Northern Economist 2.0

Tuesday 12 March 2024

Will Thunder Bay Meet Its Housing Targets?

 

The Mayor’s State of the City Address last evening highlighted  housing construction in Thunder Bay particularly touting that Thunder Bay within Ontario had met its target so far and ranking tenth amongst Ontario centers (See here for a ranking).  The Mayor reiterated once again that in response to coming economic development and demand, Thunder Bay needed more housing and has a target of 1,691 new homes over three years.  Naturally, the question that arises is whether or not Thunder Bay can indeed meet this target. Much depends on the ability of the local construction sector to actually build that many homes in three years as well as whether the demand will materialize.

 

Forecasting the future these days is a pretty perilous exercise but some insight on the ability of Thunder Bay to build what amounts to nearly 600 new homes a year can be garnered from past performance.  Figure 1 plots monthly Statistics Canada total residential permit data by dollar value and number of permits from 2011 to 2023.  The numbers fluctuate seasonally though there is a spike in 2023.  However,  there are similar spikes in earlier periods.  If you want to smooth things out by taking a average - Thunder Bay has averaged monthly over the 2011 to 2023 period approximately 25 residential permits with an average value of 6.5 million dollars.  Converted  annually, that 25 permits a month translates into 300 units - a bit short.




 

Perhaps rather than permits issued, a better indicator of Thunder Bay’s capacity and ability to build nearly 600 units annually is a longer-term total housing starts series.  Figure 2 plots this from January 1990 to January 2024 and includes a polynomial smooth to highlight trends.  The results suggest that Thunder Bay is indeed capable of building 600 units a year as we have done so in the past.  Indeed, the early 1990s resulting in over 1,000 new housing starts annually.  However, the major obstacle is likely to be not building capacity or ability but demand for new units.  As the smoothed series points point, we are on an uptick that can see about 400 new homes being built in the next year.  Reaching 600 is possible based on the recent past given the smoothed numbers going into the pandemic.  However, as noted, the result is going to be driven also by our economic growth.  Thunder Bay has been doing well economically over the last year but will require sustained performance at this level to generate the needed demand for housing.

 


 

 

Monday 12 February 2024

Municipal Spending Evolution in Thunder Bay

 

As the 2024 municipal budget season wraps up, it is worth looking at where Thunder Bay has been going over the last decade in terms of the composition of its total municipal expenditures (all spending, tax and grant supported, capital and operating).  Using multi-year financial data (2002 to 2022) from the Ontario Ministry of Municipal Affairs Financial Information Review, one can obtain an overview of the trends.  In 2012, total municipal expenditures in Thunder Bay were 505.4 million dollars and in 2022 they were 599.8 million making for an increase of 19 percent.  Compared to some other municipalities, this was actually a rather modest increase as over the same period, Greater-Sudbury saw an increase of 41 percent, Windsor 26 percent, Barrie 29 percent and Kingston 41 percent.  At the same time, over this entire period, Thunder Bay nevertheless still managed to have the largest municipal expenditure to GDP ratio of these cities.  

 

What is more interesting is the evolution in functional composition.  Figure 1 illustrates that in 2012, the City of Thunder Bay spent 5 percent of its budget on general government, 14 percent on protection of persons and property, 12 percent on transportation, 12 percent on the environment, 5 percent on health and emergency services, 13 percent on social and family services, 9 percent on cultural and recreation services, 2 percent on planning and development and 28 percent on "other".  This last category reflects Thunder Bay’s ownership of its municipal telecom utility (TBayTel) as well as differences in the way Thunder Bay approaches social housing given we have a district board – the District of Thunder Bay Social Services Administration Board.

 

 


 

Figure 2 presents the 2022 composition.  General government showed a decline to 4 percent, protection to persons and property rose to 21 percent, transportation remained at 12 percent as did the environment.  Meanwhile, health and emergency services grew to 7 percent, social and family services declined to 7 percent, and both recreation and culture and planning and development remained the same at 9 percent and 2 percent respectively.  Meanwhile, the "other" category's share declined to 26 percent.  

 

 


 

Of course, for the composition to change, it means that these categories have grown at different rates and so Figure 3 presents the percent change in total spending by category over the 2012 to 2022 period.  In accord with general local perceptions, the largest increases in spending have indeed been in protection services and health and emergency services at 76 and 73 percent respectively.  Next is recreation and culture at 25 percent, followed by the environment at 14 percent, planning and development at 13 percent, "other" at 12 percent and transportation at 11 percent.  There were two categories that saw declines in total spending: general government fell by 6 percent (there have indeed been some administrative economies) while social and family services fell by 32 percent.  

 

 


 

Given that social issues have been front and center in Thunder Bay over the last few years, this allocation does provide some insight into how Thunder Bay is dealing with some of its social issues.  Resource allocation appears to have targeted the more direct outcomes and fallout of the assorted social ills afflicting the streets of Thunder Bay.  This is to be expected.  What is somewhat more disturbing is that there has been an expenditure drop in family and social services which one might expect would be a longer-term spending approach to addressing some of the causes of social issues.  Whereas, in 2012, 64.4 million was being spent on family and social services, this has declined to 44 million by 2022.  

