FAQ
As I travel throughout the CBRM, I see that in both our downtowns and in our rural communities, we have an excess of litter.
We do not have enough garbage receptacles, especially in downtown Sydney and the North End. Our downtowns, and their adjacent neighbourhoods are popular places for visitors and residents alike to walk and enjoy. Without sufficient receptacles, emptied at regular intervals, even those who want to be responsible for their own garbage, have few or in some cases no options.
In rural areas, along roadways, I see a concerning number of beer bottles and cans, pointing to not just a littering problem, but also a substantial drinking and driving problem.
ACAP is a long-standing, hard-working community organization where there exists considerable expertise in sustainability and the environment.
Through their trashformers program they have been collecting quantitative, qualitative, and photo data over the years of problem areas and the source of these problems.
They provide some critical services to the municipality and may be able to do more through partnership and in conversation with citizens to get clear on questions like: what do we want our community to look and feel like, what infrastructure do we need to get there, and what changes in municipal policies (much higher fines for littering) and practices (receptacle emptying intervals and expectations) we need to get there.
Yes, I will make this a priority.
It's hard not to feel at times like CBRM leadership can get lost. Like there is often so much coming at them, from many directions and with a history of insufficient resources for just about everything, that they are treading water; barely keeping their heads above water.
If I were elected Mayor, within my first 100 days in office, I would draft a five year capital and infrastructure plan for the CBRM that includes this infrastructure deficit (roads, waste water, sidewalks), major municipal building repair, and new construction (i.e. library). I would take this plan to both the federal and provincial governments for discussion. I do believe - despite a sometimes strained relationship - that if presented with a reasonable short-term plan, the Province of Nova Scotia does want to support the people and success of the CBRM.
Over the years, in relation to the library, the province has said explicitly to the CBRM that the CBRM doesn’t have a plan and has not clearly conveyed its capital priorities to the province. Rather the province experiences requests from the CBRM as one-off asks, disconnected from a larger, more strategic plan and community direction.
Our growth in population and the growth in both property values and the deed transfer tax suggest that we are growing (and will continue to grow) municipal revenues. We do however need assistance from the province over the next couple of years to ensure that we have comparable infrastructure and comparable services for comparable tax rates.
I’d like to give the province the benefit of the doubt and trust that when presented with a reasonable, responsible short-term plan (a bridging plan to get the CBRM from where it is now to five years in the future when the economic benefits of recent growth in population are more fully felt) they will come to the table. $23 million - while certainly a lot of money - is only 0.13% (about one tenth of one percent) of the province’s $16.5 billion annual budget.
I know it hasn't been easy and they are not sufficient on their own, but in addition to seeing our own circumstances change in the last five years via population and business growth, we have also witnessed some unprecedented investments by the province in the CBRM (regional hospital, NSCC, Charlotte Street). These don't solve our problems but they do suggest a willingness of the province to come to the table, to not fully leave CBRM behind in the province's growth and development.
I am ready and committed to putting my time, energy, and focus on this task. It is critical for the CBRM and I am up for the daily lobbying/reaching out/relationship building work needed to make it happen.
As mayor, would you make pedestrian safety a priority, and if so, how?
In the last five years, as our community has grown, and especially as we have welcomed younger and more diverse populations we see a lot more active transportation (walking, biking, scooters) and use of public transportation than in the past.
We also have been watching as larger cities grapple with how to add safe active transportation infrastructure into existing car-centric infrastructure.
There are a number of measures I would take immediately if elected:
Review traffic light “walk” signals - have these be set to allow those with limited mobility (canes, strollers, wheelchairs) to cross in a manner that is comfortable and safe? If not, change signals to account for actual time needed to cross the street.
Prioritize painting of crosswalks in annual road line repainting (crosswalk painting in priority high traffic areas done in advance of road line painting).
Develop a priority list of crosswalks without lights that should be considered for (push-button activation yellow flashing) lights and post them on the CBRM website.
Review best practices in other similar municipalities and local implementation. Many intersections instruct the pedestrian to walk on a green signal when drivers are also told to go. This was the particular case for a tragic pedestrian fatality in 2021 in the CBRM, as well as other fatalities in other parts of the province.
