of property that have frontage on the section
of Mattro Street that is to be constructed. In the course of fully reviewing the
situation at hand, it would appear that it is not possible to proceed with a levy -
based approach.
The authority given to the City of Saint John to regulate subdivision is provided
by the Community Planning Act. The Act provides that the City may establish a
bylaw to regulate subdivision and the City has done so by adopting the Saint John
Subdivision Bylaw. At Section 9 of the Subdivision Bylaw, the City requires that:
As a condition of approval of a subdivision plan, where entry will be
gained to the subdivision by means of an existing street or other
access, by whomever owned, the person seeking approval of such plan
shall:
(a) make provision to bring the existing access to the same standard
as may be required for streets within the subdivision; or
(b) contribute to the cost of work referred to in clause (a) to the
extent required for streets within the subdivision pursuant to
Schedule "B" hereof, provided the amount contributed per lineal
foot for such access does not exceed the cost to such person per
lineal foot for streets within the subdivision or, where the plan
does not provide for the laying out of streets to be publicly -
owned, the average cost per lineal foot for subdivision streets
within the municipality constructed during the preceding twelve
months.
This section of the Bylaw flows directly from Section 42(3)(d) of the Community
Planning Act. It provides that the City may impose a condition on the approval of
a subdivision plan requiring that the person seeking approval contribute to the
M & C —2012 —233 - 3 - September 6, 2012
realized cost of constructing an existing street at the time of subdivision. Section
9 of the Subdivision Bylaw provides authority to the City to require an appropriate
financial contribution from a subdivider who will gain entry to their subdivision
from an existing street. In this case, the City can impose a condition on a
subdivider that creates new lots fronting on this 80 metre portion of Mattro Street
to secure the financial contribution for the cost of the constructing the street to the
relevant City standard.
In March of 2012, Common Council adopted a resolution stating that the City will
not accept any financial responsibility for the off -site costs associated with the
Mattro Street extension. It should be noted that the total cost of this construction
is in the order of $75,000 but this cost properly would be spread over the full 103
lot build -out of the subdivision. The resolution adopted this past March had the
effect of leaving these costs with A.J. Mallette and Sons. At the same time, a
further resolution was adopted directing staff to formulate a system of levies to
recover a portion of these costs should the owners of land adjacent to this street
extension develop or improve their own properties.
The City Solicitor is of the view that funds can only be recovered if these adjacent
lands are subdivided. This is an unfortunate limitation of the Community
Planning Act and there is nothing the City can do to change this. The land
adjacent to the Mattro Street extension may or may not be subdivided in the
fullness of time. This leaves Council with a series of options at its disposal to
conclude the conversation between the City and the developer. Council needs to
consider whether:
1. The City wants to relieve A.J. Mallette and Sons from the responsibility of
constructing the Mattro Street Extension. Staff strongly recommend
against this approach. Abandoning the street construction would be
inconsistent with Section 7 (4) of the Subdivision Bylaw, it would leave a
significant amount of residential population without a second access to
and from their home in the event of an emergency, and it will make it
substantially less efficient for the City to provide municipal services in
this area.
2. Common Council may want to reaffirm the position established by
resolution on March 26, 2012 which requires that the street be built and
that the financial responsibility for the street remain with A.J. Mallette and
Sons. Staff are now aware, however, that the limitations of the
Community Planning Act make it less likely that there will contributions to
the cost of this work from other property owners that benefit from this
infrastructure. This does represent a real potential hardship for the
developer.
3. Given that it will be more difficult for the developer to recover some of his
investment in the Mattro Street extension, Common Council may now be
of the view that the City should upfront some or all of the construction
cost of this section of street. This would facilitate the street's construction
M & C — 2012 — 233 - 4 - September 6, 2012
which is in the public interest but perhaps be a fairer solution for the
developer given that this is an off -site cost. The City may be able to
recover some of its investment if this option was to be pursued in
accordance with Section 9 of the Subdivision Bylaw. Given the limitations
of the provincial legislation, it would appear that this is the most sensible
solution in the situation. Unfortunately, this is an unbudgeted expenditure
and funds will need to be found within the 2012 General Capital Fund to
reimburse A.J. Mallette and Sons for this expense.
In summary, staff are prepared to recommend Option 3 with the
acknowledgement that the developer will undertake the work and the City will
reimburse for eligible costs in accordance with the City's Subdivision Bylaw and
policies respecting the construction of streets. As staff understand it, an
amendment to the City's Subdivision Bylaw is not required because Section 9 of
the Bylaw already provides the tool required by the City to recover costs should
adjacent lands be subdivided in the future.
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that Common Council agree to reimburse A.J. Mallette and
Sons (1985) Limited for those costs associated with the cost of constructing the
extension of Mattro Street from the Mallette and Sons property line westward to
Jadvo Street consistent with the Saint John Subdivision Bylaw and the City's
General Specifications respecting the construction of streets.
Further, it is recommended that the City Solicitor be directed to prepare or revise
the necessary City/Developer Subdivision Agreement to ensure provision of the
required work and facilities and the City reimbursement proposed.
Respectfully submitted,
,�1, �2
Ken Forrest, MCIP, RPP
Commissioner
Growth and Development Services
J. Patrick Woods, C.G.A.
Alt5k City Manager
REPORT TO COMMON COUNCIL
M &C2012 -232
September 6, 2012
His Worship Mayor Mel Norton
& Members of Common Council
Your Worship and Members of Council,
SUBJECT:
CONTRACT NO. 2012-19: DUNCRAGGAN COURT WATERMAIN RENEWAL
BACKGROUND
The City of SAnt )ohn
The 2012 Water & Sewerage Utility Fund Capital Budget includes a provision for the renewal of
approximately 25m of watermain on Duncraggan Court.
In accordance with the City of Saint John's Policy for the Procurement of Goods, Services and
Construction, this contract was called by invitation to bid as the work was valued at less than
$100,000.
TENDER RESULTS
Tenders closed on September 5, 2012, with the following results including HST:
1. Galbraith Construction Ltd., Saint John, NB
2. Fairville Construction Ltd., Saint John, NB
3. Gulf Operators Ltd., Saint John, NB
4. Maguire Excavating Ltd., Saint John, NB
The Engineer's estimate for the work was $72,400.00
$66,197.66
$73,789.57
$89,116.17
$96,358.49
M & C 2012 -232
September 6, 2012
Page 2
ANALYSIS
The tenders were reviewed by staff and were found to be formal in all respects. Staff is of the
opinion that the low tenderer has the necessary resources and expertise to perform the work, and
recommend acceptance of their tender.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
This contract involves work that is to be charged to the 2012 Water & Sewerage Utility Fund
Capital Budget. Assuming award of this contract to the low tenderer, the following analysis has
been completed which includes work that will be carried out by City Forces and others.
Budget
Project net cost
Variance (shortfall)
$75,000.00
$75,320.15
($320.15)
This budget shortfall can be managed within the overall Utility Fund Capital Program envelope.
POLICY CONFORMANCE
The recommendation in this report is made in accordance with the provisions of Council's
policy for the tendering of construction contracts, the City's General Specifications and the
specific project specifications.
I' � KI�� 1► I �1►`I 17• I�ITI�
It is recommended that Contract No. 2012 -19: Duncraggan Court Watermain Renewal, be
awarded to the low tenderer, Galbraith Construction Ltd., at the tendered price of $66,197.66
including HST as calculated based upon estimated quantities, and further, that the Mayor and
Common Clerk be authorized to execute the necessary contract documents.
o ebb, P. Eng.
Municipal Engineer
Wm. Edwards P.
Commissioner g
Transportation and Environment
pc
Brian Keenan, P. Eng.
Engineering Manager
'4
i ods CGA
City Manager
f.