 

It is interesting to note that of the five cities mentioned at the start of this post, between 2012 and 2022, Thunder Bay saw the largest percent increases in dollars spent on protection to persons and property as well as health and emergency services.  With respect to spending on family and social services, only Barrie saw a decline while Greater-Sudbury, Windsor and Kingston all saw increases.  Windsor, Barrie, Greater-Sudbury, and Kingston also all  increases in social housing spending (though Greater-Sudbury's was quite small). However,  in the case of Thunder Bay it is difficult to tell from these numbers if we are indeed spending more in social housing in the "other" category.  Ultimately, such differences across urban centers will provide an interesting laboratory experiment on how municipalities are dealing with issues like poverty, addiction and crime.

Sunday 4 February 2024

Measuring Municipal Public Sector Size

 

Public sector size and its impact on the economy is a long-standing research question in public finance.  In the case of Canada with its federal system of government, measures of public sector size often focus on either total public sector size or break it down into measures of federal and/or provincial public sector size.  These measures commonly take government spending or government revenues as a share of GDP to estimate the size of the public sector footprint.  Less common are attempts to related municipal public sector size to the size of their local economies.

 

Data is always an issue when trying to get an empirical handle on measuring things like public sector size.  Fortunately, in the case of Ontario municipalities, it is possible to get annual data on total municipal government expenditures and revenues from the Ontario Ministry of Municipal Affairs Annual Financial Information Returns which are filed by municipal governments.  Also fortunate is that Statistics Canada now provides some estimates of GDP for major census metropolitan areas going back to 2009.  While the data is a bit onerous to compile and put together, the preliminary results for Thunder Bay and three other Ontario municipalities are interesting.

 

Figure 1 plots total municipal expenditure as a share of CMA GDP from 2009 to 2022 for Thunder Bay, Greater Sudbury, Windsor, and Barrie.  These are relatively smaller Ontario urban centres well outside the GTA/Niagara region with two in northern Ontario.  Greater Sudbury is always an automatic comparison for Thunder Bay on many levels given that it is the largest city in northern Ontario with Thunder Bay second.  Also, note that for 2021 and 2022, GDP was estimated using the annual average growth rate of GDP for the 2010 to 2020 period.

 


 

 

The results reveal that total municipal expenditures in these four cities as a share of GDP reveal that Thunder Bay has a larger municipal footprint than the other three.  Over the entire period 2009 to 2022, Thunder Bay’s municipal expenditure to GDP ratio averages 9 percent while Sudbury is at 6 percent, and Windsor and Barrie each at 5 percent and 4.7 percent respectively.  In terms of trends over time, since 2011, Barrie has been trending slowly downwards, Windsor is stable, Sudbury has been growing while Thunder Bay managed a small decline that was reversed during the pandemic.  Indeed, the two end points of this chart are both associated with economic trauma in that the start is marked by the aftermath of the Great Recession and Financial Crisis and the end by the COVID-19 pandemic.

 

Nevertheless, the results suggest that based on this albeit limited sample, the two northern Ontario municipalities have larger municipal public sectors than ones in southern Ontario. Even within the north, Thunder Bay is certainly in a league of its own when it comes to the size of its municipal footprint.  Some of these differences across the cities can of course be ascribed to the generally more robust southern Ontario economic environment and better economic growth performance which naturally spills over into GDP.  At the same time, Thunder Bay is different, and the question as always is why?

 

One might argue that the municipal public sector in Thunder Bay is larger than these other cities because it has a weaker economy.  Given that so much municipal spending is mandated or guided by the province, Thunder Bay does not spend more per se but does relative to the size of its economy.  This is the “province makes us do it defence”.  On the other hand, one could argue that more spending is also a choice and Thunder Bay and the Lakehead cities that preceded it have always because of their isolation engaged in more municipal spending to provide services they feel ought to be available.  In this regards, part of the difference between Thunder Bay and other cities lies in municipal utilities given that the City of Thunder Bay essentially owns TBayTel- its own municipal telecom utility.

 

In some sense, neither explanation is terribly flattering in explaining why Thunder Bay’s municipal public sector can be nearly twice as large as that in some other southern Ontario cities.  We have a weak economy which despite all efforts continues to be weak and our municipal government plays the role of an economic stabilizer.  Or, ownership of TBayTel aside, we may simply like to spend more than other cities and are quite comfortable with the City of Thunder Bay being as large an economic driver as it is.  One suspects both these explanations are potentially inconvenient truths no one in Thunder Bay really wants to hear.

Saturday 27 January 2024

Ranking Thunder Bay's Tax Levy and More...

 

It is municipal budget season in  Ontario and Canada and this year’s proposed budget increases appear to be quite large.  Toronto, for example, has proposed a 10.5 percent tax increase while Hamilton initially was looking at a 14 percent increase. Vancouver is going up 7.5 percent while Montreal seems set to go up 5 percent which while seemingly modest given the comparisons described here is nevertheless Montreal’s largest increase in 13 years. And then there is Thunder Bay which for 2024 is proposing a 6.1 percent increase in the total tax levy which “after growth” will be 5.5 percent. 

