Will Getting City Data Get Any Easier?

 

The agenda for the September 28^th edition of Thunder Bay City Council includes a discussion of the “Open Data Portal” whose purpose is: “…is to establish a framework for making City data open and available to citizens, organizations, and businesses by minimizing barriers so that they can benefit from the information and add value to it.” What does this entail? Well, as described by the policy document:

 

The City will:

·      Maintain an open data licence and other relative information on the Open Data Portal.

·      Maintain an online Open Data Portal with a listing of all Open Data available and links to download each dataset.

·      Proactively make Data available to the public on the Open Data Portal.

·      Where available, include Metadata for each Dataset with information such as how the data was collected, when the data was last updated, and the expected update frequency of the dataset.

·      Engage in dialogue with the community regarding data needs and requests.

·      Prioritize and evaluate requests for Open Data from citizens in accordance with City policies and priorities and based on the readiness and suitability of the Datasets for public release. 

This appears to be a sort of Data liberation initiative and if the policy is to be taken at its word, then it should be a welcome addition to the City of Thunder Bay’s website.  However, one hopes that there is a discussion this evening that provides examples of what type of data will be released?  Will it be aggregate results on a neighborhood level of assorted city surveys that have been done over the years? Will we finally be getting staffing level information on a departmental basis and over time so that meaningful comparisons can be done?  What does “machine readable” mean in terms of what the City makes available?  Is it only csv or excel files or will some type of proprietary software package be needed that users will have to purchase from the City of Thunder Bay even if the data is “free”?  What exactly will the decision process be as to what data to release and what variable swill be made available?

One worries that when governments commit to “open data” the public access will become harder rather than easier despite the intent of any legislation.  Indeed, the statement that users: “Not misrepresent the information or its use” sounds like an effort to control what is done and that there will be decisions made based on the "need to know."  After all, if someone draws a conclusion from statistical analysis as to what trends are in employment or financial data that City Council or its administrators do not like or agree with, does that constitute differing empirical analysis or “misrepresentation”? 

Municipal data is already notoriously difficult to come by.  Financial and budgetary information or employment level data even if available is not transparent or easy to understand and one is often left to external sources for data that facilitates comparison of Thunder Bay’s municipal finances to other jurisdictions – such as the annual report put together by BMA consulting. True, one can go onto the Ministry of Municipal Affairs site to access the FIR data on finances, but it is not easy to use either.

So, an Administrative Open Data Committee is going to be established that will decide all of this stuff and it will: “Engage in dialogue with the public and dataset requestors as needed to get additional information and provide status about requests submitted through the open data request form on the City of Thunder Bay Website. Work with the appropriate staff from each department to document, prioritize and evaluate requests for Open Data in accordance with City policies and priorities and based on the readiness and suitability of the datasets for public release.” It would be interesting to know what datasets the city even has? 

As always, the devil is in the details.  Statistics Canada is notorious for starting and then abruptly ending data series making it difficult to construct consistent time series.  One wonders if the City is planning to provide more detailed data on things like properties in tax arrears, or how many complaints come in with respect to certain issues. For example, I would be interested in knowing how many reports have been made of pinhole leaks to the City of Thunder Bay?  Surely, knowing how many reports have been received per month over the last two years is not something that does not “respect the privacy of individuals whose information is reflected in the City Datasets.”   

My guess is that this Open Data Committee is going to take a long time to set the parameters.

 

 

Canadian Universities and COVID-19: Apocalypse ... Not?

 

 The academic year at Canada’s universities is well underway albeit in a mainly online/remote format.  It has been an extraordinary transition on the part of faculty and staff accomplished on fairly short notice. Developing or converting materials from a classroom lecture format to a more structured online delivery system has been very time intensive.  An online course requires substantially more time on the part of instructors for organization and development and it is also more work for the students taking the course.  Unlike a classroom environment where the instructor can tailor the pace of weekly delivery to accommodate progress and needs, the weekly online modules once set with their materials, schedules, quizzes and assignments, can move forward quite relentlessly. 