Saint John
Parking Commission
Commission sur
le stationnement de Saint John
August 29, 2012
His Worship Mayor Mel Norton and
Members of Common Council
City of Saint John
Bin Floor, City Hall
Saint John, NB
Your Worship & Councillors:
11th Floor, City Hall, 11 ibme I`_tage, H6tel de Ville
P.O. Box 1971 / C.P. 1971
Saint John, N.B. /N. -B. E2L 4L1
Tel / Tel: (506) 658 -2897
Fax / Tefecopieur: (506) 649 -7938
E -mail / Courriel: parkingfsaintjohn.ca
RE: Feasibility of Text to Pay System for Payment of Parkin-g Fines
At its meeting of June 18, 2012, Common Council adopted a resolution to request that the Saint
John Parking Commission investigate the feasibility of implementing a text -to -pay system for the
payment of parking fines. Council also requested the report to be prepared within a six -week
time frame.
This letter is intended to update Common Council on the Saint John Parking Commission's
progress to date. While staff has been actively compiling information on text -to -pay technology
over the past few weeks, collection of some relevant information has been delayed due to
summer vacations of many of the various industry contacts.
Therefore, Parking Commission staff will continue to work towards gathering the required
information in order to determine the feasibility of implementing a text -to -pay system in Saint
John. A recommendation will be prepared for Council's consideration before the end of October
2012.
R
TC us
Lr Chairman
/vf
www.saintjohn.ca
-�4 �-
Saint John
Parking Commission
Commission sur
le stationnement de Saint John
August 29, 2012
His Worship Mayor Mel Norton and
Members of Common Council
City of Saint John
Bch Floor, City Hall
Saint John, NB
Your Worship & Councillors:
RE: Feasibility of Pay by Phone System for Parking Meters
11th Floor, City Hall, 11 i6me Etage, H6tel de Ville
P.O. Box 1971 / C.P. 1971
Saint John, N.B. /N. -B. E2L 4L1
Tel / T6I: (506) 658 -2897
Fax / T6I6copieur. (506) 649 -7938
E -mail / Courriel: parking @saintjohn.ca
At its meeting of June 18, 2012, Common Council adopted a resolution to request that the Saint
John Parking Commission investigate the feasibility of implementing a pay -by -phone parking
system for the payment of parking fees at parking meters and pay & display machines. Council
also requested the report to be prepared within a six -week time frame.
This letter is intended to update Common Council on the Saint John Parking Commission's
progress to date. While staff has been actively compiling information on pay -by -phone parking
technology over the past few weeks, collection of some relevant information has been delayed
due to summer vacations of many of the various industry contacts.
Therefore, Parking Commission staff will continue to work towards gathering the required
information in order to determine the feasibility of implementing a pay -by -phone parking
system in Saint John. A recommendation will be prepared for Council's consideration before the
end of October 2012.
Respecirf(y su" b fitted,
,�hristopher T. Titus
Chairman
/v`f
www.salntjohn.ca
True Growth 2.0 — Charting Our Renaissance
City of Saint John
15 Market Square
PO Box 1971
Saint John, New Brunswick
E2L 4L 1
His Worship, Mayor Norton and Members of City Council,
As the chair of the True Growth 2.0 Steering Committee, I am very pleased to provide
you with an update on the True Growth 2.0 initiative, which is still on target to meet our
end of October deadline.
To date, we have met with a number of key stakeholders, and we have been gathering
strategic plans and other critical data as input into our analysis. The feedback we have
received to date has been very positive, and we are looking forward to continued
collaboration through the remainder of the project.
We have also gained agreement from St. Martins to participate in this regional effort, and
on Tuesday, September 11, we will be speaking with the Hampton Mayor and Council in
an effort to bring that community on board as well.
We would like to bring your attention to two important dates in our process: First, on
Saturday, September 22, a public event is being coordinated in partnership with the
Urban Institute and Enterprise Saint John. This event is intended to bring citizens
together in an interactive forum and generate discussion in a number of areas, and as
such, the True Growth 2.0 team will be using this opportunity to gather feedback that we
can use to inform our process as well. In addition to this, we will be organizing a
workshop with our key stakeholders to review the first draft of our document on
Thursday, October 4. Once we gather feedback from our stakeholders, we will finalize
the document in preparation for Council review late in October.
Grand Bay - Westfield • Quispamsis • Rothesay • St. Martins • Saint John
True Growth 2.0 — Charting Our Renaissance
In the meantime, our Steering Committee members will be attending the Ward meetings
scheduled this month, to hear firsthand from citizens what they'd like to see as priorities.
Between the Ward meetings and the What's the Future Saint John event on September
22, we will have a good amount of public feedback to incorporate into our document.
You should also be aware that we are working on finalizing a date to bring all Regional
Mayors and Councillors together to get feedback from the entire group. It is critical that
we have meaningful discussion with all our Regional representatives in order to create
and adopt a growth strategy that we can all support.
I look forward to discussing this further and answering any questions you may have.
Sincerely,
Deputy Mayor Shelley Rinehart (Chair)
Cc:
Dale Knox
Neil Jacobsen
Shawn Peterson
Steve Carson
Grand Bay - Westfield • Quispamsis • Rothesay • St. Martins • Saint John
Section 10.2(4)(8)
COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE
August 31, 2012
Committee of the Whole
of Common Council of
The City of Saint John
Mayor Norton and Committee Members:
Re: Amateur MMA Events
City Solicitors Office
Bureau de Pavocat municipal
Common Council received at its meeting of July 30, 2012 correspondence
signed by Shannon Adams and Ed Hoyt "... concerning the Hoyco request
to grant an entertainment licence as the Moncton City Council in their City
for Amateur MMA [mixed martial arts] Events has done for the last two
years. Also have the Provincial Government take on regulation of the
sport." The correspondence also provided what appears to be a draft
resolution containing in part as follows:
"Therefore be it resolved that: (b) staff report back on the
necessary changes to by -laws that would minimize legal liabilities
and risk to the City from authorizing the Saint John MMA and
Boxing Commission to sanction mixed martial arts in Saint John."
The matter was
"... referred to the
City
Solicitor for
a report and
recommendation."
This correspondence
has
been prepared
as a result.
An earlier request similar in all material respects was made to Council in
the spring of 2011 and that too was referred to the City Solicitor. It
resulted in my preparing an analysis and opinion dated May 20, 2011
which was delivered to the Committee of the Whole in closed session. A
copy of that correspondence is attached as it remains in my view an
accurate treatment of the fundamental issues in play from a legal
perspective. This correspondence will not duplicate the substance of the
May 20, 2011 opinion but will briefly highlight some of the main
considerations.
fir, _
SAINT JOHN P.O. Box 1971 Saint John, NB Canada E21- 4L1 I www.saintjohn.ca I C.P. 1971 Saint John, N.-B. Canada E2L 4L1
2 1 Committee of the Whole
August 31, 2012
Section 83 of the Criminal Code of Canada is at the heart of considering
the prospect of municipalities regulating MMA events:
"Engaging in prize fight
83. (1) Every one who
(a) engages as a principal in a prize fight,
(b) advises, encourages or promotes a prize fight, or
(c) is present at a prize fight as an aid, second, surgeon,
umpire, backers or reporter,
is guilty of an offence punishable on summary conviction.
Definition of "prize fight"
(2) In this section, 'prize fight" means an encounter or fight
with fists or hands between two persons who have met for that
purpose by previous arrangement made by or for them, but a
boxing contest between amateur sportsmen, where the
contestants wear boxing gloves of not less than one hundred and
forty grams each in mass, or any boxing contest held with the
permission or under the authority of an athletic board or
commission or similar body established by or under the authority
of the legislature of a province for the control of sport within the
province, shall be deemed not to be a prize fight."
The effect of section 83 is to bring in to serious question the lawfulness of
advising, encouraging, promoting or participating in a MMA event.
Notwithstanding section 83 we understand that Moncton has enacted a
by -law entitled 'A By -Law Relating to Boxing and Wrestling in the City of
Moncton" which purports to regulate activities such as MMA events. We
have grave reservations as to the correctness of the view that a
municipality has the authority to make lawful that which is an offence
under the Criminal Code. Our view is reflective of a September, 2009
document issued by the Federal Department of Justice entitled
"Background: Modernizing Criminal Procedure ". The effect of the
Department of Justice document together with the initiative of a number of
Provincial Governments was the introduction in Parliament of a Bill to
amend section 83 by expanding the exceptions to 'prize fighting" as the
latter term is used in the Code. The Bill received first and second reading
but died with the prorogation of Parliament that year.
