FINAL REPORT Municipal CAO Survey 2007 · the preliminary survey results were available. Nichols Applied Management conducted the 2007 survey and focus groups and prepared this report

FINAL REPORT

Municipal CAO Survey 2007

Submitted to:

Alberta Municipal Affairs & Housing

By:

Nichols Applied Management

Management and Economic Consultants

September, 2007

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PAGE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY...................................................................................................................I

1. INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................................1

2. METHODOLOGY.......................................................................................................................3

3. THE PROFILE OF CAOS ..........................................................................................................5

3.1 CHIEF ADMINISTRATOR EXPERIENCE.......................................................................5 3.2 FUTURE PLANS .............................................................................................................6 3.3 EDUCATIONAL AND PROFESSIONAL BACKGROUNDS............................................9

3.3.1 Education Levels..............................................................................................9 3.3.2 Professional Experience ................................................................................10

3.4 LEARNING INTERESTS AND NEEDS.........................................................................11 3.4.1 Participation in Further Learning Opportunities .............................................11 3.4.2 Training Interests ...........................................................................................13 3.4.3 Training Budgets............................................................................................15

3.5 WORK LOADS ..............................................................................................................16 3.6 SOURCES OF INFORMATION.....................................................................................20

4. ISSUES CONFRONTING MUNICIPALITIES ..........................................................................22 4.1 GENERAL FINDINGS ...................................................................................................22 4.2 GROWTH ISSUES ........................................................................................................24 4.3 PROVINCIAL SUPPORT ..............................................................................................28

5. SUPPORT PROGRAMS..........................................................................................................31 5.1 MUNICIPAL INTERNSHIP PROGRAM.........................................................................31

5.1.1 Municipal Participation ...................................................................................31 5.1.2 Land Use Planner Program ...........................................................................32

5.2 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PROCESSES......................................................................33 5.2.1 Resources and Capacity for Public Participation...........................................33 5.2.2 Public Involvement.........................................................................................37 5.2.3 Potential Assistance to Municipalities in the Field of Public

Participation ...................................................................................................38 5.3 MUNICIPAL EXCELLENCE NETWORK.......................................................................39

5.3.1 Network Use by CAOs ...................................................................................39 5.3.2 Perceived Value and Usability .......................................................................40 5.3.3 Barriers to Use ...............................................................................................41

5.4 SAFETY CODES SYSTEM ...........................................................................................42 5.4.1 Administrative Supports .................................................................................42 5.4.2 System Assessments.....................................................................................43 5.4.3 Value of the System.......................................................................................44

6. SURVEY IMPRESSIONS ........................................................................................................46

7. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS...........................................................................................47 7.1 THE PROFILE OF CAOS..............................................................................................47 7.2 ISSUES CONFRONTING MUNICIPALITIES................................................................50 7.3 AMAH SUPPORT PROGRAMS....................................................................................52 7.4 SURVEY IMPRESSIONS..............................................................................................55

TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued)

PAGE

* * *

LIST OF TABLES Table 3-1 Years of Experience as an Alberta CAO .................................................................5 Table 3-2 Years of Experience as an Alberta CAO, by Type of Municipality ..........................6 Table 3-3 Expected Number of Remaining Years as a CAO of an Alberta

Municipality ..............................................................................................................7 Table 3-4 Highest Level of Formal Education, Alberta CAOs..................................................9 Table 3-5 Highest Level of CAO Formal Education, by Type of Municipality ........................10 Table 3-6 Type of Position Held Prior to Current Job ............................................................11 Table 3-7 Type of Employer Prior to Current Job ..................................................................11 Table 3-8 Annual Budget Allocations for CAO Education and Training ................................16 Table 3-9 Indicated Increase in Time Commitment by CAO Responsibility –

Previous 3 Years....................................................................................................17 Table 3-10 Most Beneficial Sources of Information for CAOs on Time-Sensitive

Issues.....................................................................................................................20 Table 5-1 Areas Experiencing Reported Difficulty in Obtaining Effective Public

Involvement, by Type of Municipality.....................................................................38 Table 5-2 CAO Use of the Network in the Last Year .............................................................40 Table 5-3 Reported Safety Codes Accreditation....................................................................42 Table 5-4 Perceived Adequacy of Available Safety Codes System Information ...................43 Table 5-5 Accredited Municipalities Reporting Inadequacies in Available Safety

Codes System Information ....................................................................................43 Table 5-6 CAO Views Regarding Various Attributes of the Safety Codes System ...............44 Table 5-7 Perceived Municipal Support For and Value of the Safety Codes System ...........45

* * * LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 3-1 CAOs who Responded “Interested” or “Very Interested” to Different Types of Training ..............................................................................................................13

Figure 3-2 Respondents Interested in Specific Areas of Training, 2004 and 2007 ................15 Figure 3-3 Preferred Approach to Dealing with a Time-Sensitive Issue with which

CAOs are not Familiar, Percentage of Respondents ............................................21 Figure 4-1 Major Issues Urban and Rural Municipalities Will be Focussing on Over

the Next Three Years.............................................................................................22 Figure 4-2 Major Issues of Focus Over Next Three Years, Share of Responses by

Urban and Rural Municipalities..............................................................................23 Figure 4-3 Has, or is in the Process of Preparing, an Integrated Community

Sustainability Plan, by Type of Municipality...........................................................25 Figure 5-1 Perceived Adequacy of Resources to Develop and Deliver Public

Participation Processes with Regard to Environmental Issues .............................34 Figure 5-2 Perceived Adequacy of Resources with Regard to Public Participation

Programming, by Subject Area and Type of Municipality......................................36 Figure 5-3 Areas Experiencing Reported Difficulty in Obtaining Effective Public

Involvement............................................................................................................37 * * *

APPENDICES A. CAO Survey Instrument B. Survey Tabulations

FINAL REPORT

i

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The report summarizes the findings of Alberta Municipal Affairs and

Housing’s (AMAH) 2007 Chief Administrative Officer (CAO) survey. The

survey was fielded during March to May, 2007. Preliminary results were

shared -- and probed further -- with CAOs in a series of four focus group

sessions conducted in July.

The survey gathers information in three main areas: the profile and life

of CAOs, the key issues expected to affect municipalities in coming

years, and views regarding several AMAH programs and services.

Two particular findings are noted with regard to CAOs in Alberta. First,

most CAOs have reached their current position through internal

advancement within the municipal sector. Second, and notwithstanding

the plans by many CAOs to retire or change careers, a large majority of

municipalities have no succession plans in place. The findings point to

the value of investment in training programs for both CAOs and less

senior municipal employees and also the need to improve succession

planning across the province’s municipalities.

CAOs reported that the unprecedented growth occurring across the

province is accentuating demands associated with municipal

infrastructure rehabilitation and expansion, staff shortages, and

intermunicipal relations. Suggestions offered to AMAH in assisting

municipalities to deal with these issues included:

• the provision of new or enhanced advisory and

support services;

• enhanced training and further education programs;

• incentives in support of regional approaches and inter-

municipal cost-sharing;

• assistance with attracting staff;

• improvements to the Municipal Sustainability Initiative;

and,

• increased provincial consultation with municipalities

and CAOs in advance of new programs and in respect

of provincial plans and objectives.

NICHOLSApplied Management

FINAL REPORT

ii

A number of existing and potential AMAH program and service supports

were reviewed with CAOs.

The Municipal Internship Program is well-regarded but it is evident that

the coming demands on the program will exceed available internships.

Options for responding to the expected demand will need to be

considered by the Ministry.

The Municipal Excellence Network (MEnet) is used by a majority of

CAOs and most of those report success in finding what they look for and

value in the information provided. At the same time, the primary users of

MEnet appear to be non-CAO staff. As well, CAOs tend not to use the

Network for time-sensitive information needs. A number of possible

barriers to the use of MEnet were revealed during the survey process

and provide input for consideration to the on-going improvement of the

program.

CAO assessments of the Safety Codes System show that while most

attributes of the system are rated by CAOs in a neutral or more positive

way, a relatively significant minority of respondents -- particularly among

the CAOs of smaller municipalities -- express some level of

dissatisfaction with the system. While the general merits of having a

safety codes system are seen to be in little doubt, there is strong

consensus that the public’s understanding of the system is poor. In

terms of enhancement to the program, some CAOs suggested that

AMAH might provide support with software and associated technologies

to report inspection findings, and in monitoring the process in non-

accredited communities.

Most CAOs are supportive of the CAO survey, and appreciate its

regular, three-year cycle. They indicate interest in AMAH providing a

follow-on report after a period of time that indicates how the province

has responded to the survey results.


FINAL REPORT

1

1. INTRODUCTION

Alberta Municipal Affairs and Housing (AMAH) is responsible for

assisting municipalities in providing accountable and effective local

government to Albertans. The Ministry’s 2007-10 Business Plan

identifies as a core business the provision of support services that foster

excellence in local governance, management and service delivery.

AMAH recognizes that municipal chief administrative officers (CAOs)

play a fundamentally important and informed role in providing effective

local government across the province and they provide an invaluable

“window” regarding evolving issues and developments in the municipal

sector. The Ministry also is committed to ensuring that its programs and

services meet the needs of CAOs and their municipalities. In an effort

to better understand the needs of Alberta’s municipalities and senior

administrators, AMAH conducts regular surveys of CAOs from across

the province.

This report documents the approach undertaken to complete the 2007

survey and presents key findings. Where appropriate, the results of the

survey are compared to data generated through similar surveys

undertaken in 2001 and 2004. Each of these surveys has solicited input

on areas such as CAO employment, education and training, municipal

planning and priorities, succession planning, and the programs and

services offered by AMAH. The report is augmented by the input

received through focus groups with CAOs convened in July 2007 after

the preliminary survey results were available.

Nichols Applied Management conducted the 2007 survey and focus

groups and prepared this report. The following section of the report

provides a summary of the methodology used in carrying out the project.

Sections 3 through 5 provide key findings with respect to:

• the profiles of CAOs in Alberta;

• the major issues confronting municipalities in the near

future; and

• CAO perspectives on several AMAH programs and

services.


FINAL REPORT

2

Section 6 summarizes the views CAOs provided through the focus

groups in respect to the survey itself. The final section of the report

provides a summary of key findings and conclusions and includes

recommendations from CAOs and the survey team to AMAH. The 2007

CAO survey instrument is attached as Appendix A. A synopsis of

survey tabulations is included in Appendix B.


FINAL REPORT

3

2. METHODOLOGY

The survey was designed and conducted in close cooperation with

AMAH. Design of the questionnaire was undertaken in February and

March of 2007. In order to discern trends in CAO perspectives over

time, the survey included a number of the questions that had been

posed in the 2001 and 2004 surveys. New questions were added to the

survey to gather input on specific areas of interest to both CAOs and

AMAH.

While the survey was designed to enable CAOs to respond on-line,

arrangements were made to ensure that they also had the option of

receiving and completing a hard-copy version of the survey. Of the 255

responses to the survey, only 16 were not completed on-line.

The on-line survey instrument was pretested with a group of volunteer

CAO participants from different types of municipalities across the

province. The pretest validated the design and no further refinements

were made to wording or the format of the survey.

An introductory letter encouraging participation in the survey was sent

from AMAH to all CAOs in the province in mid-March. Invitations with

instructions on how to access and complete the survey were emailed to

3171 CAOs on March 26, 2007 by the consultants. Follow-up emails or

telephone calls were conveyed over the next week to correct out-of-date

email addresses or to deal with technical issues with several

municipalities’ email servers.

The survey was in the field for seven weeks and was supplemented by

a general email reminder and by targeted email and telephone

reminders to non-responders. Of the 317 CAOs invited to complete the

survey, 255 responded, a response rate of just over 80%, slightly lower

than the response levels achieved in the 2001 (84%) and 2004 (85%)

CAO surveys. Discussions and email correspondence with CAOs

revealed several factors that may account for the lower response rate:

• Demanding time commitments. Several CAOs

indicated to the survey team that they were simply too

busy to participate in the survey. The suggestion that

1 There are 347 municipalities in the province. Surveys were not sent to all

municipalities as several CAOs are responsible for multiple municipalities. Surveys were not sent to improvement districts or special areas.


FINAL REPORT

4

CAOs are busier today than they were in previous

years is supported by the survey. More than one-half

of the respondents to the survey indicated that they

have had to devote more time over the past three

years dealing with various land use planning, strategic

planning, inter-municipal, and other issues.

• New CAOs. A number of CAOs chose not to

participate, citing that they felt they were too new to

their positions to properly respond to the survey.

Interestingly, 14% of the CAOs that responded to the

survey indicated that they had been a CAO in an

Alberta municipality for less than one year.

• CAOs in transition. Several municipalities indicated

to the survey team they did not have a permanent

CAO in place at the time of the survey.

• Survey fatigue. Many CAOs – survey responders

and non-responders – indicated to the survey team

that they are typically asked to complete 20-30

surveys of one type or another annually.

Though the response rate to the CAO survey has declined marginally

from previous levels, it remains healthy. The high response rate to the

survey adds confidence that the results do in fact represent the

perspectives of the entire population of CAOs. In statistical terms the

response rates are accurate in predicting the sentiments of the entire

population of CAOs to within + 2.7 percentage points, 19 times out of

20. The high response rate -- particularly given the factors noted earlier

-- confirms the importance of the survey to the CAO community in the

province.

Based on the positive responses it received after the 2004 survey was

completed, AMAH once again provided an opportunity for CAOs to

participate in focus groups to discuss and elaborate upon the

preliminary findings of the 2007 survey. Four focus groups, one each

for cities, towns, villages and rural municipalities, were facilitated by

Nichols Applied Management in July 2007. A total of 26 CAOs

participated in these more in-depth focus discussions. Of the 26 focus

group participants, 23 had completed the 2007 survey.


FINAL REPORT

5

3. THE PROFILE OF CAOS

This section of the report provides a profile of CAOs in Alberta. It

examines the tenure of CAOs in their municipalities and their

perspectives on their future in the industry. It explores the professional

and educational backgrounds of today’s CAOs and considers CAO

views on the requirements for ongoing training. It concludes with a

discussion of the areas of responsibility where CAOs report increased

involvement over the past three years.

3.1 CHIEF ADMINISTRATOR EXPERIENCE

One of the core strengths of local government in Alberta is the quality

and experience of the CAOs across the province. Just over one-third of

the respondents to the latest survey reported more than a decade of

experience as a CAO in Alberta. Another third have between four and

ten years of experience, while the remaining one-third have been a CAO

in Alberta for less than four years. This distribution of experience

presents a positive scenario for Alberta municipalities. It suggests a

current healthy mix of both experienced and new CAOs across the

province. It also bodes well for the future as municipalities will have the

opportunity to hire experienced administrators as their CAOs retire. The

survey also identified that approximately 28% of respondents have

worked as a CAO in another province, territory or state, most often in

Saskatchewan, British Columbia or Manitoba.

As indicated in Table 3-1, the proportion of CAOs who have less than

four years of CAO experience in Alberta has increased, from 25% in

2001 to 29% in 2004, and to 34% in 2007. Concurrently, the proportion

of CAOs with more than a decade of experience has decreased, from

42% in 2001 to 35% in 2007. This trend suggests that there has been a

strong turnover within the ranks of Alberta CAOs over the past six years.

Table 3-1 Years of Experience as an Alberta CAO

2007 (n=255)

2004 (n=273)

2001 (n=273)

Less than 4 years 34% 29% 25%

4 to 10 years 31% 29% 34%

More than 10 years 35% 41% 42%


FINAL REPORT

6

Table 3-2 Years of Experience as an Alberta CAO, by Type of Municipality

Cities/ Specialized

Municipalities Towns Villages Summer Villages

Rural Municipalities

Less than 4 years 20% 36% 50% 14% 17% 4 to 10 years 50% 26% 20% 52% 45% More than 10 years 30% 38% 30% 33% 38% Total 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

Table 3-2 illustrates the slight variations in CAO tenure across different

types of municipalities. More specifically:

• One-half of the CAOs working in villages report they

have less than four years experience in their

positions;

• Roughly one-half of the CAOs in cities, rural

municipalities, and summer villages have four to ten

years of experience; and,

• Rural CAOs tend to have somewhat more experience

in their positions than urban CAOs, with more than

four out of five rural CAOs reporting they had been in

their positions for four years or more.

3.2 FUTURE PLANS

The 2001 CAO survey indicated that approximately one in three CAOs

in the province expected to no longer be a CAO within six years. This

reflected the fact that a number of older and/or long-serving CAOs were

planning their retirements. However it was also noted at the time that

almost 30% of the CAOs who indicated they were planning on leaving

their positions within six years would likely seek work outside of

municipal government prior to retiring. The 2001 survey corroborated a

growing concern regarding an impending exodus of CAOs across the

province. The provincial government responded to this issue by

reintroducing the municipal internship program and working with CAOs

to ensure that adequate provincial support programs and services were

in place.

The 2004 and 2007 CAO surveys reveal that the trend of CAOs leaving

the industry has accelerated. Table 3-3 suggests that, for the first time

since the CAO surveys were initiated, over half (53%) of CAOs


FINAL REPORT

7

anticipate that they will no longer be working as an Alberta CAO within

six years.