 

 Interestingly enough, universities have been pressuring their faculty for years to do more online because of the supposed flexibility it affords students and the anticipated “efficiencies” but this year’s rapid transition has revealed the mixed blessing that online university teaching is.  It turns out that doing online teaching well is a bit more complicated than simply piling everyone into Zoom lectures.  It helps to have infrastructure that does not collapse when too many users sign on.  It also helps to have supports for faculty and staff doing the teaching like proper computer equipment, but six months in everyone is pretty much still on their own at home improvising as they go along.  And it turns out Zoom lectures and Zoom office hours are about as well attended as regular classes - I will leave that to the reader to interpret as they wish.

 

Of course, much of the interest this year has focused on the apparent financial effects on universities from COVID-19.  In the spring, there was much widespread speculation that enrolment was going to collapse as domestic students stayed home and international students were unable to come back into the country and some institutions began pre-emptive action.  It turns out that this did not exactly come to pass.  Across the country, enrolments appear to be stable or even higher than anticipated at many universities and even international students have been able to register for courses online.  Even at Lakehead, overall enrolments are stable as the accompanying figure showing recent numbers to date suggests.  Indeed, the bigger long-term problem is not overall enrolment collapse but universities competing with themselves for students by expanding online enrolment and poaching students from each other.

 

 

 

With the enrolment apocalypse over for the time being, the media doom frenzy is focusing on other financial effects like “half-full” residences and “shuttered” food services and the “decline in public funding”.   However, with fewer students on campus, there are also fewer costs particularly in staffing like food services and cleaning much of which has been contracted out.  Moreover, with everyone working from home, heating, air conditioning and hydro costs are reduced.  And, as for the decline in public funding, that has been underway for some time.  Governments have wanted universities to reduce their dependence on public funding and as a result universities  have raised tuition fees, recruited more international students and branched out into research and ancillary fees for additional revenue.   

 

Essentially, our universities are really no longer publicly funded but publicly assisted and the bigger question is why some of our universities have not simply taken a leap and gone completely private?  Part of the answer is probably that governments cannot leave things well enough alone.  Even if universities went private, governments would probably continue to regulate tuition for political reasons as they do now thereby ham-stringing university operations just as they do now.

 

The other interesting development is that our governments are continually telling us they have your back and how they are there to support you  and yet despite a nearly $400 billion dollar deficit at the federal level and multi-billion dollar deficits provincially - shoveling all types of money out to individuals and businesses – still no real support package for universities.  Given that universities have held their own on enrolment, one might expect a little help to deal with fixed costs and the decline in revenues from ancillary services.  Public funding for universities peaked in 2010-11 and has declined since, a little bit of help during the pandemic is not unreasonable.

 

Yet, it appears that universities are on their own.  Governments generally do not like things they cannot fully control and recruit for their political purposes and university academics generally fall into that category.  Governments have been given carte blanche in their approach here because the public supports them.  The general public essentially perceives academics as public school teachers with a longer summer vacation. It still amazes me how many people ask me every September if I have gone back to work.  I have given up explaining what I do – it is a lost cause.   

 

At the same time, the public perception is understandable.  University employment is a good job. Academics like their work and that probably does generate envy given that many people do not enjoy their jobs.  However, what academics do is still work and just because faculty like their job should not represent an opportunity to make them miserable.  Indeed, academics are not the only ones with good jobs at a university – they are actually outnumbered by staff and administrators who also have nice jobs and working conditions because students come to the university to take courses taught by academic faculty.  Which brings me to my next point…

 

Compounding all of this is the opportunity that COVID-19 has provided to university boards and administrations.  Despite the fact that enrolment is stable or rising at many institutions in the wake of COVID, the continued doom mongering is a useful tool for extracting concessions.  Indeed, during a pandemic, one might expect a pull back from mercenary behaviour, but it appears that across the country, those university faculty associations unfortunate enough to have their contracts expire during the pandemic are facing particularly brutal demands for concessions on the part of university administrations.  Apparently, despite the theatrical performances of our prime ministerial soliloquist in chief in Ottawa, we are not all in this together. 

