Commentaire
I've got no problem with the concept. Similar to PSAB3150 Accounting, it's a starting point and within 50 years, the balance sheet will reflect correctly the value of our assets (instead of the consultants' best guesses and assumptions used in 2009).
Big concern for smaller (more remote) communities is the requirement of having professional engineers signing off on AMPs. Let's face it, there is an infrastructure deficit
- there always will be one but at least, municipalities are forced to be aware of them. AMPs are far the long term. Engineering diagrams and costing estimates can be prepared for the next 100 years but things/priorities change.
We engage engineering firms from Thunder Bay or Sault Ste. Marie. I believe having them sign off on a submitted AMP to the province would be a waste of resources. The time and expense to form an opinion on the work needed over the next 20 to 50 years could be spent on actual infrastructure renewal.
[Original Comment ID: 210058]
Soumis le 13 février 2018 12:01 PM
Commentaire sur
Projet de règlement sur la planification de la gestion des actifs municipaux
Numéro du REO
013-0551
Identifiant (ID) du commentaire
2165
Commentaire fait au nom
Statut du commentaire