After years of advocating for better financial management at City Hall, I'm cautiously optimistic about a potential step forward. This week, City Administration will present a report to Council on implementing zero-based budgeting for the 2027-2030 budget cycle. While this isn't a silver bullet for all our financial challenges, it's an essential tool that could help restore accountability in how our city manages taxpayer dollars.

What is Zero-Based Budgeting?

Zero-based budgeting is straightforward: instead of starting with last year's budget and simply adding more (which is how we currently operate), we start at zero. Every expense must be justified. Every program must prove its worth. Nothing is assumed to continue just because "that's how we've always done it."

Think about your own household budget. You don't automatically increase what you spend on groceries by 6% each year regardless of need. You evaluate what you actually need and adjust accordingly. 

Why This Matters to Edmonton Taxpayers

In December, City Council approved a 6.1% property tax increase for 2025, which I voted against. But the overall impact on many Edmontonians is significant:

• The cumulative property tax increase from 2023 to 2025 will be 21.3%
• With rising house values, the average single family homeowner will see their tax bills climb even higher than the 6.1% being reported
• The City's property tax revenue will jump from $1.78B in 2022 to $2.28B in 2025—a staggering $500M increase

Where is all that money going? That's exactly the question zero-based budgeting will help answer.

Zero-Based vs. Priority-Based Budgeting

Some of my colleagues have suggested priority-based budgeting instead. This approach sounds good - focus spending on what matters most. But here's the problem: we can't decide what's truly important until we understand exactly what we're spending money on today. 

It's like trying to reorganize a cluttered closet without first taking everything out to see what you actually have. Zero-based budgeting is about emptying the closet first, examining each item, and only putting back what we truly need.

Priority-based budgeting only works when we have alignment on our priorities. And to get to meaningful priorities, we need to first start with the discipline of zero-based budgeting to force hard choices, priority-based approaches tend to label everything as important.

A History of Broken Processes

Throughout my time on Council, I've consistently pushed for better financial management:

• Last term, I promoted Priority Based Budgeting, but Administration returned with "Prioritized Based Budgeting"—where nothing was actually prioritized
• In 2021, I campaigned on a line-by-line budget review, which was transformed into an Administration-led process that produced very few significant changes
• I've recommended specific actions like halting major new projects until we get cost management under control and creating an Infrastructure Committee with private sector experts

The resistance I've faced reinforces what I've been saying all along: our current budget process is fundamentally broken. Administration's standard response that "any budget reduction means service cuts" misses the point entirely. Yes, we need to reduce services we can't afford or don't need right now and correspondingly reduce the amount of money we take out of people's pockets. That's exactly what responsible governance looks like.

The Problem with Our Current Approach

Our current budget process involves cherry-picking random items to cut without any strategic framework. It's like trying to save money by skipping breakfast while ignoring the fact you're paying for three streaming services you never watch.

I've seen firsthand how this approach fails. When I proposed reducing Neighborhood Renewal spending, it mysteriously disappeared from the group submission by budget day. And when I tried to put it back in, I wasn’t allowed to.  When I suggested reducing employment positions in certain departments, I was told these reductions would not be supported.

This haphazard approach to budgeting is exactly why I've championed being "Tough on Taxes" - not because I'm against investing in our city but because I believe we need to be strategic and accountable with every dollar.

Looking at Administration's Proposal

The report coming to Council next week outlines Administration's approach to implementing zero-based budgeting. While there are positive elements, I'm concerned about how watered down this could become.

Administration is suggesting:

• Using Executive Committee instead of creating a dedicated Budget and Finance Committee
• Branch-by-branch presentations throughout 2026
• Transitioning toward a "results-based budget" over the 2027-2030 cycle

This is a start, but we need to ensure this remains a true reset of our budget process, not just a rebranding of business as usual. I'm particularly concerned that Administration seems to be pushing back against implementing a true zero-based budget. Their report states:

"Zero-based budgeting is a more time-intensive process than the City's current budget methodology and practice... The time and effort to complete zero-based budgeting exceeds the current resource capacity and additional software tools may be required."

