Mayor Contender Joe Ward Convinced Houston to Double Equalization

Joe Ward Follow Me

Posted this 2024-09-15 1:11 PM ADT

What led Premier Houston to double equalization for the CBRM? According to Tim, after summoning Joe Ward to a meeting in Sydney back in 2018—while running for the NSPC leadership—a message from myself was the turning point. While Cecil Clarke told him he was "throwing [away] money" during their debate, fortunately I was more persuasive. You can find my message to Tim, from March 25th, 2018, below.

Nota bene: Without the Nova Scotians for Equalization Fairness and my predecessor Mayor John Morgan, many citizens including myself, would not have a good understanding of the federal equalization program and how insufficient resources are impacting the CBRM. Any skills I have in persuasion were empowered by what I learned from the NSEF. On this topic, they are the giants upon whose shoulders I had to stand and deliver our request for more.

I'm Joe Ward, a candidate for CBRM mayor on October 19th, and I share my ideas and views on the public record for you to find out who I am and what I have to offer. Vote for good plans, not lawn signs.

SCROLL DOWN FOR FULL VIDEO

Like my Facebook page | ElectJoeWard.com website

My message to Tim Houston, March 25th, 2018:
###

Tim Houston, will you support removing the freeze on the provincial (~equalization) transfer, doubling it to $64 Million, from the current amount distributed to Nova Scotia Municipalities?

You're obviously keenly aware of the struggles of the CBRM without having to see an audit.

Nonetheless, will you also support the audit that is being requested by a recent motion of the CBRM Council?

I'm recommending it primarily as a conversation starting point, but setting the bar low to make it achievable. There have been a few references. One mention was an HRM councillor who suggested similar, noting that the amount may be similar to what it would be had the provincial transfer program not been suspended, circa 2015. CBRM CAO Walsh has also mentioned that the transfer program was frozen and had not, as of yet, been reevaluated since 2015.

Equalization advocates talk about much larger numbers based on their interpretation of the intent of the Federal Equalization program and how those funds should be directed. That is something that is worthy of determination, though the priority for me is simply getting an increase in provincial resources to the municipalities. Note: I'm not for too much autonomy with municipalities. The Richmond County expense scandal and the widespread criticism of Mayor Clarke are good indications that provincial oversight is definitely necessary.

The CBRM's financial indicators are very bad. The NSEF group notes how some municipalities have had to be absorbed, in a similar fashion to the recent Globe and Mail (?) article discussing Mulgrave's impending fate. A quick look at our last budget will show that we're essentially approaching insolvency, and raising tax rates will do little to help, since we're seeing rising tax arrears (demonstrating that homeowners can't withstand any more in this region).

So the indicators are fairly clear that these regions need help. As for the intent of the Federal program on how these funds should be distributed, we may need to pay particular attention to this note:

"Parliament and the government of Canada are committed to the principle of making equalization payments to ensure that provincial governments have sufficient revenues to provide reasonably comparable levels of public services at reasonably comparable levels of taxation." (Subsection 36(2) of the Constitution Act, 1982)

The CBRM having the highest commercial tax rate and the second highest residential rate while in a period of sharp decline, would be a good indication that this intent is not being met.

We pay more taxes, have a lower median family household income, are still experiencing outmigration, and now have a situation where our demolition permits are near (or have surpassed) our new construction permits. We can't grow our tax base, and we're further disincentivizing businesses and homeowners from investing more because of these rates.

We need some breathing room. I don't think the transfer program necessarily needs to be a windfall to give us carte blanche with uncontrolled spending. We certainly need checks and balances. However, we're entirely too dependant on the time-consuming process of gaining tri-level agreement on everything to move more expediently on things. This has caused us to miss opportunities like the Louisbourg Synergy project whereby we enhance our key tourism assets to bring more dollars into the province.

Meanwhile, we could also use an increased transfer as our own municipal component of tri-level investment, giving us more leverage to pull down Federal dollars.

$32 Million [more] a year for all Nova Scotia municipalities currently receiving a transfer is not much to ask. That's financially doable, even in a fiscally conservative sense. In theory, it's an investment in growth in our tax base. The Liberals just managed to find a quarter of a billion dollars. That could have funded the transfer increase for about 5 years, upwards of 7 years, depending on what is later negotiated with municipalities.