Require a briefing of senior administration and council by public works and the Cape Breton Regional Police when there is a pedestrian death or critical injury. As leaders, we need to understand why these accidents are happening so we can respond in an intelligent way. For example, is the issue an increase in car traffic, obstructed views, speed limits, or something else entirely? Our interventions must address the systemic issue(s) that have led to the fatality or injury.
Have the walk signal appear regardless of whether the button has been pushed. During last year’s snowstorm, the push buttons were inaccessible and therefore pedestrians did not get instructed of when it was safe to walk. Ensuring push buttons are accessible is ideal practice.
Make sidewalk clearing a priority in CBRM snow removal plans. Moving snow from roads onto sidewalks is not an acceptable snow removal method (except in the most extreme circumstances and for a very limited period of time). Many of our residents use only active transportation (walkers/cyclists/wheelchair users) and public transportation and we must make it so that they can safely travel throughout the CBRM in all seasons (as car users can).
In addition to these actions, I would review the 2022 Active Transportation Study and assess progress to date and next steps in the recommendations of this study.
How would you support volunteer fire halls, in detail?
Fire services in the CBRM are provided by two non-volunteer fire departments in Sydney and 32 volunteer fire departments throughout the CBRM (including three volunteer fire departments in the Sydney area). Our volunteer and non-volunteer fire departments need to work together seamlessly with respect, cooperation, and communication.
The municipal government needs to take responsibility for ensuring good working relationships and complimentary community coverage between our volunteer and non-volunteer departments. Our lives depend on it.
In addition to fire services, in many of our rural communities, our volunteer fire departments are community hubs, provide broad emergency response to things like natural disasters, are gathering places, places of community events and programming, and places of enduring volunteerism, community memory, and community care.
If elected Mayor, I would set out to understand - community by community - what role the volunteer fire hall plays in each community and what role the volunteer fire hall would like to play. Every community is unique in terms of the critical function the fire hall and its volunteers play. Would some like to function more as a community hub - with meals, navigators, and programming (in addition to emergency response)? What are the challenges related to volunteers? Would some like to be better equipped to respond to extreme weather events like Hurricane Fiona and the February 2024 storm? What is the state of the fire/emergency response equipment and technology in each? What equipment upgrades need to be prioritized? This is work I would undertake in my first 100 days in office.
The CBRM has very little discretionary funding each year. The bulk of this discretionary funding is wrapped up in the Sustainability Fund. The Sustainability Fund is approximately $1.5M each year. What would it look like to take 25% of this (or $375,000 per year) for a period of five years and set it aside to bring our volunteer fire halls up to a place of efficiency, accessibility, responsiveness, and fill the gaps in infrastructure, equipment, and technology that they need to fulfill the vision they and their communities have of their role and possibility?
Have all of our volunteer fire halls taken advantage of the provincial generator program (should they want to become warming centres in times of community emergency/disaster)? Have all of our fire halls taken advantage of provincial and federal accessibility funding to render their facilities accessible for all community members? Do all of our volunteer fire halls know of, and take advantage of provincial energy retrofit and renewables funding? If not, how can the CBRM provide the advice, connections, and capacity needed to enable all of our volunteer fire halls to secure these kinds of funds for their facilities? How will the new Nova Scotia Guard intersect - or how should it intersect - with our volunteer fire halls? The CBRM employs a full time Community Development Coordinator. If I was elected Mayor, I would prioritize creating an orderly and supported way for our fire halls to understand and participate in the growing list of facilities/capital improvement and adaptation funds available.
They are our hubs and our places of emergency response. We need to build on this, enhance this, and support this.
We are at an interesting moment in time - we have nine candidates running for Mayor, five councilors who have been acclaimed, and only one of the candidates running in a non-acclaimed district for council is female.
If we are to ensure our local democracy thrives, there are a number of directions to be considered:
I am intrigued by your ranked-ballot suggestion at the municipal level. I’m more familiar with this intervention at the provincial and federal level, but suspect it may have the same desired outcomes at the most local level of elections: encouraging more candidates, encouraging more diverse candidates, improving voter turnout (via a feeling that all votes are counted) and having elected officials who better reflect the will of the voters/popular vote.
I note that in 2021, New York City held its first ranked ballot municipal election, which resulted in NYC’s most diverse council ever and all elected Mayors in the UK are elected through ranked ballot voting!
I do think as well that the CBRM needs to take another look at a smaller council comprised of full-time councillors who are paid accordingly (rather than the current situation where the pay is closer to that of a part-time job for a job that requires consistent daytime and evening time meetings, ongoing responsiveness to constituents, and a great deal of schedule flexibility and meeting preparation).
