metrovancouver Qjpy APR SERVICES AND SOLUTIONS FOR A LIVABLE REGION File: ADO2-O1-UBCM

Transcription

1 SERVICES AND SOLUTIONS FOR A LIVABLE REGION p metrovancouver Qjpy Office oldie CommissIoraer/cblefAdminlsfltive Officer TeL Fox APR File: ADO2-O1-UBCM Mr. Gary Macisaac, Executive Director Union of British Columbia Municipalities Sheilbridge Way Richmond, BC VGX 2W9 t M7 Dnr Re: Proposed 94.1 Senslce PmvlnceWIdi CH Answn Levy This is to inform you that at its March meeting, the Greater Vancouver Regional District Board of Directors adopted the foilowing resolution: That the GyRO Board advise the Union of British Columbia Municipalities that It does not support a province-wide callanswerlevyfor94-1 services. Attached for your reference is a copy of the staff report that accompanied the Board resolution. The Board had a lengthy discussion regarding the challenges that exist in providing a province-wide service and the funding strategy. The Board felt that further work and analysis was required and encourages the UBCM and the Province to continue to explore alternative funding mechanisms to address the issues raised in the UBCM report. Yours truly, Caroi Mason Commissioner/ chief Administrative Officer cm/pv Attachment: Proposed Service Province-Wide Call Answer Levy 2014 Mar 05 Report (Doc # ) SO Kingsway, Bumayj 1ç,jp. V5H 4G8 6O4-432oyunhj!fmetrovancouvetorg -- Greater Vancouver Regional District Greater Vancouver*at uisma Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Metro Vancouver Housing Corporation

2 metrovancouver SIIIVICIS AND SOLUTIONS FOR A UVAILI SOlON Section E 2.1 To: From: Mayors Committee Greg Smith, Director, IT & Emergency Management Corporate Services Department Date: March 5, 2014 MeetIng Date: March 7, 2014 Subject: Proposed 91-1 ServIce ProvInce-Wide CaU Answer Levy nswninrsnwn, Ine That the GVRD Board advise the Union of British Columbia MunIcIpalities that It does not support a province-wide call answer levy for services. PURPOSE To provide the Mayors Committee with Infonnatlon regarding a Union of British Columbia MunIcipalitIes (UBCM) proposal to implement a province-wide call answer levy on services and seek direction on providing a response to UBCM. BAcKGROUND In an October 2013 UBW news release (Attachment 1) UBCM requested Input from its members on a proposed province-wide call answer levy on services Attachment2). In December 2013, the Metro Vancouver Regional AdmInIstrators Advisory Committee (RAAC) received a presentation about the proposed service levy from Ian MacDonald of Dave MItchell & Associates and UBCM staff. The presentation was Intended to provide additional background InformatIon to assist municipalities In responding to the survey. FollowIng discussion on the presentation, the Committee requested Metro Vancouver staff to: Work with UBCM regarding consideration of a uniform wireless levy related to nwlce In Metro Vancouver, and sollcltfeedbackfrom member municipalities based on questions posed at the December 18, 2013 RA4CmnUng and report back to MAC CaU Answer Levy Survey In order to solicit. their feedback on the proposed levy, on January 10, 2014 Men Vancouver drculated a suri,ey to Its members consisting of three questions. The three questions built upon the survey distributed by UBCM and added contextual InformatIon to ensure that the financial ImplIcatIons of the proposed service model were well understood within the context of the current E-Comm funding model. The three questions submitted to municipalities for comment were as follows: 1) Would your municipality support the conversion of the current property tax funding model to a Province-wIde call answer levy funding model for services If the overall revenue collected was cost neutral?

3 Proposed 944 Service Provinc&Wkie Call Answer Levy Mayors Committee meeting: March 7, 2014 Page 2of4 Context: The current tax requisition to und 944 service in Metro Vancouver amounts to an average of approximately $4 per household per year. 100% of the funds collected through the tax requisition flow through to our service provider EComm; there is no fee to collect or manage these funds. The 2014 EComm contract cost is $3.9 million. The conversion from $4 per household would amount to about $O2O per land line and wireless line per month (excluding collection fees). Within the context of a preference for progressive taxation and user pay, funding based on user fees rather than property tax requisitions are preferred. As a result, Metro Vancouver has previously supported the transfer from a property tax to a call answer levy onty if that could be achieved in a cost neutral way, that is, with no additional cost to the residents of the Lower Mainland. To date, this approach has not been achieved. 2) Would your murncipahty support the conversion of the current property tax funding model to a Provincew1de call answer levy funding model for 944 services if the overall revenue collected exceeded the base amount currently required ($39 Million) and if the funds were collected and redistributed back to regional E9-1-1 Service Providers under a cost sharing model to be determined by local government? Context: The Table below was developed by UBCM to illustrate the potential revenue that would be raised through the introduction of a Provincial call answer levy: $0.21 $0.25 $ million $15,300,000-$15,600,000 $O3O $ million $18,360,000-$ 18,720,000 $040 $&80 $0.50 $ million $12,852,000-$13,104, million $24,480,000-$24,960,000 $ million $30,600,000-$31,200,000 It is noted that all of the proposed CAL levels are higher than the property tax requisition currently raised within the Metro Vancouver region. The current economies of scale that exist within the Metro Vancouver E-Comm model enables the regional district to have a tax requisition equivalent to a $0.20 levy to raise its $3.9 Million per year. However, as noted above, a call answer levy of $0.20 would be too low to generate sufficient revenue in other regional Public Safety and Access Points (PSAP) areas to cover their call answer levy costs. Establishing a higher levy would actually generate more revenue than required for the existing call answer levy service. An alternative approach might be to increase the call answer levy but then redistribute the surplus generated by the higher levy back to Metro Vancouver and to other regional centres to support improve PSAP and E9-1-1 Call answer centre infrastructure requirements. As was discussed at the December 18, 2013 RAAC meeting, with the exception of a more regionally separated E-Comm backup facility, there is not an identified need for additional revenues at the current time. The potential funds generated under the proposed model could amount to as much as $10 million dollars per year. As a result, if a proposed Province-