It's a doable commitment and one that will resonate very strongly with any candidate of any political flag in Cape Breton, an area where Conservatives have an opportunity to continue to gain ground. The two Liberal ministers here were *both* at risk in the last election, with Mombourquette just making it by the NDP candidate, and MacLellan losing massive support to a first-time Conservative MLA candidate in John White.

I don't like overly dramatic interpretations of data. But things are looking bad in Cape Breton with realistic (and terrible) projections.

One thing you may want to follow up on is a recent motion by the CBRM requesting that the Auditor General do a full evaluation of the CBRM's financial position and outlook. You can get in touch with Councillor Earlene MacMullin - CBRM Councillor District 2 for more details on that request.

My ask/recommendation to you would be:

i. Campaign for unfreezing the provincial transfer and increasing it to $64 Million,

ii. Agreeing to do a municipal audit for the CBRM and all municipalities to evaluate their financial well being and outlook (and management effectiveness, or lack thereof),

The charter and tax cap are areas that can be examined more carefully once you assume the Premier's role, should your party successfully get there in the next election. These policies will certainly help you along across the Province.

P.S. There's indication that none of the three (Clarke, Mombourquette, or MacLellan) will openly advocate for any changes to the provincial transfer. Clarke talked about some *reserve* fund, Mombourquette evaded it, and MacLellan described increased equalization as a balanced removal of other provincial funds (grants in lieu, etc).

###

Follow along with my campaign and check out ElectJoeWard.com. I'm confident there are multiple ways to work with the province to lower our property taxes on par with Halifax, and spark the housing construction boom we need. When I met with Tim Houston, he told me my message to him about our economic indicators was a big part of what compelled him to offer $15 Million more to the CBRM. Now, we need to get back to that economic discussion, and bring back the $15 million and more. But, this time, we'll be ready to invest it wisely.

Posted by Joe Ward
Receive news by email and share your news and events for free on goCapeBreton.com
SHOW ME HOW