We need to get clearer on: What is the job of a Councillor in 2024? Is it full time or part time? What is not the job (and is the job of 311 or municipal staff)? And then what is the appropriate level of compensation for the kinds of candidates and Councillors we would wish to attract?
Lastly, as we head into our 26th year of amalgamation, a conversation about the success (or otherwise) of our council in representing and addressing issues that are CBRM-wide in reach or significance is warranted. To what extent do both the collective council and individual councillors think and act beyond the interests of just their district? To what extent does the current system pit districts against one another? Are there other models to be considered that would balance the voices and identities of districts with our need and desire to be a cohesive regional municipality? What might a mix of district councillors and councillors at large (elected to represent the full municipality look like)?
I appreciate your question and for me, in part, it highlights the need for a conversation about governance - How are we governing ourselves? Is it working? What can be improved? What models and options exist? And what are we willing to do to try to ensure that our structure (and the skills of those around the table) are adequate for the challenges and opportunities of 2024.
This is a great question and I've taken some time to think and write a detailed response on this important issue. I'm sharing below the letter I wrote to Father Maroun and the NSEF group.
Dear Fr Maroun and co,
I want to begin by thanking you for your question, and also thanking you for your work on this issue. We owe a great deal of gratitude to the NSEF coalition for continuing to research, educate about, and keep this issue alive in conversations across the CBRM.
As I have been holding townhall-style meet & greets in firehalls and community centres in each district, it is notable the frequency with which equalization is raised. It is an issue that resonates with residents and one that feels unresolved.
I think we all agree our taxes are too high, and have been too high for too long. At the same time, even with such high taxes, the municipality only manages to collect something like fifty per cent of what we need to be able to deliver services. This is not only unfair to our residents, but it also makes us uncompetitive as a region in trying to attract newcomers and entrepreneurs. You gotta really love this place to live here and pay these taxes.
CBRM has a $23 million annual infrastructure deficit alone. So any plan to build houses, pave roads, repair infrastructure — all the while lowering taxes — that doesn’t address the question of money is simply wishful thinking. If I am elected Mayor, in my first 100 days I will work to create a five year capital and operating plan for the CBRM that takes into account the priorities I’ve highlighted in my platform (housing, roads, a new central library, comparable services for comparable taxation, etc) and I will work with the other levels of government to secure the resources needed to achieve these objectives.
In many ways, this plan (in both the work it proposes to accomplish and in its cost) reflects the funds that have not been coming to the CBRM via the federal equalization program. But this plan lays out the issue in a slightly different way. Let me explain:
In the firehall discussions with residents, when the question of equalization has been raised, it is often accompanied by reference to former Mayor John Morgan’s failed legal battle. What many people misunderstand, though, is that strictly put Mayor Morgan didn’t lose that battle; rather, the court declined to hear the case. The inference we can draw from this decision (or non-decision) is that we should pursue the objective through negotiation rather than litigation. In other words, the court decided this was a political, as opposed to constitutional, issue — one that requires sitting at the table with the provincial government rather than across the courtroom from them.
The projects and actions outlined in the plan I’m proposing will reflect what the CBRM needs over the next five years to ensure its current rate of growth can continue, and that those who have called this place home for decades (and those who have called it home for only a few months) can continue to do so. This requires that our roads, water services, parks, libraries, and recreation facilities, among other amenities, are of a comparable quality to those in other parts of the province. And it requires that our taxes be fair — indeed, not only comparable to other jurisdictions in Canada, but competitive, in order to continue to attract newcomers and support our recent population growth.
The NS Department of Finance put the population of CBRM at 109,945 in May 2024. (https://novascotia.ca/finance/statistics/archive_news.asp?id=19934&dg=&df=&dto=0&dti=3)
This is greater than the 2019 population benchmark of 91,413; greater than the 2024 optimistic scenario of 88,710; and in fact exceeds the 2039 optimistic scenario laid out in the 2019 CBRM Viability Study by Grant Thornton. As per the report, “in the optimistic scenario, CBRM would witness surplus from year 2027 onwards, reaching $4.76 Million in 2029 and $26.49 Million in 2039. With a mix of incremental and moderate changes to certain policies and operations, the CBRM is likely to continue being operationally viable.”