Since
preparing my opinion to
the Committee in May of 2011,
there has
been
a significant development
respecting possible amendment
of Section
3 I Committee of the Whole
August 31, 2012
83. The Senate on
June 22, 2012
gave Third
Reading
to Bill S -209 which
would expressly exclude from the
term "prize
fight" used in section 83 a
number
of activities
including
place
those
identified
regulation
in section
83(2)(d):
1. Subsection 83(2) of the Criminal Code is replaced by the
following:
(2) In this section, "prize fight" means an encounter or fight with
fists, hands or feet between two persons who have met for that
purpose by previous arrangement made by or for them, but does
not include
(d) a boxing contest or mixed martial arts contest held in a
province with the permission or under the authority of an athletic
board, commission or similar body established by or under the
authority of the province's legislature for the control of sport within
the province."
Speaking to the Bill on Third Reading Senator Bob Runciman, who I
understand introduced the Bill, stated:
"The bill updates the definition of prize fighting in section 83.
When the current offence of prize fighting became part of the code
in 1934, the only exemption allowed was boxing. Much has
changed since then, and that is why witnesses told our hearings
at the Standing Senate Committee on Legal and Constitutional
Affairs that this bill is necessary.
Other combative sports have flourished in the intervening
decades, particularly at the amateur level. Mixed martial arts is
North America's fastest growing professional sport, yet
technically, all of these sports, including some Olympic events,
are illegal. Bill S -209 updates the definition of "prize fight" to
include an encounter with fists, hands or feet; and it expands the
list of exemptions to the offence to include amateur combative
sports that are on the program of the International Olympic
Committee or the International Paralympic Committee, and other
amateur sports as designated or approved by the province, as
well as boxing contests and mixed martial arts contests held
under the authority of a provincial athletic board, commission or
similar body."
A copy
of Bill S -209 is attached
for reference.
If
such a Bill
were adopted
by the
Federal
Parliament that
would
place
the
regulation
of
MMA
type
4 I Committee of the Whole
August 31, 2012
activities with a body "established by or under the authority of the
province's legislature for the control of sport within the province. It would
not be a topic for regulation by municipal by -law.
My opinion remains today as
expressed
in May of
2011: the City does not
have the authority
to licence or regulate
MMA type
events.
Respectfully Submitted,
/thnSlicitor
Enclosures
Section 10.2(4)(q)
COMMITTEE -OF- THE -WHOLE
May 20th, 2011
Committee of the Whole
of Common Council of
The City of Saint John
Mayor Court and Committee Members:
Re: Proposed Athletic By -Law
City Solicitors Office
Bureau de Pavocat municipal
Common Council, having received a request that the City adopt a by -law which would
regulate mixed martial arts ( "MMA "), referred it to the City Solicitor. This has been
prepared as a result.
The first question to be answered
in considering
the prospect
of such a by -law is whether
the requisite authority has been
delegated to
municipalities.
The proponent refers to
section
11(1)(h)
of the Municipalities Act as the source of such
authority.
In our examination of this issue, we have determined that it is necessary to also consider
the provisions of An Act to Regulate Boxing and Wrestling in the City of Saint John, S.N.B.
1950; c. 116, which provides at section 1 that the Mayor, with the approval of Common
Council, may "establish a boxing and wrestling commission ... in and for the City and
nominate and appoint the members..." Section 2 provides that a Commission so
established may formulate, make and enforce such rules and regulations, and impose
penalties, "for the proper conducting, holding and operation of boxing shows and
exhibitions in the City'. We note here that the City did enact a By -Law Respecting Boxing
and Wrestling under this authority in June 1950, and set up a Commission. This by -law
was repealed on December 4, 1995, but before it was repealed, Council resolved in June
of 1987 to accept the resignation of the members of the Commission "until such time as
the Province of New Brunswick can be encouraged to set up rules and regulations
applying to boxing in New Brunswick"
Section 11(1)(h) of the Municipalities Act is relied upon by the proponents and reads as
follows:
SAINT JOHN
P.O. Box 1971 Saint John, NB Canada E2L4L1 I www.saintjohn.ca I C.P. 1971 Saint John, N. -B. Canada E2L4L7
2 1 Common Council
May 20, 2077
11(1) In addition to any other powers given by this Act,
a municipality may make by -laws for the following
purposes:
(h) regulating and licensing exhibitions of natural or
artificial curiosity, circuses, outdoor musical concerts and
other shows or exhibitions for hire or profit, and for
granting or refusing to issue any such licence or to issue
any such licence on any condition as in the discretion of
the council may be necessary; [my emphasis]
"Exhibition" is not defined in the Act. The Oxford Dictionary offers the following definition:
The act or an instance of exhibiting; the state of being
exhibited
The verb "exhibit' is defined as:
show or reveal publicly (for interest or amusement, in
competition, etc.)
Therefore, section 11(1)(h) would lead one to conclude that municipalities have the
authority to regulate MMA exhibitions for profit. There is, however, a major complication
with such a conclusion. It is that Parliament has specifically legislated regarding `prize
fights ": under section 83 of the Criminal Code of Canada (the "Code "): it is an offence to
participate in or encourage or promote a "prize fight' with limited exceptions:
83(2) In this section, prize fight' means an encounter or
fight with fists or hands between two persons who have
met for that purpose by previous arrangement made by or
for them, but a boxing contest between amateurs
sportsmen, where the contestants wear boxing gloves of
not less than one hundred and forty grams each in mass,
or any boxing contest held with the permission or under
the authority of an athletic board or commission or similar
body established by or under the authority of the
legislature of a province for the control of sport within the
province, shall be deemed not to be a prize fight.
3 1 Common Council
May 20, 2011
Three dimensions of section 83 are pertinent for our purposes. First, a prize fight means
an "encounter or fight with fists or hands'; Secondly, it is not an offence to engage in an
amateur boxing contest using the gloves prescribed, and thirdly, it is not an offense to
engage in any boxing contest held with the permission or under the authority of an athletic
board or commission or other similar body established by or under the authority of the
Legislature "for the control of sport within the province ".
Presuming that section 83 is a proper exercise of the exclusive federal jurisdiction to
legislate in the field of Criminal Law (a safe presumption given that section 83 has been in
place for over 100 years), the provisions of section 83 are paramount to those of a
provincial legislature purporting to legislate with respect to the same topic for similar
reasons.
We have consulted with the Sports and Recreation Branch of the Department of Culture,
Wellness and Sport at the Province and they have confirmed that, in this province, there is
no body such as the one contemplated under section 83. And even if there were such a
body, it would serve to legitimize only professional boxing as we traditionally know it. It
would not, in our opinion, extend to MMA.
Boxing was defined for the purpose of section 83 of the Code in a 2000 decision of the
Ontario Court of Justice in R. v. M.A.F.A. Inc., [2000] O.J. No. 899 ( "MAFA "), where
Kastner, J. reviewed several definitions of "boxing contest" to find the ordinary meaning of
the term, and concluded as follows:
]34] the dictionary definitions seem to confine "boxing" to a
sport practiced generally with fists, often gloved, and
illustrated primarily with blows above the waist.
[44] In sum, 'boxing contest' is to be given its ordinary
meaning since the ordinary meaning of the words is
consistent with the context in which the words are used
and with the object of the Act. Thus, that is the
interpretation, which should govern.
This definition clearly does not extend to MMA where feet, knees, elbows and other parts
of the body are used during the fighting.
Consequently, we're led to the conclusion that the provincial legislature cannot effectively
delegate to municipalities the power to render lawful an activity which Parliament has
determined to be a criminal offence. In other words, a by -law regulating such an activity
would at best be ineffective.