4 Proposed 9-11 Service Provlnce.WIa Cal Answer Levy Mayors Committee meedrç March Page wide call answer levy Is contemplated, significant discussion would need to take place on how to distribute surplus funds to ensure a fair distribution of those funds to Metro Vancouver and to ensure the appropriate use of those funds to support E9-14 services. 3) Would your municipality support UBCM s position that any administration fee charged by the Telco s would reflect the actual cost to collect the levy? CoMet Call answer levies have been considered at least twice In the last 10 years at the Metro Vancouver Board and have failed to pass both times based on concerns with respect to this Issue. In the early 1990 s when call answer levies were first considered by the CRTC the Telco s successfully lobbied for the $0.07 per month fee that is currently collected almost everywhere In Canada. At that time, the $0.07 per month fee was explained by the Telco s as their actual cost to collect this levy. As was discussed at the last MAC meeting a $0.07 levy would amount to at least an additional one million dollar ($1,000,000) annual service fee in our region by the Telcos and depending on the number of cell phones, the fee collected could be significantly higher. This annual revenue is substantially higher than the actual cost to collect this levy. Five municipalities responded to the above survey with mixed concerns with respect to the implementation of a province-wide call answer levy (Attachment 3). At the February 25, 2014 RAAC meeting, the survey was discussed in further detail and a vote was taken on whether the Committee supported the concept being proposed. The Committee unanimously voted to not support the province-wide call answer levy on the 944 services. This report is now being brought forward to the Board for direction on a formal response to UBCM with aftematives presented below. ALTERNATIVES 1. That the GVRD Board advise the Union of British Columbia Municipalities that it does not support a province-wide call answer levy for 91-1 services. 2. That the GVRD Board provide alternate direction. FINANOAL IMPUCATIONS if the Board supports alternative one, the UBCM will be advised that Metro Vancouver does not support the implementation of a province-wide call answer levy. As noted above, the 2014 GVRD municipal requisition for E Emergency Telephone System Service is $3.9 Million. This requisition is funded through an assessment based property tax and represents a cost of approximately $4.00 per household. This requisition funds the annual contract with E-Comm to provide this service to the region. If a province-wide call answer levy is implemented across the province, it is anticipated that the cost per household will increase for Metro Vancouver residents in order to fund and support a province wide system. The economies of scale achieved through the funding model established in Metro Vancouver which pays for the regional E944 system make the financial implications of implementing a province-wide call answer levy more expensive than the current model. In addwon, increased costs would likely include a $0.07 levy applied by wireless service providers to offset administration charges.

5 I. Propoiid94 1 SaMe kovbm-ww A.& Lny Mayors Commlttei mieung Much 7, 2014 Page 4 o14 SUMMARY I CONCWSION In an October 2013 UBCM news release UBCM requested input from its members on a proposed provincewide call answer ivy for 91e1 services. The survey was developed to solicit input on a paper prepared entitled 91e1 Services in British Columbia e Background Review in Relation to a Province-Wide Call Answer Levy. Th report provided a framework for Introducing a province-wide levy that would capture land lines and other electronic devices to support services. Staff have reviewed the implications of the report and have consulted with Metro Vancouver members to confirm whether there Is an Interest In providing a regional position to UBCM In support of the proposed funding model Based on the analysis of the finandal ImplIcatIons, the economies of scale achieved in the Metro Vancouver E-Comm service, and the responses received from Metro Vancouver members, staff recommend to the Board that it endorse alternative one and advise UBCM that it does not support a province-wide call answer levy for services. Attachments (OtbItfl7ll4EO) Services In BC - UBCM October 2013 News Release Services in BC - Background Review - UBCM July 2013 report Services Province-Wide Call Answer Levy RAAC Survey Results