This is exactly the kind of resistance that has prevented meaningful reform in the past. Yes, proper budgeting takes time and resources - that's the point. Managing a $4 billion operation should be rigorous and thorough.

Who Should Lead This Process?

Let me be absolutely clear: this process needs to be Council-led, not Administration-led. We need a Council sub-committee that generates its own review and reports, informed by third parties reporting directly to that subcommittee.

We cannot accept watered-down Administration reports appended to an already crowded committee agenda. We cannot accept Administration filters on what gets presented to Council. We need actual reform, not lip service.

Council should employ independent consultants who report directly to Council, not to Administration. Council decides the parameters, scope, and implementation. That's the only way to ensure this process delivers the transparency Edmontonians deserve.

What Zero-Based Budgeting Could Mean for Edmonton

If implemented properly, zero-based budgeting would:

1. Create full transparency about where every tax dollar goes
2. Force hard conversations about what services are essential versus nice-to-have
3. Identify inefficiencies that current budget practices hide
4. Provide taxpayers with confidence that their money is being spent wisely
5. Help us prioritize infrastructure maintenance over new projects with uncertain returns

Back to Basics: Being Tough on Taxes

Being "Tough on Taxes" means ensuring every tax dollar spent delivers real value to Edmontonians. It means economic growth should be driven by entrepreneurs starting up and scaling their businesses here in Edmonton. Most importantly, it means taxpayers should know exactly where their money is going and that our spending aligns with what Edmontonians truly need and value.

My Commitment

As a city Councillor - and hopefully your next Mayor - I remain committed to fiscal responsibility. The current approach of ever-increasing tax rates, accumulating debt, and deferring infrastructure maintenance is unsustainable.

Edmonton deserves leadership that respects taxpayers and provides essential services efficiently. Zero-based budgeting is an important tool in achieving this goal, but it will only work if Council stays vigilant and committed to real change.

I look forward to discussing this report at Council next week and pushing for the strongest possible implementation of zero-based budgeting. While it won't solve all our problems overnight, it's an important step toward rebuilding trust and ensuring your tax dollars are respected.

What do you think about zero-based budgeting? Share your thoughts with me by e-mail or join the conversation on social media.

Update: Standing Firm on Financial Accountability

March 19, 2025

Today, City Administration presented their recommendations for implementing the zero-based budgeting motion that Council passed in December. While there are some positive aspects to their proposal, I had serious concerns about key elements that fundamentally alter what Council directed.

What Administration Gets Right

I'm comfortable with Administration's first steps, including having initial budget presentations on a department by department basis at Executive Committee. This provides a starting point for the deeper dive we need into city finances.

Where Administration's Proposal Falls Short

Administration's recommendation called for "transitioning towards a results-based budget over the course of the 2027-2030 budget cycle." I voted against this recommendation for several key reasons:

1. It's far too slow. Edmontonians can't wait until 2030 for the financial accountability they deserve. We need comprehensive change now, not a drawn-out transition that spans multiple Council terms.
2. It changes the entire focus. Results-based budgeting focuses on outcomes rather than financial constraints. While that sounds positive, it's actually backward. This approach typically sets goals first, then determines what funding is needed to achieve them—essentially justifying tax increases to meet those goals.
3. It ignores financial reality. Zero-based budgeting, by contrast, starts with what we can afford and works within those means—exactly how you manage your household budget. You don't determine what you want to buy first and then figure out how to increase your income to match; you figure out your income and then decide what you can afford.
4. It keeps Administration in control. Perhaps most concerning, this approach keeps the process Administration-led rather than Council-led. The point of zero-based budgeting is to have elected officials directing a comprehensive examination of all expenses, not having Administration decide what information to present and how to present it.

What Real Zero-Based Budgeting Requires

True zero-based budgeting demands that we:

• Start from zero for every department and program
• Require justification for every dollar spent
• Have Council, not Administration, lead the process
• Complete the review comprehensively, not piecemeal over years
• Ensure independent analysis free from Administration's filters

Where Do We Go From Here?

My vote today isn't the end of this issue. I remain committed to pushing for real financial accountability and proper fiscal management at City Hall. 