Table 3-3 Expected Number of Remaining Years as a CAO of an Alberta Municipality

2007 (n=254)

2004 (n=273)

2001 (n=273)

Less than 6 years 53% 44% 34%

6 to 10 years 19% 23% 25%

More than 10 years 18% 23% 41%

Don’t Know 10% 10% --

It is clear from the survey results that a rising share of CAOs plan to

leave the industry. Correspondingly, fewer than one in five (18%) of the

CAOs surveyed in 2007 indicate plans to remain in the industry for more

than a decade, a decline from 23% in 2004 and 41% in 2001.

Further analysis of the survey data indicates that more than three-

quarters of the CAOs currently working in cities and specialized

municipalities plan to leave their jobs within six years. This is a

significantly higher rate than reported by the CAOs of rural and small

urban municipalities where the corresponding rates vary between 43%

and 56%. Interestingly, none of the reporting CAOs from cities and

specialized municipalities anticipates staying in their positions for more

than another decade. On the other hand, approximately one in five of

the CAOs in rural and small urban municipalities anticipates remaining

in the position for more than ten years.

The 2007 survey asked CAOs who had indicated that they were

planning to leave the profession within the next ten years to identify their

reasons for doing so. They were presented with a list of possible

reasons and encouraged to select up to three. Almost one-half of these

CAOs cited retirement as the primary reason for leaving the position.

CAOs also cited work/life balance (18%), the demanding work

environment (13%), inadequate compensation (8%), and the desire to

seek new challenges (8%), or to work in another profession (5%) or

sector (3%) as reasons for leaving.

While concerns with work/life balance and the demanding nature of the

job may not be new, the fact that they are identified with such regularity

as a reason for leaving the profession is an issue that needs to be

carefully monitored and analyzed. These types of concerns were a

subject of discussion at the post-survey focus groups with CAOs. While


FINAL REPORT

8

CAOs from all types of municipalities indicated that they were dealing

with increased volumes of work, tighter deadlines, and higher

expectations (from councils and communities), the toll on work/life

balance appears more pronounced among the CAOs of villages and

small towns. This is likely due to the reality that these CAOs often have

limited internal staff resources within their respective municipalities from

which to draw support and assistance.

The survey encouraged CAOs to elaborate on their reasons for

considering leaving the profession within ten years. Numerous

responses alluded to:

• The extremely demanding work environment.

Many CAOs indicated that their job responsibilities

have increased significantly over the past few years.

Several indicated that they feel considerable pressure

trying to deal with the pressures of growth within and

adjacent to their municipalities.

• Service delivery and fiscal pressures. Several

CAOs noted the ongoing pressures of reconciling the

service level demands in their municipalities with the

limited financial resources available.

• Issues of municipal governance. Several CAOs

commented that their councils do not fully

comprehend the respective roles and responsibilities

of council and administration. They noted that

councils are increasingly micromanaging day-to-day

operations.

The evidence that many CAOs will be leaving their positions within the

next decade is exacerbated by the fact that few municipalities have

developed and implemented formal succession plans. Over 85% of the

CAOs who responded to the 2007 survey indicated that their

municipalities do not have succession plans in place. The absence of

succession planning within municipalities also was identified in previous

CAO surveys. Individual municipalities, municipal associations and the

provincial government need to review options for improving succession

planning within Alberta’s municipal sector.


FINAL REPORT

9

3.3 EDUCATIONAL AND PROFESSIONAL BACKGROUNDS

Alberta CAOs generally are well educated and have substantial levels of

directly related professional experience.

3.3.1 Education Levels

The education levels of CAOs of Alberta municipalities are presented in

Table 3-4. The results show that most CAOs (90%) have formal

education beyond the high school level and 28% have at least one

university degree. While the general educational levels of CAOs haven’t

changed materially since 2004, it is noted that only 22% of CAOs who

responded to the survey in 2001 indicated that they had graduated from

university. This increase suggests that a majority of the CAOs hired

over the past six years have university degrees.

Table 3-4 Highest Level of Formal Education, Alberta CAOs

Level of Education 2007

(n=255) 2004

(n=273) 2001

(n=273)

High school or less 10% 10% 10%

College/Technical School 47% 48%

Some university 15% 14% 68%1

University degree/post-graduate 28% 28% 22% 1. No similar breakdown of university/college/technical school is available as per 2004,

2007.

Table 3-5 presents the education levels of CAOs by type of municipality.

CAOs in Alberta’s cities and specialized municipalities are more likely to

have university degrees (50%), but a large share of CAOs from the

various types of municipalities have some post-secondary educational

experience. It is noteworthy that just over one-quarter of village CAOs

report that they have not pursued post-secondary education. Efforts

should be undertaken to identify if specific upgrading or training

programs might be of benefit to these CAOs.


FINAL REPORT

10

Table 3-5 Highest Level of CAO Formal Education, by Type of Municipality

% with High school or

less

% with College/ Technical

School % with Some

University % with University

degree/post-graduate Cities/Specialized Municipalities 0% 50% 0% 50%

Towns 4% 40% 21% 36% Villages 27% 52% 9% 13% Summer Villages 0% 43% 24% 33% Rural Municipalities 5% 49% 14% 32%

Survey respondents were asked also to identify the disciplines of study

that were pursued in relation to their completed degrees and diplomas.

A total of 171 of the respondents provided such information. The most

mentioned areas of study included business and commerce (73), public

administration (29), general arts (15), recreation (12), planning (7) and

engineering (7).

3.3.2 Professional Experience

The 2007 survey findings clearly illustrate that municipal CAOs in

Alberta have strong professional backgrounds. As indicated in Table 3-

6, 41% of the respondents to the latest survey reported that they had

earlier CAO experience in another municipality prior to assuming their

current position. Of those CAOs without previous CAO experience, the

majority (91 of 145) moved from a corporate services function, while the

remainder came from more specialized or technical service areas.

Table 3-7 illustrates further that over two-thirds of CAOs worked in

municipal government before assuming their current positions. Most of

this experience was gained within their current municipality or another

Alberta municipality. Many of the remaining one-third of respondents

were formerly employed with other public or private sector

organizations.

It is clear from the survey data that most of the CAOs in Alberta

municipalities have “come up through the ranks” within municipal

government, either through promotion within a municipality or movement

between municipalities. This is an important finding as it justifies

investment in provincial training programs for CAOs and municipal

employees.


FINAL REPORT

11

Table 3-6 Type of Position Held Prior to Current Job

2007

# %

CAO/Other 101 41%

Corporate Services (HR, IT, Accounting, Finance) 91 37%

Community Services (Recreation, Culture, Social Services) 28 11%

Planning and Engineering 13 5%

Operations (Water, Sewer, Sanitation, Transportation) 10 4%

Protective Services (Police, Fire, Ambulance) 3 1%

Total 246 100%

Table 3-7 Type of Employer Prior to Current Job

2007 # %

Municipal Government

Another position within current municipality 75 30%

Another Alberta municipality 69 28%

Another municipality outside of Alberta 20 8%

Sub-total (Municipal Government) 164 67%

Non-Municipal Public Sector 24 10%

Private sector 50 20%

Other 8 3%

Total 246 100%

3.4 LEARNING INTERESTS AND NEEDS

CAOs display a strong commitment to life-long learning. They

participate in a wide range of municipal management training and have

identified significant personal and employer interest in a number of fields

of training.

3.4.1 Participation in Further Learning Opportunities

Survey respondents were provided with a list of municipal management

courses, workshops and seminars and were asked if they had attended

any within the past three years. A significant majority (83%) indicated

that they have recently participated in at least one training opportunity,

with many indicating that they had participated in two or more. This is a

significantly higher participation rate than that which was reported in

2004 when only 60% of CAOs indicated that they had taken a municipal

management course within the past three years.


FINAL REPORT

12

The most popular training opportunities identified by CAOs were the

conferences and workshops offered by municipal associations and the

workshops provided by AMAH. Almost one-half (47%) of the

respondents to the 2007 survey reported attending an AMAH workshop.

Approximately six in ten CAOs (57%) indicated that they had attended

association-sponsored conferences. Over 35% of the CAOs also

indicated that they participated in a municipal administrators leadership

workshop within the past three years.

Levels of participation in municipal management training opportunities

differ by type of municipality. Further analysis of the 2007 survey data

indicates that CAOs of Alberta towns are the most likely to participate in

these further learning options. They were almost twice as likely as their

colleagues from other types of municipalities to take advantage of such

opportunities. CAOs from cities and summer villages were the least

likely to participate in further training. The differences in CAO

participation rates across the various types of municipalities may be

attributed to a number of factors, including:

• Length of tenure as a CAO. CAOs who have been

in their positions for many years may have already

participated in particular training opportunities.

• Educational attainment of CAOs. CAOs with higher

levels of post-secondary education, particularly in

areas of business and public administration, may not

feel the need to augment their training in municipal

management.

• Lack of time to participate in training. CAOs who

work alone or who work on a part-time basis may not

have sufficient time to pursue training opportunities,

particularly those which may require extended periods

of time away from their municipalities.

• Lack of resources to participate in training. Almost

one-half (47%) of the CAOs who responded to the

2007 survey indicated that their municipalities’ budget

allocation for CAO education and training is less than

$1,500, with 17% reporting that their municipalities do

not allocate any funding for this purpose.


FINAL REPORT

13

3.4.2 Training Interests

AMAH is keenly interested in knowing more about municipalities’

training interests and needs. The 2007 survey asked CAOs to rate the

degree of interest their municipalities have in a wide range of training

areas. As illustrated in Figure 3-1, approximately two-thirds of CAOs

indicated that their municipalities are particularly interested in four

specific areas of training:

• Financial management and budgeting;

• Strategic thinking and business planning;

• Knowledge of the Municipal Government Act, and

other relevant legislation; and

• Municipal roles and responsibilities.

It is important to note that at least one-quarter and up to just over one-

half of the CAOs indicated that their municipalities would be interested

in each of the other areas of training identified in the 2007 survey.

Figure 3-1 CAOs who Responded “Interested” or “Very Interested” to Different Types of Training1

24%

36%

39%

44%

49%

49%

50%

50%

52%

62%

63%

66%

66%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80%

Returning Officer Training (During Non-election Years)

Tax Recovery Process

Written Communication

Public/Media Relations

Human Resource Management Practices

Interpersonal Communication (with Staff and Council)

Mediation and Negotiation

Drafting Bylaws, Policies and Minutes

Project Management

Municipal Roles & Responsibilities

Knowledge of MGA, Other Legislation

Strategic Thinking and Business Planning

Financial Management and Budgeting

1. Question 8, respondents reporting 4 or 5 on scale of 1 to 5, with (5) indicating Very

Interested in area of training.


FINAL REPORT

14

Further analysis of the 2007 survey data shows that interest in the most

preferred areas of training varies somewhat across different types of

municipalities. While the CAOs from cities, towns and rural

municipalities indicated that financial management and budgeting was

the highest priority training area, CAOs from villages and summer

villages rated strategic thinking/business planning and municipal roles

and responsibilities as the highest priorities, respectively. At least one-

half of the CAOs from each type of municipality indicated that their

municipalities would be interested in training regarding the Municipal

Government Act and other relevant legislation.

A comparison of data from this survey and the survey conducted in

2004 suggests a rising interest in each of the four areas of training

identified as the highest priorities in 2007. Figure 3-2 illustrates this

trend. The identified increase in municipal interest was most prominent

in the areas of financial management and budgeting and knowledge of

the Municipal Government Act and other legislation.

The focus groups with CAOs that were conducted to review the

preliminary survey results confirmed the strong interest in these areas of

training. CAOs from both urban and rural municipalities emphasized

that their councils and their municipalities would benefit from learning

more about financial management, strategic planning and municipal

roles and responsibilities.

CAOs commented through the survey and the focus groups that further

training regarding municipal governance and leadership would also be

very beneficial. Interest was also expressed in learning more about

tangible asset management, intermunicipal planning and cooperation,

municipal best practices, and municipal sustainability.

It was clear from the survey and the subsequent focus groups that many

CAOs believe that elected officials, particularly those who are new to

council, should be required to participate in some form of municipal

training that focuses on governance and municipal roles and

responsibilities.

Many CAOs emphasized that while they appreciate how important

training is -- for themselves, their councils and their staff -- taking the

time to participate in related opportunities is very limited. Several CAOs

suggested that training opportunities should be made available at a local

or regional level, beyond the locations where most training currently

takes place. Others suggested that training would be more effective if it

were geared toward similar types of municipalities.


FINAL REPORT

15

Finally, many CAOs suggested that short courses on time management,

stress management, and work/life balance would be helpful.

Figure 3-2 Respondents Interested in Specific Areas of Training, 2004 and 20071

56%52%

63%

55%

62% 63%66% 66%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

Municipal Roles &Responsibilities

Knowledge of MGA, OtherLegislation

Strategic Thinking andBusiness Planning

Financial Management andBudgeting

2004 (n=273) 2007 (n≥244)

% of Respondents

1. Question 8, respondents reporting 4 or 5 on scale of 1 to 5, with (5) indicating Very

Interested in area of training.

3.4.3 Training Budgets

Despite the high level of interest in further training and learning,

municipalities tend not to allocate significant levels of funding for CAOs

to pursue such opportunities. Respondents were asked to identify their

municipalities’ budget allocation for CAO education and training. As

indicated in Table 3-8, responses were varied. Just over one-third of

the municipalities budget over $2,500 for CAO education and training on

an annual basis.


FINAL REPORT

16

Table 3-8 Annual Budget Allocations for CAO Education and Training

(n=253)1

No Budget Allocation 17%

$1 to $499 6%

$500 to $1,499 25%

$1,500 to $2,499 17%

$2,500 to $3,499 13%

$3,500 to $6,499 17%

$6,500 or more 6%

Total 100%1

1. Total does not add to 100% due to rounding.

Further analysis of the survey data confirms a direct relationship

between the size of a municipality and the amount of funding allocated

for CAO training. Almost 89% of the city CAOs report that their

municipalities annually budget in excess of $3,500 for this purpose.

Less than one-half of rural municipalities and just over one-quarter of

towns make a similar commitment. Only 5% of villages and no summer

villages annually allocate over $3,500 to CAO training.

Given the level of interest expressed in various types of training and the

ongoing challenges associated with recruiting and retaining staff, more

municipalities should consider increasing their budgets and

opportunities for CAO training and education. As well, AMAH and the

municipal associations should continue to work with municipalities to

develop new opportunities for increasing the participation of CAOs in

relevant and timely learning forums.

3.5 WORK LOADS

The 2007 survey presented CAOs with 11 different areas of

responsibility and asked them to indicate whether the amount of time

they devoted to each of these areas has decreased, stayed the same,

or increased over the past three years (or since they assumed the

position of CAO).

A very small minority of CAOs reported that the time they devote to any

particular area of responsibility has decreased in recent years, with an

overwhelming share of respondents indicating additional time

commitments to the various areas. Those functions most commonly

identified as consuming additional workload are as follows:


FINAL REPORT

17

• Land use planning and development (76% of

respondents);

• Strategic and business planning (73%);

• Interacting with neighboring municipalities (66%);

• Administration (65%);

• Finance and budgeting (51%); and

• Management of staff and staff issues (51%).

Between one-quarter and one-half of CAOs also indicated that the

remaining areas of responsibility (public interaction, council interaction,

services and program management, and drafting bylaws and policy)

have required larger time commitments.

Table 3-9 Indicated Increase in Time Commitment by CAO Responsibility – Previous 3 Years1

20071 2004 2001

% Change 2004 to 2007

Land use planning/development 76% 34% -2 +42% Strategic planning/Business planning 73% 44% 43% +29% Interacting with neighbouring municipalities 66% -2 -2 n/a

Administration 65% 37% 34% +28% Finance and Budgeting 51% 17% 17% +34% Management of staff and dealing with staff issues 51% 31% 37% +20%

Interacting with the public 49% 33% 38% +16% Interacting with Council 49% 39% 40% +10% Managing services and programs 40% 27% 29% +13% Accounting 33% 15% 13% +18% Drafting bylaws and policy 28% 17% 23% +11% 1. Percentage of CAOs indicating an increase in time commitment over the past three

years. 2. Responsibility area not included in survey.

CAOs attribute the requirement to spend more time in these areas on a

number of factors, including:

• Economic growth across the province. Not

surprisingly, many CAOs report that their

municipalities are dealing with record levels of

residential, commercial and industrial growth. Land


FINAL REPORT

18

use planning and decision-making in a robust

economy consumes a significant amount of time and

resources.

• Increasing public demands and expectations.

Many CAOs report that citizen expectations for

municipal programs and services have increased

significantly over the past three years.

• More active municipal councils. A number of CAOs

have suggested that their councils are becoming

increasingly involved in day-to-day municipal

operations.

• Increased provincial funding. The implementation

of new grant programs and the resultant expansion of

infrastructure programs has created a significant

amount of work for CAOs. Several CAOs emphasized

that it is particularly difficult to implement capital

programs in a hot economy. Others noted the

complexities associated with conditional grant

programs.

• Greater onus on intermunicipal and regional

cooperation. Whether in response to provincial

requirements or incentives or municipal plans and

agreements, CAOs report a significant increase in the

time they devote to working with municipal neighbors.

They emphasize that political and public involvement

in intermunicipal issues has placed increasing

demands on administrators’ time.

CAOs also reported through the survey that they are spending more

time interacting with provincial departments and agencies, community

groups and citizens, the private sector, and third party (e.g., university,

association, consultants) information-gathering agencies.

Several also emphasized a growing need to focus on the

implementation of information technology and communication systems

within their municipalities.

