Every Saturday until election day, the Sun will run a feature where we ask Brandon’s two mayoral candidates to submit a written answer to a question on a topic important to the city.
This week’s question is: This year infrastructure has been and will likely continue to be a concern in the city, whether it’s projects to add capacity to existing systems — such as the wastewater lift station project in southwest Brandon — or to fix streets. However, such projects are not cheap. As mayor, how would you handle the business of renewing Brandon’s infrastructure while not overburdening either the city’s finances or the finances of its residents?
Jeff Fawcett: Ever since Brandon established its first road (gravel), or installed its first water line, it has had to plan and budget for infrastructure maintenance. That continues in city departments today, with road and pipe assessments and short- and long-term planning for maintenance and unscheduled repairs. Residents may notice councillors championing for them in high concern/complaint areas that sometimes don’t align with engineering assessments and timelines.
That is how our democratic discussions/debates work. Most of these projects are financed through senior government grants (such as Gas Tax), and local reserve funds. Management is always trying to be on top of senior government funding that can be used toward any infrastructure projects. Council does need to be sure it is maintaining reserve funds for these projects, as it is tempting to cut reserves to help today’s budget while straddling future residents and councils with higher tax rates.
A large portion of infrastructure is tied to our utilities (water/waste water). Water and waste water are of the highest priority for a municipal government. As we know, our utility rates are increasing over the next four years, starting in July 2023. That proposed increase in utility rates is driven by: financial requirements, debt payments and projects as well as operating expenses.
We must maintain the physical and financial health of the utilities. One of our ongoing issues over at least the last decade is not having a more diligent rate review timeline (Manitoba Public Utilities Board is the rate provider). While no residents complained of rates unchanged since 2018, it had the utilities operating at a loss and now five years later the increase is extreme versus the preferred and more manageable slow and steady rate increases. This is something that will be addressed going forward.
There is always new and infill development going on in the city. As always the infrastructure on these sites are paid for by the builders/developers. The portion on city property becomes city responsibility after warranty has expired (usually two years); until then the builders/developers maintain and repair any work.
The biggest change that has occurred in new development over the last decade is the implementation of the development cost charges. This has new development paying for the off-site infrastructure that is needed to service the new developments. It may be looked at as a large “local improvement tax” on new developments. While the city may be getting the debenture on these infrastructure projects, it is the development cost charges that pay that debenture down over time. Moving forward this is a great benefit over time to the city and residents at large.
To conclude, we also need to push our own city staff to “finish jobs” in a timely manner. If water is out for a house or block, we are quick (usually) to get services back on for residents but, not always as good at finishing the street, sidewalk or yard repair that was damaged in the process. That will be a goal to improve. So as with mayors past and those in the future, I would work with council, the city management and staff, to manage our infrastructure maintenance and growth with timely and fiscal responsibility.
Elliott Oleson: Balancing the desire for growth against the need to maintain the existing hard and soft infrastructure is a challenge that every city faces. When this balance is achieved, the result is vitality and vibrancy. When it is not, the result is gradual and incessant decay.
Brandon’s operating philosophy has long been that prosperity derives naturally from minimized taxes financed by outward growth. It is the idea that the taxes, fees and such that the city will receive from development will more than pay for the required ongoing burden and future city betterment expenditures. I’d say the tire-eating potholes scattered strategically around Brandon would argue against the general benefit of this approach.
We have ample space already existing in Brandon for significant commercial and residential development that are already connected to roads and sewage and thus could be developed at minimal expense to the city both up front and ongoing. This would provide the city with tax and other revenues without the city accepting added upkeep commitments in perpetuity. This is somewhat long-term.
In the shorter term, the roads and sidewalks need fixing now. We need sewage upgrades now. It would be cool if the city could start taking meaningful steps to reducing its contribution to children’s daily lead intake now. All of that costs money. That means either taxes or fees. I favour taxes coupled with a different emphasis on where grants, subsidies and various city assistance are focused. Here is why.
That $50 you save on property tax in a year ($4.17/month) can’t go to fixing that pothole you hit each day on your way to and from work. Over the course of the year, the added wear on your vehicle costs you more than $50. Consider then the added maintenance costs to the businesses that run a fleet of vehicles. Who are those costs being shunted to?
On the other hand, that $50 from each tax-paying Brandonite combined can work toward getting the roads fixed and save the whole community those extra costs and frustrations at less expense to each of us. As an added bonus the better roads, efficient sewage, good lighting and such are the sorts of things more likely to encourage investment than a boondocks development with a spanky new lift station.
Infrastructure requires an ongoing commitment to upkeep, or the decay becomes cost-prohibitive and destructive. Brandon has failed in that commitment and the results are clear to us each day we travel our city. We need to direct funds to repairs and upgrades and we need to finance those ongoing commitments and to do that we need to stop paying to look ever outward and instead look inward and upward.
» The Brandon Sun
The AI boom has catapulted Nvidia’s stock to an all-time high. The GPUs by Nvidia are the best-in-class hardware for supporting AI work
Maryland State Retirement and Pension System has made $250m (€230.6m) worth of infrastructure commitments through funds managed by DigitalBridge Partners and
A coalition of environmental advocacy groups will petition the Biden administration to propose rules that require stricter enforcement for cleaning up left
The newly-launched Investment Dashboard allows users to explore infrastructure projects across t