 

While one might argue that Thunder Bay's increase seems modest compared to these other metropolises, much like the case of Montreal, the more apt comparisons are with the past rather than other cities.  Even in the case of Ontario municipalities, there are differences in municipal structure with Thunder Bay as a single tier municipality not always directly comparable to other cities – the famous apples versus oranges argument city administrators usually bring up at budget time.  Ultimately, one needs to look at how Thunder Bay’s tax levy and proposed levy increase stacks up against past ones.

 

Figure 1 plots a two-axis chart of the total tax levy as well as the dollar change in the levy from year to year going from 1990 to the proposed 2024 figures.  In 1990, the tax levy was 63.4 million dollars while today the proposed amount for 2024 is 231.7 million dollars.  And of course, this is just the tax levy and not the total budget which is funded by both tax levies and government grants and comes in including operating and capital at a combined total of approximately 538 million dollars.  The trend has been upwards with an increase every year with the exception of 1995 which appears to have seen a drop in the levy of 1.3 million dollars.  The proposed increase for 2024 is 13.3 million which is well above the average annual increase for the 1991 to 2024 period of 4.95 million dollars.

 


 

 

How does this year’s percentage increase in the tax levy stack up to past ones? Figure 2 plots each percent increase in the total tax levy from 1991 to 2024 ranking them from highest to lowest and at 6.1 percent, the proposed 2024 levy increase is the 5th highest in over thirty years (but second highest in strict absolute dollar terms). The increases range from a high of 21.8 percent in 1998 to a low of -1.7 percent in 1995.  All other things given this year’s proposed increase is at the higher end of the range in percentage terms.

 


 

 

Of course, it is often argued that the reason taxes go up apart from new needs or mandated responsibility increases from the province is a general rise in costs driven by inflation. Inflation certainly has been in the headlines the last year, so it is worth checking out the correlation between the CPI inflation rate for Thunder Bay and the percent change in the tax levy.  Oddly enough, when a linear trend is fitted to the scatter plot of tax levy increases versus the inflation rate, the relationship appears to be slightly negative – that is, higher inflation rates were correlated with lower tax increases. 

 

However, one could argue that these results are driven by 1998 with its 21 percent levy increase (If you recall the late 1990s was an era of municipal restructuring with changes in how taxes were allocated between residential and business and also local education and of course social service downloading).  However, if you omit that year as an outlier, what you get is essentially a flat curve.  That is, the rate of inflation does not seem to drive the rate increases.  They are being driven by other factors and since we don’t know what we don’t know, those factors are best left up to city administrators who are in the know about what they may or may not know.  Nevertheless, do not expect a straightforward answer as the factors over and above inflation are indeed complicated.

 


 

 

Many people find the budgeting process of the City of Thunder Bay (and indeed municipal governments in general) rather arcane and overly complicated.  Indeed, even those of us with a public finance background find municipal budgets particularly confusing and exasperating as they are indeed laid out in a manner that does not inspire clarity.  They look nothing like a federal or provincial budget which a least provide a one- or two-page table easily summarizing revenues and expenditures.  Now one may argue that this is not good for local democracy if ratepayers do not understand municipal finances because they are not readily transparent. 

 

This is where the ratepayer errs.  This is actually not about democracy.  It is about the needs of the corporation and corporations are perpetually lived entities with limited liability and interested in their own financial preservation.  They respond more often to the money rather than to voter pressure.  The phrase “You Can’t Fight City Hall” does not exist for no reason.  Remember, like other municipalities, our city government is The Corporation of the City of Thunder Bay.  Despite popular sentiment and belief, municipalities in Canada are not independent tiers of government but creatures of the provinces.  Local service provision has essentially been contracted out by provincial governments to municipal corporations.  The democratic accountability for municipal government ultimately lies in provincial elections rather than local ones. 

 

City councils are essentially boards of directors, and they serve to demonstrate responsibility for corporate direction but little else in terms of day-to-day finance and operations.  True, ratepayers engage with the corporation by selecting the board of directors in elections and participating in numerous surveys and public consultations but then any corporation worth its salt always is doing customer satisfaction surveys.  The real business and complex operations geared around the financial operations of the corporation is conducted by its officers and employees and generally behind closed doors. 

 

The members of the board - our councilors – are essentially a large focus group attempting to promote public relations engagement in a theatrical setting for the people the corporation ultimately derives its revenue from and provides services to. That usually explains why so much of council meeting’s time is usually taken up by discussion of minor manners that galvanize emotions (time to change street names again anyone?) and complicated large multi-million-dollar decisions seem to occur quickly on the advice of administration. There are exceptions when fate delivers exceptionally persistent and informed councilors - witness the turf facility debate to date - but corporate administrations play the long game and eventually wear out the opposition.

 

Even the current review of the size and structure of Thunder Bay City Council is largely designed to create a sense of public engagement with the process rather than any actual decision making.  Remember, Thunder Bay was created by an act of the provincial government.  Thunder Bay can certainly try and change its system of municipal representation and structure, but the province will have the ultimate say and the corporation will implement that.  Remember Toronto in 2018?  The number of wards  (and councilors) was reduced nearly 50 percent in the middle of a municipal election but not as a result of a grass roots consultation but by the provincial government because they wanted to and they could.