Table 3-9 compares data from each of the three CAO surveys

conducted by AMAH over the past six years. It illustrates the trends that

CAOs are reporting with respect to the amount of time they spend on


FINAL REPORT

19

selected aspects of their jobs. The table shows the percentage of CAOs

who indicated, in each of the CAO surveys, that they were required to

spend more time on a particular area of responsibility. The highest

percentage increases for every area of responsibility are evident in the

recent 2007 survey.

The four focus groups held to review the preliminary survey results

considered today’s time commitments on CAOs. While many CAOs

expressed strong dedication to their jobs and communities and high

levels of job satisfaction, the consensus within the focus groups was

that there has been a significant increase in the expectations and

responsibilities of CAOs. CAOs from smaller municipalities emphasized

that this situation has been particularly difficult because they have few

other managers to provide them with support. Several village and rural

CAOs expressed high levels of stress and corresponding diminishment

in job satisfaction. The increased time commitment evidenced in the

Table 3-9 results appear to have come largely at the cost to CAOs of

more time on the job, with correspondingly less time for personal and

family life.

Given the pressures that they are under, CAOs are very interested in

the future of municipal governance and service delivery in Alberta. They

express a strong desire to know more about the provincial government’s

position on:

• provincial and municipal roles and responsibilities;

• municipal financial sustainability; and

• intermunicipal and regional planning.

The increasing demands on CAOs and the resultant impact on

municipal governance and service delivery needs to be given careful

consideration. Future CAO surveys should include an opportunity for

CAOs to rate their level of job satisfaction. These ratings could then be

analyzed with respect to length of service, professional background,

education level, and size and type of municipality. Having a strong

understanding of where pressure points might occur along these

dimensions will aid AMAH in providing supports to help CAOs achieve

their municipalities’ objectives.


FINAL REPORT

20

3.6 SOURCES OF INFORMATION

CAOs were also asked to consider where they seek information when

they are addressing time-sensitive issues. Table 3-10 summarizes their

responses to a question asking them what they believed were the “most

beneficial” sources of information available to them. It is clear that the

vast majority of CAOs are most comfortable dealing with time-sensitive

issues with their colleagues (40%), AMAH advisors (28%) and their staff

(22%). A very small minority of CAOs identify other sources of

information as “most beneficial” to them in time-sensitive situations.

Table 3-10 Most Beneficial Sources of Information for CAOs on Time-Sensitive Issues

First Choice

Second Choice

Phoning a colleague in another municipality 40% 41%

Calling AMAH advisor 28% 24%

Discussing the issue with staff 22% 14%

Accessing information on the Internet 5% 12%

Referring to publications, articles, books 2% 5%

Calling one of the municipal associations 1% 2%

Accessing the Municipal Excellent Network (MEnet) 1% 1%

Other 2% 1%

Approximately one-third of survey respondents identified AMAH

advisors as a primary choice for information. CAOs did express three

concerns regarding AMAH advisors. First, many believe that the

complement of core, seasoned advisors within AMAH is decreasing.

Second, many believe that AMAH advisors are equally busy as

themselves and may not be readily available to answer questions and

provide support. Third, several CAOs report that they are usually

advised to seek independent legal advice.

In addition to the foregoing observations offered regarding AMAH

advisors, the department should also consider the input CAOs provided

in respect of the MEnet initiative. Many CAOs expressed the opinion

that MEnet is difficult and time-consuming to use.

As indicated in Figure 3-3, there appears to have been a minor shift

over the past few years in opinion regarding the best sources of

information. While phoning colleagues in other municipalities continues

to be viewed as the most beneficial source of information, CAOs are


FINAL REPORT

21

now more likely to contact the advisors at AMAH. This reverses a

downward trend reported in the 2004 survey.

Figure 3-3 Preferred Approach to Dealing with a Time-Sensitive Issue with which CAOs are not Familiar, Percentage of Respondents

0%

1%

1%

2%

24%

23%

46%

1%

3%

2%

4%

27%

16%

47%

1%

1%

2%

5%

22%

28%

40%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%

Refer to MEnet

Call one of the Associations

Refer to publications, articles, books

Access information on the Internet

Discuss with Staff

Call AMAH Municipal Advisors

Phoning a Colleague

2001 (n=268) 2004 (n=273) 2007 (n=247)

Further analysis of the survey data did not indicate a statistically

significant difference in opinion on this question across different types of

municipalities. CAOs from all types of municipalities report that they rely

primarily on colleagues in other municipalities and AMAH advisors when

then need information in a time-sensitive situation. As expected, CAOs

from larger municipalities also report that they will discuss issues with

their staff, an option that often is not available to CAOs from many

villages, summer villages and small rural municipalities.


FINAL REPORT

22

4. ISSUES CONFRONTING MUNICIPALITIES

4.1 GENERAL FINDINGS

CAOs identified 16 different types of issues in response to an open-

ended question that asked them what they felt were the major issues

their municipalities will be focusing on over the next three years. Figure

4-1 identifies these issues and the frequency in which they were

identified.

Figure 4-1 Major Issues Urban and Rural Municipalities Will be Focussing on Over the Next Three Years1

2%

2%

3%

3%

3%

3%

4%

5%

7%

7%

9%

14%

19%

25%

38%

68%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80%

Staff education

Succession planning

Attracting new businesses

Recreation facilities

Implementing Tangible Asset Accounting

Environmental concerns

Increased cost for projects

Annexation

Affordable Housing

Long-term capital planning

Developing relationships with adjoining municipalities

Land development

Financial shortfalls

Lack of qualified staff

Growth management

Infrastructure

1. Question 13, “Over the next three years, what do you feel are the major issues that

your municipality will be focusing in?”. Multiple responses permitted.

Detailed analysis of the survey data indicates that these types of

concerns are identified by all types of municipalities.


FINAL REPORT

23

With regard to infrastructure and growth management issues, urban and

rural municipalities identify those issues in rough correspondence to the

representational weighting of those groups of municipalities (77% and

23% respectively). Perhaps surprisingly, however, the rural municipal

CAOs identify upcoming issues of staffing disproportionately to their

share of all responding municipalities.

Figure 4-2 Major Issues of Focus Over Next Three Years, Share of Responses by Urban and Rural Municipalities

80%75%

53%

20%25%

47%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

Infrastructure Growth Management Lack of Qualified Staff

Urban Rural

The post-survey focus groups provided CAOs with an opportunity to

discuss the major issues in greater detail and to identify how AMAH and

the provincial government might assist municipalities in responding to

these issues. The CAOs emphasized three important points:

• First, these issues affect all municipalities to some

degree;

• Second, the issues are highly inter-related; and,

• Third, the issues are directly related to the

unprecedented rate of economic growth across the

province.


FINAL REPORT

24

4.2 GROWTH ISSUES

Many of the municipal issues that CAOs expect to focus on over the

next few years relate directly or indirectly to continued growth pressures.

CAOs emphasized that the pressures of responding to on-going rapid

growth manifest themselves in a number of ways, including:

• Increased demands on existing programs,

services and infrastructure. Many CAOs noted their

municipalities will need to ensure that they are

positioned to provide programs and services to a

greater number of people over the next few years.

They emphasized that this will be particularly difficult

as many municipal facilities are already operating at

or beyond capacity. The demands on existing

infrastructure – particularly roads, water and

wastewater systems and recreational facilities – will

continue to be a major issue in many municipalities.

• Demands for new or expanded infrastructure.

Many CAOs indicated that their municipalities are

struggling to develop the infrastructure required to

accommodate growth. Almost two-thirds (62%) of the

CAOs who responded to the survey indicated that

their municipal councils have approved capital plans

covering at least three years. Cities (89%), rural

municipalities (77%) and towns (72%) are most likely

to have these types of plans. Less than one-half

(43%) of village and summer village CAOs report that

their municipalities have these types of plans in place.

Many CAOs noted that their municipalities are struggling to find the

appropriate balance between investing in the rehabilitation of existing

infrastructure and the construction of new infrastructure. These

administrators emphasized that their municipalities are currently facing

significant “infrastructure deficits” brought about by decisions to defer or

reduce maintenance and rehabilitation programs over the past decade.

Survey respondents who indicated that their municipalities had a

council-approved capital plan in place were asked if their municipalities


FINAL REPORT

25

also had2 an Integrated Community Sustainability Plan (ICSP) in place.

As illustrated in Figure 4-3, responses varied by type of municipality.

While CAOs emphasized that increased provincial investment in

infrastructure through the Municipal Sustainability Initiative was

welcomed by their municipalities, concerns were raised with respect to

the “conditionality” of the funding and the significant demands placed on

municipalities by current grant application and reporting requirements.

Figure 4-3 Has, or is in the Process of Preparing, an Integrated Community Sustainability Plan, by Type of Municipality1

30%

39%

56%

81%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Villages

Towns

Cities & SpecializedMunicipalities


1. Question 12b, “Does your municipality have, or is it in the process of preparing an

Integrated Community Sustainability Plan (ICSP)?”.

A number of CAOs also noted concerns with their municipalities’

capabilities to accurately define and quantify their infrastructure deficits.

This was particularly true for water and sewer infrastructure in small

urban and rural municipalities.

Several CAOs also suggested that the social infrastructure in their

communities will continue to deteriorate as available resources will likely

be committed to such core infrastructure components as roads.

2 CAOs were prompted to respond in the positive if their municipalities were currently in

the process of developing an Integrated Community Sustainability Plan.


FINAL REPORT

26

During the course of the focus sessions with CAOs, the municipal

administrators elaborated on a number of the key impacts associated

with the significant local growth that is occurring across many

communities in the province. These include:

• Changing citizen and community demands. Many

CAOs emphasized that their citizens and community

stakeholders are becoming more demanding. It was

suggested that residents increasingly see themselves

as consumers or customers of municipal services

rather than citizens of the municipality. They expect

immediate responses to their concerns, inquiries and

requests for service. This change in citizen

perspective is evident across urban and rural

municipalities, large and small. Several rural CAOs

felt that this phenomenon was associated in part with

the movement of urban people to rural communities.

Urban CAOs attributed the change to a broader

societal shift associated with technology and

globalization.

CAOs from rural municipalities also noted that their

municipalities are responding to new types of service

and development requests, including full-service

industrial parks.

• Tighter labour markets. CAOs also reported that

recruiting and retaining staff is becoming increasingly

difficult and likely will be a significant municipal

concern in the future. Municipalities are competing

with the private sector and each other for skilled staff.

Several municipalities also noted that it is more and

more difficult to hire contractors and equipment.

CAOs reported through the survey that it is particularly

difficult within their municipalities to recruit to public

works, building and development, CAO, finance and

accounting, and community service (e.g., pool staff,

FCSS, parks and recreation, safety codes, by-law

enforcement) positions. Three in ten CAOs noted that

their municipalities have been unsuccessful in

recruiting to particular positions over the past year.

Many CAOs indicated that it was difficult even to

recruit to summer and temporary positions. The


FINAL REPORT

27

length of time searching for candidates ranged from

eight months for building and development positions

to two years for engineers.

Many of the CAOs in the focus groups noted concern

with the fact that 20-30 municipalities are currently

searching for CAOs.

Several CAOs from smaller municipalities indicated

that they were having significant difficulties recruiting

and retaining certified water and wastewater treatment

plant operators. They reported that it is difficult to

compete with larger municipalities for staff, particularly

engineers, public works staff, emergency responders,

planners, accountants and assessors.

Several CAOs also noted that housing is becoming an

important factor in attracting and retaining staff.

• Cost escalation. A number of CAOs also

emphasized that economic growth in the province has

significantly increased municipalities’ cost of doing

business. Contract prices, labour rates and utility

costs are increasing significantly.

• Greater attention toward regional and

intermunicipal relationships. CAOs recognize the

importance of intermunicipal relationships, especially

in an environment of rapid economic growth. They

appreciate the provincial government’s

encouragement of intermunicipal approaches to

issues, but emphasize that working across municipal

boundaries consumes significant time and effort.

Several CAOs indicated that they and their councils

are very anxious to see the results of current work

regarding an Edmonton region growth management

plan and the development of a provincial land use

planning framework.

• Concern with the environment. CAOs indicated that

rising public interest in environmental protection and

more stringent environmental regulations and policies

(federal and provincial) are placing new demands on


FINAL REPORT

28

municipalities. The environment is increasingly

becoming part of many municipalities’ agendas. The

relative capacities of municipalities to address

environmental issues vary considerably.

4.3 PROVINCIAL SUPPORT

The CAOs participating in the post-survey focus groups were asked to

consider how AMAH specifically and the provincial government more

generally could support their municipalities’ efforts to deal with the major

issues facing them. Their suggestions and recommendations involve:


support services;

• training programs;

• assistance in attracting municipal staff;

• improvements to the Municipal Sustainability

Initiative; and

• increased consultation with CAOs.

Those CAOs particularly from the rural and smaller urban municipalities,

emphasized that they require further assistance to deal with the major

issues they confront. They suggested that AMAH and other provincial

departments should be providing them with templates and guidelines to

help them prepare grant applications, undertake public consultation,

deal with issues such as tangible asset accounting, and meet regulatory

reporting requirements.3 Several CAOs noted that the province needs

to do a better job communicating information to them (e.g., assessment

data and school requisitions) on a timely basis.

A number of CAOs suggested that more resources be dedicated to

enhancing the capacity of municipal advisory services within AMAH.

Many recommended that new municipal advisors should have personal

experience working at the municipal level of government. Others

recommended that advisors should spend more time on site visits.

CAOs of rural and small urban jurisdictions recommended that the

province undertake a study of the issues affecting those municipalities

3 It was obvious during the focus group discussions that there is a wide range in levels

of awareness among CAOs with respect to what types of provincial templates, guidelines and supports are already available to municipalities.


FINAL REPORT

29

whose populations are holding steady or are in decline. The notion

expressed by these CAOs is that these municipalities may not be

receiving the attention they require given the province’s focus on

responding to growth.

As noted elsewhere in the report, CAOs are very interested in training

and further education programs for themselves, their staff and their

councils. Focus group participants suggested that provincial training

programs be developed around major issues like land use planning and

water treatment. There are existing training programs in these areas,

and perhaps AMAH could examine approaches for better ensuring that

information about such training opportunities reaches municipal

administrators.

CAOs are supportive of provincial incentives that encourage

municipalities to take regional approaches to resolving issues. Some

recommended that the province do more to encourage municipalities to

cost-share the delivery of programs and services and the development

of infrastructure.

Many CAOs believe that the province can play an important role in

helping municipalities to recruit staff. Several suggestions were put

forward during the focus groups, including:

• developing public education programs designed to

promote careers in municipal government;

• working with high schools to incorporate municipal

jobs into career planning courses; and,

• expanding post-secondary programs in municipal

planning and development, including rural and

regional planning.

A number of CAOs raised concerns with the Municipal Sustainability

Initiative (MSI). They noted that the program is under review and

recommended that it should be revised to make it more unconditional. It

should also be reviewed in an effort to reduce the time and resources

required to apply for funding and report on results. CAOs expressed in

strong terms that they are responsible for infrastructure programs in


FINAL REPORT

30

their municipalities and should be trusted to work with their councils and

communities to make appropriate investment decisions.4

Finally, CAOs also suggested that AMAH and other provincial

departments need to do a better job consulting them prior to introducing

programs aimed at supporting municipalities. CAOs are concerned that

the “solution to every problem results in more work for CAOs”. Focus

group discussions noted that municipalities need to be considered when

developing provincial land use planning frameworks or rural

development strategies. Municipalities also desire more information

regarding the provincial government’s long-term plans and objectives,

many of which affect them directly.

4 Subsequent to the survey and focus sessions the province in September 2007

announced new provisions for the MSI. These include significantly reduced conditionality and reporting requirements.


FINAL REPORT

31

5. SUPPORT PROGRAMS

One of the objectives of the CAO survey is to gauge opinions with

respect to a variety of the programs and services provided by AMAH.

The department uses the data from the CAO surveys to assist in the

evaluation and design (or redesign) of existing provincial programs and

services and to identify the need for and to develop new support

services. The 2007 survey solicited input regarding:

• the Municipal Internship Program;

• public participation processes used by municipalities;

• the Municipal Excellence Network; and,

• the provincial safety codes system.

The preliminary findings from the survey were shared with CAOs during

the post-survey focus groups. The feedback from both the survey and

the focus groups is summarized below.

5.1 MUNICIPAL INTERNSHIP PROGRAM

AMAH, in partnership with Alberta municipalities, coordinates the

Municipal Internship Program. Under the program, AMAH provides

financial assistance to municipalities and municipal organizations willing

to commit the time and resources necessary to host and train an intern.

The objective of the program is to provide recent post-secondary

graduates the opportunity to gain experience as a first step toward a

career in municipal government.

5.1.1 Municipal Participation

CAOs generally are well aware and informed about the internship

program. The majority of CAOs who participated in the focus groups

had a good understanding of the program and were very supportive of

its approach and objectives. They emphasized that the program

provides good training opportunities, creates more informed citizens,

and helps with succession planning.

When asked about the likelihood of their municipality applying to

participate in the program over the next three years, almost one in three

(29%) of CAOs indicated that their municipalities were likely or very


FINAL REPORT

32

likely to apply. This represents a slight increase over the 2004 CAO

survey results, which reported that 25% of CAOs thought it likely that

their municipalities would apply to become involved in the program over

the next three years.

Interest in the program is highest among cities: two-thirds of city CAOs

indicated potential involvement in the program over the next three years.