It’s almost hard to believe, but the CBRM has achieved what at times felt impossible: population stabilization. We need to turn our attention now to ensuring that we have the housing and infrastructure to sustain these levels of population — which are an immense gift and arrived sooner than any of us expected — and support further growth.
The recent turn in CBRM’s population, while not without challenges, fundamentally changes the economic foundation and possibilities for the community. It means we can see sustained self-sufficiency on the other side of the next five years. The most strategic request of the province at this time, therefore, is a series of targeted, project-specific requests to help CBRM bridge the gap. This requires clearly articulating what we need, how much it will cost, and most importantly, where it will get us.
And where, exactly, will it get us? To a place wherein CBRM has managed to successfully grow its tax base, to be able to deliver municipal services at a level and quality we all know we deserve, and to do so at a tax rate that is fair. Not only fair, but competitive in that it supports — rather than hinders — further growth.
We’re not there yet. We can get there in the long run. But, in the short term, we need the other levels of government to — as I say — bridge the gap for us. That’s going to require a new relationship with the other levels of government when it comes to how this municipality’s operating and capital budgets are financed. But we have much reason for optimism. We’ve already seen signals that the province is interested in investing in CBRM, in the form of its investments in health care, the relocation of NSCC to the Sydney waterfront, and the CBU medical school.
For my part, I’ve been building affordable housing in this community for forty years. I’ve built more affordable housing units than I can count, and I know how to convene and collaborate with the other stakeholders — CBU, NSCC, developers and non-profits, and the other levels of government — to build the 2,550 units we need to address the deficit identified in the province’s own housing assessment of the CBRM housing and rental market. I’ve worked with government for my entire career, and in that time I’ve yet to find a government department wherein we couldn’t get to the place we set out to — if we had a plan that clearly articulated what we would need in order to achieve our objective, and clearly articulated where it would get us. I believe we (the NSEF and I) share the same objective, of a prosperous, sustainable economy and community that is a self-sufficient and even contributing member of the Nova Scotia family.
All my very best to you,
-Rankin
Still have a question? Three ways to get in touch:
- Email info@rankinmacsween.ca
- Text/call 902-578-4366
- Or message on Facebook
As I travel throughout the CBRM, I see that in both our downtowns and in our rural communities, we have an excess of litter.
We do not have enough garbage receptacles, especially in downtown Sydney and the North End. Our downtowns, and their adjacent neighbourhoods are popular places for visitors and residents alike to walk and enjoy. Without sufficient receptacles, emptied at regular intervals, even those who want to be responsible for their own garbage, have few or in some cases no options.
In rural areas, along roadways, I see a concerning number of beer bottles and cans, pointing to not just a littering problem, but also a substantial drinking and driving problem.
ACAP is a long-standing, hard-working community organization where there exists considerable expertise in sustainability and the environment.
Through their trashformers program they have been collecting quantitative, qualitative, and photo data over the years of problem areas and the source of these problems.
They provide some critical services to the municipality and may be able to do more through partnership and in conversation with citizens to get clear on questions like: what do we want our community to look and feel like, what infrastructure do we need to get there, and what changes in municipal policies (much higher fines for littering) and practices (receptacle emptying intervals and expectations) we need to get there.
Yes, I will make this a priority.
It's hard not to feel at times like CBRM leadership can get lost. Like there is often so much coming at them, from many directions and with a history of insufficient resources for just about everything, that they are treading water; barely keeping their heads above water.
If I were elected Mayor, within my first 100 days in office, I would draft a five year capital and infrastructure plan for the CBRM that includes this infrastructure deficit (roads, waste water, sidewalks), major municipal building repair, and new construction (i.e. library). I would take this plan to both the federal and provincial governments for discussion. I do believe - despite a sometimes strained relationship - that if presented with a reasonable short-term plan, the Province of Nova Scotia does want to support the people and success of the CBRM.
Over the years, in relation to the library, the province has said explicitly to the CBRM that the CBRM doesn’t have a plan and has not clearly conveyed its capital priorities to the province. Rather the province experiences requests from the CBRM as one-off asks, disconnected from a larger, more strategic plan and community direction.
Our growth in population and the growth in both property values and the deed transfer tax suggest that we are growing (and will continue to grow) municipal revenues. We do however need assistance from the province over the next couple of years to ensure that we have comparable infrastructure and comparable services for comparable tax rates.
