Representation without Taxation? A Historical Review of Newfoundland and Labrador’s Municipal System and Quasi-Municipal Structures
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Newfoundland and Labrador is unique among Canadian provinces in its municipallevel governmental structures, and in particular, its substantial lack thereof. The province does not have a system of counties or an operating form of regional government. Many areas of the province operate without a formal municipal government and avoid property taxation by operating on a limited fee-for-service model of local government, or in some cases a total lack of sub-provincial government. Tens of thousands of residents live within this tax-free model today. This paper explores how this anomalous situation came to be, the issues it creates in modern society and how these issues are dealt with in practice. Terre-Neuve-et-Labrador est unique parmi les provinces canadiennes en ce qui concerne les structures gouvernementales au niveau municipal, et en particulier leur absence quasi totale. La province ne dispose pas d’un système de comtés ou d’une forme opérationnelle de gouvernement régional. De nombreuses régions de la province fonctionnent sans administration municipale officielle et évitent l’impôt foncier en appliquant un modèle limité de paiement à l’acte de l’administration locale ou, dans certains cas, une absence totale d’administration infraprovinciale. Des dizaines de milliers d’habitants vivent aujourd’hui dans le cadre de ce modèle d’exonération fiscale. Dans présent article, nous explorons la genèse de cette situation anormale, les problèmes qu’elle engendre dans la société moderne et la manière dont ces problèmes sont traités dans la pratique.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.011 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".