Research November 2011 Shachi Kurl, Director of Provincial Affairs, British Columbia & Yukon Madeleine Delli-Benedetti, Research Analyst Intern Queenie Wong, Senior Research Analyst Figure 1.1 BC Municipal Operating Spending Growth (Adjusted for Inflation) and Population Growth, 2000- 2009 50% Population 45% Growth 46% 40% 35% Operating 30% Spending Growth 25% (Adjusted for Inflation) 20% 15% 12% 10% 5% 0% 2000 2003 2006 2009 www.cfib.ca BC Municipal Spending Watch 2 Section One: Introduction Section Two: Methodology This section will outline CFIB’s approach to analyzing municipal spending. Section Three: Municipal Revenue Trends This section provides a breakdown and overview of major revenue sources. Section Four: Municipal Spending Trends This section will look at municipal spending by geographic region. Operating spending levels and operating spending growth will be analyzed. Section Five: Basis for Spending Comparison This section will address the feedback received from municipal associations concerning previous reports. Section Six: Conclusions Section Seven: Recommendations 1 Leahy, Doug. City of Penticton. 2011. City of Penticton 2009 to 2012 Financial Plans. BC Municipal Spending Watch 3 Table 1.1 How BC’s Largest Municipalities Spend (population 25,000 and above) Listed from Worst to Least Worst* 2000-2009 2000-2009 Real 2000-2009 2000-2009** Real Operating Operating 2009 Operating Municipality Population Savings for Spending Spending per Spending per Growth (%) Family of 4 ($) Growth (%) Capita Growth Capita ($) (%) Penticton 5 66 59 2,326 11,339 West Vancouver 2 45 42 1,850 8,596 Langford 38 160 88 842 9,311 Kelowna 22 76 45 1,552 7,019 Victoria 8 40 30 1,789 6,141 Langley -District 15 85 61 1,144 4,364 North Vancouver -City 7 54 44 1,466 7,761 North Vancouver -District 1 49 48 1,380 7,881 Prince George -3 27 31 1,516 5,739 Abbotsford 13 70 50 1,089 3,226 Vernon 14 70 49 1,097 4,997 Vancouver 11 39 25 1,586 4,787 Chilliwack 18 81 53 939 4,725 Delta -1 25 26 1,448 3,910 New Westminster 13 27 12 1,697 1,665 Richmond 13 47 30 1,302 4,298 Maple Ridge 16 68 44 1,014 5,322 Kamloops 8 34 25 1,342 3,627 Coquitlam 5 40 33 1,146 3,981 Port Moody 34 67 25 1,255 3,656 North Cowichan 9 51 38 983 3,022 Langley - City 3 33 29 1,095 3,621 Saanich 5 37 30 1,057 3,309 Burnaby 12 38 24 1,171 2,584 Surrey 25 73 39 856 3,079 Port Coquitlam 7 38 29 1,036 5,120 Nanaimo 13 35 20 1,215 1,664 Campbell River 7 25 17 1,165 3,507 Mission 15 33 15 1,054 1,148 *The rankings are based on an equal weighting of 2000-2009 operating spending growth and 2009 operating spending levels. This is different from previous reports that mainly considered operating spending growth. Overall rankings are available in Appendix III and IV. **To calculate the total savings over the time period 2000-2009, it is assumed that the municipality held operating spending to population and inflation growth. BC Municipal Spending Watch 4 Table 1.2 BC’s Freest Spending Municipalities – The 30 Worst Listed from Worst to Least Worst* 2000-2009 Real 2000-2009 Real 2000-2009 2000-2009** Operating Operating 2009 Operating Municipality Population Savings for Spending Spending per Spending per Growth (%) Family of 4 ($) Growth (%) Capita Growth Capita ($) (%) Lytton -29 85 161 4,826 42,175 Whistler 11 86 68 6,306 36,663 Stewart -27 31 79 4,083 11,122 Sooke 15 297 246 702 8,909 Fort Nelson (Northern Rockies RM) 28 185 122 3,126 17,341 Port Edward -18 51 84 3,479 46,269 Fort St. James -35 36 109 2,629 26,734 Zeballos -31 8 57 3,585 16,024 Fraser Lake -14 82 110 2,389 10,790 Mackenzie -32 29 89 2,661 20,383 Valemount -15 56 83 2,440 9,986 Wells 7 64 53 2,996 19,974 Lions Bay -5 124 135 1,280 10,971 McBride -7 70 82 2,221 19,364 Chetwynd -6 66 75 2,330 16,760 Sayward -15 30 53 2,739 8,310 Masset -7 25 33 3,062 26,593 Granisle 4 48 42 2,802 14,244 Penticton 5 66 59 2,326 11,339 Tahsis -43 -38 8 3,223 8,910 Dawson Creek 6 52 43 2,459 12,947 Ucluelet -2 50 53 2,264 16,350 Kimberley 2 63 60 2,077 13,776 Tofino 24 100 61 2,039 14,647 Hudson's Hope 1 33 33 2,510 15,989 Port Clements -11 48 66 1,815 8,605 Lillooet -16 54 83 1,428 8,449 Osoyoos 20 118 81 1,442 6,123 Golden -2 75 79 1,466 9,196 Clinton -5 49 57 1,884 9,511 *The rankings are based on an equal weighting of 2000-2009 operating spending growth and 2009 operating spending