4 1 Common Council
May 20, 2011
We are aware that Moncton has a By -Law titled 'A By -Law Relating to Boxing and
Wrestling in the City of Moncton ", which purports to regulate activities such as MMA. Our
research revealed that there have been no prosecutions in Moncton for violations of
section 83 of the Code. We are told that it is the police's practice in the province that if
there is a body in place purporting to govern MMA, charges will not be laid. We have
strong reservations as to the correctness of the police's assumptions that all is lawful
provided that any body is in place purporting to have authority to regulate the activity in
question.
There have been prosecutions in Fredericton for a kick - boxing event, and there was a
successful prosecution in Saint John in 2003 (see: R. v. Jay Chang, [2003] N.B.J. No. 332)
respecting a so- called MMA event. In the latter, the Provincial Court of New Brunswick
adopted the meaning of "boxing contest" that was determined MAFA.
The Ontario legislature has created the Office of the Athletics Commissioner under the
Athletics Control Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. A -34. That office is responsible for the supervision
of professional exhibitions of various combative events including so- called MMA contests.
It has been suggested that legislative scheme rests upon the argument that the term
"boxing contest ", as used in section 83 of the Code, extends to MMA contests. We believe
such an argument is very tenuous. Our view is supported by a document issued in
September of 2009 by the federal Department of Justice entitled "Backgrounder:
Modernizing Criminal Procedure'. That publication described a proposed amendment to
section 83 of the Code which would expand the exceptions to "prize fighting ... so that
amateur combative sports such as Judo and Karate (currently on the Olympic program)
would be allowed". If the federal Department of Justice did not believe Judo or Karate fell
within the scope of "boxing contest ", it is hard to imagine how MMA events could be found
to do so.
There is a consensus on the part of all jurisdictions across the country that section 83 of
the Code is archaic. Especially since sports such as Judo and Karate, which are
recognized Olympic sports, are technically illegal in Canada by virtue of section 83 of the
Code. This would render all amateur Judo competitions in the country illegal. Yet, they
take place every year.
That, apparently, is why the Province of New Brunswick and other provinces came
together to draft and submit to Parliament an amendment to section 83 in 2009, which
would expand the list of permitted exceptions so that amateur combative sports such as
Judo and karate would be allowed. The amendment received first and second reading in
2009, and then got no further upon the government being prorogued.
Finally, should Common Council chose to adopt such a by -law, there would be a
significant liability risk, regardless of whether the entity in charge of the event carried
5 Common Council
May 20, 2011
sufficient insurance. It is entirely possible that were a claim made by the City under such
coverage, the insurer might resist on the basis of the underlying absence of authority in the
City to regulate the activity in question. However, we have not examined that matter
closely.
It is for
the provincial legislature to
decide whether to proceed
in a fashion similar to the
Ontario
scheme. If it were to do so,
any attendant risk would be
the province's to
bear.
In summary, it is our opinion that the City does not have the authority to licence and
regulate MMA -type events.
Respectfully Submitted,
John . Nugent
City Solicitor
S -209
Parliament of Canada
Sites I A to Z Index I Contact Us I Fmncais
Home I Parliameman- Business I Senators and Members I About Parliament I Visitor Information I Emnlovment
S -209 S -209
First Session, Potty -fiat Paula zaza. Presi session 0uarente d unieme I69islawre,
60 -61 Elizabeth 11, 2011 -2012 60 -61 Elizabeth lL 2011 -2012
SENATE OF CANADA
BILL S -209
An Act to amend the Criminal Code (prize fights)
AS PASSED
BYTHESENATE
JUNE 22, 2012
1128
SUMMARY
The evuehnml amends as O'm✓na/ Code by plandmg We Jot of permined nests
strider lie sines fipMinQ ryovisions.
Also waileble on the Parliament of Cat Visit Site at 0¢ fallowing addnae'
httP: /wmr.Patl.geee
I at Session. 41st Par]iement,
6061 Elizabeth 11, 2011 -2012
SENATE OF CANADA
BILL S -209
An Act to amend the Criminal Code (prize
fights)
Rs. C. C 4 Her Majesty, by and with the advice and
consent of the Senate and House of
Commons of Canada, enacts as follows:
SENAT DU CANADA
PROJET DE LOI S -209
Lei modifiant le Code criminel (combats concertos)
ADOPTA
PAR LE SENAT
LE 22 MN M12
SOhNWRE
It Ihto nbdihe le Cwfe o'Immel a0n d Assess, Is held des apoM1i pennis am
tgm6 do dialmaiteas Pound aw 1%oet Wnocris
Assesi dispersible sm Is site Web du Padvnnn du Canada d I'Wrme snieaete:
httP:'Mww.Paa.geea
1'a station, 41a Ifgultion,
60 -61 Elizabeth11,2011 -2012
SENAT DO CANADA
PROJET DE LOI S -209
Loi modifiant le Code criminel (combats
concertos)
Sa Majesty, sur Favis et avec Is '"a-eh.C46
consentement du Synat et de la Chambre des
communes du Canada, ddicte :
Page 1 of 2
Search
http:// www. parl. ge. ca/ HousePublications /Publication.aspx ?Docid- 5696980 &file =4 31/08/2012
1. Subsection 83(2) of the Criminal Code
is replaced by the following:
¢ammo ermine (2) In this section, "prim fight" means an
rew'
encounter or fight with fists, hands or feet
between two persons who have met for that
purpose by previous arrangement made by or
for them, but does not include
(a) a contest between amateur athletes in a
combative sport with fists, hands or feet
held in a province if the sport is on the
programme of the International Olympic
Committee or the International pamlympic
Committee and, in the case where the
province's lieutenant governor in council
or any other person or body specified by
him or her requires it, the contest is held
with their permission;
(b) a contest between amateur athletes in a
combative sport with fists, hands or feet
held in a province if the sport has been
designated by the province's liemeadant
governor in council or by any other person
or body specified by him or her and, in the
case where the lieutenant governor in
council or other specified person or body
requires it, the contest is held with their
permission;
(c) a contest between amateur athletes in a
combative sport with fists, hands or feet
held in a province with the permission of
the province's lieutenant governor in
council or any other person or body
specified by him or her; and
(d) a boxing contest or mixed martial arts
contest held in a province with the
permission or under the authority of an
athletic board, wmmission or similar body
established by or under the authority of the
province's legislature for the control of
sport within the province.
Published mulerauWontyofdie dma¢ of Canada
Aseilable fsoin
Publishing and Depository Services
Public Works and Govemmeru Services Canada
ome Important Notices
1. Le paragraphs 83(2) du Code criminal
est remplate par cc qui suit:
(2) An present article, o combat concert¢ n 06m��c° °yea
s'ente id d'un match on combat, avec led
poings, les mains on les pieds, entre debts
personnel qui se soot renc(ntrees a came fin
par arrangement prealable conclu par elles,
on pour elles. La presente definition exclut
toutefois:
a) le match de sport de combat, avec lea
poings, les mains on lea foods, term come
athletes amateurs dans one province, si le
sport est vise par le programme du Comite
international olympique on du Comite
international paralympique et, dans le cas
ou le lieutenant- gouvetneur en counsel de
Is province on Is personne ou l'organisme
qu'il design Pexige, si le match est tenu
avec leur permission;
b) le match de sport de combat, avec lea
poings, Its mains ou les pieds, temp entre
athletes amateurs dans one province, si le
sport est design¢ par le lieutenant -
gouvemem en cursed de Is province on
par Is personne on I'organisme qu'il
design ct, dans Is cas od 1'un on Pautre de
ceux -ci fexige, si Is match est tenu avec
lent permission;
c) le match de sport de combat, avec les
poings, les mains on les pieds, renu entre
athletes amateurs dans one province avec
Is permission du lieutenant- gouvemeur on
conseil de la province on Is personme on
1'organisme qu'il design;
et) le match de boxe on d'arts martimp:
mixtes tenu dans one province avec Is
permission on sous Pautorite d'une
commission athletique on d'un organisme
semblable etabli par Is legislature he Is
province, ou sous son motile, pour la
regie du sport dans Is province.
