Why is the District responsible for some roads?<\/strong><\/p>\n At one time there was a Ministry of Transportation subsidy for roads, and it was larger for regional governments than for local ones so it made sense for Muskoka\u2019s arterial routes \u2013 the towns\u2019 main streets, roads linking communities, and those leading to major employers \u2013 to be maintained by the District. Ultimately, the province\u2019s 100-series highways, such as 117, 118 and 169, were added to the mix to create the District\u2019s current roads network.<\/p>\n District ownership of roads was also a requirement under the Muskoka Act. It has since been replaced by the Municipal Act 2001 which takes a broader view and assigns \u2018non-exclusive\u2019 jurisdiction for highways to both upper tier and lower tier municipalities. And that means that there\u2019s nothing stopping Muskoka\u2019s lower tier municipalities from taking control of District roads, said Aitchison.<\/p>\n Why should responsibility for District roads be transferred to lower tier municipalities?<\/strong><\/p>\n Many of Muskoka\u2019s roads are in rough shape. A 2015 roads need study for Huntsville alone identified more than $43 million in spending required now just to bring our existing roads network up to standards, but the Town\u2019s annual budget can\u2019t absorb that kind of expenditure.<\/p>\n \u201cOur roads are so bad, you just have to start with the worst and keep working your way up,\u201d Aitchison told Council.<\/p>\n Old Muskoka Road, pictured here in 2015, was flagged as a priority roads project for 2016 and 2017<\/p><\/div>\n In that light, looking at where and how much the District is spending on its roads just doesn\u2019t make sense, said Aitchison.<\/p>\n He used a local example to illustrate his point. Huntsville\u2019s King William Street is the busiest District road in all of Muskoka with annual average daily traffic (AADT) of 11,910 cars (measured in 2013). It, like the other busiest sections of District roads in Huntsville that see annual daily averages of thousands of vehicles \u2013 Main, West, Brunel, Ravenscliffe, Aspdin, South Mary Lake and Canal \u2013 are in much better shape than Huntsville\u2019s rural roads. Meanwhile, the District plan has earmarked $11 million in spending in Huntsville over the next 10 years, $3.4 million of which will be used to rebuild Brittania Road (Muskoka Road 10) which sees an AADT of just 450 vehicles where it meets Brunel Road and only 150 where it meets South Portage Road.<\/p>\n \u201c(That road) does not justify a reconstruction with full asphalt, it justifies ditching and culverts and a surface treatment probably to the tune of $300,000 as opposed to that kind of money,\u201d said Aitchison.<\/p>\n How Huntsville would spend \u2013 and save \u2013 dollars for roads<\/strong><\/p>\n If Huntsville collected its portion of the District tax levy for roads, it would also have to pay for winter maintenance and may need to hire another employee to help manage the additional roads. But Aitchison said what\u2019s missing from the District plan is setting aside future funds for both bridge replacement and future road resurfacing.<\/p>\n \u201cIn Huntsville, that adds up to a total of $671,00 that we should be putting away every year to create a reserve so that if we need to replace those District bridges that exist in Huntsville we would have the money to do it,\u201d said Aitchison. \u201cAfter we spend exactly what the District currently spends plus create a (bridge) reserve\u2026you would see what we\u2019re left over with is almost $1.1 million. So if you carry this through for the next 10 years, you would see that we would have spent almost $11 million on road reconstruction, we would have created a $6.7 million reserve for bridges, and we could actually end up with a cumulative reserve of $9 million. There\u2019s some significant numbers here.\u201d<\/p>\n This is why I am particularly excited about this because it will put us in a position where we are spending more money on roads capital plus creating a reserve for those bridges so when it comes time to replace (them), we won\u2019t be sweating about whether the province is going to give us some money or not or whether we\u2019ll be able to pull it off. We\u2019ll be in position where if we have to replace a bridge, we\u2019ll have the money to do it. \u201cMy argument is that if we did this, Huntsville could do a much better analysis of our entire road network and then take that money that the District is spending now wastefully all around the region,” said Aitchison. “We could actually get our spend up to $4 or 5 million on the existing road network, create a reserve of over $6 million for bridges and do a lot more work on the District roads and you wouldn\u2019t have to raise taxes to do it. It would be a much smarter spend.\u201d<\/p>\n Winners and losers<\/strong><\/p>\n If the example is translated to Muskoka\u2019s other lower tier municipalities, there are clear winners and also some losers, but only if the District\u2019s current plan is followed to the letter. Muskoka Lakes stands to see the most benefit from Aitchison\u2019s proposal.<\/p>\n Muskoka Lakes pays almost 38 per cent of the District levy but has just 24 per cent of the District roads. \u201cI find it shocking that over the next 10 years, $97 million will be collected from Muskoka Lakes taxpayers and $37 million will be spent on capital projects,\u201d said Aitchison. \u201cBoth Muskoka Lakes and Georgian Bay pay a higher percentage for the District roads department than they have percentage of roads. The towns do better in this area. It\u2019s another example where the townships are funding District programs to a greater degree than the towns are.\u201d<\/p>\n Aitchison said that while that model makes sense for social services like policing and ambulances, it doesn\u2019t make sense for roads.<\/p>\n Muskoka\u2019s two other towns do stand to lose under the proposed change, however, but largely because there are high-dollar projects currently planned that don\u2019t make sense, said Aitchison, including a road that would bypass Bracebridge and a $13 million reconstruction of a low-volume road in Gravenhurst.<\/p>\n Aitchison told Council that he had talked to all of the other mayors except Gravenhurst\u2019s, and the townships are excited or intrigued about the concept while Bracebridge Mayor Graydon Smith is anxious but agreed that some of the projects don\u2019t make sense.<\/p>\n Under his proposal, Aitchison noted that there would also be a net loss of jobs \u2013 there are almost 30 District employees that would be out of work if the department was eliminated. Some could be absorbed by the lower tier municipalities, but not all.<\/p>\n Next steps<\/strong><\/p>\n Aitchison acknowledged that the District\u2019s new commissioner of engineering and public works, Fred Jahn, has also been looking at the roads budget. \u201cOne of the reports that\u2019s coming to Engineering and Public Works in January is a review of the classification of what is a District road\u2026 The standard has been the standard for a long time and we never really questioned it, but the new commissioner now is looking at it very seriously. There is some discussion about reclassifying roads and giving some of them back to the municipalities, but those kinds of half-measures only will make it more expensive. They aren\u2019t going to lay anyone off, they aren\u2019t going to reduce the levy.\u201d<\/p>\n While more analysis is needed to ensure the plan would work, agreements would need to be forged between municipalities for shared roads, and both District Council and all of the lower tier municipalities would need to be on board, Aitchison is confident that it\u2019s a good plan.<\/p>\n This is something I\u2019m pushing at District level. I think this could present a tremendous opportunity for lower tier municipalities to significantly change how we deal with our transportation network. I see it also as an opportunity to work with our rural municipalities who are feeling the weight of added costs for policing and all the services that are offered at the District level\u2026 The towns have done very well by the townships and I see this as an opportunity where the real money is to actually make a difference and help those taxpayers that have been footing the bill for years and come up with a solution that actually makes sense for the towns as well.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n Read the report Mayor Aitchison presented to Town Council here<\/a><\/span>.<\/p>\n![\"Old](\"https:\/\/media-doppleronline-ca.s3-accelerate.amazonaws.com\/2016\/09\/Old-Muskoka-Road-2015.jpg\")
\nMayor Scott Aitchison<\/cite><\/p><\/blockquote>\n