I meant to post this forever ago, but it is here now.

Have people been attending the Town Hall presentations? I know tonight’s evilly conflicted with the CHAI meeting but perhaps you caught another one or like me was suspiciously missing from the CHAI meeting.

If you haven't seen it the Mayor's Presentation check it out and share your comments.

The emphasis of the Town Hall was ... well I think it has been or could be phrased in many ways such as; Infrastructure, Viability, Sustainability, Property Taxes or How the Provincial Government is bad for Calgary, the little City that could.

As the plan is pretty simple and available online I won't summarize at this point. But I will share my notes from the open mike. My comments are limited to my own understanding of the discussion so if you can please ad to my summary.

In response to a question about the city forming a bank the answer was pretty along the lines of “No, the City is not in the business of banking”

In response to a suggestion that homelessness be addressed through involuntary treatment the Mayor took a moment to remind us that the City is heroically trying to save the day but it is up to residents like those who have the chance to come on board with the plan for the old Brick building as a temporary shelter. And when pushed, the Mayor also said that the suggested solution would be the mandate of the provincial or federal governments.

When asked if property tax would increase if a deal with the province (referring to the Province sharing more than 50% of property tax with the City) would not be attainable the Mayor discussed the pie which is not growing at the same rate as the need for services and programs. At least that is how I understood the question and the answer but I think I was changing seats during this discussion so … the most important thing to know is that the pie got a lot of airtime tonight.

In the first question about growth there was concern raised about 6 high rises, it seemed to me that the suggestion was that due to these high rises the city was growing (personally I think the cause and affect might be reversed but that could be argued, I suppose, for some time.) The response was that the Mayor and Council are working to curb urban sprawl and support smart growth principles.

A question about the imbalance between rising taxes in inner city neighbourhoods and suburban neighbourhoods was raised amidst cheers. Though the Mayor showed sympathy to this he did not indicate any intention to address it explaining that the Market Value assessment is a better model than the previous model which I think was manual intervals but my handwriting seems to have taken a turn for the messy and I am really not familiar with what was in place before. Further pushing, from the questioner, for more creative solutions and I believe a pie reference and a further push, from the Mayor, for the Provincial Government to hand over 100% of property tax income to the municipal government.

This is long so I am skipping the HWY 22X and Pool discussions not that they aren’t important but that this is a housing site so if you really want that other stuff tell me.

A great question well explained but miss-answered by the Mayor about how seniors who wish to stay in the communities and homes they have been in for several decades but are risking losing that option due to rising property tax. The Mayor first answered talking about diverse communities which include care facilities and referred to Garrison Woods. The questioner rephrased and this time was told that the City would not be looking at income support as a solution. The questioner still feeling the point was being missed tried again this time getting an answer about Hardship case reduction and coming back to “if we had a bigger pie we could be more creative”.

A question about split-rate property tax based on primary residence and not. The solution was understood but not one being seriously considered by the Municipal government.

Question about 50 Million going to Parks and not housing. Answer that Housing is not a local responsibility (implication being Provincial and Federal governments should be stepping up) but that it is a community priority so the Municipal government steps in.

Capping pensioner’s taxation was raised but not seen as a viable option though, once again, sympathy to the plight of seniors and pensioners was conveyed.

A first year UofC student inquired about the potential of reducing growth rather than just increasing the ever popular pie. The suggestion that the imbalance between supply and demand can be resolved not just by increasing the pie but also by reducing the demand. The question was also answered with an explanation of smart growth and a reference to the Mahogany development. Which was not really an answer to reducing growth the questioner rephrased suggesting future growth could be curbed a premise that was mostly denied there was a joking comment about walls not working.

A Queen Elizabeth student praised the plan asked about the likelihood of the province accepting the proposal lead to so many flashes going off as the youngest person in the room at centre stage was clearly a photo op and I pretty much missed the answer in all the excitement.

A final comment from the floor that growth can not be controlled which left me so shell shocked I missed the wrap up from the moderator and the meeting and this long post come to an end.