Like 6 Dislike 0

FOLLOW 11

2,224 20

20

Depth
Raymond Mac Donald Follow Me 2024-09-16 7:23 AM ADT Reply 1 0 It's quite obvious to me from the above and reading your website yesterday{now removed} that NSEF will be getting special treatment and acting as your advisors if you are the successful candidate for Mayor.I do fully endorse your open door policy which every candidate should advocate but your words of praise for NSEF seems to put them in a different category than everyone else.Good for folks to know that up front. Joe Ward My Post Follow Me 2024-09-16 7:53 AM ADT Reply 1 0 Hi Raymond, thank you for pointing that out. A key approach to my campaign is transparency. It’s the candidates that are not declaring their influences that are troubling. I’m not doing yard signs or selfie campaigns doing the bake-sale circuit. I’m putting my ideas out there to be judged by my fellow citizens. The NSEF note is still on my website. I added a 10-minute video outlining my response to their question of how to get more resources for the CBRM. My approach is negotiation with a strong proposal and options, similar to when I persuaded Houston to send us $15 million more. That’s what he told me after calling for me to meet with him in 2018. My letter to him is posted above for anyone curious about how to make a deal with the province. The NSEF gets a special note because they have been the champions of a pivotal issue for us for a very, very long time. They’ve been the ones who educated me on the complexities of equalization, motivating me to do my own research and strategies. But, tow truck drivers or folks upset about housing strategies or anything else will always have an invite to see me. I can’t come up with solutions without talking to the key stakeholders. Raymond Mac Donald Follow Me 2024-09-16 8:26 AM ADT Reply 0 0 So,if you are successful,folks can look forward to the public bashing of our bankers in Halifax and Ottawa from whatever party is in power,who have become quite adept over the years at checking their CALLER ID or hitting their DELETE button or both when it comes to contact from CBRM.Without those partners we can kiss the new library or other major hopes and wishes good bye. Joe Ward My Post Follow Me 2024-09-16 8:53 AM ADT Reply 3 0 When I’m mayor, they can look forward to a new approach to CBRM leadership and negotiation. You’re right, I’m not about backroom deals and suggesting the public should just trust us. Our status and requests will be public. It’s party politics that causes stubborn positioning. I’m for mutually beneficial deal making. Houston needs a housing solution. We need a property tax solution and housing. We’re now aligned. So we talk in a business and economic framework, not try to score points to advance a political party of any stripe. Charles Sampson Follow Me 2024-09-16 12:28 PM ADT Reply 1 0 Joe, one question: given the past history of government outright refusal to negotiate and explain their numbers relative to the Equalization formula’s connection to the constitution and when the provincial government stated there is no connection between the federal Equalization and the provincial (equalization) grant, have you placed a time frame on achieving the government transparency and accountability required that you mentioned? Without government accountability, which has been the case for as long as Fr. Maroun has championed this issue and John Morgan before him, shouldn't your position be negotiation before having to litigate. Joe Ward My Post Follow Me 2024-09-16 1:23 PM ADT Reply 0 0 Hi Charles, I think the challenge with getting the feds to explain the equalization formulas in the context of the constitutional requirement is that there's a disconnection. They have enormous flexibility in interpreting 36(2), and the spreadsheets used for its calculation are focused on measured fiscal capacity, more so than fiscal effort, and certainly not tax rates. We can play it forward and in reverse: High taxes mean we're making a larger fiscal effort to yield a lower fiscal capacity. I'm not seeing calculations based on rates, only on yields. Thus, I think they simply make inferences. If your fiscal effort (aka yield) is lower than other provides, your tax rates and fiscal effort must be higher than they should be. A data-filled spreadsheet is tidy. Explaining the thesis of how a data-filled spreadsheet maps to insufficiently specific constitutional clause is not tidy at all. Hence, hard questions are often avoided. The province (or any province) is simply being purposefully misleading when they try to describe something like the "municipal financial capacity grant" as not being sourced from or the same species as Equalization. Without equalization, the province would lack billions of dollars, and such a grant wouldn't exist. Likewise, its prior name included "equalization", it performs just as the federal equalization transfer does. I.e. it is given because municipalities need to provide a standard of services than they cannot provide without it, and cannot endure further tax increases. My primary approach is to negotiate, which I see as a different situation now, because the last elected official that was a strong advocate for equalization fairness was Mayor John Morgan. John is a lawyer; I'm an analyst. He tried to litigate in court; I prefer negotiation but will litigate in the court of public opinion—in a very calculated, professional manner. (continued) Joe Ward My Post Follow Me 2024-09-16 1:33 PM ADT Reply 0 0 The timeline for me is right out of the gate. I would prefer that the CBRM council pass a motion to acknowledge commitment to pursuing more resources and promoting effective use of equalization that meets its constitutional intentions. I need a majority of councillors to get on board with it. However, I am of the view that the CBRM mayor has some flexibility in their exploratory correspondence, even without an act of Council. And, I would argue that I would not be constrained in communicating in the capacity of the mayor for my own research into