 

The point of all this?  The City of Thunder Bay needs a 6.1 percent in the total tax levy to fund its operations and tinkering around the edges aside, will get most of that increase.  And will we get a revamped municipal ward and councilor structure? Certainly. But only if the province goes along with it.

Wednesday 17 January 2024

Reforming Thunder Bay City Council: The Journey Begins

 

It appears that Thunder Bay City Council has finally decided to get serious about looking at its size and composition with the move to appoint a six-member citizen committee that will lead a review process over the next year that might actually result in changes in time for the 2026 municipal election.  The committee will have a far-reaching mandate to explore the size of council, their status as full or part-time membership as well as the structure of the current at-large and ward hybrid model that has governed Thunder Bay municipal politics since the 1980s.  When Thunder Bay was created it 1970, it began with a mayor and 12 councillors elected evenly across four wards which was revised to seven wards in 1976 and then took its current form of seven ward and five at large councillors in 1985.

 

This is coming about nearly three years after a previous council began to explore the issue and which ultimately generated this post which concluded: “it would be better if more of an effort was made to commission an independent arm’s length panel to review the situation and present options to council.”  Well, a committee has finally been appointed by City Council and is made up of six members.  The committee is chaired by former councillor Rebecca Johnson and vice-chaired by another former councillor Cody Fraser as well as citizens Riley Burton, Wayne Bahlieda, Heather McLeod and Carlos Santander-Maturana. 

 

The committee will conduct a two-phase consultation with the public.  The first phase includes a survey to ascertain how the public engages and interacts with City Council and examining if they have a desire to see changes to the composition of council. Phase two will include discussion and consultation with the public on potential options that could result in changes to council composition and/or the ward boundaries.  The committee will then take all of this information and “provide a report to City council with recommended changes to the composition of council or the ward system next year”.

 

The wording on the City of Thunder Bay website seems to imply that there will be changes and the chair of the committee in a TBTNewswatch story seemed to say that she believed that this time there were going to be changes made.  Indeed, phase two already says it is about options for change even before phase one has ascertained a desire for change  This is somewhat disconcerting because it suggests that someone or somebody somewhere has already decided that changes will be made, and the only real question is what those changes might be.  When put alongside a less than transparent process for committee member selection that were apparently “carefully chosen” and a survey that requires registration, one begins to wonder if the result is already a foregone conclusion.  Of course, one should be charitable on an issue that has reared its head up numerous times over the years and has only finally resulted in a serious attempt to examine it.  Given the length of time it has taken to get to this point, I suppose one should simply be grateful a committee has been struck even if the process seems akin to foxes guarding the hen house.

 

It is fair to ask what possibly an economist could contribute to a debate on municipal governance?  However, barring the reality that economists are municipal citizens too, it remains that economists are fully capable of examining the costs and benefits of institutional arrangements and their evolution as well as public finance aspects.  It is not an incursion into new territory to be staked out but rather an extension of what many institutional economists and economic historians already do.   In the case of the size, structure, composition and representativeness of the current institutional arrangement, there needs to be a framework for the decision making as well as an examination of what issues need to be addressed with the change.

 

A change in the current arrangements of municipal council represents an institutional change or innovation and such changes should be made if the perceived net benefits of the new arrangement exceed the net benefits of the previous one plus the costs of transitioning to a new arrangement – both social and economic costs.  It requires in the end an analysis of the current system and its benefits and costs not just economically but in terms of effectiveness in democratic representation and decision making as well as community spirit and engagement. 

 

What is not functioning under the current arrangement?  What could be improved?  What are the advantages of the current system of seven ward and five at-large representatives plus a mayor and what are its drawbacks?  In other words, what exactly are we trying to fix or improve.  What is driving the need to make changes to city council?  For example, simply being unable to get a consensus on building a new turf facility is not a reason to change the decision-making mechanism. Similarly, rancorous meetings are also not a reason to reform city council if the debate results in things getting done or poor decisions avoided.

 

Much of the debate in the past has focused on issues like ward councillors being too focused on their wards and not seeing the “bigger picture” when it comes to city issues.  Other times, there have been concerns that at-large councillors by not being tied to a ward and its needs were somehow shirking their duties by picking and choosing what they wanted to focus on.  Indeed, Thunder Bay politics at the municipal level has occasionally seemed like council consisted of a mayor, five mayors in waiting and seven dwarf councillors left to do a lot of the heavy lifting on local issues.  On the other hand, one could also argue that having five at large councillors allowed for citizens to go beyond their immediate ward councillor when lobbying if they felt they had not had their issue addressed.

 

And the hybrid system itself with two types of councillors is rather unique – why is it that Thunder Bay cannot have either a system of all ward councillors or all at large councillors?  What was the original purpose of going to a hybrid model and have those reasons shifted?  Then, there is the issue of the total number of councillors given the population size as on a per capita basis Thunder Bay probably has more councillors than many other cities in Ontario.  Burlington, for example, with a population nearly double that of Thunder Bay, has six ward councillors plus a mayor.  Kingston, on the other hand, which is one and a half times Thunder Bay’s population, has a mayor representing “the city as a whole” and twelve district councillors.