Approximately 40% of the CAOs from towns and rural municipalities

indicated a similar interest.

Just over one-half (55%) of the CAOs surveyed indicated that it was

unlikely that their municipalities would be involved in the program in the

future.5 These CAOs were asked to identify reasons behind their

municipalities’ expected lack of participation in the program. Over 60%

of these CAOs noted that their municipality is not eligible to host an

intern.6 Other explanatory responses included the concerns that the

municipality did not have adequate budgetary resources to commit to

the program and the suggested lack of available time to devote to the

training of an intern.

Overall, the program has been well received by CAOs across the

province. It is likely that demand for the program over the next three

years will substantially exceed supply, with more municipalities

interested in hosting an intern than there are internships. AMAH will

need to consider options for responding to this expected demand.

Future communications about the programs should emphasize that it is

not designed to produce new CAOs in a short period. While this has

never been an objective of the program, a degree of misperception on

this issue is evident within the CAO community.

Finally, in response to suggestions from a number of CAOs, AMAH may

also wish to consider options for lengthening the term of an internship to

two years and for allowing smaller municipalities to participate in some

aspects of the program.

5.1.2 Land Use Planner Program

In response to input from municipalities over the past few years, AMAH

is currently piloting an internship program for municipal land use

planners.

5 16% of CAOs expressed a neutral position on the question. 6 The Municipal Internship Program has population thresholds that make very large and

small (less than 700 population) municipalities ineligible to participate in the program.


FINAL REPORT

33

The CAOs who participated in the focus groups were aware and

supportive of the expansion of the internship program. They

emphasized that land use planning is a critical area of responsibility for

Alberta municipalities. They believe that the program will provide

Alberta-specific training in land use planning and will help support

municipal efforts to attract and retain planning staff in the future.

One in three CAOs indicated through the survey that their municipalities

would be either likely or very likely to participate in the Planning

Internship Program. It should be noted that this level of interest is

higher than that expressed for the existing program.

5.2 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PROCESSES

AMAH is aware that municipalities are often required to design and

deliver public participation processes. The 2007 survey asked CAOs to

comment on the:

• adequacy of municipal resources to implement these

processes;

• areas that pose the most difficulty in obtaining

effective public involvement; and

• ways in which AMAH could assist municipalities with

public participation in these areas.

5.2.1 Resources and Capacity for Public Participation

The survey asked if municipalities have adequate resources to

effectively design and deliver appropriate public participation processes

in a number of areas, including:

• Environmental issues;

• Planning and development issues;

• Policy development;

• Recreation;

• Strategic and/or business planning (including

budgeting); and

• Transportation.


FINAL REPORT

34

The survey data clearly indicates differences in opinion regarding the

adequacy of resources to undertake public participation processes in

various subject areas. Roughly one-half of the CAOs surveyed

indicated that their municipalities have adequate resources to implement

public participation processes around policy development (57%),

planning and development (56%), strategic and business planning

(53%), recreation (52%), and transportation (43%). However, with

regard to the area of environmental issues, (refer to Figure 5-1) 70% of

CAOs indicated that their municipalities do not have adequate

resources to conduct public participation processes.

Figure 5-1 Perceived Adequacy of Resources to Develop and Deliver Public Participation Processes with Regard to Environmental Issues1

30%

21%

27%

32%

35%

56%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Overall

Villages


Summer Villages

Towns

Cities & SpecializedMunicipalities

1. Municipalities responding “yes” to Question 22.

Further analysis of the survey data (see Figure 5-2) indicates that there

is some significant variation in the responses to this question across

different types of municipalities. City CAOs are far more confident of

their municipalities’ capacity to undertake public participation in each of

the six subject areas compared to their colleagues in the rural and

smaller urban municipalities. A strong majority of city CAOs believe that

their municipalities have adequate resources to handle five of the six

areas of consultation, environmental issues being the exception where a

third of the CAOs are less confident regarding their public participation

resources.

Town CAOs are more divided on this question. While 73% of towns

believe they have the resources to implement public participation


FINAL REPORT


35

processes in the area of recreation, their overall level of confidence is

lower in each of the other areas with environmental issues the lowest at

only 35%. CAOs from rural municipalities also report a wide range of

opinion on the adequacy of municipal resources to conduct public

participation processes, with satisfaction ranging from a low of 27% with

regard to environmental matters to a high of 73% in respect of

recreation.

The perceived adequacy of resources among villages is less than 40%

in all of the identified issue areas.

The range of opinion across different types of municipalities is

somewhat predictable. Larger municipalities may have dedicated

resources (staff and funding) to implement public participation

processes. While cities and larger rural municipalities may have been

involved in public consultation processes for a number of years, smaller

municipalities are typically less experienced in this area.

The issue of public consultation was discussed at the post-survey focus

sessions. The participating CAOs concurred with the findings of the

survey and offered a number of additional insights.

• City CAOs are quite confident in the capacity of their

municipalities to undertake public consultation. They

stress that public consultation is a strength of

municipal government.

• Rural CAOs emphasized that they often rely on

communications specialists to assist with public

participation processes.

• Most CAOs noted that long-term planning issues

typically receive far less public attention than more

immediate issues.

• Village and town CAOs noted that attendance at

public meetings of any type is typically very small.

They note that their citizens are reluctant to participate

in public consultation unless it directly affects them.

• Most CAOs agreed that public consultation around

environmental issues is particularly difficult. Several

noted that many of these types of issues are beyond

the mandate of municipalities and should be dealt with

at a provincial or federal level.

FINAL REPORT

Figure 5-2 Perceived Adequacy of Resources with Regard to Public Participation Programming, by Subject Area and Type of Municipality1

56%

89%

89%

100%

89%

67%

35%

65%

63%

73%

58%

49%

21%

35%

33%

38%

39%

20%

27%

64%

69%

37%

57%

62%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Environmental Issues

ng and Development Issues

Policy Development

Recreation

ic and/or Business Planning

Transportation

Planni

Strateg

Cities & Specialized Municipalities Towns Villages Rural Municipalities


36

1. Figure 5-2 excludes summer villages.

FINAL REPORT

37

5.2.2 Public Involvement

CAOs were asked in the survey to identify areas where their

municipalities experience difficulties in obtaining effective public

involvement. The six areas identified in the earlier question regarding

the adequacy of municipal resources to implement public participation

processes were used to prompt responses from the CAOs. The survey

results are summarized in Figure 5-3, while Table 5-2 organizes the

responses by type of municipality.

Approximately one-half of all respondents reported difficulty in obtaining

effective public involvement in Strategic and/or Business planning

(52%), Policy Development (48%), and Environmental Issues (47%).

Planning and Development Issues (41%) and Transportation (32%)

received a lower ranking of difficulty. The area where least difficulty is

reported regarding obtaining public involvement is Recreation (27%).

Figure 5-3 Areas Experiencing Reported Difficulty in Obtaining Effective Public Involvement1

27%

32%

41%

47%

48%

52%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Recreation

Transportation

Planning andDevelopment Issues

Environmental Issues

Policy Development

Strategic and/or BusinessPlanning

1. Question 23. Percent of respondents identifying the area as posing difficulties in

obtaining effective public involvement.


FINAL REPORT

38

Table 5-1 Areas Experiencing Reported Difficulty in Obtaining Effective Public Involvement, by Type of Municipality

Environmental

Issues

Planning and Development

IssuesPolicy

Development Recreation

Strategic and/or

Business Planning Transportation

Cities & Specialized Municipalities 30% 20% 70% 40% 60% 50%Towns 49% 37% 45% 23% 52% 31%Villages 51% 53% 53% 36% 59% 37%Summer Villages 33% 29% 33% 14% 29% 14%Rural Municipalities 46% 39% 49% 23% 53% 28%

1. Question 23. Percent of respondents identifying the area as posing difficulties in obtaining effective public involvement.

5.2.3 Potential Assistance to Municipalities in the Field of Public Participation

CAOs were asked to comment on what AMAH might do to assist their

municipalities with public participation processes. Just over one-quarter

of the survey respondents provided a response to this question. The

post-survey focus sessions also probed the need and opportunities to

support in this area.

The most common suggestions from the survey and focus groups

included:

• Training for municipal staff and councillors. Many

CAOs from smaller municipalities suggested that

AMAH could provide training sessions on how to

facilitate public meetings. Several CAOs (38% of

survey respondents) suggested that these sessions

should include summaries of best practices in

municipal public consultation.

• Provision of facilitators. A number of CAOs

indicated that it would be helpful if AMAH (or other

provincial departments) could provide trained

facilitators to municipalities (34% of survey

respondents).

• Provision of funding guidelines. Several CAOs

recommended that AMAH assist in defining guidelines

for the funding of municipal public participation

processes.


FINAL REPORT

39

• Public education. A number of CAOs also thought

that AMAH had a role to play in educating the public

on the importance of becoming involved in public

participation processes (15% of survey respondents).

CAOs in the focus groups downplayed the need for direct AMAH

involvement in this area. Many emphasized that they have the capacity

to undertake public consultation on their own. Others indicated that the

public consultation initiatives in their municipalities are very informal and

are typically not seen as a priority within their communities.

5.3 MUNICIPAL EXCELLENCE NETWORK

The Municipal Excellence Network (MEnet) is an initiative developed

through the collaborative efforts of Alberta municipalities and AMAH.

MEnet provides web-based access to information on business and

operational practices in the areas of municipal governance,

administration, human resources, financial management, infrastructure

services, development services, safety services and community

services.

The survey and focus groups asked CAOs to assess MEnet and provide

suggestions for improvement.

5.3.1 Network Use by CAOs

As presented in Table 5-3, over one-half (55%) of CAOs reported

accessing MEnet over the past year, approximately the same level of

access that was reported in the 2004 CAO survey (53%). MEnet use by

CAOs varies by type of municipality. Rural and town CAOs are more

likely to have accessed MEnet than their colleagues in other

municipalities.

Table 5-2 also illustrates several shifts in usage across municipalities

over the past three years. While access by city and village CAOs has

dropped significantly since 2004, access by rural CAOs has increased

considerably.


FINAL REPORT

40

Table 5-2 CAO Use of the Network in the Last Year

2007 2004 Change in

Accessing MEnet Overall 55% 53% +2% Villages 43% 71% -28% Cities 44% 80% -36% Municipal Districts 44% 27% +17% Summer Villages 48% 46% +2% Towns 65% 72% -7% Counties 69% 36% +33%

1. Counties and Municipal Districts were not combined as “Rural Municipalities” for this table, so that responses can be compared with the 2004 survey.

CAOs participating in the post-survey focus groups noted that they do

not utilize MEnet on a regular basis. Many emphasized that their staff

are more likely to use the network.

5.3.2 Perceived Value and Usability

Four out of five of the of CAOs who indicated that they had accessed

MEnet in the past year indicated that they found the information they

were looking for.7 A higher percentage (97%) indicated that they found

the information to be of value. Further analysis of the survey data

indicates that these high ratings are shared by CAOs from all types of

municipalities.

CAOs were also asked to rate the overall usability of MEnet. While 40%

stated it was easy to use, 43% expressed a neutral opinion and 17%

indicated that MEnet was difficult to use. Ratings of usefulness varied

across different types of municipalities. A strong majority (70%) of

CAOs from summer villages indicated that MEnet is easy to use. Less

than half of the CAOs in each of the other types of municipalities

expressed a similar opinion, ranging from 43% for town CAOs to 25%

for city CAOs.

Focus group participants noted that:

• searching for information on MEnet is difficult, with

several CAOs suggesting that a Google-based search

feature would be an improvement;

7 CAOs were asked in the survey to identify what information they were searching for.

Only 10% of the survey respondents provided a response to this question.


FINAL REPORT

41

• the websites of other municipalities are more useful

than MEnet in terms of design and functionality;

• the presentation of practices on MEnet is overly

complicated;

• as it is time-consuming to submit practices to MEnet, it

is likely that many good practices are never submitted;

and

• it would be helpful if the practices on MEnet were

evaluated and ranked somehow.

As noted earlier in this report, CAOs report that they do not generally

rely on MEnet as a source of time-sensitive information. They are far

more likely to consult a colleague in another municipality, AMAH

advisors, or their own staff when they need such information.

5.3.3 Barriers to Use

Over one-half of the CAOs who participated in the survey responded to

a question regarding potential barriers to the accessibility of MEnet.

The most common barriers identified included:

• Unsuccessful experiences. Many CAOs indicated

that while they had used MEnet in the past, they found

that it didn’t meet their needs.

• Difficulties with use. Approximately one in five of

the CAOs who responded to this question noted that

they found MEnet difficult to use.

• Lack of awareness of MEnet. Many CAOs report

that they were simply not aware of MEnet.

• Lack of time to access MEnet. A number of CAOs

indicated that they simply did not have enough time in

their schedules to make use of MEnet.

• Insufficient internet connection speed. Finally,

CAOs from a number of smaller, remote municipalities

noted that their municipalities lack the technology to

make efficient use of MEnet.


FINAL REPORT

42

AMAH should consider the input CAOs have provided through the

survey and focus groups, but should remain cognizant of the fact that

CAOs are typically not primary users of MEnet. As emphasized by

CAOs during the focus groups, municipal staff are more likely to be

MEnet users. However, AMAH should continue to promote the

advantages of MEnet to the CAO community in Alberta.

5.4 SAFETY CODES SYSTEM

Municipalities in Alberta have the ability to determine if they will

administer the Safety Codes Act (SCA) within their boundaries to

become accredited in one or more of the construction disciplines:

building, electrical, plumbing and gas. Administering the SCA involves

issuing permits and conducting inspections. Accredited municipalities

have the authority to administer the SCA themselves, while AMAH

administers the SCA for non-accredited municipalities.

The CAO survey, for the first time, contained a number of questions

relating to the administration of the SCA. Reported levels of

accreditation by type of municipality are summarized in Table 5-3.

Overall, three-fifths of reporting CAOs indicate that their municipality is

accredited, while one-third indicate that the municipality is non-

accredited. Perhaps surprisingly, almost one-tenth of all respondents

reported that they are “not sure” of the accreditation status of their

communities. The “not sure” responses are largely concentrated among

the villages.

Table 5-3 Reported Safety Codes Accreditation1

Cities & Specialized

Municipalities (n=10)

Towns (n=83)

Villages (n=73)

Summer Villages (n=21)


(n=57) Accredited 100% 72% 40% 71% 54% Non-accredited 0% 25% 38% 29% 42% Not Sure 0% 2% 22% 0% 4% Total 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

1. Question 28.

5.4.1 Administrative Supports

Those CAOs of accredited municipalities were queried about the

perceived adequacy of various information supports in the safety codes

system. The information areas probed included information technology,

accreditation models, service delivery models, and bylaw development.


FINAL REPORT

43

As summarized in Table 5-4, a higher proportion of CAOs are of the

view that information supports are adequate than believe the opposite.

Satisfaction with the available information appears strongest in relation

to the information about service delivery models (e.g., joint

accreditation, regional service commissions, etc.), and weakest

regarding information technology.

Table 5-4 Perceived Adequacy of Available Safety Codes System Information

Subject1 Inadequate2 Adequate3

- - - Percent of Respondents - - -

Information Technology (e.g., electronic permitting systems)

29% 35%

Accreditation Models 27% 46%

Service Delivery Models 17% 51%

By-law Development 28% 40% 1. Question 29. Results from accredited municipalities only. 2. Percent reporting 1 or 2 on scale of 1 to 5, with (1) indicating complete disagreement

that appropriate information is available. 3. Percent reporting 4 or 5 on scale of 1 to 5, with (5) indicating complete agreement that

appropriate information is available.

The reported satisfaction with available information varies significantly

across municipal groupings, with the CAOs of villages especially, and to

a lesser degree summer villages, reporting inadequacies in available

information, as shown in Table 5-5.

Table 5-5 Accredited Municipalities Reporting Inadequacies in Available Safety Codes System Information1

Cities Towns Villages Summer Villages Rural All

Information Area % disagreeing that appropriate information is available

Information Technology 0% 25% 59% 36% 16% 29%

Accreditation Models 0% 29% 52% 29% 9% 27%

Service Delivery Models 0% 13% 41% 21% 9% 17%

By-law Development 0% 27% 56% 39% 9% 28%

1. Question 29. Percent reporting 1 or 2 on a scale of 1 to 5, with (1) indicating complete disagreement that appropriate information is available.

5.4.2 System Assessments

The CAOs of the accredited municipalities were also asked whether

they agreed or disagreed (on a scale of 1 to 5) with various statements

about the safety codes system, including the adequacy of enforcement


FINAL REPORT

44

systems, municipal resourcing, technical information, the public’s

understanding of the safety system, and the system’s ability to meet the

public’s safety needs. In all of the five areas probed but one, general

levels of satisfaction are greater than or equal to levels of

dissatisfaction, as shown in Table 5-6. However, a sizeable minority of

CAOs (roughly one-third of responses to the sub-questions excluding

“public understanding”) are of the view that the systems, resourcing and

technical supports that underlie the safety codes programs are

inadequate. With regard to the general public’s understanding of the

safety system, two-thirds of the CAOs of accredited municipalities8

believe that levels of understanding are inadequate. That view is

shared closely by the CAOs of all groups of municipalities.

Table 5-6 CAO Views Regarding Various Attributes of the Safety Codes System

Subject1 Agree2 Neutral3 Disagree4

Adequate systems in place to enforce codes?

34% 37% 29%

Adequate municipal resources to provide appropriate levels of service?