many of the questions raised by the NSEF, as well as my own. I don't think we should have to wait years at a time for Council to write letters or report back on them. That crosses the border into absurdity. My timeframe for more resources is within the 4-year term, preferably in the first year. I don't see why we can't do it before the first budget. The pursuit of answers on equalization questions should be ongoing, but proactive, offered as an open and shared resource to the public, and will have various ETAs. There will be many questions that can gain answers in weeks. There may be some small changes to how the equalization program is managed that could be achieved in the short-term. Any large-scale changes will be a long-term approach. One thing that may be controversial about me is that I'm willing to go after a financial solution that lowers our taxes, even if every question about Equalization is not resolved, or if the provincial or federal government are not yet on side with our view of it. They can call the funding source anything they want as long as there is a new funding source that lets us get what the CBRM needs. That is, I'll manage these separate pursuits concurrently, not consecutively. Getting all the answers resolved on Equalization is not something I'll consider a prerequisite to pulling more money in and pulling tax rates down in line with the HRM.
Charles Sampson Follow Me 2024-09-16 1:06 PM ADT Reply 0 0 “So,if you are successful,folks can look forward to the public bashing of our bankers in Halifax and Ottawa from whatever party is in power,who have become quite adept over the years at checking their CALLER ID or hitting their DELETE button or both when it comes to contact from CBRM.Without those partners we can kiss the new library or other major hopes and wishes good bye.” Raymond, you are sounding more like a government troll. What bashing of the bankers in Halifax or Ottawa are you referring to happened with John Morgan or Fr. Maroun’s volunteer citizens NSEF group? Your hyperbole of what will happen is not true based upon the facts of the past. Should Joe Ward be successful in winning the mayoral race, he has explained his position will be “another” attempt to have government come to these negotiations with the purpose of the government being transparent about the federal Equalization disbursements in this province. This is not a “bashing of the bankers in Halifax or Ottawa” as you stated. It is simply a legal responsibility required of governments who profess to be democratic. And, IMO, governments have created this illegality and now more people are getting involved in the seeking an end to this kind of government manipulation involving serious misappropriation of public money generated by a government constitutional law.
Raymond Mac Donald Follow Me 2024-09-18 6:32 AM ADT Reply 0 0 Since your writings and those of NSEF are so full of technical jibbersish making them too complicated and boring for most folks to read or understand why not set the record straight.You,as a result of an email to the premier and a personal meeting with him{supported by NSEF material,a group most politicians have on IGNORE},are responsible for CBRM receiving the infamous 15 Million bucks during the outgoing administration and they themselves deserve no credit.Citizens deserve the straight goods on this point.A simple yes or no would suffice. Joe Ward My Post Follow Me 2024-09-18 9:42 AM ADT Reply 0 0 Beware a debate where the person asks a loaded question, and wants to restrict the answer to "yes" or "no." But, I can address each of the several points you made for you. :) Discussions of municipal finance and equalization from the constitutional level, down to the distribution formulas is very complex. It's not for everyone. We had better make sure those we elect aren't overwhelmed or disinterested in it. 1. I, like others, identified that when candidates are running for a role, it is a great time to try to get them to commit to something on the record. In this case, it was Houston running for the NSPC leadership against Clarke, and he needed support from Cape Breton. 2. Thus I, like others, continued to write about him, or to him, trying to get his position on matters that are important to us, and to get him to agree to include the things we need in our platform. Asking Clarke is a lost cause. He's always opposed increasing the equalization grant to the CBRM, because he likely figured his time with the province as MLA and minister was going to be a straight shot to Ottawa and he wouldn't need to deal with us again. 3. My understanding of equalization comes from the NSEF. I took what I've learned from them, and I applied my own approach from my background and my experience (business, systems analysis, communications). Without them, I may never have taken an interest in the topic. I'm certainly not stealing their thunder. They have always been the champions of this push for more resources for all Nova Scotians, and certainly for the CBRM. 4. My influence strategy is to comment on political representatives' social media or news articles, to write to them directly, or to publish my own commentary in either writing or video. (continued) Joe Ward My Post Follow Me 2024-09-18 9:50 AM ADT Reply 0 0 5. I targeted a Tim Houston Facebook page over a couple of days. I understood that Tim was not responding well to the equalization topic, as the NSEF told me that he was refusing meetings and wanted to send staffers instead. 6. The message I drafted to Tim switched gears to start to talk about funding for the CBRM as more of an economic/financial basis (as I've posted above, for all to see). 7. When Tim started campaigning in Cape Breton, he started taking meetings with folks all across the community. They all do so. They try to build up their base of support. 8. He requested that I attend a meeting. Now, as a good communicator, you bring people into a room for good news, not bad news. That's when he unveiled the doubling of equalization to $64 million. I'm not suggesting I influenced him because it coincidentally was the same as I requested. I'm suggesting I influenced him, because he told me point blank that I did—with the same message to him that I posted for everyone to see (above). 