Edmonton taxpayers deserve better than a watered-down approach to financial accountability. We need a genuine budget reset that examines every dollar spent and ensures your tax dollars are respected.

I'm frustrated that Administration has once again tried to dilute Council's direction, but I'll continue advocating for the comprehensive financial review Edmonton needs.

Today marks an exciting milestone for Edmonton as the City, Province, and Oilers Entertainment Group (OEG) announced a transformative partnership for our downtown. While the Downtown CRL extension we discussed on Wednesday laid the financial foundation, today's announcement brings that vision to life through concrete collaborations. I want to take this opportunity to share why I strongly support this initiative, one that I believe will reshape our urban core for generations to come.

A Vision Worth Backing

I've always believed that smart investments in infrastructure pay dividends far beyond their initial costs. This partnership represents exactly that kind of strategic thinking - bringing together government and private sector resources to create something greater than any one party could achieve alone.

What excites me most about this collaboration is how it addresses multiple urban challenges simultaneously: housing accessibility, public gathering spaces, economic development, and downtown vibrancy. It's comprehensive city-building at its best.

The CRL: A Proven Success Story

We've already witnessed the CRL's effectiveness since its implementation in 2015. It has catalyzed our downtown's evolution through projects like Rogers Place, Warehouse Park, and enhanced public realms. The results speak for themselves: over $4.7 billion in new development and more than 3,500 new homes either built or under construction. Before the CRL, downtown was adding about 134 housing units a year. After? That jumped to 351 units annually.

This isn't theoretical - it's proven. We've seen the CRL mechanism work in real time, creating a virtuous cycle of investment and growth.

Why I Support This Partnership

I firmly believe that our city building efforts are going to require unique partnership arrangements over the next decade.  The City simply does not have the financial resources to go it alone. And past experience shows that OEG is a partner that actually builds what they say they are going to build. 

This partnership makes sound fiscal sense for several reasons:

1. Leveraged investment: For every dollar the City contributes through the CRL, we're attracting multiple dollars from the Province and private sector.
2. Self-funding mechanism: The CRL works by capturing future property tax growth within the downtown area and reinvesting it right back into that same area. This isn't about raising existing taxes - it's about harnessing the value of new development.
3. Economic multiplier effects: The construction jobs, permanent employment, and increased tourism will benefit our entire city's economy. For perspective, just the first three rounds of the Oilers playoff run generated an estimated $179 million in economic impact, including more than 60,000 overnight stays in Edmonton hotels. These numbers demonstrate the powerful economic engine that downtown attractions can create.
4. Housing diversity and accessibility: With 2,500 new housing units planned just in the Village at Ice District, we're creating more housing choices at a critical time. Last year alone, Edmonton welcomed more than 64,000 new residents, with projections indicating another 100,000 will arrive by 2026. This rapid growth demands bold action on housing. The development will include housing ideally situated near MacEwan University, attainable housing options, seniors housing, and family-friendly rentals - all directly connected to public transit. With its proximity to campus, these new housing options will give MacEwan students more choices to live downtown, strengthening the connection between the university and our city center.

The Broader Vision

While the CRL extension is important, this partnership goes beyond a single financing tool. It represents a comprehensive approach to downtown revitalization that includes:

• Community Event Park: A $250-million indoor/outdoor space that would be owned by the City but operated by OEG. Importantly, one-third of booking time would be reserved for community groups and non-profits at below-market rates. This space fills a critical programming gap in our downtown, offering year-round facilities for sporting events, cultural celebrations, and community gatherings. With retractable canopies outdoors and versatile indoor spaces including meeting rooms and classrooms, it creates opportunities for minor hockey, youth soccer, basketball leagues, and countless community activities. Connected to both Rogers Place and the LRT, it will be accessible to diverse groups throughout Edmonton.
• Village at Ice District: A vibrant, mixed-use neighborhood with diverse housing options that will bring thousands of new residents downtown.
• Strategic Investments: From cleaning up contaminated sites to improving transit entrances and creating welcoming public spaces, we're addressing the barriers that have held downtown back.

