Community Articles
Go to Site Index See "Community Articles" main page
General News · 27th November 2011
Wendy Legare
THE LAND USE PLANNING FUNCTION
ELECTORAL AREA SERVICES COMMITTEE
SERVICE COST ALLOCATION

From the MINUTES of the Meeting of the EASC held on Wednesday Sept.07,2011.

Part 26 (Planning & Land Use Management) Service Cost Allocation Review

Leigh/Whalley: EASC 120/11
THAT the report from the Chief Administrative Officer be received. [Item]
PART 26 (PLANNING & LAND USE MANAGEMENT) COST SHARING
PURPOSE/PROBLEM -To consider an alternative cost sharing formula for special project work undertaken pursuant to Part 26 (Planning and Land Use Management) of the Local Government Act.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

At its July 29, 2010 meeting the Regional Board passed the following resolution:
Whalley/Abram: SRD 422/10 .

THAT a staff report be prepared on the matter of an informal review of the service for the land-use planning function of the electoral areas with particular reference to the cost allocation formula amongst the electoral areas.

Subsequent discussions at the Electoral Areas Services Committee have confirmed that the scope of the analysis should be limited to investigating the impact of special project costs being charged to the electoral area within which the project is being undertaken. Special projects are understood to include the development or comprehensive review of official community plans and zoning bylaws, neighbourhood plans, agricultural plans and sustainability plans where these are applicable to a single electoral area. The day to day work of evaluating applications for rezoning, subdivision approval, development permits and similar matters would continue to be funded according to the current cost sharing formula.
The attached Exhibit 1 provides a quantitative analysis of financial impacts to each of the current service participants which would result if the proposed cost sharing formula had been in place since 2009. Analysis beyond 2012 is not possible at this time because the special projects included in the financial plan have not yet been aligned to specific electoral areas. It is also worthwhile noting that the costs of staff involvement in the projects shown have not been included in the analysis since they are not recorded on a regular basis nor has the Committee indicated that it wishes to include such costs.
If the Strathcona Regional District decides to transition to a different cost sharing formula it will be necessary to consider a service bylaw which articulates in more precise form the methods by which shareable and non-shareable costs will be determined.

RECOMMENDATIONS
THAT the report from the Chief Administrative Officer be received. CARRIED.
-------------------
Whalley/Leigh: EASC 121/11

THAT the Committee recommend that a bylaw be prepared for further consideration which establishes a cost sharing formula for the land-use planning function of the electoral areas whereby special project costs shall be charged to the electoral area within which the project is being undertaken. Special projects are understood to include the development or comprehensive review of official community plans and zoning bylaws, neighbourhood plans, agricultural plans and sustainability plans where these are applicable to a single electoral area; and furthermore,
THAT the day to day work of evaluating applications for rezoning, subdivision approval, development permits and similar matters would continue to be funded according to the current cost sharing formula; and finally,THAT it articulates the methods by which shareable and non-shareable costs will be determined. CARRIED (Sept.07, 2011)

ps - Currently every Regional District taxpayer in each of the four Electoral Areas pays the same mil rate, based on property values, for the entire Electoral Areas Planning Service. This includes the costs incurred by any Electoral Area: Discovery Islands - Mainland Inlets, Oyster Bay-Buttle Lake, Kyuquot/Nootka- Sayward, Cortes Island.
What are some of the reasons for the proposal? - the expenses of special projects that are unique to one area only, and that benefit one area only, should be paid by that area only. This is fair to the residents of other areas who have no benefit from these services. Also, it would hopefully restrain the exhorbitant spending that the current situation strongly encourages.

http://srdws.strathconard.ca/Agenda_minutes/SRDCommittees/EAS/12-Oct-11/20110907-EASC-Minutes.pdf