 

Deficits, Inflation and Interest Rates: A Very Simple Analysis

 

The immediate impact of COVID-19 on Canada’s economy - like many others - has been a drop in GDP and a massive ramping up of government deficits given the collapse in revenues and in increase in emergency spending and benefits.  At the federal level, the deficit for 2020 is anticipated to be closer to $400 billion. In the wake of Wednesday’s Throne Speech there should be a fiscal update or budget that will provide further fiscal details.  In the meantime, it is worth thinking a bit about what the ultimate impact of such large deficits will be not just in Canada but on the world economy.

 

The traditional aggregate demand(AD)-aggregate supply(AS) framework for looking at fiscal and monetary policy suggests that large deficits will shift AD to the right and raise price (P) and output (Y).  The increase in prices then triggers inflationary expectations which shifts the aggregate supply curve upwards starting a wage-price spiral.  Bringing inflation under control ultimately then requires tighter monetary policy that raises interest rates and brings down aggregate demand and inflationary expectations. It all seems simple enough except since 2008-09, the massive deficits incurred around the world do not seem to have done any of this.  Indeed, inflation is low and interest rates have gone lower.  The world is awash in cheap money.  And, Modern Monetary Theory (MMT) has been gaining ground with arguments that we can stimulate demand practically forever by having sovereign governments with their own currency increasing the money supply.

 

I think if we had to draw a picture of the global economy under the current situation, it looks something like this (Figure 1):

 

 

 

If we think of the world economy as a giant AD and a giant AS curve, the AD curve has a traditional downward slope, but the AS curve is flat rather than upward sloping or vertical.  That is, world aggregate supply as a result of integrated international supply chains, trade, increasing capital mobility, technology and digitization – essentially the results of globalization since the 1990s – has become perfectly elastic.  As a result, even with deficits and cheap money shifting that aggregate demand curve repeatedly to the right, there has been no inflationary pressure.  Supply has expanded to accommodate demand and hence inflation has stayed low and there has been no upward pressure on interest rates.

 

This means that in a sense we are going to be able to both have our cake and eat it for some time.  Inflation will probably not rear up its head anytime soon and interest rates are going to stay low and probably below the rate of economic growth meaning that governments will not face immense debt service or debt burdens from their massively expanding debt.  However, I think eventually, the global economy is going to more likely start to resemble Figure 2 down below:

 

 

 

While one can argue that the economy has always been global, modern economic history has been marked by two distinct periods of globalization: 1870 to 1914 and 1990 to 2016.  The first great globalization coincided with the hegemony of the Pax Britannica, the  industrial age and the liberalization of the world economy which came to a crashing halt with World War I and which then took decades to resume.  After the shocks and trauma of trade restrictions, world wars, political extremism and the Depression, the post-World War II era saw slow steps to more trade and the fall of the Berlin Wall marks the start of the second age of globalization and trade liberalization which moved together with the internet and rapid technological change in communications, and China’s rapid industrialization and development. Much of this growth of trade occurred under the hegemony of the Pax Americana and included shifting of production to lower labour cost environments.  This age was dealt a blow by the 2008-09 recession and came to an end with the rise of populism and trade restrictions which officially begin with the election of Donald Trump in 2016 and the American retreat from a more global role.

 

The second great globalization essentially flattened the aggregate supply curve which is why inflationary pressure has been muted.  Because of technological change, improved transport and communications, the shifting of production to the cheapest spot with integrated supply chains, and freer trade – the aggregate supply curve became perfectly elastic and able to accommodate rising AD at an almost infinite pace.  However, we are now in a volatile  transition period that has been aggravated by the pandemic. Since 2016, there have been more trade disputes, concern and push back against China’s seeming unwillingness to play by the rules of a more liberal-democratic world economic order, and trade disruption by populist politicians.  The end result of this will be an AS curve marked by higher costs of production with output expansion – in other words, more of an upward sloping curve. 

 

The result of expanding demand with an upward sloping AS curve will be rising prices and hence the return of inflation.  Combine this upward pressure on prices with eventual competition for borrowers to take on more and more government debt and there will be a rise in interest rates.  The events of the last five years have ensured that interest rates will rise – it is not a question of if but when.

Dealing with Legacies: Victoriaville Edition

 

The 1960s and 1970s spawned the era of urban renewal and in Thunder Bay the result was two projects which left a legacy of costs and expenses and mixed results – the downtown urban renewal malls.  On the north side was Keskus and on the southside it was Victoriaville.  These were the legacy projects of their day designed to reverse the retail exodus from downtown and restore them to their former glory. 