I’d like to give the province the benefit of the doubt and trust that when presented with a reasonable, responsible short-term plan (a bridging plan to get the CBRM from where it is now to five years in the future when the economic benefits of recent growth in population are more fully felt) they will come to the table. $23 million - while certainly a lot of money - is only 0.13% (about one tenth of one percent) of the province’s $16.5 billion annual budget.
I know it hasn't been easy and they are not sufficient on their own, but in addition to seeing our own circumstances change in the last five years via population and business growth, we have also witnessed some unprecedented investments by the province in the CBRM (regional hospital, NSCC, Charlotte Street). These don't solve our problems but they do suggest a willingness of the province to come to the table, to not fully leave CBRM behind in the province's growth and development.
I am ready and committed to putting my time, energy, and focus on this task. It is critical for the CBRM and I am up for the daily lobbying/reaching out/relationship building work needed to make it happen.
As mayor, would you make pedestrian safety a priority, and if so, how?
In the last five years, as our community has grown, and especially as we have welcomed younger and more diverse populations we see a lot more active transportation (walking, biking, scooters) and use of public transportation than in the past.
We also have been watching as larger cities grapple with how to add safe active transportation infrastructure into existing car-centric infrastructure.
There are a number of measures I would take immediately if elected:
Review traffic light “walk” signals - have these be set to allow those with limited mobility (canes, strollers, wheelchairs) to cross in a manner that is comfortable and safe? If not, change signals to account for actual time needed to cross the street.
Prioritize painting of crosswalks in annual road line repainting (crosswalk painting in priority high traffic areas done in advance of road line painting).
Develop a priority list of crosswalks without lights that should be considered for (push-button activation yellow flashing) lights and post them on the CBRM website.
Review best practices in other similar municipalities and local implementation. Many intersections instruct the pedestrian to walk on a green signal when drivers are also told to go. This was the particular case for a tragic pedestrian fatality in 2021 in the CBRM, as well as other fatalities in other parts of the province.
Require a briefing of senior administration and council by public works and the Cape Breton Regional Police when there is a pedestrian death or critical injury. As leaders, we need to understand why these accidents are happening so we can respond in an intelligent way. For example, is the issue an increase in car traffic, obstructed views, speed limits, or something else entirely? Our interventions must address the systemic issue(s) that have led to the fatality or injury.
Have the walk signal appear regardless of whether the button has been pushed. During last year’s snowstorm, the push buttons were inaccessible and therefore pedestrians did not get instructed of when it was safe to walk. Ensuring push buttons are accessible is ideal practice.
Make sidewalk clearing a priority in CBRM snow removal plans. Moving snow from roads onto sidewalks is not an acceptable snow removal method (except in the most extreme circumstances and for a very limited period of time). Many of our residents use only active transportation (walkers/cyclists/wheelchair users) and public transportation and we must make it so that they can safely travel throughout the CBRM in all seasons (as car users can).
In addition to these actions, I would review the 2022 Active Transportation Study and assess progress to date and next steps in the recommendations of this study.
How would you support volunteer fire halls, in detail?
Fire services in the CBRM are provided by two non-volunteer fire departments in Sydney and 32 volunteer fire departments throughout the CBRM (including three volunteer fire departments in the Sydney area). Our volunteer and non-volunteer fire departments need to work together seamlessly with respect, cooperation, and communication.
The municipal government needs to take responsibility for ensuring good working relationships and complimentary community coverage between our volunteer and non-volunteer departments. Our lives depend on it.
In addition to fire services, in many of our rural communities, our volunteer fire departments are community hubs, provide broad emergency response to things like natural disasters, are gathering places, places of community events and programming, and places of enduring volunteerism, community memory, and community care.
If elected Mayor, I would set out to understand - community by community - what role the volunteer fire hall plays in each community and what role the volunteer fire hall would like to play. Every community is unique in terms of the critical function the fire hall and its volunteers play. Would some like to function more as a community hub - with meals, navigators, and programming (in addition to emergency response)? What are the challenges related to volunteers? Would some like to be better equipped to respond to extreme weather events like Hurricane Fiona and the February 2024 storm? What is the state of the fire/emergency response equipment and technology in each? What equipment upgrades need to be prioritized? This is work I would undertake in my first 100 days in office.