Community Input and Next Steps

It's important to note that this announcement represents the beginning of a process, not the end. There will be significant opportunities for community consultation and public input as we move forward. Many details still need to be finalized, and I'm committed to ensuring Edmontonians have meaningful input into how these spaces will function and serve our community.

I believe the success of this initiative depends on it truly reflecting the needs and aspirations of our city. The one-third community access provision for the Event Park is a good start, but we need to work together to ensure this facility genuinely serves the public interest.

A Once-in-a-Generation Opportunity

What convinces me most that this partnership deserves support is that it represents a rare alignment of provincial, municipal, and private sector interests. The Province has committed substantial funding, OEG is making major investments, and the City can leverage the CRL to maximize the impact of our contribution.

This kind of opportunity doesn't come along often. When partners are willing to invest alongside us, with a proven mechanism like the CRL to ensure financial sustainability, it's the right time to act strategically.

Why Every Edmontonian Should Care

Even if you rarely visit downtown, a vibrant city center benefits everyone:

• Downtown generates over 5% of Edmonton's property taxes while taking up less than 1% of the city's land. It's our most efficient tax generator.
• Great cities have great downtowns that attract talent, investment, and opportunity.
• A thriving downtown becomes a place we can all enjoy and take pride in - somewhere to meet friends, catch a show, enjoy festivals, or just spend an afternoon.

Moving Forward Together

Our City Plan envisions a downtown with at least 24,000 residents (nearly double today's population). This partnership gives us a concrete pathway to achieving that vision through strategic collaboration.

As we move forward, I'll continue to ensure this collaboration delivers the public benefits promised while protecting taxpayer interests. I believe the extensive public booking provisions for the Event Park, the focus on diverse housing options, and the overall structure of the partnership reflect a balanced approach that serves our city well.

I believe in collaborative city-building because I've seen it work. The Downtown CRL has proven that strategic public investments can attract significant private development, creating places people want to be. With the right partners, clear agreements, and appropriate oversight, we can create a downtown that serves all Edmontonians while strengthening our city's economic foundation. 

What do you think? Is this partnership a good investment in Edmonton's future? I'd love to hear your thoughts.

Tim

Today at City Hall, we discussed extending the Downtown Community Revitalization Levy (CRL) by ten years. While that might sound like dry municipal policy, it's actually about something we all care about: building a vibrant heart for our city.

What's a CRL anyway?

Think of the CRL as a special financial tool that works like this: we invest in catalytic infrastructure improvements downtown, those improvements attract new buildings and businesses, and then the new property taxes from those developments pay back the original investment. It's like planting seeds to grow a garden.

Since 2015, this approach has helped transform our downtown with projects like Rogers Place, Warehouse Park, and improved streetscapes. The results? Over $4.7 billion in new development and more than 3,500 new homes either built or under construction. Before the CRL, downtown was adding about 134 housing units a year. After? That jumped to 351 units annually.

Why extend it now?

Unfortunately, COVID hit downtown hard. Add in skyrocketing construction costs, and development has slowed significantly since 2022. Many downtown lots still sit empty or underused.

By extending the CRL for another decade, we could generate between $700-975 million to invest in projects that would kick-start more development. This isn't about spending more tax dollars - it's about redirecting future new property tax revenue in the downtown area to fund improvements in that same area.

What would the money go toward?

You may have seen recent news about partnerships between the City, the Province, and Oilers Entertainment Group. The proposed CRL extension would help fund several exciting projects:

• Event Park: A $250-million indoor/outdoor space that would be owned by the City but operated by OEG. Importantly, one-third of booking time would be reserved for community groups and non-profits at below-market rates. This would create a much-needed public space downtown for events, sports, and community activities.
• Village at Ice District: Infrastructure to support a new mixed-use development with up to 2,500 housing units north of Rogers Place. This would include various housing types – student housing, affordable options, and family rentals – helping address our housing needs.
• Other Strategic Investments:
  • Cleaning up contaminated sites that nobody wants to touch right now
  • Making our LRT entrances more welcoming and safe
  • Small but meaningful improvements to public spaces that make downtown more inviting

The Province has already signaled strong support, including $106 million in the 2025 budget for downtown revitalization projects, with $52 million specifically for the Event Park.