33% 34% 33%

Adequate technical information and advice supports?

37% 39% 25%

Adequate public understanding? 10% 27% 62%

System able to meet the public’s safety needs?

36% 43% 20%

1. Question 30. Results from accredited municipalities only. 2. Indicating (4) and (5) on 1-5 scale. 3. Indicating (3) on 1-5 scale. 4. Indicating (1) and (2) on 1-5 scale.

There is some range of views among the different types of municipalities

with regard especially to the adequacy of municipal resourcing and

available technical supports, with the CAOs of villages – and to a lesser

degree summer villages – expressing the greatest dissatisfaction. A

relatively high proportion of city CAOs (one-third) do not believe that the

safety codes system is meeting public safety needs, compared to less

than one-sixth of town CAOs who share the same view.

5.4.3 Value of the System

All CAOs, regardless of the safety codes accreditation status of their

municipalities, were asked a number of questions regarding their

perceived value of a safety code system and the general support for that 8 Ranging from 57% among summer villages to 67% among cities.


FINAL REPORT

45

system within the municipality. As summarized in Table 5-7, the system

is shown to have generally high value and public support across the

municipal sector. The perceived value of the safety codes system is

lowest among rural municipalities and summer villages while levels of

municipal support are lowest among villages and rural municipalities.

Table 5-7 Perceived Municipal Support For and Value of the Safety Codes System

Disagree1 Neutral2 Agree3 Total

System assists municipality to maintain orderly permitting/ construction procedures

12% 30% 59% 100%

System provides a mechanism to address building-related safety concerns

12% 28% 61% 100%

System is supported by municipality

7% 30% 64% 100%

1. (1) and (2), completely disagree/disagree on a scale of 1 to 5. 2. (3) on a scale of 1 to 5, from completely disagree to completely agree. 3. (4) and (5), completely agree/agree, on a scale of 1 to 5 from completely disagree to

completely agree.

Focus group participants raised some concerns regarding the provincial

safety codes system. CAOs expressed uncertainty about liability

coverage, the thoroughness of safety audits, and the lack of follow-up

when deficiencies are reported on audits. Also discussed was the

concept of “permit shopping” and differences in service levels and timing

depending on the contractor used.

CAOs in the focus groups suggested that AMAH might provide support

with software and associated technologies to report inspection findings,

and in monitoring the process in non-accredited communities.


FINAL REPORT

46

6. SURVEY IMPRESSIONS

CAOs were not surveyed regarding their impressions of the survey

instrument or methodology. However, Nichols Applied Management

facilitated discussions on this topic during the post-survey focus groups.

The decision to do so emanated from a concern with the lower response

rate to the 2007 survey and the need to ensure that future surveys meet

the expectations of CAOs and AMAH.

Most of the CAOs who participated in the focus groups indicated that

they are supportive of this particular survey. They emphasized two

points. First, this is one of the better surveys they are asked to

complete. Second, they look forward to reviewing the results each time

it is conducted. They indicated that they believe that AMAH makes

good use of the information that is gathered through the survey. They

also noted that they use the results of this survey in their day-to-day

work with their councils and administrations.

They appreciate that this survey is fielded on a regular, three-year cycle.

They support the inclusion of questions designed to identify key issues

impacting CAOs and municipalities and to provide input on different

AMAH programs and services.

These are important conclusions given that CAOs report that they are

asked to complete between 20 and 30 surveys every year, many of

which do not provide them with feedback.

CAOs appreciate the efforts AMAH makes to disseminate the results of

this survey. Many indicated that the presentations AMAH made at

different meetings of CAOs following the 2004 survey were very

informative. CAOs enjoyed the opportunity to review the results with

their colleagues. These types of information-sharing should be

continued in the future.

CAOs are very interested in how AMAH will respond to this and future

surveys. They indicated that they would find it very helpful if AMAH

would delineate in a short report how the provincial government was

responding to the survey results. They recommended that this report be

prepared a year after the survey is completed.

It is clear that CAOs see value in this survey. AMAH should continue to

survey CAOs every three years.


FINAL REPORT

47

7. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

AMAH recognizes that municipal chief administrative officers (CAOs)

play a fundamentally important and informed role in providing effective

local government across the province and they provide an invaluable

“window” regarding evolving issues and developments in the municipal

sector. The Ministry also is committed to ensuring that its programs and

services meet the needs of CAOs and their municipalities. In an effort

to better understand the needs of Alberta’s municipalities and senior

administrators, AMAH conducts regular surveys of CAOs across the

province.

Nichols Applied Management was commissioned to conduct the 2007

survey, facilitate follow-up focus groups with CAOs, and prepare a

report of findings. The following is a summary of key findings with

respect to:

• the profiles of CAOs in Alberta;

• the major issues expected to confront municipalities in

the near future;

• CAO perspectives regarding several AMAH programs

and services; and

• CAO feedback on the survey itself.

7.1 THE PROFILE OF CAOS

Chief Administrator Experience

One of the core strengths of local government in Alberta relates to the

quality and experience of the CAOs across the province. Just over one-

third of the respondents to the 2007 survey indicated that they have

more than a decade of experience as a CAO in Alberta. Another third

have between four and ten years of experience, while the remaining

one-third have been a CAO in Alberta for less than four years.

Future Plans

The 2007 survey indicates that over one-half of CAOs anticipate that

they will no longer be working as an Alberta CAO within six years. More

than three-quarters of the CAOs currently working in cities and


FINAL REPORT

48

specialized municipalities report that they plan to leave their jobs within

six years. This is a significantly higher rate than reported by the CAOs

of rural and small urban municipalities where the corresponding rates

vary between 43% and 56%.

The 2007 survey asked CAOs who had indicated that they were

planning to leave the profession within the next ten years to identify their

reasons for doing so. While almost one-half of these CAOs cited

retirement as their primary reason for leaving the position, 18% cited

work/life balance, and 13% noted the demanding work environment in

which they work. While concerns with work/life balance and the

demanding nature of the job may not be new, the fact that they are

identified with such regularity as a reason for leaving the profession is

an issue that needs to be carefully monitored and analyzed.

The concern that many CAOs will be leaving their positions within the

next decade is exacerbated by the fact that few municipalities have

developed and implemented formal succession plans. Over 85% of the

CAOs who responded to the 2007 survey indicated that their

municipalities do not have succession plans in place.

Individual municipalities, municipal associations and the provincial

government need to review options for improving succession planning

within Alberta’s municipal sector.

Education and Professional Backgrounds

Most CAOs in Alberta (90%) have achieved a level of formal education

beyond high school graduation and 28% have at least one university

degree. A comparison of 2001 and 2007 survey results suggests that a

majority of the CAOs hired over the past six years have university

degrees.

It is clear from the survey data that most of the CAOs in Alberta

municipalities have “come up through the ranks” within municipal

government, either through promotion within their current municipality or

through movement between municipalities. This finding supports the

investment in provincial training programs for CAOs and municipal

employees.

Learning Interests and Needs

Approximately two-thirds of CAOs indicated that their municipalities are

particularly interested in four specific areas of training:


FINAL REPORT

49

• Financial management and budgeting;

• Strategic thinking and business planning;

• Knowledge of Municipal Government Act, other

legislation; and

• Municipal roles and responsibilities.

It is important to note as well that between roughly one-quarter and one-

half of the CAOs indicated that their municipalities would be interested

in each of the other areas of training identified in the 2007 survey.

It was clear from the survey and the subsequent focus groups that many

CAOs believe that elected officials, particularly those who are new to

council, should be required to participate in some form of municipal

training that focuses on governance and municipal roles and

responsibilities.

Given the level of interest expressed in various types of training and the

ongoing challenges associated with recruiting and retaining staff, more

municipalities should consider increasing their budgets and

opportunities for CAO training. As well, AMAH and the municipal

associations should continue to work with municipalities to develop new

opportunities for increasing the participation of CAOs in relevant and

timely learning forums.

Work Loads

In response to questions about work loads, a strong majority of CAOs

report that they are required to spend increasing amounts of time on a

wide range of responsibilities. They attribute this to economic growth

across the province; increased public expectations; greater involvement

by municipal councils in day-to-day municipal operations; the

implementation implications of new infrastructure funding programs; and

a growing need to do regional and intermunicipal work.

Given the pressures that they are under, CAOs are very interested in

the future of municipal governance and service delivery in Alberta. They

express a strong desire to know more about the provincial government’s

position on:

• provincial and municipal roles and responsibilities;

• municipal financial sustainability; and


FINAL REPORT

50

• intermunicipal and regional planning.

The increasing demands on CAOs need to be given careful

consideration. Future CAO surveys should include an opportunity for

CAOs to rate their level of job satisfaction. These ratings could then be

analyzed with respect to length of service, professional background,

education level, and size and type of municipality. Having a strong

understanding of where pressure points might occur along these

dimensions will aid AMAH in providing supports to help CAOs achieve

both their personal and their municipalities’ objectives.

Sources of Information

A majority of CAOs indicated that they are most comfortable dealing

with time-sensitive issues with their colleagues (40%), AMAH advisors

(28%) and their staff (22%).

While phoning colleagues in other municipalities continues to be viewed

as the most beneficial source of information, CAOs report that they are

more likely to contact the advisors at AMAH than they were in the past.

CAOs did, however, express concerns with AMAH advisors. A number

of CAOs believe that the complement of core, seasoned advisors within

AMAH is decreasing. Others believe that AMAH advisors are as busy

as themselves and may not be readily available to answer questions

and provide support. Several CAOs report that they are usually advised

to seek independent legal advice.

AMAH should carefully consider these perspectives in planning and

implementing municipal advisory services.

7.2 ISSUES CONFRONTING MUNICIPALITIES

General Findings

CAOs identified 16 different types of issues in response to an open-

ended question that asked them what they felt were the major issues

their municipalities will be focusing on over the next three years. The

issues most often noted by CAOs included:

• Infrastructure;

• Growth management;

• Lack of qualified staff; and

• Financial shortfalls.


FINAL REPORT

51

The survey data suggests that most municipalities across the province

are facing similar issues. While both urban and rural CAOs identify

similar sets of issues, the impact of particular issues may be more

strongly felt in specific types of municipalities.

CAOs used the post-survey focus groups to emphasize that many of the

issues are interconnected and directly related to economic growth

across the province. They emphasized that the pressures of growth

manifest themselves in a number of ways, including:

• increased demands on existing programs, services

and infrastructure;

• demands for new or expanded infrastructure;

• changing citizen and community demands;

• tighter labour markets;

• cost escalation;

• greater attention toward regional and intermunicipal

relationships; and

• rising concerns about the environment.

Provincial Support

The CAOs participating in the post-survey focus groups were asked to

consider how AMAH and the provincial government could support their

municipalities’ efforts to deal with major issues. Their suggestions and

recommendations involve:


support services;

• enhanced training and further education programs;

• incentives in support of regional approaches and

inter-municipal cost sharing;

• assistance with attracting staff;

• improvements to the Municipal Sustainability

Initiative; and


FINAL REPORT

52

• increased consultation with municipalities and

CAOs in advance of new local government

programs and in respect of provincial plans and

objectives.

7.3 AMAH SUPPORT PROGRAMS

Municipal Internship Program

The Municipal Internship Program has been well received by CAOs

across the province. It is likely that demands for the program over the

next three years will substantially exceed supply, with more

municipalities interested in hosting an intern than there are internships.

AMAH will need to consider options for responding to this demand.

Future communications about the program should emphasize that it is

not designed to produce new CAOs within a year. While this has never

been an objective of the program, a degree of misperception about this

issue is evident within the CAO community.

In response to suggestions from a number of CAOs, AMAH may also

wish to consider options for lengthening the term of an internship to two

years and for allowing smaller municipalities to participate in some

aspects of the program.

CAOs are aware and supportive of the expansion of the internship

program to include land use planners. They believe that the program

will provide Alberta-specific training in land use planning and will help

support municipal efforts to attract and retain planning staff in the future.

Public Participation Processes

The survey clearly indicates differences in opinion regarding the

adequacy of resources to undertake public participation processes.

Roughly one-half of the CAOs surveyed indicated that their

municipalities have adequate resources to implement public

participation processes around policy development (57%), planning and

development (56%), strategic and business planning (53%), recreation

(52%), and transportation (43%). However, with regard to the area of

environmental issues, 70% of CAOs indicated that their municipalities

do not have adequate resources to conduct public participation

processes.

The survey data indicate that there is some significant variation in the

responses to this question across different types of municipalities. City


FINAL REPORT

53

CAOs are far more confident of their municipalities’ capacity to

undertake public participation than their colleagues in rural and smaller

urban municipalities.

CAOs were asked to comment on what AMAH could do to assist their

municipalities with public participation processes. The most common

suggestions from the survey and focus groups included:

• training for municipal staff and councillors;

• provision of facilitators;

• provision of funding guidelines; and

• public education.

CAOs in the focus groups downplayed the need for direct AMAH

involvement in this area. Many emphasized that they have the capacity

to undertake public consultation on their own. Others indicated that the

public consultation initiatives in their municipalities are very informal and

are typically not seen as a priority within their communities.

Municipal Excellence Network

Over one-half (55%) of CAOs reported accessing MEnet over the past

year, approximately the same level of access that was reported in the

2004 CAO survey (53%). While access by city and village CAOs has

dropped significantly since 2004, access by rural CAOs has increased

considerably. MEnet use by CAOs varies by type of municipality. Rural

municipality and town CAOs are more likely to have accessed MEnet

than their colleagues in other municipalities.

More than one-half of the CAOs who participated in the survey

responded to a question regarding potential barriers to the accessibility

of MEnet. The most common barriers identified included:

• unsuccessful experiences;

• difficulties with use;

• lack of awareness of MEnet;

• lack of time to access MEnet; and

• insufficient internet connection speed.


FINAL REPORT

54

AMAH should consider the input CAOs have provided through the

survey and focus groups, but should remain cognizant of the fact that

CAOs are typically not the primary users of MEnet. As emphasized by

CAOs during the focus groups, municipal staff are more likely to be

MEnet users. AMAH should continue to promote the advantages of

MEnet to the CAO community in Alberta.

Safety Codes Administration

The 2007 CAO survey, for the first time, contained a number of

questions relating to the administration of the Safety Codes Act. Three-

fifths of reporting CAOs indicate that their municipality is accredited,

while one-third indicate that the municipality is non-accredited. Perhaps

surprisingly, almost one-tenth of all respondents reported that they are

“not sure” of the accreditation status of their communities. The “not

sure” responses are largely concentrated among the villages.

The CAOs of accredited municipalities were queried about the

adequacy of various information supports within the safety codes

system. A higher proportion of CAOs are of the view that information

supports are adequate than believe the opposite. Satisfaction with the

available information appears strongest in relation to the information

about service delivery models (e.g., joint accreditation, regional service

commissions, etc.), and weakest regarding information technology. The

reported satisfaction with available information varies significantly

across municipal groupings, with the CAOs of villages especially, and to

a lesser degree summer villages, reporting inadequacies in available

information.

CAOs were asked to assess a number of dimensions of the safety

codes system, and in all but one of those areas, general levels of

satisfaction exceed the levels of dissatisfaction. The exception relates

to the adequacy of the public’s understanding of the safety codes

program. Only one-tenth of CAOs agree with the view that the public

has an adequate understanding of the role and function of the safety

codes system.

While the survey indicated that CAOs believe that the current safety

codes system is valuable and supported across the municipal sector,

the focus group participants raised several concerns. CAOs expressed

uncertainty about liability coverage, the thoroughness of safety audits,

and the lack of follow-up when deficiencies are reported on audits.


FINAL REPORT

55

These CAOs suggested that AMAH might provide support with software

and associated technologies to report inspection findings, and to

monitor the process in non-accredited communities.

7.4 SURVEY IMPRESSIONS

Most of the CAOs who participated in the focus groups indicated that

they are supportive of this particular survey. They believe that AMAH

makes good use of the information that is gathered through the project

and they note that they use the results in their day-to-day work with their

councils and administrations. They appreciate that the survey is fielded

on a regular, three-year cycle.

CAOs appreciate the efforts AMAH makes to disseminate the results of

the survey. Many indicated that the presentations AMAH made at

different meetings of CAOs following the 2004 survey were very

informative and they enjoyed the opportunity to review the results with

their colleagues. These types of information-sharing should be

continued in the future.

CAOs are very interested in how AMAH will respond to this and future

surveys. They indicated that they would find it very helpful if AMAH

would delineate in a short report how the provincial government was

responding to the survey results. They recommended that this report be

prepared a year after the survey is completed.


FINAL REPORT

Appendix A

CAO Survey Instrument

A-1

CAO Name:_____________________

Municipality:_____________________

CAO Survey 2007 Thank you for participating in this survey of CAOs of Alberta municipalities. Your opinions are important to us and will help Alberta Municipal Affairs and Housing (MA&H) design and maintain its services to better meet your needs. Your responses to this study will be confidential and will not be shared with anyone. The survey is being handled by a third-party, Nichols Applied Management, and individual survey results will not be reported back to MA&H. This survey will take approximately 30 minutes to complete. Please remember that you can start and stop at any time to accommodate your schedule and we look forward to receiving your responses by April 5, 2007.

MA&H will share the results of this survey with all respondents. Simply by participating in this survey, you can ensure that you receive valuable information about the collective priorities and perspectives of Alberta's municipal managers.

As you go through the survey, please ensure that you answer each question. Thank you in advance for your time and thoughtful responses.