 

The projects were slowly strangled by demographics as middle class residents moved to suburban areas and out of the downtown residential area, the rise of the intercity shopping area, cross-border shopping and most recently internet shopping.  Victoriaville in particular was also hurt by the malls locational position that blocked the corner of Victoria and Syndicate – akin to putting a shopping mall right on the intersection of Dundas and Yonge in Toronto or James and King in Hamilton.  Many cities had downtown urban renewal mall projects but Victoriaville was unique in how its design essentially killed traffic flow.

 

The two projects were also not helped by the loss of key anchor stores be it Eaton’s on the north side in the 1990s or Chapples on the south side during the recession and high interest rates of the early 1980s.  The north side mall eventually made way for a casino and downtown redevelopment centred around waterfront tourism.  The south side mall lingers on, given life support by the location of city government services and community functions.  However, its days appear to be numbered as Thunder Bay City council will debate its future Monday evening.

 

A report being discussed presents four redevelopment opportunities for the area:

 

Options 1A & 1B: Revitalize the existing infrastructure through retaining the existing building and either revitalizing the retail components or repurposing the existing space; (Cost: 1A-$34,860,000 or 1B-$15,360,000).

Option 2: Reconfigure the existing infrastructure, reopen Victoria Avenue, and maintain a portion of the existing structure on Syndicate Avenue south of Victoria Avenue; (Cost:$22,490,000) and,

Option 3: Remove the existing infrastructure, reopen Victoria Avenue, and re- energize public spaces on Syndicate Avenue.(Cost: $10,750,000).

 

Options 1A and 1B essentially will keep the mall on top of the intersection, option 2 reopens Victoria but maintains Syndicate as blocked while option 3 reopens Victoria Avenue and reopens Syndicate fully but to “reenergized public spaces” which it appears means some type of pedestrian traffic but not vehicles.  The report does not address the attached McKellar Mall – which is full of City offices for the most part and will continue on.

 

My guess is that there were be some support for 1B tomorrow night because City Councillors know that Victoriaville has to go but they still want to be seen as “constructive” and investing in the area’s activities and 1B allows them to both get rid of Victoriaville and pretend they are replacing it with another legacy.  Option 2 will probably have a bit more support from those who like option 1B because it costs only a ‘bit more” but allows for a more innovative looking “legacy.”  However, the best choice of the four is the last one – Option 3 and not because it is the cheapest but because it is the one that opens up the intersection the most though Syndicate is only going to be fully open as a pedestrian space.  The intersection is much like a key artery and the blockage needs to be removed if there is any hope of more robust activity emerging in the area. 

 

Even with the intersection opened up, the area is so far gone that it may likely never regain even a semblance of its former glory.  Indeed, there are now too many competing interests for retail and office activity in Thunder Bay’s dispersed urban pattern to expect that much more will happen in the former Fort William downtown aside from government and social services.  The best option is actually not there – Option 4: fully open up the intersection by removing the Syndicate Avenue parking ramp and making Syndicate a full street again just like that planned for the reopened Victoria.  This is an option given that the very end of the report argues that the parking ramp can be relocated. 

 

Given the current division of Council into fiscal realists and legacy investors, I would day that Option 3 will get five to six backers, while the remaining support will fracture between Option 1B and Option 2.  Having four choices does not provide for a clear voting and decision process so getting to a final choice is likely to be messy.  The only certainty is that cleaning up this legacy project is going to cost money no matter which way you look at it.  Given that Mayor Mauro is on the record as stating that the last couple of years have seen “reasonable” tax increases, get ready for the 2021 “unreasonable” increase.

 

 

Looks Like a Second Wave

Ontario's COVID-19 daily case numbers have now been trending up since August and the most recent plot and LOWESS smooth I have put together shows an upward trajectory as steep as the first wave.  Moreover, it is a pretty tight fit around the trend line - little dispersion.  That could be the result of more substantial and consistent testing as opposed to the first wave, or it could mean a more persistent and ingrained wave is underway.  The only silver lining to date is that deaths have not taken a similar upward spike.