Beyond the Ice District

The CRL extension isn't just about the Ice District. It's about creating the conditions for growth and vibrancy throughout our downtown. With additional projects focusing on streetscapes, green spaces, and neighborhood connections, the benefits would ripple across the entire downtown area.

Why should you care?

Even if you don't live or work downtown, a thriving city center benefits everyone. Downtown generates over 5% of Edmonton's property taxes while taking up less than 1% of the city's land. It's our most efficient tax generator.

More importantly, a vibrant downtown becomes a place we can all enjoy and take pride in - somewhere to meet friends, catch a concert, enjoy festivals, or just spend an afternoon.

Our City Plan envisions a downtown with at least 24,000 residents (nearly double today's population). Getting there requires some smart investments now.

What's next?

If Council approves this plan, we'll ask the province to extend the CRL regulation. With their approval, we can move forward on these catalyst projects.

I believe in this approach because we've already seen it work. The Downtown CRL has proven that strategic public investments can attract significant private development and create places people want to be.

What do you think? Is extending the Downtown CRL a good investment in Edmonton's future? I'd love to hear your thoughts.

Tim

If you've driven, walked, or biked around Edmonton lately, you've probably experienced our city's approach to street design firsthand – whether you realized it or not. 

This week at Urban Planning Committee, administration presented a verbal update on the Complete Streets Design Standards revisions. Now, if you're wondering what that even means – you're not alone!

I want to share some thoughts with you about this important issue that affects how our neighborhoods are built, maintained, and ultimately, how much you pay to live here.

What's This All About?

For those unfamiliar, Complete Streets is the City's approach to designing roads that work for everyone – whether you're walking, biking, taking the bus, or driving. It sounds straightforward, but the way these standards are implemented has significant impacts on our communities and city finances. 

These standards affect how much your home costs, how your neighborhood functions, and even how easily the city can clear snow from your street in winter. 

Why I Requested This Report

A few weeks ago, I made a motion asking administration to provide an update on these standards because I've been hearing serious concerns from residents and industry partners about how they're being implemented.

After hearing administration's update earlier today, my concerns remain. Let me explain why this matters to all of us.

The Concerns I'm Hearing

Our industry partners (the folks who actually design and build most of our roads) submitted over 800 comments during the latest review. That's not a typo – 800 comments. When that many professionals raise concerns, I believe we need to listen.

Here's what they're telling me:

• Reality check needed: Some of the new requirements like wider sidewalks, separated bike lanes, curb extensions, and raised crosswalks sound great on paper, but fitting them into existing neighborhoods isn't always possible without significant land acquisition or losing features like tree-lined boulevards.
• Cost implications: These standards increase costs for new developments, infill projects, and city maintenance – and guess who ultimately pays for that? All of us, through higher housing prices and taxes. We need to build infrastructure that delivers real value while being fiscally responsible with your money.
• Practical challenges: Think about snow clearing in Edmonton (we all know what that's like). Have we fully considered how these new designs will work when we've got two feet of snow to deal with?
• Community input: The recent example in Dunluce shows that sometimes what works in theory doesn't match what communities actually want or need.

Finding Middle Ground

Don't get me wrong – I'm all for streets that work for everyone. I want safe routes for kids to walk to school, accessible paths for seniors, and efficient ways for all of us to get around. I want to build a network of streets that accommodate vehicles, transit and active transportation.

But we need to be practical. We can't just pile on endless requirements without considering the real-world impacts and costs. That's not building it better – that's just building it more expensively.

We need standards that:

1. Can flex to fit different neighborhoods
2. Consider the full lifecycle costs
3. Truly involve both industry experts and community members
4. Provide clear guidance without creating endless hurdles

Where Do We Go From Here?

After hearing the update this week, I'm more convinced than ever that we need to take a second look at these standards. We need:

1. Guidelines that make sense and are easy to follow
2. A real conversation about what these features cost
3. Flexibility for different types of neighborhoods
4. Better collaboration between everyone involved

And we need a full stop on Neighborhood Renewal until we get these standards right.