 

Perhaps fewer councillors but all full-time rather than the current part-time might make for better decision making.  However, that would likely mean a higher stipend and part of the argument for reducing the size of council is a belief that somehow there are going to be cost savings.  If you are indeed looking at cost savings in municipal government, reducing the number and salaries of councillors is merely symbolic as the real savings lie elsewhere. On the other hand, one can argue that being a councillor is about community service and the money should not matter.

 

Would having all councillors as ward councillors make the council too parochial as each seeks only to look after neighborhood concerns?  Or will having all at-large councillors undermine the position of mayor as all councillors can claim to have a city-wide mandate from the electorate?  Indeed, if all the councillors are at large, why elect a separate mayor at all?  Make the mayor the at-large councillor with the most votes.  Or, if we move to an all-at-large approach, will only high-profile individuals and financially better off individuals being able to run for council given that ward races can favour ward residents with close neighborhood ties while city wide campaigns are more expensive to mount? 

 

And all of this of course is intertwined with the issue about whether we need to or should redesign our ward system given the current imbalances in population across wards as populations in the city have shifted.  Should we go to eight or ten numbered as opposed to named wards with approximately equivalent populations, as well as a mayor?  Should the councillors be all at-large or all ward based or some new type of hybrid?  What should the borders of the new wards be?  Will changing the number of wards and councillors as well as redesigning borders lead to better democratic accountability?  More citizen involvement? And on top of all of this – do we want a first past the post system electing our councillors?  Ranked or weighted ballots – especially for at-large candidates?

 

 


 

As mentioned before, all of this is really not new territory for an economist.  Institutions and their quality are fundamental to successfully functioning economies.  Has Thunder Bay been hurt economically by its current municipal institutions? Indeed, one could in a moment of introspection go further and ask if amalgamation was responsible for the economic slowdown after 1970 given a monopoly one-city government replaced what were a set of competitive municipalities.  There can be a lot at stake here as change for the sake of change without understanding the reasons for change as well as the long-term ramifications can leave us worse off.  Borrowing from the words of our outgoing City Manager, if you “don’t know what you don’t know”, then how can you know that what you are doing is the best decision possible?  The committee indeed has its work cut out for it and one hopes that they are independently minded enough to be able to know what questions to ask, when to ask them and more importantly, when to suggest to do something and when to do nothing.

Tuesday 2 January 2024

Reflections on the New Year

 

Happy New Year to all!  One must admit that 2023 has been a bit of a ride regionally, nationally, and internationally.  Regionally, Thunder By and northern Ontario have had a reasonably good year economically though many of the trends affecting the country and the world – the higher cost of living, homelessness and a general angst and anxiety about the future – are also part of life here.  Sometimes, even the nature of “high tech”  21st century crime sometimes makes one wonder if the world has truly been turned upside. 

 

The country’s economy has slowed but there is no recession yet.  If anything, the Bank of Canada is not given enough credit for engineering what to this point has been a soft landing of higher interest rates, slower growth and falling inflation.  As much as people complain about the cost of housing in Canada and the seeming inability to get things done, it also seems to be a feature of other countries such as the USA, the UK and Australia.  Indeed, it is interesting how similar debates around housing issues are occurring in countries around the world.  And of course, there is the international front where a definite challenge is underway from the CRINKs (China, Russia, Iran and North Korea) in three specific theatres  – Middle East, Ukraine and Taiwan – and in the Cyber world to the EU-Anglosphere-Asia/Pacific Western Alliance. 

 

Still, much of the global turmoil seems far removed from Thunder Bay which is still in many respects still somewhat both removed and integrated with life in the rest of province and country.  Air travel is still the quickest and most convenient way to get from here to anywhere but the pre-pandemic age of numerous, cheap, and conveniently scheduled flights connecting Thunder Bay to Toronto and ultimately the world has departed for now.  As much as Thunder Bay is plugged into the modern world, we still seem to wait a long time for things other places seem to get much sooner. After all, we have been waiting for an Ikea and a Costco since at least the mid 1990s.  As my running joke goes, Thunder Bay is probably a great place to wait for the apocalypse.  When the world ends, it will happen at least ten years later in Thunder Bay. 

 

Of course, as much as there seems to be constant change and turmoil, after 33 years of teaching and research and nearly twice that number of years being alive, one achieves a certain serenity from the patterns of constant change.  In many respects, one has seen it all. I reflect that during my career, my teaching has gone from hand-written lecture notes and chalkboards to electronic screens and PowerPoints while my research output was once typed on a manual typewriter after organizing index card cards from research trips to the library where sources were hunted down from a card catalogue. Today, I can surf any number of libraries and digital sources for both data and output on my laptop or iPad from the comfort of my own home. Writing - including blogging - is much faster than it ever was.