The CBRM has very little discretionary funding each year. The bulk of this discretionary funding is wrapped up in the Sustainability Fund. The Sustainability Fund is approximately $1.5M each year. What would it look like to take 25% of this (or $375,000 per year) for a period of five years and set it aside to bring our volunteer fire halls up to a place of efficiency, accessibility, responsiveness, and fill the gaps in infrastructure, equipment, and technology that they need to fulfill the vision they and their communities have of their role and possibility?
Have all of our volunteer fire halls taken advantage of the provincial generator program (should they want to become warming centres in times of community emergency/disaster)? Have all of our fire halls taken advantage of provincial and federal accessibility funding to render their facilities accessible for all community members? Do all of our volunteer fire halls know of, and take advantage of provincial energy retrofit and renewables funding? If not, how can the CBRM provide the advice, connections, and capacity needed to enable all of our volunteer fire halls to secure these kinds of funds for their facilities? How will the new Nova Scotia Guard intersect - or how should it intersect - with our volunteer fire halls? The CBRM employs a full time Community Development Coordinator. If I was elected Mayor, I would prioritize creating an orderly and supported way for our fire halls to understand and participate in the growing list of facilities/capital improvement and adaptation funds available.
They are our hubs and our places of emergency response. We need to build on this, enhance this, and support this.
We are at an interesting moment in time - we have nine candidates running for Mayor, five councilors who have been acclaimed, and only one of the candidates running in a non-acclaimed district for council is female.
If we are to ensure our local democracy thrives, there are a number of directions to be considered:
I am intrigued by your ranked-ballot suggestion at the municipal level. I’m more familiar with this intervention at the provincial and federal level, but suspect it may have the same desired outcomes at the most local level of elections: encouraging more candidates, encouraging more diverse candidates, improving voter turnout (via a feeling that all votes are counted) and having elected officials who better reflect the will of the voters/popular vote.
I note that in 2021, New York City held its first ranked ballot municipal election, which resulted in NYC’s most diverse council ever and all elected Mayors in the UK are elected through ranked ballot voting!
I do think as well that the CBRM needs to take another look at a smaller council comprised of full-time councillors who are paid accordingly (rather than the current situation where the pay is closer to that of a part-time job for a job that requires consistent daytime and evening time meetings, ongoing responsiveness to constituents, and a great deal of schedule flexibility and meeting preparation).
We need to get clearer on: What is the job of a Councillor in 2024? Is it full time or part time? What is not the job (and is the job of 311 or municipal staff)? And then what is the appropriate level of compensation for the kinds of candidates and Councillors we would wish to attract?
Lastly, as we head into our 26th year of amalgamation, a conversation about the success (or otherwise) of our council in representing and addressing issues that are CBRM-wide in reach or significance is warranted. To what extent do both the collective council and individual councillors think and act beyond the interests of just their district? To what extent does the current system pit districts against one another? Are there other models to be considered that would balance the voices and identities of districts with our need and desire to be a cohesive regional municipality? What might a mix of district councillors and councillors at large (elected to represent the full municipality look like)?
I appreciate your question and for me, in part, it highlights the need for a conversation about governance - How are we governing ourselves? Is it working? What can be improved? What models and options exist? And what are we willing to do to try to ensure that our structure (and the skills of those around the table) are adequate for the challenges and opportunities of 2024.
This is a great question and I've taken some time to think and write a detailed response on this important issue. I'm sharing below the letter I wrote to Father Maroun and the NSEF group.
Dear Fr Maroun and co,
I want to begin by thanking you for your question, and also thanking you for your work on this issue. We owe a great deal of gratitude to the NSEF coalition for continuing to research, educate about, and keep this issue alive in conversations across the CBRM.
As I have been holding townhall-style meet & greets in firehalls and community centres in each district, it is notable the frequency with which equalization is raised. It is an issue that resonates with residents and one that feels unresolved.
I think we all agree our taxes are too high, and have been too high for too long. At the same time, even with such high taxes, the municipality only manages to collect something like fifty per cent of what we need to be able to deliver services. This is not only unfair to our residents, but it also makes us uncompetitive as a region in trying to attract newcomers and entrepreneurs. You gotta really love this place to live here and pay these taxes.