Public also busbowlion do seat do Canada
nispenibleauryb de:
Lot Pinions al Sw oc a de deem
rmsam publics at Services gommnernemaua Canada
Page 2 of 2
http:// www. parl. ge. ca/ HousePublications /Publication.aspx ?Docid- 5696980 &file =4 31/08/2012
i3 a
City of Saint John
Position Paper on Local Governance Reform
X111
September 2012
City of Saint John's Position Paper on Local Governance Reform 1012 1
INTRODUCTION
Ii. N
On July 30th, 2012, the City of Saint John Common Council committed to developing a position on local
governance reform, which would be shared with the City's partners, including the Government of New
Brunswick. The objective behind developing the City's position was to strengthen the current local
governance system for the benefit of the City of Saint John, municipalities, local service districts and the
Government of New Brunswick. While this position paper should articulate the City's direction on local
governance reform, we also hope it contributes to the broader pan - provincial conversation.
City of Saint John acknowledges the difficulties in reforming
Kcal governance, and is encouraged by the Government of
New Brunswick's announcement in December 2011 for an
Action Plan for a New Local Governance System in New
Brunswick. The 23 different studies to examine local
government in New Brunswick over the past 20 years are
indicative of the challenges and complexities tied to local
governance reform.' The City of Saint John believes that New
- unswick's local governance structure is well- served by
increased coordination and cooperation, and the City will use
this opportunity to expand upon long- standing relationships
with the Government of New Brunswick, municipalities
within the region, the Cities of New Brunswick Association,
the City of Moncton and City of Fredericton, as well as
municipalities and local service districts from across New
Brunswick.
The current dialogue on local governance reform in New Brunswick cannot be removed from the global
economic context as well as the financial challenges faced by all three levels of government. Similar to
the Province's Government Renewal Program, the City of Saint John has also initiated a core service
review, which mimics efforts from all governments to identify savings and new revenue streams. In
these difficult times, governments have a responsibility to cooperate in order to support a strong quality
of life for citizens. It is this quality of life indicator that must be considered in all governmental austerity
measures, including those measures that impact funding between two levels of government.
1 Finn, Jean -Guy, "Building Stronger Local Governments and Regions: An Action Plan for the Future of Local
Government in New Brunswick," November 2008, Page 6 [available at:
http: / /www.gn b.ca /cn b /prom os /flg /RS b profi les -e.a sp)
Q
August 2012 SAINT !"If'.v
City of Saint John's Position Paper on Local Governance Reform 2012
The funding and legislative tools allotted to local governs
other levels of government play a central role in support
strong quality of life for citizens. Whether it is through ro
infrastructure, clean water, wastewater, transit services,
safe neighbourhoods, crime prevention, arts and culture,
or recreational facilities, municipalities are inherently
involved in the delivery of services that impact the lives
of citizens. These services support an environment where
citizens and businesses want to invest in their
communities, continue their education, pursue careers,
and raise families.
The City of Saint John is committed to work collaboratively
all levels of government to support citizens, which is why
embedded this principle in its 20 year community goals:
2
"Our City plays a leadership role with other local, provincial and national elected officials to
address common challenges and opportunities for our community."'
Similar to what the Government of New Brunswick is experiencing, the City of Saint John has had to rely
on alternative measures to cover financial shortfalls, as costs to deliver services have increased. The
majority of Saint John's funding shortfall has been recovered by tax -rate increases, tax -base growth and
internal austerity measures. With one of the highest tax rates in the province, the City of Saint John
must now be cautious not to simply seek additional revenue through property tax, as it may result in
adversely affecting Saint John's competitiveness with other centres in the southern region, New
Brunswick, and Atlantic Canada. This signifies that the City must have the financial and legislative tools
to fulfill its service mandate in an efficient and effective manner.
PART ONE: GENERAL
A) The Government of New Brunswick should provide more clarity on the role all local governments
will have in "rebuilding a stronger, healthier, and more innovative province: i3
The discussion on local governance reform is currently focused on very specific components of
the local governance system, instead of a discussion on the larger issue of redefining or
strengthening the relationship between the Government of New Brunswick, local governments
and their respective roles and responsibilities.
2 City of Saint John, "Our Saint John," November 2007 [available at: http: / /www.saintiohn.ca /en /home /mayor-
a n d -co u n ci I /com m u n i tyvisi o n. aspx]
3 Premier David Alward, "State of the Province Address," January 2012 [available at:
http: / /www2.gn b.ca /content /gn b /en /departments /premier /promo /sop2012.htmi l
August 2012 SAINT JOHN
City of Saint John's Position Paper on Local Governance Reform 2012
B) The City of Saint John believes that the current local governance reform package should encourage
the development of strong cities in New Brunswick.
• Urban New Brunswick has played a vital role in the development of the social. economic and
cultural landscape of New Brunswick, and it has a key
the future. Cities in New Brunswick support their
neighbouring communities and indeed the continued
strength of New Brunswick. In addition, the
Province's tax revenue is inextricably tied to a
strong and vibrant urban New Brunswick. If the
Province decreases the resources available to
cities, the impact will be felt across New Brunswick.
• The City of Saint John is the industrial and
commercial hub of New Brunswick, and is proud to
house an environment ideal for studying, working,
living and investing. Reforms to New Brunswick's loca
governance system should build on the City's econom
contribution and enhance the City's ability to generat
activity.
• The City of Saint John believes that urban centres mu!
partners in the Province's growth strategy, but not at
towns, villages and local service districts. All local govt
in New Brunswick's future, and should be actively involved in its development. The City of Saint
John is interested in receiving greater direction and vision from the Province on the role urban
municipalities will play in New Brunswick's future.
3
C) We believe the development and implementation of the Province's local governance reforms will
benefit from on -going direct local government consultation.
• The Province's consultation method associated with the proposed reforms has been directed
towards umbrella municipal associations to a greater extent than it has been directed towards
local governments. More so, the Province can benefit from more fully engaging the public
administration of local governments within discussions on an on -going basis.
D) We recommend that the Government of New Brunswick clarify all aspects of the intended reform
components before implementing individual facets of the reform in an incremental fashion.
• Local governments must understand all the components of the reform package before the
Province expects municipalities to provide meaningful commentary on one particular
component. The local governance system is an integrated system, where the numerous facets of
the system rely on each other. The Province should be cautious in their implementation of
particular pieces of the reform without providing direction on all other matters. An incremental
approach to policy development is a concerning one, and as we are all striving to build a modern
August 2012 SMNT JOHN
City of Saint John's Position Paper on Local Governance Reform 2012
4
and sustainable local governance system, the City encourages the Province to reconsider its
approach to policy development.
PART TWO: FISCAL REFORM
A) Local governments are seeking increased provincial transfers truly commensurate with their service
responsibility, whether through property assessment, the unconditional grantor any future
community funding arrangement.
• Local governments across New Brunswick, including the City of Saint John, are compromised in
their ability to deliver a strong quality of life to citizens because of lack of financial resources and
legislative tools. This local governance reform process cannot result in fewer resources for local
governments, nor can it result in the creation of additional responsibilities without additional
resources, as it is our belief that such actions may have an adverse effect on the quality of life of
citizens.
• The City of Saint John actively participated in research and deliberation associated with the Finn
Report, and continues to believe that a transfer of additional tax room in lieu of the
unconditional grant is a better long -term approach.
B) The distribution of the unconditional grant must account for the services, responsibilities and the
fiscal capacity of local governments to deliver such services.
• The financial capacity of the City of Saint John is constantly challenged because of the
geographical size of the municipality, which requires a multitude of residential and industrial
services and infrastructure. In addition, the City also houses pockets of extremely dense
residential areas with ageing infrastructure, which also has a financial impact on the City's ability
to deliver strong and reliable services to citizens. Finally, with a poverty rate near 20 % of the
population, it must be recognized that residents' ability to pay is not limitless.
• As indicated in the 2007 report prepared by the Cities of New Brunswick Association, "any
changes to the provincial /municipal funding arrangement needs to adhere to the principles of
fiscal autonomy, stability, predictability, simplicity, accountability, neutrality and especially
equity and fairness.i4 More adequate funding from the Government of New Brunswick will
allow for more strategic long -term decision- making on behalf of local governments.