 

With all the new technology and social changes, one can sometimes start to feel like a dinosaur but the trick to avoid that fate is of course to maintain a curiosity and enthusiasm for the world around you, to see things in a different light, and to try new things.  After all, despite the gloom, 2024 should be the quintessential Canadian year.  A year of beer as we celebrate the year of 20-2-4s.  What could be more Canadian than that?  To a 2024 of hope and wonder and if things go off the rails, there is always a beer.

 


 

Saturday 2 December 2023

Thunder Bay's Economy: The Year Forward and Back

 

As 2023 winds down and 2024 arrives, a retrospective combined with a look ahead on the economy is a timely exercise.  The economic indicators to date for 2023 suggest that Thunder Bay has had a very good year.  Average monthly employment in 2023 to date is up about 3 percent over 2022 – representing nearly 2,000 new jobs.  However, while average monthly employment appears to have recovered from the pandemic, it has yet to permanently surpass the 2018 level.  However, on the plus side, the accompanying figure suggests that Thunder Bay’s employment does appear to be on a modest longer-term upward growth trend after years of being seemingly flat.  As well, the seasonally adjusted unemployment rate remains around 5 percent and the average for 2023 is lower than 2022 which suggests that the local labor market does not have a lot of slack in it.  

 


 

Along with employment opportunities being generated in large public sector construction projects in both the city and the region, there is also substantial activity in the local retail and tourism /hospitality sector with the opening of new retail and food service outlets as well as a very successful cruise ship season.  The port has also seen growing grain shipments as Thunder Bay resumes much if its traditional role in Canada's grain transport network.  On the housing front, while starts are not at historic highs, there nevertheless has been substantial activity particularly in the multi-residential unit sector.  Overall, Thunder Bay has seen healthy economic activity despite the recent rise in interest rates.  This is the result of continued activity in its traditional sectors of construction, forestry and port activity combined with activity on the mining front. As a result, population can be expected to grow albeit at rates still well below provincial and national growth rates.

Perhaps the biggest impact locally is the construction of Thunder Bay’s $1.2-billion provincial jail which until completion in 2025 will drive Thunder Bay’s labor market and economy even if the Canadian economy slows down in 2024. At the same time, the massive project has complicated the availability of local trades people with lengthy waiting lists for electricians, plumbers and carpentry services for smaller projects and home renovations assuming that you can even get trades people to agree to come.  However, completion of the jail project will likely see a ramping down of economic growth in the economy and in the absence of equally large new projects some alleviation of a relatively tight labor market particularly in building trades.

According to the Conference Board of Canada, housing starts in Thunder Bay are expected to grow but the numbers in their forecast seem unlikely to meet the 275 annual units required to meet provincial targets.  Nevertheless, Thunder Bay appears to be pressing forward with plans to apply for federal funding to build two thousand homes over the next three years - over 600 new units a year.  An average of 600 to 700 new homes a year is an amount that has not been seen in Thunder Bay since the baby boom years of the 1960s and 1970s.  Ultimately the success of such a grand scheme depends on local demand and this depends on what interest rates are like, what the state of the economy is and whether people have the incomes and purchasing power to pay for the housing.  Never mind if enough building trades people are available to actually do the work.

Going into 2024 and as noted in the most recent Conference Board Report, one can expect to see employment growth in construction, transport and warehousing, health care and social assistance, accommodation and food services and public administration.  Other sectors such as manufacturing, utilities, professional and scientific services, and educational services are expected to remain flat or even decline slightly.  Declines can particularly be expected in the areas of educational services given regional demographics and public funding levels, as well as the local FIRE sector (finance, insurance, real estate) given the rise in interest rates.  The post-secondary sector in Thunder Bay is also in uncertain territory given the dependence on volatile flows of international students and lack of clarity from the provincial government as to what directions in funding it may pursue in the wake of the Blue-Ribbon Panel Report. While the Blue-Ribbon Report called for increases in tuition and the provincial government grant to post-secondary institutions, the government’s response to date has been to continue to seek efficiencies which means the structural problems of university finances are unlikely to be resolved anytime soon.

Going forward there is also some economic uncertainty on several fronts.  It remains to be seen what the long-term outcome of the sale of Resolute Forest Products to Atlas Holdings will be on both local production and employment levels.  The future of the Alstom plant is also always precarious in the absence of a major transit project to generate longer-term employment.  As for the future of lithium refining in the region by companies such as Rock Tech Lithium, Toronto’s Avalon Advanced Materials and Green Technology Metals of Australia, there are positive expectations that these projects will finally trigger the long-awaited mining boom given the flurry of recent announcements and media stories. 

However, despite purchases of waterfront land, to date these are all plans, and the industry appears to be waiting for public money to assist their development.  It is unclear if any of these companies will be able to raise the necessary funds either publicly or privately to finance their activity in the face of international competition in the industry with other players with their infrastructure needs already in place.  As well, demand for fully electric vehicles – a key driver of the demand for lithium – has also been exhibiting weakness given the cost of the vehicles, their range, the availability of charging facilities and competition from alternatives such as hybrids as well as traditional gasoline powered vehicles.  As a result, the lithium refining industry in Thunder Bay and Canada while hopeful in its signs, may remain a work in progress for the foreseeable future.