I'll keep pushing for a balanced approach that creates great streets without breaking the bank or ignoring the unique character of our neighborhoods. This is part of my commitment to building it better for Edmonton's future.

I'd like to hear your experiences with street designs in your neighborhood. What's working? What isn't? Have you noticed changes that seem impractical for Edmonton's climate or your community's needs? Your feedback helps me advocate effectively on your behalf.

Tim

Finance Minister Nate Horner tabled the 2025-26 provincial budget yesterday. I want to share some quick thoughts on what this means for Edmonton and why I believe we need a fundamental reset in how our city approaches provincial relations.

Navigating Uncertain Times

Let's be honest - this budget comes at a really challenging time for both Alberta and Edmonton. We're all watching the Trump tariff threats with concern, knowing they could hit our province's economy hard. Meanwhile, Edmonton is facing its own financial crunch. The provincial government has had to make difficult decisions, creating multiple budget scenarios to prepare for various outcomes.

Minister Horner called it a budget of "tough but measured choices." His team had to revise their revenue assumptions back in January just to account for all this uncertainty. As he put it, "There's so many things that are out of our control." That's exactly why I believe different orders of government need to be working together closer than ever - not picking fights with each other.

What's in it for Edmonton?

I'm glad to see some tax relief that will help Edmonton families, with that new eight percent income tax bracket for income up to $60,000. Every bit helps when household budgets are stretched thin.

I'm particularly happy about the commitment to build five new schools in Edmonton. Anyone with kids knows how desperately we need these new classrooms in our fast-growing communities.

I'm encouraged to see provincial funding for several key post-secondary projects: NorQuest College, the University of Alberta Biological Sciences Centre, ongoing support for MacEwan University's School of Business, and planning for NAIT's Advanced Skills Centre.

The budget includes a substantial $106 million investment in downtown Edmonton: $52 million for an event park east of Rogers Place, $37.5 million to demolish the old Coliseum, and $16.4 million to prepare land at the Ice District Village. These investments matter for our city's future and connect to important discussions about the Community Revitalization Levy happening next week. I'm looking forward to digging into how we can maximize the impact of these provincial investments.

We also continue to receive significant provincial funding for the Yellowhead Freeway Conversion, the 50th Street rail overpass, improvements to Anthony Henday Drive, and Phase 3 of Terwillegar Drive - not to mention two LRT extension projects. While these weren't new announcements in this budget, they represent ongoing provincial commitment to Edmonton's infrastructure.

Public Safety and Addiction Treatment: A Clear Provincial Priority

I commend the Province for its investment in recovery and addiction treatment centers and its ongoing commitment to public safety. The budget allocates $1.7 billion for implementing the compassionate intervention framework and Recovery Alberta Services, which is a significant investment to address the opioid crisis that has devastated families across our city.

The province has also bumped public safety funding by 3.7% to $1.3 billion and has requested alignment of community peace officers with police services. That's a pragmatic move that should improve how we coordinate our response to public safety concerns.

These aren't just budget line items - they're investments that will make a real difference in our communities if we work together to implement them effectively.

A Missed Opportunity for Constructive Engagement

While last year's budget included funding for some important Edmonton projects like the MacEwan School of Business building and Phase 3 of Terwillegar Drive, there was not nearly enough support for critical infrastructure investments. That should have been a moment for some serious soul-searching at City Council.

Instead, what happened? Mayor Sohi and his allies launched a campaign focused on recovering $15 million per year in unpaid property taxes from the province. Let me be straight with you - while a $15 million grant increase is welcome, when coupled with the increase in provincial education property taxes, the effect on your property tax bill will likely be net zero at best. Not exactly the major victory some will portray it to be.

Rather than picking public fights with the province - over the wrong thing - we NEED to collaborate with them for the good of our city. Our infrastructure needs, from transportation to affordable housing to our $1.7 billion deferred maintenance backlog, require provincial support in the hundreds of millions of dollars. We can't afford to damage that relationship over relatively minor disputes.