4 Cities of New Brunswick Association, "The Future of Provincial /Municipal Relations: A Vision for New Brunswick,"
2007, page 11.
August 2012 SAINT 1oHN
City of Saint John's Position Paper on Local Governance Reform 2012
C) In order to maintain the integrity of the property assessment system, we believe property
assessment should be uniform, market - based, and at arm's length from all governments.
• The Government of New Brunswick's intention to permanently
property assessment for seniors-' impacts not only tax revenue foi
Province, but will also impact the limited property tax revenue to la
governments. It will also introduce distortions in what should be
market -based assessment system.
PART THREE: BOUNDARY /SERVICE REFORM
A) The voting authority within regional service commissions should
represent the proportional size and contribution of local governments.
• While the City of Saint John represents approximately 60% of the
total population and property assessment of regional boundary
#9, the City has been allocated one vote in a commission of nine
voting members. Commissions should uphold the same values and
principles that all eovernment entities strive to maintain. which inrim
accountability, representation by population and democracv.
0
The introduction of regional service commissions should not compromise
existing collaboration within the region and it is our hope that the
commission builds on existing collaborative capacity.
• The City of Saint John has played a leadership role in encouraging
collaboration and the sharing of infrastructure and services with
neighbouring communities. The City of Saint John is motivated to
leverage its existing services, resources, and infrastructure as a
cost - sharing opportunity for the City and its neighbouring
communities in the delivery of services throughout the region.
C) The City of Saint John's municipal plan must not only be upheld, but also contribute to regional
plans through the regional service commission.
• The City of Saint John has undergone an award - winning process in developing a strong and
focused municipal plan. The outcome is a plan that manages the City's long -term direction, not
only for planning, but for numerous components of the City's services, infrastructure, and
operations. We believe Plan SJ should play an important role in supporting the future regional
plan for the commission.
5 Progressive Conservative Party of New Brunswick, "Putting New Brunswick First... For a Change," September
2010, page 14.
=k
August 2012 SAINT JOHN
City of Saint John's Position Paper on Local Governance Reform 2012
D) Planning across New Brunswick would benefit from simple and concise regulations and policy
statements from the Province, which would be actualized by regional
commissions and local governments all while setting a sustainabl
for New Brunswick.
In addition, the Province should strive to align its key
service boundaries (Department of Transportation,
Department of Environment and Local Government,
Economic Development) within the new regional service
commissions, in order to maintain consistency and
simplicity in government services and programming.
PART FOUR: LEGISLATIVE REFORM
A) The permissive legislative approach has been well- received by
governments in other provincial jurisdictions, and the Province is
encouraged to continue their pursuit of a permissive relationship with local governments.
Most provinces (Alberta, British Columbia, Saskatchewan, and Manitoba, among others) have
introduced permissive legislation for local governments, and the result has been positive for
provincial governments and local governments. The permissive approach is recognized as a
means to empower local governments to respond to emerging local issues in a timely and
effective manner. The permissive framework also encourages experimentation amongst and
between similar local governments to address common issues, which in turn results in a
sustainable and progressive approach to local governance.
The Government of New Brunswick should not be prevented from modernizing its legislative
relationship with local government because of the limited capacity of some local governments.
If need be, permissive legislation should be enacted for the use of those local governments that
have the capacity to utilize such authority.
CONCLUSION
The City of Saint John is encouraged by the Province's reforms, and the Province's determination in
introducing important and needed changes to New Brunswick's local governments. The City will use this
opportunity to expand upon long- standing relationships with its partners, which includes the
Government of New Brunswick. The City urges the Province to pursue a comprehensive and integrated
approach to reform that will enhance the ability of cities and all local governments to contribute to the
wealth and well -being of New Brunswick.
While the City of Saint John is energized by the Province's local governance reform package, growing
urbanization of the New Brunswick population and economy coupled with infrastructure challenges
necessitates a renewed fiscal relationship that strengthens local governments, and subsequently, New
� P.-
August 2012 SAINT JOHN
City of Saint John's Positron Paper on Local Governance Reform 2012
Brunswick. This new funding arrangement is needed to deliver the infrastructure and services for
economic growth and improved quality of life for citizens. The City of Saint John hopes this position
paper contributes to the pan - provincial discussion on local governance reform, and we look forward to
continuing the conversation.
For more information, please connect with:
The City of Saint John
P.O. Box 1971
Saint John, New Brunswick E2L 4L1
Email: Phil.ouellette @saintiohn.ca
Phone: 506- 658 -4022
7
August 2012 SAINT JOHN
fulty of Saint John
Expose" de position spar fa re"forme
ww.If
de !a gouvernance locale
Septembre 2012
Expose de position de la City of Saint John sur la reforme de la gouvernance locale de 2012 1
INTRODUCTION
Le 30 juillet 2012, le Conseil municipal de Saint John s'est engage a formuler une position au sujet de la
reforme de gouvernance locale. Cette position sera portee a la connaissance des partenaires de la Ville,
dont le gouvernement du Nouveau - Brunswick. La formulation de la position de la Ville avait pour
objectif de renforcer I'actuel systeme de gouvernance locale, et ce, au profit de la City of Saint John, des
municipalites, des districts de services locaux et du gouvernement du Nouveau - Brunswick. Bien que le
present expose de position soit axe principalement sur ('orientation de la Ville concernant la reforme de
gouvernance locale, nous esperons qu'il contribuera a alimenter le debat a 1'echelle provinciale.
Ville de Saint John reconnalt les difficultes que comporte la reforme de
; ouvernance locale et est encouragee par 1'annonce faite par le
gouvernement du Nouveau - Brunswick, en decembre 2011, du
lancement d'un Plan d'action pour un nouveau systeme de gouvernance
locale au Nouveau - Brunswick. Les 23 etudes differentes qui se sont
penchees sur I'administration locale au Nouveau - Brunswick au tours
des 20 dernieres annees decrivent les defis et les complexites que
comporte la reforme de gouvernance locale.' La Ville de Saint John est
1'avis que la structure de gouvernance locale du Nouveau - Brunswick
3rofiterait dune coordination et dune cooperation accrues, et la Ville
saisira cette occasion pour renforcer les relations qu'elle entretient de
longue date avec le gouvernement du Nouveau- Brunswick, les
municipalites de la region, I'Association des villes du Nouveau -
Brunswick, is Ville de Moncton, la Ville de Fredericton ainsi que les
nunicipalites et les districts de services locaux des quatre coins du
Nouveau- Brunswick.
Le dialogue actuel sur la reforme de gouvernance locale au Nouveau - Brunswick ne peut titre dissocie du
contexte economique mondial et des defis financiers auxquels font face les trois ordres de
gouvernement. Dans une demarche semblable a Celle du programme provincial de Renouvellement du
gouvernement, la Ville de Saint John a entame un examen des services de base calque sur les efforts
deployes par tous les gouvernements pour realiser des economies et trouver de nouvelles sources de
revenu. En ces temps difficiles, it incombe aux administrations publiques de travailler de concert afin de
soutenir une qualite de vie solide pour les citoyens. C'est cet indicateur, la qualite de vie, qui doit titre
pris en compte clans la mise en eeuvre de toutes les mesures d'austerite gouvernementales, y compris
les mesures qui influent sur le financement qui se fait entre les deux paliers de gouvernement.
' Finn, Jean -Guy, a Batir des gouvernements locaux et des regions viables : plan d'action pour I'avenir de la
gouvernance locale au Nouveau - Brunswick », Novembre 2008, page 8 [accessible a I'adresse
http://www.gnb.ca/cnb/promos/flg/RSDprofiles-e.asp]
Q�
Ao6t 2012 SAINT JOHN
Expose de position de la City of Saint John sur la reforme de la gouvernance locale de 2012 2
Les outils de financement et les autres outils legislatifs accordes aux gouvernements locaux par d'autres
niveaux de gouvernement jouent un role central clans le soutien dune solide qualite de vie pour les
citoyens. Que ce soit par 1'entremise des infrastructures ro
I'acces a I'eau potable, du traitement des eaux usees, des servi
transport en commun, de la securite clans les quartiers, de
prevention du crime, de la promotion des arts et de is culture of
des installations recreatives, les municipalites participent a la
prestations de services qui ont une incidence sur la vie des
citoyens. Ces services soutiennent un environnement dans
lequel les citoyens et les entreprises veulent investir,
poursuivre leurs etudes, faire carriere et elever une famille.
