Post by Max on Nov 30, 2007 13:05:49 GMT -3
Posted By Denis St. Pierre
Posted 2 hours ago
City of Greater Sudbury officials question the accuracy of a Conservative think tank report that ranks the municipality poorly in terms of effective use of tax dollars.
"We quickly analyzed it and it appears they weren't comparing apples to apples; it was apples to oranges," Greater Sudbury's chief administrator Mark Mieto said of the report by the Frontier Centre for Public Policy.
Winnipeg-based Frontier Centre bills itself as an independent public policy think tank. Critics have characterized it as ultra right wing with a neo-conservative agenda that includes privatization of health care and other services, as well as opposition to mainstream positions on issues such as global warming.
Frontier Centre has released a Local Government Performance Index report comparing Canada's 30 largest municipalities, including Greater Sudbury as the 29th-largest city in the country. The Frontier Centre report assessed municipal performance indicators such as revenue sources, how those revenues are spent, long-term debt and public reporting standards.
Greater Sudbury did not fare well in the report, which analyzed 2005 municipal statistics.
"Based on the findings taken from the ... 2005 data set, the citizens of Sudbury lose most ways," the report concludes.
"Sudbury, even allowing for its limits of scale, lower local economic performance and its limited financial means, provides expensive council services, many of which appear to be of a non-core nature."
Greater Sudbury also collects more revenue from its citizens and its staffing complement is above average, the report states.
On the plus side, Greater Sudbury is "in a strong financial position," has much lower debt than most other municipalities and "the quality of operational expenditures is noteworthy," the report adds.
While city officials could be expected to differ with the report's negative conclusions, it would appear that the study does have some obvious flaws.
For example, it appears to penalize Ontario cities, such as Greater Sudbury, for taking money away from "core" programs and services and spending it on "non-core" activities.
But several of those so-called non-core activities, also characterized as "niceties" in the Frontier Centre report, must be provided by Ontario municipalities under provincial legislation, Mieto noted.
The Frontier Centre report also appears to fail to make a distinction between single-tier municipalities such as Greater Sudbury and two-tier regional governments, Mieto said.
Mississauga, for example, received a better rating than Sudbury, he noted. But Mississauga is a lower-tier municipality and is part of Peel and it is the upper-tier regional government that provides many expensive services, Mieto noted.
Posted 2 hours ago
City of Greater Sudbury officials question the accuracy of a Conservative think tank report that ranks the municipality poorly in terms of effective use of tax dollars.
"We quickly analyzed it and it appears they weren't comparing apples to apples; it was apples to oranges," Greater Sudbury's chief administrator Mark Mieto said of the report by the Frontier Centre for Public Policy.
Winnipeg-based Frontier Centre bills itself as an independent public policy think tank. Critics have characterized it as ultra right wing with a neo-conservative agenda that includes privatization of health care and other services, as well as opposition to mainstream positions on issues such as global warming.
Frontier Centre has released a Local Government Performance Index report comparing Canada's 30 largest municipalities, including Greater Sudbury as the 29th-largest city in the country. The Frontier Centre report assessed municipal performance indicators such as revenue sources, how those revenues are spent, long-term debt and public reporting standards.
Greater Sudbury did not fare well in the report, which analyzed 2005 municipal statistics.
"Based on the findings taken from the ... 2005 data set, the citizens of Sudbury lose most ways," the report concludes.
"Sudbury, even allowing for its limits of scale, lower local economic performance and its limited financial means, provides expensive council services, many of which appear to be of a non-core nature."
Greater Sudbury also collects more revenue from its citizens and its staffing complement is above average, the report states.
On the plus side, Greater Sudbury is "in a strong financial position," has much lower debt than most other municipalities and "the quality of operational expenditures is noteworthy," the report adds.
While city officials could be expected to differ with the report's negative conclusions, it would appear that the study does have some obvious flaws.
For example, it appears to penalize Ontario cities, such as Greater Sudbury, for taking money away from "core" programs and services and spending it on "non-core" activities.
But several of those so-called non-core activities, also characterized as "niceties" in the Frontier Centre report, must be provided by Ontario municipalities under provincial legislation, Mieto noted.
The Frontier Centre report also appears to fail to make a distinction between single-tier municipalities such as Greater Sudbury and two-tier regional governments, Mieto said.
Mississauga, for example, received a better rating than Sudbury, he noted. But Mississauga is a lower-tier municipality and is part of Peel and it is the upper-tier regional government that provides many expensive services, Mieto noted.