Socio-Economic Impact Assessment of the CPC Closure Nichols Applied - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Socio-Economic Impact Assessment of the CPC Closure Nichols Applied Management Inc . February 14, 2017 Management and Economic Consultants

Introduction • Nichols Applied Management Inc. • Established in 1973 • Experts in socio-economic impact assessments, growth analysis, and municipal finance. • Previous closure experience includes: • Agrium Phosphate Mine – Kapuskasing, Ontario • Vale Nickel Mine and Smelter – Thompson, Manitoba • Luscar Cheviot Mine – Hinton, Alberta • Shell Waterton Complex – Pincher Creek, Alberta

Study Approach • Identify the current contribution of the CPC to the Town; • Quantify the loss to the Town if the CPC relocates: • Population • Economic activity (GDP, jobs, income) • Housing • Education • Municipal fiscal effects • Social infrastructure

Key Findings • Employee survey to understand demographics and propensity to relocate • 2 scenarios: 1) 29 relocate, 26 commute, 140 remain: Population impact of 100 people 2) All those not involved in agriculture relocate: Population impact of 420 people

Key Findings • Historic population growth (1991 to 2016) of 0.42% • Largely on the strength of in-migration • Vegreville’s population is older than the provincial average. Female | Male | Alberta 85+ 80 to 84 75 to 79 70 to 74 65 to 69 60 to 64 55 to 59 50 to 54 45 to 49 40 to 44 35 to 39 30 to 34 25 to 29 20 to 24 15 to 19 10 to 14 5 to 9 0 to 4 8 6 4 2 0 2 4 6 8 Percent of Population

Key Findings • Both scenarios will reduce the permanent population of the Town in the long run. • When combined with the demographics of the community, the impact is negative growth in the long run (scenario 2). No Change | Closure | Severe Scenario 5,900 5,800 5,700 5,600 5,500 Population 5,400 5,300 5,200 5,100 5,000 4,900 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 2036

Key Findings • The CPC currently spends roughly $13.4 million per year to operate – mostly on wages/salaries. • Economic Impact, loss of: • $12.7 million in GDP • $11.6 million in labour income • 240 jobs • Scenario 1: large increase in unemployment (15%)

Key Findings • Housing impacts: • Drop in prices due to sale of homes • Scenario 1: 10% • Scenario 2: 25% to 30% • Financial implications to the municipality.

Key Findings • Municipal Fiscal Impacts • Assessment and Taxation • Grants • Property Taxes: • Scenario 1: Reduction in revenues of $384,000 or increase mill rates by roughly 5% • Scenario 2: Reduction in revenues of $1.15 million or increase mill rates by roughly 16.45% • Grants: • Scenario 1: Net reduction of $22,000 • Scenario 2: Net reduction of $94,000

Key Findings • Education • Scenario 1: 40 students, funding of $275,000 • Scenario 2: 130 students, funding of $900,000 • Impact of funding loss is unclear, depends on school boards.

Key Findings • Social Infrastructure • Didn’t find any one industry/service likely to be severely diminished • Discussion with FCSS representatives • Primary concerns relate to quality of life and family cohesion • Less time for activities, family • Possible increase in before and after school care programming • Loss of volunteers in the community