Should you have any questions or concerns about this survey, please contact Jeff Bellinger at Nichols Applied Management in Edmonton at 780-409-1752 or via e-mail [email protected].

A-2

PART 1: EMPLOYMENT, EDUCATION AND TRAINING

The first section gathers basic information regarding your employment experience, education, training and future career plans. This data will increase our understanding of the current demographics of Alberta's municipal managers and will allow for a more detailed and meaningful analysis of the survey results. AN OPPORTUNITY TO PROVIDE ANY ADDITIONAL COMMENTS OR IDEAS WILL FOLLOW.

1. How long have you been a CAO in an Alberta municipality? PLEASE SELECT ONE ONLY.

1 Less than one year 2 1 to 3 years 3 4 to 6 years 4 7 to 10 years 5 11 to 15 years 6 More than 15 years

1a) If applicable, how many years were you a CAO in another province, territory or state? PLEASE SELECT ONE ONLY.

1 Less than 3 years 2 4 to 6 years 3 7 to 10 years 4 11 to 15 years 5 More than 15 years

1b) If applicable, please indicate the other provinces, territories, or states in which you have been a CAO. _________________________________________

2. How many more years do you anticipate working as a CAO in an Alberta municipality? PLEASE SELECT ONE ONLY.

1 Less than one year 2 1 to 3 years 3 4 to 6 years 4 7 to 10 years 5 11 to 15 years 6 More than 15 years 7 Don't know

2a) If you have a plan to leave the municipal CAO profession in the next 10 years, what would be your reasons for doing so. PLEASE SELECT UP TO THREE REASONS.

1 work in another sector 3 work in another profession 5 personal health 7 work/life balance 9 seek new challenges

2 work environment too demanding 4 inadequate compensation 6 retirement 8 other (specify)

_______________________

A-3

3. Which one of the following describes the most recent job you held prior to your current position as CAO in terms of both the employer type and the type of job? PLEASE SELECT ONE ONLY.

Type of Job Employer Type

Corporate Services

(e.g. HR, IT, Accounting,

Finance)

Community Services

(e.g. Recreation,

Culture, Social

Services

Operations (e.g. Water,

Sewer, Sanitation,

Transportation)

Protective Services (e.g. police,

fire, ambulance)

Planning

and Engineering

CAO/ other

Another position within the municipality

11 21 31 41 51 61

With another Alberta municipality

12 22 32 42 52 62

With another municipality outside of Alberta

13 23 33 43 53 63

With a non-municipal public-sector employer

14 24 34 44 54 64

With a private-sector employer

15 25 35 45 55 65

Other (Please Specify) _______________

16 26 36 46 56 66

4. Which one of the following best describes the highest level of formal education you have obtained? PLEASE SELECT ONE ONLY.

1 Less than high school education 2 High school completion 3 Some community college 4 Community college/university certificate or diploma 5 Technical school certificate/journeymen papers 6 Some university 7 University undergraduate degree 8 University graduate degree

A-4

5. If applicable, in which of the following fields do you hold a university degree or college diploma? PLEASE SELECT ALL THAT APPLY.

College diploma(excluding certificates)

Undergraduate degree

Graduate degree

General Arts and Humanities 11 21 31 Business / Commerce 12 22 32 Education 13 23 33 Engineering 14 24 34 Law 15 25 35 Public Administration 16 26 36 Recreation 17 27 37 Science 18 28 38 Planning 19 29 39 Other (Please Specify) _______________________

110 210 310

6. Which of the following municipal management courses, workshops, or seminars have you taken within the past three years? PLEASE SELECT ALL THAT APPLY.

1 Alberta Municipal Affairs and Housing (MA&H) workshops 2 Association sponsored conferences or workshops (please specify the Association(s)) ____________________________________________________________________

3 Banff Centre Leadership Development Program 4 Certificate in Municipal Management and Leadership (CMML) 5 Municipal Administrators Leadership Workshop 6 Muniversity 7 National Advanced Certificate in Local Authority Administration (NACLAA) Level I/Local Government Certificate Program 8 NACLAA Level II 9 Royal Roads University's Local Government Leadership 10 Other (Please specify): _____________________________________________ 11 None

7. What is your municipality budget allocation for CAO education and training?

1 $0 (no budget allocation) 2 $1 to $499 3 $500 to $1,499 4 $1,500 to 2,499 5 $2,500 to $3,499 6 $3,500 to $6,499 7 $6,500 or more

A-5

8. Please indicate your municipality’s degree of interest in each of the following areas of training by using the scale of 1 to 5 where "1" means "not at all interested" and "5" means "very interested". PLEASE SELECT THE APPROPRIATE BOX IN EACH ROW.

Not at all interested

Very Interested

1 2 3 4 5 Skills in drafting by-laws, policies and minutes

1 2 3 4 5

Written communication skills (correspondence and reports)

1 2 3 4 5

Interpersonal communication skills (with staff and council)

1 2 3 4 5

Public/media relations skills 1 2 3 4 5

Mediation and negotiation skills 1 2 3 4 5

Strategic thinking and business planning skills

1 2 3 4 5

Project Management skills 1 2 3 4 5

Financial management and budgeting skills

1 2 3 4 5

Human resource management practices

1 2 3 4 5

Knowledge of the Municipal Government Act/other legislation

1 2 3 4 5

Municipal roles and responsibilities

1 2 3 4 5

Tax recovery process 1 2 3 4 5

Returning Officer training during non-election years

1 2 3 4 5

Other (Please specify) ______________________

1 2 3 4 5

9. Please note any additional comments, issues or ideas related to employment, education or training below. If you do not have any additional comments to make, please leave this space blank.

A-6

PART 2: CAO RESPONSIBILITIES The next set of questions is about CAO responsibilities, municipal priorities and planning and succession planning. This information will help Alberta Municipal Affairs and Housing identify the areas in which CAOs may require additional assistance and will assist in pinpointing current trends that municipal administrators face. AN OPPORTUNITY TO PROVIDE ANY ADDITIONAL COMMENTS OR IDEAS WILL FOLLOW.

10. Please indicate whether the amount of time you devote to each of the following areas has decreased, stayed about the same, or increased over the past three years (or since you assumed the position of CAO). PLEASE SELECT THE APPROPRIATE BOX IN EACH ROW.

Decreased

Stayed the same Increased

Finance and budgeting 1 2 3

Accounting 1 2 3

Administration 1 2 3

Strategic planning/Business planning 1 2 3

Land use planning/development 1 2 3

Management of staff and dealing with staff issues 1 2 3

Managing services and programs 1 2 3

Drafting by-laws and policy 1 2 3

Interacting with the public 1 2 3

Interacting with council 1 2 3

Interacting with neighboring municipalities 1 2 3

Other (Please specify): ______________________________ 1 2 3

11. Please indicate which of the following sources of information is most beneficial to you when you are addressing a time-sensitive issue that you have not previously confronted. PLEASE SELECT THE ITEM THAT IS MOST BENEFICIAL IN THE FIRST COLUMN, SECOND MOST BENEFICIAL IN THE SECOND COLUMN AND THIRD MOST BENEFICIAL IN THE THIRD COLUMN.

Most

beneficial

Second most

beneficial

Third most

beneficialPhoning a colleague in another municipality 1 1 1 Discussing the issue with your staff 2 2 2 Accessing information about the issue on the internet 3 3 3 The Municipal Excellence Network 4 4 4 Referring to publications/articles/books 5 5 5 Calling municipal advisors at Municipal Affairs 6 6 6 Calling one of the Associations 7 7 7 Other (Please specify):__________________________________ 8 8 8

A-7

12. Does your municipality have a council approved capital plan covering three years or more?

1 Yes ------------------► Now please go to Question 12a)

2 No ------------------► Now please go to Question 13

12a) Does your municipality have a financial plan to provide for the planned capital spending?

1 Yes 2 No

12b) Does your municipality have, or is it in the process of preparing an Integrated Community Sustainability Plan (ICSP)?

1 Yes 2 No

13. Over the next three years, what do you feel are the major issues that your municipality will be focusing on?

14. On a scale of 1 to 5 where "1" means "very poor" and "5" means "excellent", how would you rate the opportunities for advancement within your municipality for a new employee with management potential?

Very poor Excellent

1 2 3 4 5

1 2 3 4 5

14a) If you answered “1” or “2” to Question 14, please indicate why you feel the opportunities for advancement within your municipality are poor.

A-8

15. Do you have a formal succession plan in place?

1 Yes 2 No

16. Did you recruit and staff within the past three years?

1 Yes ---► Now please go to question 16a

2 No ---► Now please go to question 19

16a) Of the positions you have had to recruit for within the past three years, which positions were most difficult to fill? PLEASE RANK THE THREE MOST DIFFICULT POSITIONS TO FILL.

Most Difficult

Second Most Difficult

Third Most Difficult

17. Were there any positions you were unable to fill?

1 Yes ------------------► Now please go to question 18

2 No ------------------► Now please go to question 19

18. Which positions were you unable to fill?

Length of time

searching (months) Positions

A-9

19. Please note any additional comments, issues or ideas related to CAO responsibilities below. If you do not have any additional comments to make, please leave this space blank.

PART 3: PROGRAMS AND SERVICES

The last set of questions is related to MA&H’s programs and services, such as the Municipal Internship Program, training services, safety services and the Municipal Excellence Network. Your responses to these questions will provide MA&H with necessary information in order to better address your future needs. AN OPPORTUNITY TO PROVIDE ANY ADDITIONAL COMMENTS OR IDEAS WILL FOLLOW.

20. MA&H reintroduced the Municipal Internship Program to assist Alberta municipalities with a population of 700 or more in their succession planning efforts to train qualified individuals who can progress to municipal leadership positions. Within the next three years, how likely is it that your municipality will apply to participate in the Municipal Internship Program? Please use a scale of 1 to 5 where “1" means "not at all likely" and "5" means "very likely".

Not at all likely

Very likely

1 2 3 4 5

1 2 3 4 5

If you answered "1" or "2" to Question 20 please complete Question 20a) now. Otherwise please skip to Question 21.

20a) Why will your municipality not be likely to apply to participate in the Municipal Internship Program? PLEASE SELECT ALL THAT APPLY.

1 Ineligible. Our population is less than 700. 2 No time available 3 No expertise to pass on to an intern 4 Do not have the budget/resources to commit 5 Not interested in the program 6 Do not think we would be selected as hosts 7 Other (Please specify):____________________________________________

A-10

21. MA&H is piloting an internship program for the planning profession. How likely is it that your municipality would be interested in participating in the Planning Internship Program? Please use a scale of 1 to 5 where “1" means "not at all likely" and "5" means "very likely".

Not at all likely

Very likely

1 2 3 4 5

1 2 3 4 5

22. Do you have adequate resources to effectively design and deliver appropriate public participation processes in the following areas for your citizens/clients? YES NO Environmental Issues 1 2 Planning and Development issues 1 2 Policy Development 1 2 Recreation 1 2 Strategic and/or Business Planning (including budgeting) 1 2 Transportation 1 2 Other: _________________________________________ 1 2

23. Which of the following areas pose difficulties in obtaining effective public involvement? PLEASE SELECT ALL THAT APPLY.

1 Environmental Issues 2 Planning and Development issues 3 Policy Development 4 Recreation 5 Strategic and/or Business Planning (including budgeting) 6 Transportation 7 Other:

_____________________________________________

24. What can Municipal Affairs and Housing do to assist your municipality with public participation in these areas?

A-11

25. Have you accessed the Municipal Excellence Network (MEnet) website in the last year?

1 Yes ------------------► Now please go to question 25a)


25a) Did you find the information you were looking for?

1 Yes --------►25a.1) Was the information of value? 1 Yes 2 No

2 No

25b) What information/tools were you searching for? ___________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________

25c) How would you rate the usability of the website? Please use a scale of 1 to 5 where “1" means "easy" and "5" means "difficult"

Easy Difficult 1 2 3 4 5

1 2 3 4 5

26. Are there any tools, resources or information that MEnet could offer to assist you in the operations and/or governance of your municipality? ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

27. Are there any specific barriers to the accessibility of MEnet? PLEASE SELECT ALL THAT APPLY.

Not aware of MEnet 1 Tried it, but it did not meet my needs so I have not been back

2

Connection speed 3 Ease of use 4 Other (Please Specify): ________________________ 5

A-12

28. We are interested in your perception of the safety codes system as regulated by the Safety Codes Act and related codes and standards.

Municipalities in Alberta have the ability to determine if they will administer the Safety Codes Act (SCA) within their boundaries to become accredited in one or more of the construction disciplines; building, electrical, plumbing and gas. Administering the SCA means issuing permits and conducting inspections. As an accredited municipality you will have chosen to administer the SCA yourself or as a non-accredited municipality MA&H will do this on your behalf. Is your municipality:

1 Accredited Go to Question 29

2 Non-accredited If your municipality is non-accredited, please proceed to Question 31.

3 Not Sure If you are unsure about your municipality’s accreditation, please proceed to Question 31.

29. Please indicate your level of agreement with each of the following statements about administrative supports in the safety codes system. Please respond on a scale of 1 to 5, where “1” means “completely disagree” and “5” means “completely agree”:

Completely disagree

Completely agree

1 2 3 4 5 Your municipality has appropriate information about Information Technology – electronic permit system to record permits issued and inspection performed

1 2 3 4 5

Your municipality has appropriate information about accreditation models (joint accreditation, Regional Service Commissions)

1 2 3 4 5

Your municipality has appropriate information about service delivery models (municipal SCO staff, contracted accredited agencies)

1 2 3 4 5

Your municipality has appropriate information about by-law development (secondary suites, permit fees)

1 2 3 4 5

A-13

30. Please indicate your level of agreement with each of the following statements about the Safety Codes System: Please respond on a scale of 1 to 5, where “1” means “completely disagree” and “5” means “completely agree”:

Completely disagree

Completely agree

1 2 3 4 5 There are adequate systems in place to enforce Safety Codes.

1 2 3 4 5

There are adequate municipal resources to provide an appropriate level of service.

1 2 3 4 5

There is adequate support in the form of technical information and advice.

1 2 3 4 5

There is adequate general public understanding of the safety system.

1 2 3 4 5

The safety codes system is able to meet the general public’s safety needs.

1 2 3 4 5

31. Regardless of your municipality’s decision to administer the Safety Codes Act please provide your level of agreement regarding the value to you of the safety codes system. Please respond on a scale of 1 to 5, where “1” means “completely disagree” and “5” means “completely agree”:

Completely disagree

Completely agree

1 2 3 4 5 The Safety Codes System assists my municipality to maintain orderly permitting and construction procedures.

1 2 3 4 5

The Safety Codes System provides a mechanism to address building-related safety concerns.

1 2 3 4 5

The Safety Codes System is supported by my municipality.

1 2 3 4 5

32. Please note any additional comments regarding the Safety Codes System, below. If you do not have any additional comments to make, please leave this space blank.

A-14

33. Please feel free to provide any additional comments related to any of the areas addressed during this survey in the space below.

Thank you very much for your time and valuable input.

Please fax completed survey to Nichols Applied Management at:

FAX: (780) 428-7644 or

Mail it to:

Nichols Applied Management 1100, 10130 – 103 Street Edmonton, AB T5J 3N9

Attn: CAO Survey Administrator

FINAL REPORT

Appendix B

Survey Tabulations

B-1

CAO Name:_____________________

Municipality:_____________________

CAO Survey 2007 Thank you for participating in this survey of CAOs of Alberta municipalities. Your opinions are important to us and will help Alberta Municipal Affairs and Housing (MA&H) design and maintain its services to better meet your needs. Your responses to this study will be confidential and will not be shared with anyone. The survey is being handled by a third-party, Nichols Applied Management, and individual survey results will not be reported back to MA&H. This survey will take approximately 30 minutes to complete. Please remember that you can start and stop at any time to accommodate your schedule and we look forward to receiving your responses by April 5, 2007.

MA&H will share the results of this survey with all respondents. Simply by participating in this survey, you can ensure that you receive valuable information about the collective priorities and perspectives of Alberta's municipal managers.

As you go through the survey, please ensure that you answer each question. Thank you in advance for your time and thoughtful responses.

Should you have any questions or concerns about this survey, please contact Jeff Bellinger at Nichols Applied Management in Edmonton at 780-409-1752 or via e-mail [email protected].

B-2

PART 1: EMPLOYMENT, EDUCATION AND TRAINING

The first section gathers basic information regarding your employment experience, education, training and future career plans. This data will increase our understanding of the current demographics of Alberta's municipal managers and will allow for a more detailed and meaningful analysis of the survey results. AN OPPORTUNITY TO PROVIDE ANY ADDITIONAL COMMENTS OR IDEAS WILL FOLLOW.

1. How long have you been a CAO in an Alberta municipality? PLEASE SELECT ONE ONLY.

Time as a CAO # %Less than one year 35 13.71 to 3 years 51 20.04 to 6 years 43 16.97 to 10 years 37 14.511 to 15 years 24 9.4More than 15 years 65 25.5Total 255 100.0

1a) If applicable, how many years were you a CAO in another province, territory or state? PLEASE SELECT ONE ONLY.