Of course, in terms of what Thunder Bay can do to deal with all these changes and the economic uncertainty does not have a simple answer.  Thunder Bay, much like Canada as a whole, is a small economy unable to influence global economic and political trends beyond its borders.  Nevertheless, given the current buoyancy in the local economy, it is important to make hay while the sun shines.  Going forward, Thunder Bay must continue to make itself as attractive a jurisdiction for business investment as it can.  That means continuing to provide quality of life amenities, a range of useful and timely services for all demographic groups and a competitive local municipal service and tax environment.  Needless to say, at particularly at the municipal level, there will be a need to provide more while keeping the tax burden down – a tall order to fill at the best of times.

Monday 13 November 2023

Tracking Thunder Bay’s Economy: Another View

 

As 2022 begins to wind up, it is worth taking a look at how Thunder Bay’s economy is doing using less traditional indicators to shed light not only on its economic performance but the perennial question of whether its population is growing or not.  One way of looking at Thunder Bay’s economy and making some comparisons to other centers is the use of Tax Filer data available from Statistics Canada. The number of T1 Tax Filers can be used as a correlate of not only population numbers but also incomes and economic activity.   

 

Figure 1 plots the number of tax filers by year from 2000 to 2001 in the Thunder Bay CMA with a linear trend.  There has definitely been some growth in the number of tax filers over the last few decades. From 88,240 T1s filed in 2000 to 92,660 in 2021, Thunder Bay has seen a 5 percent increase in the total number of tax filers between those two years though numbers do fluctuate from year to year.  Thunder Bay’s CMA population in the 2001 Census was 121,986 and its CMA population in the 2021 Census was 123,258 – an increase of 1 percent.  One would expect the number of tax filers reporting income is somewhat a more robust count than the number of people filling out the census at least in terms of compliance. 

 

 


 

If the 5 percent growth Tax Filer growth rate was applied to Thunder Bay’s population in 2001, then in 2021 one would have a CMA population of 128,085.  So, in response to the question of whether or not there are more people living in Thunder Bay than the official census count states, the answer it is perhaps so.  Even so, it is not the tens of thousands of people that seems to have seized the imagination of local politicians lobbying for more resources.  At least that is assuming that these tens of thousands of additional people have employment and are reporting an income.  Of course, if they are not working and therefore not reporting an income or are working and not reporting an income, well those are entirely different matters that should definitely concern the federal and provincial governments.

 


 

 

Delving deeper into the numbers, Figure 2 plots the average annual growth rate of the number of T1 Tax filers over the period 2001 to 2021 for Thunder Bay, as well as Toronto, Hamilton, Greater Sudbury, and Ontario as a whole.  It appears that Thunder Bay’s average annual tax filer growth rate is well below that for Ontario and Toronto but also Hamilton and Greater Sudbury.   Thus, another indicator that while we are growing, we are not growing as quickly as other population centres. 

 


 

 

Finally, Figure 3 plots average annual T1 Tax Filer Income and it illustrates that while average income has grown, Thunder Bay is below Ontario and also below the other three comparison cities in the chart.  As of 2021, average tax filer income in Thunder Bay is $53,289 compared to $56,691 in Greater Sudbury, $57,936 in Hamilton and $59,410 in Toronto with the average for Ontario at $56,893. Given that average rents and cost of living in Thunder Bay have grown to levels not incomparable to southern Ontario cities, this would suggest that many in Thunder Bay are currently quite stretched when it comes to their finances.

 

So, there you have yet another set of performance indicators on Thunder Bay’s economy. 

Sunday 1 October 2023

Thunder Bay, Burlington, Windrows and Civic Darwinism

 

Winter is approaching and it continues that compared to Thunder Bay, some southern Ontario municipalities are way ahead of the game when it comes to dealing with the lethal combination of climate change and aging populations.  In recent years, Thunder Bay has been getting heavier and wetter snowfalls which in the aftermath are quickly compacted into thick ice on residential streets.  Once the city snowploughs come through the neighborhood, usually several days after the snowfall, the result is a windrow at the end of one’s driveways.  Notwithstanding the snow already in one’s driveway, increasingly, we are not looking at six inches to a foot of snow left behind but massive walls of ice and snow which even a heavy duty snowblower is challenged to deal with.  The result for young and old alike is a period of massive exertion to exit one’s driveway which increasingly has been found to culminate in cardiac events not conducive to one’s longevity.

 

Now this blog has brought the issue of windrows up before but obviously to little avail in Thunder Bay.  A 2021 blog post noted that even Ignace Ontario was apparently getting its municipal snow grader outfitted with a “snowgate” while at the time it was noted that other cities in southern Ontario such as Richmond hill, Markham and even Toronto had windrow removal programs in place.  To this list can now be added the City of Burlington Ontario which according to a story in the Hamilton Spectator appears to have moved beyond a targeted windrow removal program (for seniors or people on disabilities) to a more general program that naturally comes at a charge.  As the story reads:

 

Burlington city council has approved enhancements to its program to clear snow left behind by plows, including increasing the number of available spots from 200 to 1,000 driveways.