La City of Saint John est determinee a travailler de concert aver
tous les paliers de gouvernement afin de soutenir les citoyens, e
c'est pourquoi elle a inscrit le principe suivant parmi ses objei
communautaires sur 20 ans :
Notre ville joue un role de leadership aupres d'autres representants elus a 1'echelle locale,
provinciale et nationale afin de relever des defis communs et d'offrir des possibilites au sein de
notre collectivite. » Z
D'une maniere semblable a ce que fait le gouvernement du Nouveau - Brunswick, la City of Saint John
doit s'appuyer sur des mesures de rechange pour compenser une insuffisance de moyens financiers,
etant donne que les couts relatifs a la prestation des services ont augmente. La majeure partie du
manque de financement de la City of Saint John a ete couverte par des hausses des taux d'imposition,
par la croissance de I'assiette fiscale et par des mesures d'austerite internes. Ayant un des taux
d'imposition les plus eleves de la province, la City of Saint John doit maintenant faire preuve de
prudence et ne pas simplement chercher des revenus supplementaires par 1'entremise de l'impot
foncier, car cela peut avoir un effet negatif sur la competitivite de Saint John par rapport a d'autres
centres du sud de Nouveau - Brunswick, des autres regions de la province et du Canada atlantique. Cela
veut dire que la Ville doit disposer des outils financiers et legislatifs necessaires pour s'acquitter de fagon
efficiente et efficace de son mandat en matiere de prestation de services.
2 City of Saint John, « Notre Saint John u, novembre 2007 [accessible A I'adresse :
[http: / /www.saintjoh n.ca /fr /accuei I /ma1rieconsei I mu nicipal /enoncedevision.aspx]
AoOt 2012 SAINT IOHN
Expose de position de la City of Saint John:ur la reforme de la gouvernance locale de .2012 3
PARTIE UN : GENERALITES
A) Le gouvernement du Nouveau - Brunswick devrait apporter des eclaircissements concernant le role
clu'auront toutes les municipalites en vue de a rebgtir une province plus forte, plus en sant6 et plus
innovatrice 3).3
• La discussion sur la reforme de gouvernance locale est centree actuellement sur des
composantes tres precises du systeme de gouvernance locale au lieu de porter sur la question
plus large de la redefinition ou du renforcement de la relation entre le gouvernement du
Nouveau- Brunswick et les gouvernements locaux, et sur les roles et responsabilites de ceux -ci et
du gouvernement.
8) La City of Saint John est d'avis que l'actuel train de mesures pour la reforme de gouvernance locale
devrait encourager le developpement de villes fortes au Nouveau - Brunswick.
• Le Nouveau - Brunswick urbain joue un role vital dans le developpement du paysage social,
economique et culturel de la province, et un role cle pour I'avenir. Les villes du Nouveau-
Brunswick soutiennent les collectivites voisines at assure ^* im
continuite de la vigueur de la province. En outre, les rece
fiscales de la province sont inextricablement liees a un
Nouveau - Brunswick urbain solide et dynamique. Si le
gouvernement provincial reduit les ressources
accessibles aux villes, I'impact se fera sentir partout
dans la province.
R La City of Saint John est le centre industriel et
commercial du Nouveau - Brunswick, et elle est fiere
d'off rir un environnement ideal pour etudier, travailler,
resider et investir. La reforme du systeme municipal du
Nouveau - Brunswick devrait s'appuyer sur la contribution
Saint John a 1'economie de la province et ameliorer la cal
de la ville a generer de I'activite economique.
• La City of Saint John estime que les centres urbains doive
partenaires actifs dans la strategie de croissance du gouv
provincial, mais non aux depens des petites villes, des vill
districts de services locaux. Toutes les gouvernements lo(
role dans I'avenir du Nouveau - Brunswick et devraient paruciper aciivement au
3 Premier ministre David Alward, (( Discours sur I'etat de la province 2012)), janvier 2012 [accessible a I'adresse
http: / /ww2.gnb.ca/ content /gnb /fr /ministeres /premier mini stre /promo /sop2012.htmlj
Association des villes du Nouveau - Brunswick, (( The Future of Provincial /Municipal Relations: A Vision for New
Brunswick )), 2007, page 11.
AoQt 2012 SAINT IOTA N
Expose de position de la City of Saint John sur to reforme de la gouvernance locale de 2012 4
developpement de la province. La City of Saint John souhaite recevoir davantage d'orientation
et de vision de la part du gouvernement provincial concernant le role que joueront les
municipalites urbaines dans l'avenir du Nouveau- Brunswick.
C) Nous croyons que I'elaboration et la wise en oeuvre de la reforme de gouvernance locale du
gouvernement du Nouveau - Brunswick profiteront d'une consultation directe et continue des
gouvernements locaux.
La methode de consultation du gouvernement provincial pour les reformes proposees est
orientee davantage vers les associations municipales faitieres que vers les gouvernements
locaux. Or, le gouvernement provincial peut profiter d'une plus grande participation des
gouvernements locaux a des discussions menees de fagon continue.
D) Nous recommandons que le gouvernement du Nouveau - Brunswick clarifie tous les aspects des
composantes de la reforme preuue, avant de mettre en oeuvre des elements de celle -ci d'une maniere
progressive.
Les gouvernements locaux doivent comprendre toutes les composantes de la reforme avant que
le gouvernement provincial puisse s'attendre a ce qu'elles formulent des commentaires valables
sur une composante precise. Le systeme de gouvernance locale est un systeme integre dont les
nombreuses facettes sont interdependantes. Le gouvernement provincial devrait faire preuve
de prudence clans la mise en oeuvre de certains elements de la reforme sans la communication
d'une orientation concernant tous les autres aspects. Une approche progressive pour
I'elaboration de politiques est une source de preoccupation, et etant donne que nous nous
efforgons tous de batir un systeme de gouvernance locale moderne et durable, la Ville invite le
gouvernement provincial a revoir son approche en la matiere.
PARTIE DEUX : REFORME FISCALE
A) Les gouvernements locaux demandent des transferts provinciaux qui correspondent vraiment a
leurs responsabilites en matiere de services, que ce soit par 1'entremise de I'evaluation fonciere, de la
subvention inconditionnelle ou de tout autre arrangement futur pour le financement des collectivites.
• Des gouvernements locaux des quatre coins du Nouveau- Brunswick, dont la Ville de Saint John,
ont du mal a off rir une solide qualite de vie a leurs citoyens en raison du manque de ressources
financieres et d'outils legislatifs. Le processus de reforme de gouvernance locale ne peut aboutir
A une reduction des ressources dont disposent les gouvernements locaux, ni a la creation de
responsabilites supplementaires sans I'apport de ressources additionnelles, car nous estimons
que de telles mesures pourraient avoir un effet negatif sur la qualite de vie des citoyens.
• La Ville de Saint John participe activement a la recherche et aux deliberations liees au Rapport
Finn, et elle continue de croire qu'un transfert d'espace fiscal additionnel en lieu et place de la
subvention inconditionnelle conttiue une meilleure approche a long terme.
Aout 2012 PANT JOHN
Expose de position de la City of Saint John sur /a reforme de la gouvernance locale de :2012 5
B) La repartition de la subvention inconditionnelle doit tenir compte des services et des
responsabilites des gouvernements locaux ainsi que de la capacite financiere de celles -ci a assurer la
prestation de ces services.