CBRM has a $23 million annual infrastructure deficit alone. So any plan to build houses, pave roads, repair infrastructure — all the while lowering taxes — that doesn’t address the question of money is simply wishful thinking. If I am elected Mayor, in my first 100 days I will work to create a five year capital and operating plan for the CBRM that takes into account the priorities I’ve highlighted in my platform (housing, roads, a new central library, comparable services for comparable taxation, etc) and I will work with the other levels of government to secure the resources needed to achieve these objectives.
In many ways, this plan (in both the work it proposes to accomplish and in its cost) reflects the funds that have not been coming to the CBRM via the federal equalization program. But this plan lays out the issue in a slightly different way. Let me explain:
In the firehall discussions with residents, when the question of equalization has been raised, it is often accompanied by reference to former Mayor John Morgan’s failed legal battle. What many people misunderstand, though, is that strictly put Mayor Morgan didn’t lose that battle; rather, the court declined to hear the case. The inference we can draw from this decision (or non-decision) is that we should pursue the objective through negotiation rather than litigation. In other words, the court decided this was a political, as opposed to constitutional, issue — one that requires sitting at the table with the provincial government rather than across the courtroom from them.
The projects and actions outlined in the plan I’m proposing will reflect what the CBRM needs over the next five years to ensure its current rate of growth can continue, and that those who have called this place home for decades (and those who have called it home for only a few months) can continue to do so. This requires that our roads, water services, parks, libraries, and recreation facilities, among other amenities, are of a comparable quality to those in other parts of the province. And it requires that our taxes be fair — indeed, not only comparable to other jurisdictions in Canada, but competitive, in order to continue to attract newcomers and support our recent population growth.
The NS Department of Finance put the population of CBRM at 109,945 in May 2024. (https://novascotia.ca/finance/statistics/archive_news.asp?id=19934&dg=&df=&dto=0&dti=3)
This is greater than the 2019 population benchmark of 91,413; greater than the 2024 optimistic scenario of 88,710; and in fact exceeds the 2039 optimistic scenario laid out in the 2019 CBRM Viability Study by Grant Thornton. As per the report, “in the optimistic scenario, CBRM would witness surplus from year 2027 onwards, reaching $4.76 Million in 2029 and $26.49 Million in 2039. With a mix of incremental and moderate changes to certain policies and operations, the CBRM is likely to continue being operationally viable.”
It’s almost hard to believe, but the CBRM has achieved what at times felt impossible: population stabilization. We need to turn our attention now to ensuring that we have the housing and infrastructure to sustain these levels of population — which are an immense gift and arrived sooner than any of us expected — and support further growth.
The recent turn in CBRM’s population, while not without challenges, fundamentally changes the economic foundation and possibilities for the community. It means we can see sustained self-sufficiency on the other side of the next five years. The most strategic request of the province at this time, therefore, is a series of targeted, project-specific requests to help CBRM bridge the gap. This requires clearly articulating what we need, how much it will cost, and most importantly, where it will get us.
And where, exactly, will it get us? To a place wherein CBRM has managed to successfully grow its tax base, to be able to deliver municipal services at a level and quality we all know we deserve, and to do so at a tax rate that is fair. Not only fair, but competitive in that it supports — rather than hinders — further growth.
We’re not there yet. We can get there in the long run. But, in the short term, we need the other levels of government to — as I say — bridge the gap for us. That’s going to require a new relationship with the other levels of government when it comes to how this municipality’s operating and capital budgets are financed. But we have much reason for optimism. We’ve already seen signals that the province is interested in investing in CBRM, in the form of its investments in health care, the relocation of NSCC to the Sydney waterfront, and the CBU medical school.
For my part, I’ve been building affordable housing in this community for forty years. I’ve built more affordable housing units than I can count, and I know how to convene and collaborate with the other stakeholders — CBU, NSCC, developers and non-profits, and the other levels of government — to build the 2,550 units we need to address the deficit identified in the province’s own housing assessment of the CBRM housing and rental market. I’ve worked with government for my entire career, and in that time I’ve yet to find a government department wherein we couldn’t get to the place we set out to — if we had a plan that clearly articulated what we would need in order to achieve our objective, and clearly articulated where it would get us. I believe we (the NSEF and I) share the same objective, of a prosperous, sustainable economy and community that is a self-sufficient and even contributing member of the Nova Scotia family.
All my very best to you,
-Rankin
Still have a question? Three ways to get in touch:
- Email info@rankinmacsween.ca
- Text/call 902-578-4366
- Or message on Facebook