Time as a CAO Elsewhere # %Less than 3 years 44 62.94 to 6 years 3 4.37 to 10 years 6 8.611 to 15 years 5 7.1More than 15 years 12 17.1Total 70 100.0

2. How many more years do you anticipate working as a CAO in an Alberta municipality? PLEASE SELECT ONE ONLY.

Additional years # %Less than one year 14 5.51 to 3 years 69 27.24 to 6 years 52 20.57 to 10 years 49 19.311 to 15 years 21 8.3More than 15 years 24 9.4Don’t Know 25 9.8Total 254 100.0

B-3

2a) If you have a plan to leave the municipal CAO profession in the next 10 years, what would be your reasons for doing so. PLEASE SELECT UP TO THREE REASONS.

Reasons for departure # %work in another sector 8 4.5work environment too demanding 39 21.9work in another profession 16 9.0inadequate compensation 25 14.0personal health 4 2.2retirement 127 71.3work/life balance 53 29.8seek new challenges 24 13.5other 6 3.4Total 302

3. Which one of the following describes the most recent job you held prior to your current position as CAO in terms of both the employer type and the type of job? PLEASE SELECT ONE ONLY.

Type of Position Held Prior to Current Job Type of Employer Prior to Current Job # % # %

CAO/Other 101 41% Municipal Government Corporate Services (HR, IT, Accounting, Finance)

91 37% Another position within current municipality

75 30%

Community Services (Recreation, Culture, Social Services)

28 11% Another Alberta municipality 69 28%

Planning and Engineering 13 5% Another municipality outside of Alberta

20 8%

Operations (Water, Sewer, Sanitation, Transportation)

10 4% Sub-total (Municipal Government) 164 67%

Protective Services (Police, Fire, Ambulance)

3 1% Non-Municipal Public Sector 24 10%

Total 246 100% Private sector 50 20% Other 8 3% Total 246 100%

4. Which one of the following best describes the highest level of formal education you have obtained? PLEASE SELECT ONE ONLY.

Highest Level of Education Reported # % Less than high school education 1 .4 High school completion 26 10.3 Some community college 5 2.0 Community college/university certificate or diploma 100 39.5 Technical school certificate/journeymen papers 12 4.7 Some university 38 15.0 University undergraduate degree 40 15.8 University graduate degree 32 12.3 Total 253 100.0

B-4

5. If applicable, in which of the following fields do you hold a university degree or college diploma? PLEASE SELECT ALL THAT APPLY.

Field of Study

College diploma (excluding

certificates) Undergraduate

degree Graduate degree Total

% of Total Fields of Study

General Arts and Humanities 1 11 3 15 8% Business / Commerce 39 21 13 73 39% Education 3 3 2% Engineering 3 2 2 7 4% Law 3 2 5 10 5% Public Administration 15 10 4 29 15% Recreation 4 5 3 12 6% Science 2 2 4 2% Planning 4 2 1 7 4% Other 16 7 6 29 15% Total by Level of Achievement 85 62 42 189 Percent by Level of Achievement 45% 33% 22% 100% 100%

6. Which of the following municipal management courses, workshops, or seminars have you taken within the past three years? PLEASE SELECT ALL THAT APPLY.

Type of Program # % of

RespondentsAlberta Municipal Affairs and Housing (MA&H) workshops 113 46.9Association sponsored conferences or workshops 138 57.3Banff Centre Leadership Development Program 14 5.8Certificate in Municipal Management and Leadership (CMML) 8 3.3Municipal Administrators Leadership Workshop 85 35.3Muniversity 36 14.9National Advanced Certificate in Local Authority Administration (NACLAA) Level I/Local Government Certificate Program

40 16.6

NACLAA Level II 16 6.6Royal Roads University's Local Government Leadership 3 1.2Other 31 12.9None 42 17.4Total Responses 526

7. What is your municipality budget allocation for CAO education and training?

Budget # %$0 (no budget allocation) 42 16.6$1 to $499 15 5.9$500 to $1,499 62 24.5$1,500 to 2,499 43 17.0$2,500 to $3,499 33 13.0$3,500 to $6,499 44 17.4$6,500 or more 14 5.5Total 253 100.0

B-5

8. Please indicate your municipality’s degree of interest in each of the following areas of training by using the scale of 1 to 5 where "1" means "not at all interested" and "5" means "very interested". PLEASE SELECT THE APPROPRIATE BOX IN EACH ROW.

Not at all interested

Very Interested

Total Reporting

Area of Training 1 2 3 4 5 Skills in drafting by-laws, policies and minutes • Responses 15 29 79 79 46 248 • % of Total 6% 12% 32% 32% 19% 100% Written communication skills (correspondence and reports)

• Responses 23 50 77 66 30 246 • % of Total 9% 20% 31% 27% 12% 100% Interpersonal communication skills (with staff and

council)

• Responses 19 34 72 73 48 246 • % of Total 8% 14% 29% 30% 20% 100% Public/media relations skills • Responses 24 35 79 75 33 246 • % of Total 10% 14% 32% 31% 13% 100% Mediation and negotiation skills • Responses 25 34 64 72 49 244 • % of Total 10% 14% 26% 30% 20% 100% Strategic thinking and business planning skills • Responses 11 19 54 95 68 247 • % of Total 5% 8% 22% 39% 28% 100% Project Management skills • Responses 10 31 77 83 43 244 • % of Total 4% 13% 32% 34% 18% 100% Financial management and budgeting skills • Responses 9 19 56 98 65 247 • % of Total 4% 8% 23% 40% 26% 100% Human resource management practices • Responses 18 34 73 87 33 245 • % of Total 7% 14% 30% 36% 14% 100% Knowledge of the Municipal Government Act/other

legislation

• Responses 5 25 61 101 53 245 • % of Total 2% 10% 25% 41% 22% 100% Municipal roles and responsibilities • Responses 9 25 60 98 54 246 • % of Total 4% 10% 24% 40% 22% 100% Tax recovery process • Responses 23 56 79 62 27 247 • % of Total 9% 23% 32% 25% 11% 100% Returning Officer training during non-election years • Responses 61 62 66 42 16 247 • % of Total 25% 25% 27% 17% 7% 100%

9. Please note any additional comments, issues or ideas related to employment, education or training below. If you do not have any additional comments to make, please leave this space blank.

Any form of education is valuable and I feel that even if we view them as refreshers it is all good.

As a CAO working in a small community you have to have good knowledge of all areas. Training courses are vital. Time to attend is also hard as not enough time to do everything.

As a 'one-person' office, it is extremely difficult to do what is required for the job, let alone fit in training. I would like to take additional education towards a certificate, but there is simply no time. Council was not willing to pay the $500 per course either. They do send me to one-day course if I feel I need to attend. The Village is so small, this position is only half-time, so I also have another half-time job elsewhere.

B-6

I am not a fan of completing surveys. Quite often the surveys do not assist the person completing the survey, only providing some form of substantiation to the agency initiating the survey. I would LOVE to see some local benefit from this one. For example, before the great Alberta cut-backs in the early 1990's, Municipal Affairs had a series of qualified and experienced staffers that acted as Municipal Advisors and regularly visited community offices, CAOs and Councils. In the 1990's, those positions were cut-back to three or four people ... and everyone was centered in Edmonton. If Municipal Affairs REALLY wants to be helpful, at a time when many experienced CAOs will be retiring and when many communities will be faced with the most stress and pressure in their history, Municipal Affairs will resurrect these positions and have people complete regular site visits, complete regular training sessions with CAOs and with Councils. Many communities will be facing great transition, so it would be good for Municipal Affairs to be proactive in this evolution, as opposed to having to rescue communities after the fact.

I am not so sure that this field is that appealing to younger people. While the position has the rewards of doing something that either betters a neighbourhood, the municipality, or something else, one has to ask why they would stay in this field when there are better paying opportunities with clearer objectives elsewhere. The one thing this field has, and should be enhanced, is the defined benefit pension plan, the LAPP. Just the same, at some point, one may have to leave to make some serious coin given the relative efforts expended and knowledge gained by working in this sector.

I am replacing a maternity leave position. All the courses and conferences are given to the one who is on maternity.

I answered question 8 in what I thought my Council's answers would be, not my personal answers.

I feel it is very important to educate all municipal staff and council.

I think you will find that the municipal profession needs to brought back up to the "employment choice" by the upcoming young professionals. It has slipped to near the bottom of the list due to work load, stresses, wage scales, benefits and overall political appreciation and job demands. The industry is in big trouble! You see it in the faces of most all of the senior executives, they are simply frustrated and played out! Municipalities need specialized, top quality people to stay for longer than 2 or 3 years. When you only get 4 or 5 applications, and candidates that you can hire (far too many times) do not meet minimum standards and when they get those standards they move on. The learning curve is far too inefficient and expensive to sustain. Succession Planning does not work well from the experiences I have seen. The question that needs to be asked is why are most CAOs choosing retirement at 50 -55 when they are not only extremely experienced but also very capable to work until 60 or 65. The true answer will be that "enough is enough" and that most will take the early retirement and supplement it with some part time work, because they are simply totally played out. Look into the success of the municipal intern program and track who remains in the field and who have said "no way". I think it will show some serious concerns for individuals entering the profession. I like many other CAOs have very much enjoyed the field but the enjoyment appears to be nearing its end. It has been my way of life since the mid 80's, but I too am considering other options because everything falls back on the CAO should there be staff shortages (which are high), weaker candidates being accepted (due to lack of interest and a hot economy), service level demands that far exceed resources, and an ecomony growth rate far beyond sustainability. The only way I see a resolve is to make local government much bigger so that micromanagement is not optional and that economies to scale will kick in including reducing duplication and creating some serious depth to organizational charts that will allow for extremely competitive human resource policies and a truly sustainable succession planning system that can go 3 - 5 people deep at a minimum. The time is now before it is too late, legislate bigger regional governments that will allow professionals to do what they are trained for and that is to administrate the day-to-day operations of that government based on uniform policy. That will not only minimize territorial Rurban issues but it will also promote regional priorities, co-operation. long term planning and future sustainability. You have councils that are designing roads, handicap sidewalks, setting rates and fees at levels that are not sustainable, handling all press releases, approving expenditures, providing direction to staff on a one-to-one basis, making split-minute decisions that are revisited "regularly" 5 or more times, making unprofessional planning decisions that dramatically affect future municipal administrations and councils, and micromanaging day-to-day operations. The trouble you have will be to get political buy-in to give any controls up, so if the larger governments are not an option due to AUMA and AAMDC political structure then spend some time legislating how councils are to operate. Be MUCH MORE specific in what they are to do and how it they are to do it. Be specific in what requires political direction and what is to be handled by administration professionals. While these comments may sound extremely negative they truly need to be before the profession slips any further! Thanks and good luck!

I work in a one-person office. Workshops are great but they lead to a backlog of work.

I've found the NACLAA courses a great complement to my University training (provided the public interest perspective vs. the business profit perspective) and would encourage all senior level municipal employees to take the courses. Municipal Affairs always puts on excellent day courses; the trick is scheduling time to take them.

My Council is very open to any training which benefits the Town employees.

My experience with training offered by Municipal Affairs would be that it is not at a sufficiently in-depth level to add much value.

Orientation courses for new directors and CAOs that run at least twice a year would be very helpful. The CAO course and Director of Finance course may be specific to those jobs or at least parts of it could be. I mean something that would be about three days long and cover the basics: responsibilities, available resources, risks, etc.

Our municipality is located in far east central Alberta. It seems that any courses or workshops we are interested in require hours of driving and often overnight accommodations. This quickly cuts into our budgeted funds. It would be nice to have some functions in our area of the Province.

B-7

Part-time CAO in Summer Villages is obviously a unique CAO position in comparison to full-time CAO's in larger municipalities.

Relevant courses that come up get looked at. As for yearly budget, most of us have meals, mileage, registration and hotels all in different budget lines. Your question should be more related to stated overall expenses

Smaller municipalities do not have the financial means to compete with larger municipalities when attracting or retaining CAOs. May I suggest the Province work with smaller municipalities to provide a benefit package that is comparable. For example, the dental, eye care, etc., could be improved in smaller municipalities by using the same coverage (under one insure group for all municipalities). Recruitment costs for CAOs in smaller municipalities could be shared with the province. Long-service awards for CAOs for smaller municipalities could be recognized by the Province.

The municipality is interested, however do not have funds for all that is required.

The quality of presenters and material offered in MA&H workshops is dismal at best. It is high time MA&H brought on more dynamic municipally seasoned staff, however at the current pay scales, MA&H will not attract quality folks out of the local municipal field.

The replacement CAO would have an interest in almost all categories, which will happen part way through 2007.

There needs to be more encouragement in support of other programs to be taken outside what might be seen as "municipal" areas such as Senior Executive Training, or QA/QC Programs. While the private sector takes these programs, in many cases Councils look only at the costs and not the benefits. My sense is that many CAOs do not suggest these programs because of council's potential reaction.

This question was answered in the broadest sense, for our organization’s needs overall.

This was a very well thought-out survey, I liked the specific questions.

With regards to the "Municipal Roles and Responsibilities" I recommend it to be mandatory for all newly elected councillors and staff.

Work demand prohibits training as much as the financial commitments.

Work/Life Balance, Stress Management, and Time Management.

B-8

PART 2: CAO RESPONSIBILITIES The next set of questions is about CAO responsibilities, municipal priorities and planning and succession planning. This information will help Alberta Municipal Affairs and Housing identify the areas in which CAOs may require additional assistance and will assist in pinpointing current trends that municipal administrators face. AN OPPORTUNITY TO PROVIDE ANY ADDITIONAL COMMENTS OR IDEAS WILL FOLLOW.

10. Please indicate whether the amount of time you devote to each of the following areas has decreased, stayed about the same, or increased over the past three years (or since you assumed the position of CAO). PLEASE SELECT THE APPROPRIATE BOX IN EACH ROW.

Area of Responsibility Decreased Stayed the

same Increased Finance and budgeting 9 113 127 Accounting 34 132 83 Administration 5 81 162 Strategic planning/Business planning 2 65 182 Land use planning/development 4 55 190 Management of staff and dealing with staff issues 8 113 125 Managing services and programs 8 142 98 Drafting by-laws and policy 17 161 70 Interacting with the public 5 121 123 Interacting with council 3 124 121 Interacting with neighboring municipalities 3 82 164

11. Please indicate which of the following sources of information is most beneficial to you when you are addressing a time-sensitive issue that you have not previously confronted. PLEASE SELECT THE ITEM THAT IS MOST BENEFICIAL IN THE FIRST COLUMN, SECOND MOST BENEFICIAL IN THE SECOND COLUMN AND THIRD MOST BENEFICIAL IN THE THIRD COLUMN.

Source of Information

(1) Most

beneficial

(2) Second most

beneficial

(3) Third most beneficial

Total (1) to (3)

Phoning a colleague in another municipality 99 101 31 231 Discussing the issue with your staff 55 35 41 131 Accessing information about the issue on the internet

11 29 59 99

The Municipal Excellence Network 3 2 16 21 Referring to publications/articles/books 4 11 19 34 Calling municipal advisors at Municipal Affairs 68 58 31 157 Calling one of the Associations 2 6 35 43 Other 5 3 10 18

B-9

12. Does your municipality have a council approved capital plan covering three years or more? # %Yes 156 62.4No 94 37.6Total 250 100.0

1 Yes ------------------► Now please go to Question 12a)

2 No ------------------► Now please go to Question 13

12a) Does your municipality have a financial plan to provide for the planned capital spending? (Respondents instructed to complete if they answered YES to Question 12)

# %Yes 132 84.1No 25 15.9Total 157 100.012b) Does your municipality have, or is it in the process of preparing an Integrated

Community Sustainability Plan (ICSP)?

# %Yes 74 47.7No 81 52.3Total 155 100.0

13. Over the next three years, what do you feel are the major issues that your municipality will be focusing on?

Number of CAOs responding: 470 Responses coded, results shown in report – Figure 4-1.

14. On a scale of 1 to 5 where "1" means "very poor" and "5" means "excellent", how would you rate the opportunities for advancement within your municipality for a new employee with management potential?

Very poor Excellent

1 2 3 4 5 TOTAL

Responses # of Responses 51 35 63 67 32 248 % of Responses 20.6 14.1 25.4 27.0 12.9 100.0

14a) If you answered “1” or “2” to Question 14, please indicate why you feel the opportunities for advancement within your municipality are poor.

Summary of responses provided by 79 CAOs • Small organization, by its very nature has very few positions (73) • Very little turnover (5) • Not encouraged by organization (1)

B-10

15. Do you have a formal succession plan in place? # %Yes 32 12.9No 217 87.1Total 249 100.0

16. Did you recruit any staff within the past three years? # %Yes 203 81.2No 47 18.8Total 250 100.0

1 Yes ---► Now please go to question 16a

2 No ---► Now please go to question 19

16a) Of the positions you have had to recruit for within the past three years, which positions were most difficult to fill? PLEASE RANK THE THREE MOST DIFFICULT POSITIONS TO FILL.