Forward Together

With all the economic uncertainty from potential U.S. tariffs, a partnership approach isn't just nice to have - it's essential. The province has set aside a $4 billion contingency for unexpected challenges.

The province has made significant progress with their red tape reduction initiatives, recently introducing an "automatic yes toolkit" and "shot clock" provisions on permit applications across government. These innovations could offer valuable lessons for improving our own municipal processes.

Similarly, the province has begun implementing artificial intelligence tools to "follow the money" in their bureaucracy, enhancing transparency and efficiency. We should explore whether similar technologies could benefit Edmonton's financial management systems.

There is so much to be gained from collaborative work that recognizes we all serve the same taxpayer, and that we have a shared responsibility to maximize the value of every dollar spent. Particularly during these profoundly uncertain economic times, Edmonton's leadership MUST BE at the table, working constructively to ensure our city's priorities are understood and addressed.

My Commitment to Edmonton

If you trust me with your vote for mayor, here's what I commit to:

1. I'll reset our relationship with the provincial government from day one, focusing on productive engagement instead of public disputes.
2. I'll make securing provincial funding for critical infrastructure projects a top priority.
3. I'll work collaboratively on our shared challenges, from economic development to public safety to efficient government services.
4. I'll fight to ensure Edmonton receives its fair share as the capital city while being realistic about provincial fiscal constraints.

Edmonton deserves leadership that understands how to build partnerships. Fighting with other levels of government might make for splashy headlines, but it doesn't help get roads built or services delivered.

In these uncertain economic times, all orders of government need to work together, not against each other. The potential impact of U.S. tariffs makes it more critical than ever to have a mayor who can work effectively with the province.

I look forward to continuing this conversation in the coming months. Together, we can build the partnership approach Edmonton needs to thrive.

CityNews: February 3, 2025

Incoming U.S. tariffs on Canadian goods have been paused for 30 days but Edmonton's city and business leaders say now is the time to start thinking about thinking locally when it comes to big projects.

Real Talk Ryan Jespersen: November 21, 2024

Tim Cartmell wants to be Mayor of Edmonton. The two-term city councillor (and former engineer) says Council has lost its way and spending is out of control. Is he the right guy to fix it?

Last week Mayor Sohi launched a website intended to pressure the Provincial Government to increase grants in lieu of taxes. This website and its automated form letter function was created by the Mayor’s office and was NOT approved by City Council. Nor was Council informed ahead of time. 

Edmonton absolutely needs more support from the Province.  But speaking through websites and form letters are not the collaborative approaches needed to address our problems, and in fact serve as distractions that interfere with attempts to gain that Provincial support. As an elected official myself, I can state that deliberate attempts to frustrate and annoy and embarrass people are not an effective way to reach an agreement.

Today at Executive Committee we debated a report analyzing the City of Edmonton’s capital and operating funding shortfall. This discussion served to emphasize just how important it is to reach funding partnerships with the Province.

Many of the causes of these shortfalls fall outside the control of the City of Edmonton. But how we react to those shortfalls is entirely within the City’s control, and includes prioritizing services and investments and the creation of imaginative funding solutions and partnerships.

The report also highlights that the city has moved into non-traditional service areas that do not have the required level of accountability attached. This is why I have called for a halt on new projects until the city addresses its management approach. We cannot keep throwing money at projects that simply are not meeting demands, timelines or budget.

We need to get much more effective in how we allocate scarce tax dollars. At the same time, we need to continue collaborative engagement and advocacy with higher orders of government on municipal funding. It is my intention to work towards those innovative solutions, and engage in actual conversations with my provincial colleagues.

I have heard from many of you that you are frustrated by the property tax increase, as well as a corresponding decrease in services and supports. At a time where there is an affordability crisis and Edmontonians are having to tighten their budgets and look at every dollar they spend, they have every right to expect the same from their municipal government.  I have been clear on my belief that Edmontonians cannot continue to pay for our lack of accountability and failure to address our responsibilities with higher property taxes and that we need to look inward and tighten our own budget instead.

That is the only sustainable path forward for the city and I will continue to push for that on city council.