Government at all levels should strive to increase efficiencies while reducing as much as possible the cost burden on taxpayers to ensure the best proverbial bang per buck.
Calgary — a large city spanning more than 800 square kilometres with a population of more than one million people — is run by one council and its administrative staff.
Meanwhile, throughout the province, counties and municipal districts with populations in the mere thousands have multiple councils and administrative bodies — and the significant costs that come associated with them.
Granted, rural regions like Mountain View County cover a much greater area than Calgary or Edmonton — almost 3,800 square kilometres in this case — but the overall population represented is but a tiny fraction compared to the major metropolitan centres.
The City of Calgary's council consists of 15 members, including the mayor.
So more than one million people are represented by barely more than a dozen elected officials.
But in counties and municipal districts, there are often numerous councils and corresponding administration staff. Villages with populations in the hundreds have their own councils, some of which are largely formed by acclamation from lack of candidates.
So perhaps amalgamating rural districts under the umbrella of one regional council would make more sense. For example, a county like Mountain View could instead of having numerous councils have just one group of elected officials with representation from each municipality in the region.
In this fictitious thought experiment, the regional council would have elected officials representing voters from Sundre, Olds, Didsbury, Carstairs, Cremona and of course the rural areas as well.
In the long run, such a cost-saving measure would conserve millions of tax dollars that could instead be earmarked for desperately needed projects like roads, underground services as well as new public facilities such as sportsplexes.
During a time when municipalities throughout the country face massive infrastructure deficits, every potential option will have to be considered long and hard.
To continue forward with a system as we have always done without giving serious thought to revisions and coming up with improvements is short-sighted and frankly unsustainable.
Voters unquestionably have every right to want local representation that keeps in mind their local interests as well as concerns.
However, what Albertans have to ask themselves is what cost they're willing to pay for such specialized micromanaging representation, and how much they would rather have quality infrastructure and public institutions.
The provincial government has not yet completed its review of the Municipal Government Act, so such a drastic change is not about to happen, nor is it even on the table for official consideration for that matter.
Regardless, amalgamation remains valid food for thought as we look to the future.
— Simon Ducatel, editor