Most

Difficult Second Most

Difficult Third Most

Difficult Type of Position # % # % # % Public Works 85 46.2% 63 39.6% 35 28.5% Building and Dev't 30 16.3% 26 16.4% 24 19.5% CAO 21 11.4% 4 2.5% 0 0.0% Finance and Accounting 19 10.3% 21 13.2% 10 8.1% Recreation 8 4.3% 6 3.1% 11 8.9% Admin 7 3.8% 14 8.8% 10 8.1% Community Services 6 3.3% 1 0.6% 2 1.6% ERD 3 1.6% 0 2 1.6% Enforcement 2 1.1% 11 7.5% 6 4.9% Summer and Temporary 1 0.5% 4 2.5% 11 8.9% Mgt (area unspecified) 1 0.5% 1 0.6% 1 0.8% Corporate Services/HR 1 0.5% 2 1.3% 2 1.6% Tradespersons 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% Transportation 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 1 0.8% Assessors 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% Engineers 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 2 1.6% IT 0 0.0% 2 1.3% 2 1.6% Other 0 0.0% 4 2.5% 4 3.3% Total 184 100.0% 159 100.0% 123 100.0%

17. Were there any positions you were unable to fill?

# %Yes 61 30.2No 141 69.8Total 202 100.0

1 Yes ------------------► Now please go to question 18


B-11

18. Which positions were you unable to fill?

Length of time searching (months) Positions

24 ARENA STAFF 24 DIRECTOR OF OPERATIONAL SERVICES 24 ENGINEER 24 PLANNING/DEVELOPMENT OFFICER 24 ENGINEERING 24 CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER 24 PUBLIC WORKS 24 CIVIL ENGINEERS 18 PUBLIC WORKS OPERATOR ONE 18 PUBLIC WORKS MANAGER 16 WATER STAFF 14 PUBLIC WORKS MANAGER 13 UTILITY OPERATOR 12 TOURISM MANAGER 12 EMT 12 LAND PLANNER 12 GRADER OPERATOR 12 SAFETY CODES 12 PLANNER 11 UTILITY OPERATOR II 9 INFRASTRUCTURE TECHNICIAN 9 WATER AND WASTEWATER OPERATOR 2 8 DIRECTOR OF OPERATIONS 8 WTP OPERATOR II 8 BUILDING MAINTENANCE SPECIALISTS 7 CAO 7 PLANNER 6 ACCOUNTING 6 BYLAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER 6 CERTIFIED WATER TREATMENT PLANT OPERATOR 6 PROPERTY AND PLANNING MANAGER 6 MANAGER OF PUBLIC WORKS 6 PLANNER 6 HEAVY EQUIPMENT OPERATOR 6 CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT OPERATORS 6 MECHANIC 6 P.W. SUPERINTENDENT 6 PLANNER 6 EQUIPMENT OPERATORS 6 OPEN SPACES FOREMAN 6 OPERATIONS MANAGER 6 MANAGER OF BYLAW ENFORCEMENT 6 OUTDOOR RECREATION WORKS (GOLF COURSE, ETC.) 6 WATER TREATMENT PLANT OPERATOR 6 PW MANAGEMENT 6 ACCOUNTING PERSONNEL, CGA 6 PLANNER 6 DIRECTOR OF PLANNING AND TECHNICAL SERVICES 6 FINANCE OFFICER 5 PART TIME RECREATION STAFF 5 OPERATIONS TECHNOLOGIST 5 MECHANIC 5 TRANSPORTATION MANAGER 5 ARENA STAFF 4 TEMPORARY SUMMER LABOURERS (2) 4 ASSESSMENT 4 FACILITY CUSTODIANS 4 SEASONAL STAFF FOR ASB AND PW 4 DIRECTOR OF PLANNING 4 SUMMER PARKS STAFF (COULD NOT RECRUIT FULL CONTINGENT) 3 SAFETY CODES

B-12

3 DEVELOPMENT OFFICER 3 ASSISTANT ADMINISTRATOR 3 ASSESSOR 3 LABOURERS 3 STEP STUDENT 2 PUBLIC WORKS MANAGER 2 EQUIPMENT OPERATOR

don't know STEP STUDENT ongoing ENGINEERING/PLANNING TECHNOLOGIST ongoing RELIEF STAFF ongoing PUBLIC WORKS WATER TREATMENT PLANT OPERATORS ongoing PARKS AND ARENA STAFF ongoing SPECIAL CONSTABLE ongoing PLANNERS

19. Please note any additional comments, issues or ideas related to CAO responsibilities below. If you do not have any additional comments to make, please leave this space blank.

We have a very high staff turnover rate.

Limited resources make it difficult to retain qualified staff.

The CAO position is becoming increasingly difficult due to the wide range of skills needed.

CAOs in small municipalities are under pressure because they are responsible for all aspects of the municipality.

Constantly increasing responsibility make the CAO role more difficult and less attractive.

Succession planning is not happening as it should. No one is willing to do the CAO job.

Municipal staff shortages make the CAO role more difficult.

We eventually find staff but it takes much longer than it should and we are often forced to promote from within.

The roles of administrators and elected officials are not clearly defined and this results in wasted time and resources.

The province needs to streamline the application process for grants.

Compensation for CAOs is poor.

Grants should be announced at budget time so municipalities can better plan.

More workshops geared towards small municipalities.

MA&H has been helping in assisting me to correct errors made by administrators in the past.

It is difficult to find public works employees.

The tangible capital asset program is creating a financial burden for small municipalities.

Staff and contractor shortages increase the pressure on municipal employees and councillors.

Our municipality has outdated computers, is weak in the human resource area, and has little long-term planning.

Recruiting is not too difficult if you are willing to pay for good people.

Senior staff members need to be leaders.

The province should move FCSS to Child and Family Services.

A CAO mentoring program would be helpful.

B-13

PART 3: PROGRAMS AND SERVICES

The last set of questions is related to MA&H’s programs and services, such as the Municipal Internship Program, training services, safety services and the Municipal Excellence Network. Your responses to these questions will provide MA&H with necessary information in order to better address your future needs. AN OPPORTUNITY TO PROVIDE ANY ADDITIONAL COMMENTS OR IDEAS WILL FOLLOW.

20. MA&H reintroduced the Municipal Internship Program to assist Alberta municipalities with a population of 700 or more in their succession planning efforts to train qualified individuals who can progress to municipal leadership positions. Within the next three years, how likely is it that your municipality will apply to participate in the Municipal Internship Program? Please use a scale of 1 to 5 where “1" means "not at all likely" and "5" means "very likely".

Not at all likely

Very likely

1 2 3 4 5 Total Number of Responses 100 32 37 26 44 239

% of Responses 41.8 13.4 15.5 10.9 18.4 100.0

If you answered "1" or "2" to Question 20 please complete Question 20a) now. Otherwise please skip to Question 21.

20a) Why will your municipality not be likely to apply to participate in the Municipal Internship Program? PLEASE SELECT ALL THAT APPLY.

Reason for Expected Non-Participation # % of

ResponsesIneligible. Our population is less than 700. 74 59.7No time available 29 23.4No expertise to pass on to an intern 9 7.3Do not have the budget/resources to commit 34 27.4Not interested in the program 5 4.0Do not think we would be selected as hosts 12 9.7Other 16 12.9Total 179

B-14

21. MA&H is piloting an internship program for the planning profession. How likely is it that your municipality would be interested in participating in the Planning Internship Program? Please use a scale of 1 to 5 where “1" means "not at all likely" and "5" means "very likely".

Not at all likely

Very likely

1 2 3 4 5 Total Number of Responses 97 38 24 46 37 242

% of Responses 40.1 15.7 9.9 19.0 15.3 100.0

22. Do you have adequate resources to effectively design and deliver appropriate public participation processes in the following areas for your citizens/clients? Yes No Total Environmental Issues 69 164 233 Planning and Development issues 132 103 235 Policy Development 131 101 232 Recreation 122 111 233 Strategic and/or Business Planning (including budgeting) 124 109 233 Transportation 98 130 228

23. Which of the following areas pose difficulties in obtaining effective public involvement? PLEASE SELECT ALL THAT APPLY.

Responses % Responding

“Poses Difficulty” Environmental Issues 115 46.7 Planning and Development issues 101 41.1 Policy Development 119 48.4 Recreation 66 26.8 Strategic and/or Business Planning (including budgeting) 129 52.4 Transportation 78 31.7 Other1 13 5.3

1. “Other” areas cited include:

General, the public is also busy and 60-70% are not interested or concerned enough to provide input into proactive planning areas UNLESS they have an immediate vested interest, i.e., annexations and they own affected land, etc. The public good is harder to define due to this ambivalence and busyness.

Inter municipal issues.

It’s issue dependent.

Low population, less available volunteers, higher and more complicated demands.

Our "public" seems to be too busy or disengaged, which is not "normal" for our community.

Our needs are few and when something arises we usually find required resource.

Presently we are not seeing difficulty in getting public participation, our ratepayers are showing much interest in what is happening in our community.

Public do not appear to be very interested unless direct effect. Sometimes not even then.

Public response and involvement are issues.

B-15

The Council doesn't want public involvement, even to having citizens on our appeal Boards, etc.

The public only get involved when it is a negative issue.

Unless the public perceive themselves to be negatively impacted by a proposed development they have expressed little interest in participating in County consultations.

We have found that the public seems 'tapped out' and find the processes relating to citizen engagement more difficult. We are now looking at less invasive options for public participation (i.e., Internet/Email responses). We recently hosted an Open House for public comment on the Town being a founding member of a REDA. We had 7 people show up over a four-hour period. We did very well compared to our partners in Lesser Slave River (who had 5 show up).

We have had some public involvement with zoning bylaw changes - it is probably hard to get effective public involvement unless the public feels or is made to see something affects them personally.

24. What can Municipal Affairs and Housing do to assist your municipality with public participation in these areas?

Educate the public on their rights to participate and the issues at hand.

Provide training for municipal staff and councillors to facilitate public meetings and outline best practices.

Provide facilitators and funding for public meetings.

Emphasize the importance of public participation to the municipal governments.

Provide topic specific experts.

Show the public that their input is taken seriously.

Provide relief to administrators so that they can focus on public participation.

The public prefers to rely on municipal authorities to make decisions.

Provide public participation best practices designed specifically for small municipalities.

Continue with current conflict resolution initiatives.

Better communication with provincial departments.

25. Have you accessed the Municipal Excellence Network (MEnet) website in the last year?

Responses %Yes 135 54.9No 111 45.1Total 246 100.0

1 Yes ------------------► Now please go to question 25a)


B-16

25a) Did you find the information you were looking for?

Responses %Yes 108 80.6No 26 19.4Total 134 100.0

25a.1) Was the information of value? Responses %Yes 104 97.2No 3 2.8Total 107 100.0

25b) What information/tools were you searching for?

Amalgamation, annexation or inter-regional cooperation

Best practices

Bylaw assistance

Bylaws, recreation opportunities, and programming in other municipalities

Cemetery bylaws / regulations / strategic planning presentation

Document imaging and electronic records management best practices

Ideas for funding a rehab of a water distribution system

Information/agreements on intermunicipal water/sewer service connections

Partnerships

Policies

Policy handbook structure outline, council meeting tools

Policy information

Samples / copies of various bylaws

Specific bylaws

25c) [If answered YES to question 25.] How would you rate the usability of the website? Please use a scale of 1 to 5 where “1" means "easy" and "5" means "difficult"

Easy Difficult 1 2 3 4 5 Total

Number of Responses 12 40 56 22 1 131

% of Responses 9.2 30.5 42.7 16.8 .8 100.0

B-17

26. Are there any tools, resources or information that MEnet could offer to assist you in the operations and/or governance of your municipality?

Resources specifically designed to meet the needs of small municipalities

Policy and Bylaw information

Best practice information

Business plan development tools

Strategic planning tools

Search features could be improved

Municipal internship documentation

Information on accepted standards

Information on regional planning

Communication tools

27. Are there any specific barriers to the accessibility of MEnet? PLEASE SELECT ALL THAT APPLY.

Responses

% of Surveys

Completed Not aware of MEnet 28 20.9 Tried it, but it did not meet my needs so I have not been back

40 29.9

Connection speed 22 16.4 Ease of use 31 23.1 Other 31 23.1

Footnote: Other barriers cited included:

Again, a time issue for the user. Already on the computer too much. See no reason to use it more. Available time/work load. Finding the time for it seems to be the biggest factor. Have had no need to use it. Have not had time to become familiar with it. I do not remember, was a password required. If there is, that slows things down. I just always resort to other resources like peer contact. Just never used it. Lack of time to go online and look. Lack of time. Need to have someone solicit more practices again. Never have had time to explore. No time. No time - easier to use other resources. No time to spend examining the network. Not really aware of MEnet. Skepticism with regard to the usefulness given my current understanding of the source of information. i.e. other municipalities view of what qualifies as best practices. Search criteria tends to provide results that are too broad based. Small office and just have not had the time.

B-18

The way things are rolling right now, there is not even sufficient time to spend on that site or any other. Research time is either not there or extremely limited. The only reason I am able to get this survey completed is to lock up and extend my time at the end of the day. Time. Time - I only have 24 hours in my day and I'm getting older and need at least 8 hours to sleep. Time - it seems that every association now has an interactive website - there is just no time to look at everything. Time constraints. Time consuming. Time, like this survey there is not enough time in the day to do everything that is expected. Too busy to take time to look things up. Would rather call someone for an immediate response. Very time consuming and not all that easy to use. You have to have the time.

28. We are interested in your perception of the safety codes system as regulated by the Safety Codes Act and related codes and standards.

Municipalities in Alberta have the ability to determine if they will administer the Safety Codes Act (SCA) within their boundaries to become accredited in one or more of the construction disciplines; building, electrical, plumbing and gas. Administering the SCA means issuing permits and conducting inspections. As an accredited municipality you will have chosen to administer the SCA yourself or as a non-accredited municipality MA&H will do this on your behalf. Is your municipality:

Responses %

Accredited - Go to Question 29 145 59.4

Non-accredited - If your municipality is non-accredited, please proceed to Question 31.

79 32.5

Not Sure - If you are unsure about your municipality’s accreditation, please proceed to Question 31.

20 8.2

Total 244 100.0

B-19

29. Please indicate your level of agreement with each of the following statements about administrative supports in the safety codes system. Please respond on a scale of 1 to 5, where “1” means “completely disagree” and “5” means “completely agree”:

Completely

disagree Completel

y agree Total

Responses 1 2 3 4 5 Your municipality has appropriate information about Information Technology – electronic permit system to record permits issued and inspection performed

19 21 49 31 17 137

Your municipality has appropriate information about accreditation models (joint accreditation, Regional Service Commissions)

14 23 37 43 21 138

Your municipality has appropriate information about service delivery models (municipal SCO staff, contracted accredited agencies)

7 17 43 47 24 138

Your municipality has appropriate information about by-law development (secondary suites, permit fees)

14 24 44 36 18 136

30. Please indicate your level of agreement with each of the following statements about the Safety Codes System: Please respond on a scale of 1 to 5, where “1” means “completely disagree” and “5” means “completely agree”:

Completely

disagree Completely

agree 1 2 3 4 5

Total Responses

There are adequate systems in place to enforce Safety Codes.

11 28 50 37 10 136

There are adequate municipal resources to provide an appropriate level of service.

16 29 46 38 7 136

There is adequate support in the form of technical information and advice.

8 25 52 39 11 135

There is adequate general public understanding of the safety system.

34 50 37 11 3 135

The safety codes system is able to meet the general public’s safety needs.

6 22 59 43 6 136

B-20

31. Regardless of your municipality’s decision to administer the Safety Codes Act please provide your level of agreement regarding the value to you of the safety codes system. Please respond on a scale of 1 to 5, where “1” means “completely disagree” and “5” means “completely agree”:

Completely

disagree Completely

agree 1 2 3 4 5

Total Responses

The Safety Codes System assists my municipality to maintain orderly permitting and construction procedures.

13 14 68 92 40 227

The Safety Codes System provides a mechanism to address building-related safety concerns.

9 17 63 95 43 227

The Safety Codes System is supported by my municipality.

6 9 68 80 62 225

32. Please note any additional comments regarding the Safety Codes System, below. If you do not have any additional comments to make, please leave this space blank.

Our permits are administered by a neighbouring municipality or regional partner.

The province should be running the safety codes system.

Needs to be better enforcement of safety codes compliance. Not enough inspectors. Need ability to cross-reference permits.

Privatizing permits was a mistake and has caused concern over public safety.

POSSE software for tracking permits is difficult to use.

Success in this area is a reflection of the contractors we have hired.

Our municipality does not have the resources to become accredited.

Hiring safety code officers is difficult.

Alberta Permit Pro does a good job.

We are unhappy with our permit contractor.

We are accredited for fire only.

We don't issue many building permits.

Safety code audits are helpful to ensure everything is being done properly.

Safety code service providers need to all be on the same page regarding development permits.

Many councils and volunteer fire chiefs do not understand fire service.

B-21

33. Please feel free to provide any additional comments related to any of the areas addressed during this survey in the space below.

Effort should be made in developing a degree in municipal administration.

Safety codes are very important to development but we are unable to rely on the contractors.

Assistance in creating cost sharing agreements between rural and urban municipalities is needed.

Information regarding the education tax requisitions should be released earlier in the year.

Safety codes questions were poorly formatted. Should consider some municipalities are accredited for fire only.

Still confused about private septic/sewage disposal system and regulation.

Province needs to review safety code compliance system.

CAO of a small village requires a very broad skill set.

Need more assessors.

Tangible asset capitalization of roads is a bad idea.

Thank you very much for your time and valuable input.

Please fax completed survey to Nichols Applied Management at:

FAX: (780) 428-7644 or

Mail it to: Nichols Applied Management

1100, 10130 – 103 Street Edmonton, AB T5J 3N9

Attn: CAO Survey Administrator

Documents

FINAL REPORT Municipal CAO Survey 2007 · the preliminary survey results were available. Nichols Applied Management conducted the 2007 survey and focus groups and prepared this report