Jim Prentice's response to Question 2

Question 2(a): What are your plans for long-range, sustainable, predictable operating and capital funding for Alberta’s largest cities?

On the question of municipal funding, I know that municipalities need financial certainty and I am willing to look at and consult on different options – including user fees, shared service agreements, the Education portion of property tax, bonds, infrastructure pricing, as well as to look at the benefits and challenges associated with existing grant programs – both operational and capital.

Question 2(b): What are your thoughts on the future of existing infrastructure programs, including the MSI?

Question 2(c): What is your opinion of the Wild Rose 10-10 Capital Plan?

I understand the MGA review is looking at some of these options. I also expect this question to be a major focus of discussion in terms of City Charter discussions. I have been hearing many comments about property assessment processes and property taxation tools. I am open to consulting with you on different options, as outlined above. I have also been clear however, that I am not in support of developing new taxes; I believe we have lots of options to review without heading down this path.

The responses from the Jim Prentice campaign, in the form of a full letter to the mayor, is linked here for viewing.

View Response
by Thomas Lukaszuk
by Ric McIver
by Jim Prentice