9. From there, not satisfied with taking any politician for their word, I continued writing about it, and was contacting people close to him to let them know he had to put that commitment on the public record, or it meant nothing. And it finally made it to everyone when he declared it during the debate, about 6 months later. Tim Houston sat across from me and told me that it was my message to him that convinced him to double the equalization grant. I don't care if it was a political move. My goal was to get more for the CBRM in any way possible. But, my message to Tim would never have existed without the years of persistence by the good people of the NSEF who care enough about this topic to manage the complexity and stay with a topic some consider boring, because they care enough for all Nova Scotians to do so. Raymond Mac Donald Follow Me 2024-09-18 9:55 AM ADT Reply 1 1 Just more of the same jibberish.I hope folks see through it.It's really insulting. Joe Ward My Post Follow Me 2024-09-18 9:58 AM ADT Reply 1 0 I'm sorry you feel that way, Raymond. I hope that in the near future you appreciate the ends—when we're successful—even if you're disinterested in the means to getting there. Nova Scotians for Equalization Fairness Follow Me 2024-09-18 10:48 AM ADT Reply 1 0 Raymond is 100% a troll who is trying to distract from the reality. Don't waste your time trying to explain anything to him. He is either a simpleton or a government troll playing a role. He refuses to show his face and debate his stance on any topic publicly, in order to learn. He has, in our opinion and our opinion only, ODD (Oppositional Defiance Disorder) where as he likes to oppose everything he reads on this platform. He claims to have been an auditor in the past so he should be able to understand what you are saying. Just because he does not understand equalization and calls it "jibberish" should be an indicator to ignore Raymond MacDonald. Don't waste your time on him. Raymond Mac Donald Follow Me 2024-09-18 3:54 PM ADT Reply 0 0 Glad we have a place like this to express our opinions and folks now know that NSEF support Joe Ward and Archie MacKinnon. Nova Scotians for Equalization Fairness Follow Me 2024-09-19 11:00 AM ADT Reply 1 0 The NSEF supports any candidate who will fight this injustice. Rankin MacSween, Cecil Clarke and James Edwards have not contacted us or stated that they will fight for our fair share. The rest of the candidates have contacted us. Get informed before you make your silly and ignorant comments. Raymond Mac Donald Follow Me 2024-09-19 7:21 PM ADT Reply 0 0 I just googled ODD (Oppositional Defiance Disorder).The good news is.....it's curable. Barry Smith Follow Me 2024-09-19 8:50 AM ADT Reply 0 0 So you got us the $15 MILLION from the province Joe...we always knew you were a tory..lol The final result Joe is what council decided to do with it....remember the ill conceived tax break, remember the mayor has only one vote, to think off the things that extra money could have got us as I mentioned in a letter to the editor cbpost. So the next council will be made up of many of the same people....large acclamation! Joe Ward My Post Follow Me 2024-09-19 10:17 AM ADT Reply 0 0 Barry, when you're a rational thinker who has no party alignment, the minute you do anything close to the right, you're a Conservative—in the mind of the Liberals. And, the minute you do anything to the left, you're a Liberal—in the mind of the Conservatives. One day, I'll be able to convince folks that I'm fully independent. But, in this political system, the successful independents are always securing the things we need from members of a political party. I'm just open to negotiate with them all without an agenda, beyond getting the things we need for the CBRM. The final result of the $15 million we achieved is what a council that I didn't lead did with the money. A part of my next negotiation with Houston is letting him know why we won't repeat those mistakes and make him feel like he wasted the investment. We're going to agree on how its used, not spend it willy nilly. The idea of the mayor having one vote is technically correct, but it entirely understates the role of leadership and influence. A good leader influences the votes of others, in addition to their own. I'm not going to be a mayor who sits around looking to break ties. I'm a mayor that wants to build majorities on council, so that my objectives are successful, and I must do so with influence—by superior communication to gain support for what we need. I'm very familiar with all of the acclaimed councillors. I know where I'm already aligned with them, what their strengths and weaknesses are (from my perspective), where to expect pushback, and where to expect collaboration. I would prefer the districts had a contested elections, but in terms of those who are acclaimed, I can work with them.
Charles Sampson Follow Me 2024-09-19 12:11 PM ADT Reply 0 0 Raymond, you have stated, “Since your writings and those of NSEF are so full of technical jibbersish making them too complicated and boring for most folks to read or understand why not set the record straight.” Ray, the language is not from the NSEF, and you know that. The language about the Equalization transfers is from the federal government’s website, as is the dollar numbers. This federal Equalization program is 100% a federal initiative in terms of its design, implementation and funding. Federal taxes are the funding source. So says economist Trevor Tombe, PhD., University. Of Calgary. He is regarded as an authority figure on this issue, which the media has been using regularly for explaining this issue. So, Ray, your criticism is being misdirected in blaming anyone but the federal government’s elected members of parliament first. Then, after that, the silent MLAs and our municipal government members.