In addition, service boundaries will expand to include all areas of the city.

As part of the city’s windrow program, crews will clear windrows within 36 hours of snowfall stopping and within 12 hours of residential road plowing. A windrow is the pile of snow that is left at the bottom of driveways by roadway plows.

Residential road plowing only occurs after accumulation of 7.5 centimetres or more of snow. Windrow-clearing services will run from Dec. 1, 2023, until March 31, 2024. A non-refundable fee of $125 plus HST per driveway entrance for the entire season must be paid at the time of registration.

In years past, the program was only offered to people with disabilities and individuals unable to clear their windrows. As part of the program’s expansion, the city now has the capacity to offer spots to any resident.

The city will continue to focus on providing spots to people with disabilities. Previous registrants will be contacted over the next week to secure a spot in the program. Following that, advanced registration for people with disabilities will open on Oct. 5 at 9 a.m. Registration for residents city-wide will open on Oct. 19 at 9 a.m.

 

Now, one is not asking for the city of Thunder Bay to provide free windrow removal.  After all, Thunder Bay has pretty clearly stated what its priorities are when it comes to tax funded or assisted municipal services.  While Thunder Bay does spend one of the highest per capita amounts of major Ontario cities, it has chosen to prioritize three things: general government, police, and fire services.  Indeed, of 27 major Ontario municipalities, Thunder Bay historically spends the most dollars per capita of its of its tax levy supported operating budget on these three items.   Indeed, historically nearly 60 percent of Thunder Bay’s operating tax levy is spent on these three items - again, the highest of these 27 major municipalities.  However, the City of Thunder Bay does not even appear interested in pursuing an approach like that of Burlington where one could essentially pay for the windrows to be removed so after the residential street is ploughed.  It is probably too entrepreneurial an approach for a gvoernmental body in Thunder bay to attempt.  On the other hand, given Thunder Bay’s municipal cost structure, one suspects that even if such a service were offered, it would be substantially more expensive than what Burlington is planning to offer.

 

So, there you have it.  Winter is coming and with it Thunder Bay’s survival of the fittest approach to retirement living.  

 


 

Wednesday 20 September 2023

Strong Mayors and Housing: Thunder Bay Edition

 

Thunder Bay City Council this week did not support Mayor Ken Boshcoff’s desire to acquire “strong mayor powers” in a quest to meet provincial targets for housing and reap the benefits of associated funding support.  In some respects, this is not a surprise, not so much because members of council are so concerned about local democracy but because it does represent an erosion of their power given that strong powers on offer allow mayors to pass bylaws with the support of just one third of council, as well as veto bylaws passed by council on matters involving provincial priorities. In addition, the mayor will be able to propose the city budget, reorganize city departments and hire or fire the city manager and even some department heads. If anything, this represents a major potential increase in workload for the Office of the Mayor and one suspects there will eventually be some hiring to provide the necessary support.

 

Thunder Bay City Council because of its unique structure of at-large and ward councillors has always had councillors whose electoral mandate pretty much matched that of the mayor given they were elected by city-wide voters.  What the new changes mean in Thunder Bay and indeed in municipalities across the province is that the power structure has been unilaterally changed by the province in an effort to get the provincial housing agenda kick-started.  Indeed, going down the road, what some future mayor might do with such powers is a real concern. Nevertheless, it would appear that the mayor is going to ask for those powers with or without council support because the mayor wants to commit Thunder Bay to a target set by the province of 2,200 new homes by 2031.

 

This target is an interesting one because it means that over the next eight years (2024 to 2031), Thunder Bay needs to build an average of 275 new housing units annually.  The accompanying figure plots the annual number of housing starts from 1972 to 2023 and also plots the annual target set at an average of 275 units per year.  The 2023 estimate is incomplete given that the numbers from Statistics Canada only go to August and the monthly average based on January to August is used to fill in the rest of the year.  Even that total seems an underestimate given the couple of large apartment projects that have emerged that might double the total for 2023.  

 


 

 

Needless to say, the target is an ambitious one given that since 2000, the annual average works out to about 105 units per year.  In other words, going forward, it will be expected that Thunder Bay has to achieve just over 2.5 times the number of starts than it has managed on average over the last two decades. 

 

Can a strong mayor somehow wield the influence and power to more than double the number of housing starts in Thunder Bay?  Given the shortage of building trade workers as well as the fact that for the houses to be built, there has to be a demand for the housing and interest rates have spiked at the moment, it will be a challenge.  Then there is the ability of developers to earn a profit on the new builds whether single detached houses, apartments, or condos, even with whatever financial support the province has in mind.  Again, one suspects this target may be a tough one to reach.  A lot depends on whether or not there really are a lot more people in Thunder Bay than official counts say there are and if those people are actually interested in permanent housing in Thunder Bay and more importantly have the ability to pay for it either as owners or renters.

 

One suspects that in the end, the real influence of strong mayor powers in Thunder Bay will not be so much on the future housing stock but on things like the city budget and even senior staffing.  The mayor’s position is about to get more important and as the adage goes, with great power comes great responsibility.