La capacite financiere de la City of Saint John est constamment mise a 1'epreuve en raison de la
taille geographique de la municipalite, qui exige une multitude dP �;.
residentiels et commerciaux, et d'infrastructures. En outre,
municipalite comprend des zones residentielles tres denses dont le
infrastructures sont vieillissantes, ce qui influe egalement sur la
capacite financiere de la Ville a off rir aux citoyens des services de
qualite et fiables. Enfin, avec un taux de pauvrete proche de
20 p. 100 de la population, it faut reconnaitre que la capacite de
payer des residents nest pas illimitee.
• Comme on le mentionne clans le rapport de 2007 produit par
I'Association des villes du Nouveau- Brunswick, [Traduction] « toui
modification apportee A ('arrangement de financement provinci
municipal doit respecter les principes d'autonomie financiere, i
stabilite, de previsibilite, de simplicite, de responsabilite, de neutral
et, tout particulierement, d'equite )>,4 Un financement plus adequa
municipalites par le gouvernement du Nouveau - Brunswick perme...,.
prise de decisions a long terme plus strategique au nom des gouvernements locaux.
Q Afin de maintenir I'integrite du systeme devaluation fonciere, nous croyons que cette evaluation
devrait titre uniforme et fondee sur le marche, et qu'elle devrait se faire dune maniere independante
de tous les paliers de gouvernement.
_- L'intention du gouvernement du Nouveau - Brunswick de geler de fat on permanente 1'evaluation
fonciere clans le cas des aines5 a une incidence non seulement sur les recettes fiscales du
gouvernement provincial, mais egalement sur les recettes limitees des gouvernements locaux
qui proviennent de is taxe fonciere. Ce gel introduira egalement des distorsions clans ce qui
devrait We un systeme devaluation fonde sur le marche.
PARTIE TROTS: REFORME DES DELIMITATIONS
TERRITORIALES ET DES SERVICES
A) Le droit de vote au sein des commissions de services regionaux devrait representer la faille et la
contribution proportion nel les des gouvernements locaux.
4 Association des villes du Nouveau - Brunswick, « The Future of Provincial /Municipal Relations: A Vision for New
Brunswick », 2007, page 11.
5 Le Parti progressiste - conservateur du Nouveau- Brunswick, « Le Nouveau - Brunswick d'abord... pour un
changement », septembre 2010, page 16.
!
AoOt 2012 SAINT JOHN
Expose de position de la City of Saint John sur la reforme de la gouvernance locale de 2012
Alors que la City of Saint John represente environ 60 p. 100 du total de la population et de
1'evaluation fonciere de la delimitation regionale n °9, la Ville a droit a une seule voix au sein
dune commission composee de neuf membres votants. Les commissions devraient respecter
les memes valeurs et les m6mes principes que toutes les entites gouvernementales s'efforcent
de respecter, et qui incluent la responsabilite, la representativite d'apres la population et la
democratie.
6
itroduction de commissions de services regionaux ne devralt pas
impromettre la collaboration qui existe au sein de la region, et nous
esperons que la commission renforcera la capacite de collaboration qui est
en place.
• La City of Saint John joue un role de chef de file clans
1'encouragement de la collaboration et du partage
d'infrastructures et de services avec les collectivites voisines. Elle
est motivee a mettre a contribution ses ressources, ses
infrastructures et ses services existants comme possibilite de partage
des couts, pour elle et pour les collectivites voisines, clans la prestation
ue services a I'echelle de la region.
C) Le plan municipal de la City of Saint John doit non seulement etre maintenu, mail it doit egalement
contribuer a la mise en oeuvre de plans regionaux par 1'entremise de la commission de services
regionaux.
• La City of Saint John a mis en oeuvre un processus prime clans ['elaboration d'un plan municipal
solide et cible. Le resultat est un plan qui gere ('orientation a
long terme de la Ville, non seulement en matiere de
planification, mais egalement pour de nombreuses
composantes des services, des infrastructures et des
activites de la Ville. Nous croyons que le Plan Si
devralt jouer un role important dans le soutien au
plan regional pour la commission.
4W
D) La planification aux quatre coins du Nouveau- t,=
Brunswick beneficierait de I'etablissement de reglements = ;
et d enonces de politiques simples et succincts de la
province, qui seraient concretises par les commissions a
I'echelle regionale et les gouvernements locaux, tout en tra ;ant
une voie durable pour le Nouveau- Brunswick.
En outre, le gouvernement provincial devrait s'efforcer d'harmoniser les delimitations de ses
principaux services (ministere des Transports, ministere de I'Environnement et des
Gouvernements locaux, et ministere du Developpement economique) au sein des nouvelles
t.
pout 2012 SAINT JOHN
Exposd de position de la City of Saint John sur la rdforme de la gouvernance locale de 2012 7
commissions de services regionaux, afin de maintenir l'uniformite et la simplicite clans les
services et les programmes gouvernementaux.
PARTI E 4: REFORME LEGISLATIVE
A) L'approche legislative permissive est bien accueillie par les gouvernements locaux dans d'autres
provinces, et le gouvernement du Nouveau - Brunswick est encourage a continuer I'etablissement
d'une relation permissive avec les gouvernements locaux.
• La plupart des provinces (Alberta, Colombie- Britannique, Saskatchewan et Manitoba, entre
autres) ont introduit une legislation permissive pour les gouvernements locaux, et le resultat a
ete positif tant pour les gouvernements provinciaux que pour les gouvernements locaux.
L'approche permissive est reconnue comme un moyen d'habiliter les gouvernements locaux
pour reagir promptement et efficacement face A des enjeux locaux emergents. Le cadre
permissif encourage egalement 1'experimentation entre gouvernements provinciaux similaires,
et au sein de ceux -ci, afin de resoudre des problemes communs, et cela se traduit par I'adoption
d'une approche durable et progressiste en matiere de gouvernance locale.
• On ne devrait pas empecher le gouvernement du Nouveau - Brunswick de moderniser sa relation
avec les gouvernements locaux en matiere legislative au motif de la capacite limitee de certains
des gouvernements locaux. Au besoin, on devrait promulguer une legislation permissive a
('intention des gouvernements locaux qui ont la capacite d'utiliser ce type de pouvoir.
CONCLUSION
La Ville de Saint John est encouragee par les reformes entreprises par le gouvernement du Nouveau -
Brunswick ainsi que par la determination dont fait preuve celui -ci clans ('introduction des changements
dont ont besoin les gouvernements locaux de la province. La Ville profitera de cette occasion pour
elargir les relations de longue date qu'elle entretient avec ses partenaires, qui incluent le gouvernement
du Nouveau- Brunswick. La Ville demande avec instance au gouvernement provincial de poursuivre une
approche exhaustive et integree pour mettre en oeuvre les reformes et ameliorer la capacite des villes et
de tous les gouvernements locaux a contribuer A la prosperite et au bien -titre du Nouveau - Brunswick.
Bien que la Ville de Saint John soit dynamisee par le train de mesures de la reforme de gouvernance
locale entreprise par la province, ('urbanisation croissante de la population et de I'economie du
Nouveau - Brunswick ainsi que les defis en matiere d'infrastructures requierent une relation fiscale
renouvelee qui renforce les gouvernements locaux et, par ricochet, 1'ensemble de la province. Ce nouvel
arrangement de financement est necessaire pour mettre en place les infrastructures et les services dont
on a besoin pour assurer la croissance economique et I'amelioration de la qualite de vie des citoyens. La
Ville de Saint John espere que le present expose de position alimentera la discussion sur la reforme de
gouvernance locale A 1'echelle de la province. Nous nous rejouissons de pouvoir poursuivre le dialogue.
�R
Ao0t 2012 SAINT JOHN
Exposd de position de /a City of Saint John sur la r6forme de la gouvemance locale de 2012 8
Pour obtenir de plus amples renseignements, veuillez communiquer avec
The City of Saint John
Case postale 1971
Saint John (Nouveau- Brunswick) E2L 4L1
Adresse dlectronique : ahil.ouellette @saintiohn.ca
Numero de telephone: 506 -658 -4022
�p
Aout 2012 SAINT IoHN