levels. This is different from previous reports that mainly considered operating spending growth. Overall rankings are available in Appendix III and IV. **To calculate the total savings over the time period 2000-2009, it is assumed that the municipality held operating spending to population and inflation growth. BC Municipal Spending Watch 5 2 A standardized index is created for each indicator (between 0 and 100). A municipality with the highest real operating spending per capita growth is given a score of 0 while the municipality with the lowest 2000-2009 real operating spending per capita growth is given a score of 100. All other municipalities are given a 3 Barriere, Canal Flats, Clearwater, Lantzville, proportionate score within that range. The same Queen Charlotte, Sechelt Indian Government, exercise is applied to the indicator for the 2009 Vanderhoof and West Kelowna, were excluded operating spending per capita. from the study because of the lack of information dating back to 2000. BC Municipal Spending Watch 6 Figure 3.1 Sources of Municipal Revenue (Percentage of Total), 2009 Other Developer 4% Contributions 8% Government Transfers 9% Own Purpose Taxation 47% Sales of Services 32% Figure 3.2 Growth of Revenue Sources, 2000-2009 590% 214% 123% 78% 62% Own Purpose Sales of Services Government Developer Total Revenue Taxation Transfers Contributions 4 Previously known as the Ministry of Community Services. 5 In the case of West Vancouver, transportation and transit expenses have also been excluded from operating spending because there was a dramatic change in these expenses after 2000 that skewed the spending numbers. This is addressed previous editions of this report. Due to changes in accounting practices, starting from 2008, amortization is excluded from total expenses. BC Municipal Spending Watch 7 Figure 4.1 Real Operating Spending Growth and Population Growth, 2000- 2009 100% Population Growth 85% 80% 60% Operating Spending 40% Growth (Adjusted for 20% Inflation) 0% 2000 2003 2006 2009 -20% -29% -40% 50% Population 45% Growth 40% 30% Operating Spending Growth 20% (Adjusted for Inflation) 10% 2% 0% 2000 2003 2006 2009 -10% 50% Population Growth 39% 40% Operating 30% Spending Growth (Adjusted for Inflation) 20% 11% 10% 0% 2000 2003 2006 2009 BC Municipal Spending Watch 8 Table 4.1 Vancouver, Coast & Mountain Listed from Worst to Least Worst* 2000-2009 2000-2009 Real 2000-2009 2000-2009** Real Operating Operating 2009 Operating Municipality Population Savings for Spending Spending per Spending per Growth (%) Family of 4 ($) Growth (%) Capita Growth Capita ($) (%) Lytton -29 85 161 4,826 42,175 Lions Bay -5 124 135 1,280 10,971 West Vancouver 2 45 42 1,850 8,596 Pitt Meadows 18 104 73 1,092 5,543 Kent 8 80 67 1,216 7,318 Langley-District 15 85 61 1,144 4,364 North Vancouver-City 7 54 44 1,466 7,761 North Vancouver-District 1 49 48 1,380 7,881 Bowen Island 20 63 36 1,370 5,369 Abbotsford 13 70 50 1,089 3,226 Vancouver 11 39 25 1,586 4,787 Chilliwack 18 81 53 939 4,725 Harrison Hot Springs 25 57 26 1,470 963 Delta -1 25 26 1,448 3,910 New Westminster 13 27 12 1,697 1,665 Belcarra -5 39 47 985 5,285 Richmond 13 47 30 1,302 4,298 White Rock 4 40 34 1,226 4,420 Hope -1 34 35 1,197 5,003 Maple Ridge 16 68 44 1,014 5,322 Anmore 53 126 48 857 9,031 Port Moody 34 67 25 1,255 3,656 Langley-City 3 33 29 1,095 3,621 Burnaby 12 38 24 1,171 2,584 Surrey 25 73 39 856 3,079 Port Coquitlam 7 38 29 1,036 5,120 Mission 15 33 15 1,054 1,148 *The rankings are based on an equal weighting of 2000-2009 operating spending growth and 2009 operating spending levels. This is different from previous reports that mainly considered operating spending growth. Overall rankings are available in Appendix III and IV. **To calculate the total savings over the time period 2000-2009, it is assumed that the municipality held operating spending to population and inflation growth. BC Municipal Spending Watch 9 Figure 4.2 Real Operating Spending Growth and Population Growth, 2000- 2009 300% Population 297% Growth 250% 200% Operating Spending Growth 150% (Adjusted for Inflation) 100% 50% 15% 0% 2000 2003 2006 2009 50% Population Growth 40% 40% Operating 30% Spending Growth (Adjusted for Inflation) 20% 10% 8% 0% 2000 2003 2006 2009 6 Sooke incorporated in December 1999 to become the District of Sooke.