In response to a question I was asked regarding tax increases in the Crowsnest Pass.
Is there anybody that believes the line as been held on Taxes? I don't.
In the George Cuff report it states on Page 86 Municipal Taxes in the Crowsnest Pass, grew at an average of 3.8% between 2002-2007. In 2008 they went up 11.2%, 2009 3.4% and 2010 3.2%. That's an average from 2002-2010 of 4.5% or 40.6% over nine years.
I would describe that far from holding the line.
According to Stats Canada and the Consumer Price Index the cost of living in that same time frame as gone up 21.5%.
Versus 40.6% on taxes that's almost double.
11 comments:
I am not sure how they base the taxes but i thought that since 1995 the provincial government has legislated that the municipalities have to use Market Value Assesment to determine residential taxes. Do they have the right to go over and above this or is that the minimum tax you can pay.
Peter your right they have to use market assessment but that's only half the equation then council sets the mill rate the combination of the two determines the taxes we pay.
Thats why when assessments go up mill rates usually go down and vice versa.
Where they build in the tax increases, is if assessment values go up 20% they only drop the mill rate 15% which leads to a 5% tax increase.
thanks for clarifing that. High residental taxes are definately a problem for this community as thats what deters people from purchasing a home here. Lets hope this council and the committies they have set up can address this.I think that they are going to find themselves facing the same issues as the previous council and you can only go to the well so many times as the saying goes.
knowing that formula is used what caused the 11.2% increase in 2008. Can you give us some examples of the reasoning behind adjusting the mill rate. I realize expences not budgeted for in a previous year could affect this but what else.
"In the George Cuff report it states on Page 86 Municipal Taxes in the Crowsnest Pass, grew at an average of 3.8% between 2002-2007."
Does this mean % of total revenues, or per taxpayer or what? If the population was growing at 4% that might not be bad, if it is shrinking, worse.(I have not read Cuff)
Dean, I think you have under stated the property tax increase from 2002 to 2010 as 40.6%. I believe the percentage of increace is based on the pervous years taxes. I have done a calculation below on a $1,000.00 tax bill in 2001 has become $1,484 in 2010. This is a 48.5 increase in 9 years.
Tax---% of------$ of
Year Increase Increase Tax Bill
2001---------------1,000.00
2002 3.80% 38.00 1,038.00
2003 3.80% 39.44 1,077.44
2004 3.80% 40.94 1,118.39
2005 3.80% 42.50 1,160.89
2006 3.80% 44.11 1,205.00
2007 3.80% 45.79 1,250.79
2008 11.20% 140.09 1,390.88
2009 3.40% 47.29 1,438.17
2010 3.20% 46.02 1,484.19
Based on the numbers provided by anonymous (Jan 22, 12:17PM), the "average" tax rate for 2001 to 2010 is 4.485%. In other words a uniform annual tax increase of that amount would result in the same total 48.5% in 9 years.
Here is another way of looking at things. Say our Tax Bill last year was 2,000.00 and the council aims for a modest tax increase of 5% each year, it will not take 20 years for the tax bill to double. It will be double 13 years from now in 2024.
Tax---% of---Amount of--TAX
Year Increase Increase--BILL
2010 - - 2,000.00
2011 5.00% 100.00 2,100.00
2012 5.00% 105.00 2,205.00
2013 5.00% 110.25 2,315.25
2014 5.00% 115.76 2,431.01
2015 5.00% 121.55 2,552.56
2016 5.00% 127.63 2,680.19
2017 5.00% 134.01 2,814.20
2018 5.00% 140.71 2,954.91
2019 5.00% 147.75 3,102.66
2020 5.00% 155.13 3,257.79
2021 5.00% 162.89 3,420.68
2022 5.00% 171.03 3,591.71
2023 5.00% 179.59 3,771.30
2024 5.00% 188.56 3,959.86
I think we have to keep an eye on where we are aiming for when we talk about tax increases. Tax increases are not the change I voted for when I voted for change. I thought the debate focused on doing things better and more efficiently and changing the culture so the community starts growing.
Election Forum Speech 2010
I believe we need a common-sense revolution here. We need to restore public confidence in our council and administration by bringing back transparency, fiscal responsibility, and accountability and due diligence. Taxpayers are frustrated with municipal hall with their hidden agendas, in-camera meetings, and lack of public consultation, such as we experienced with the Bridgecreek/River Run fiasco. Taxes have risen by more than 57% since 2000, yet service levels have not improved nor is there anything for the naked eye to see for all this money. While at the same time little to nothing has been invested in the social fabric of our society, resulting in our now having a serious social deficit. The simple fact is the Pass has a spending problem, not a revenue problem, while at the same time we are not getting value for money spent. This needs to change...
Taxes have risen by more than 57% since 2000.
Few responses here:
For the question why the 11.2% in 2008, combination of several factors Peter.
1. New council number of in experienced councilors that were looking for direction from experienced councilors and administration. (Were led down the garden path, big part of why the attitude amongst councilors changed in 2009/10)
2. Historically the first year budgets of a council carry the largest burden, simply because they have two more years to recover.(This council may be different due to the position a number of them took during the campaign on tax increases)
3. All departments try to fill there wish list during the first year due to the inexperience of the new council.
4. 2008 the municipality committed to a lot of projects.
5. 2010 would have been up around 7-8% if the majority of council had not agreed to cut new positions that are now back on the agenda for this year.
6. Councilors due to being new and figuring out where everybody sat on various issues, was not willing to make the tough choices. Budget passed by a vote of 6-1 I was the only councilor opposed.
Example it only takes an expenditure of $65,000 to make a difference of 1% in tax cuts.
2008 advertising was $60,000 higher than 2010 (1%). 2008 in excess of $100,000 was put into the centre (2%).
Regarding the question about population from the 2001 to 2006 census the CNP's population droped by 8%. The single largest drop percentage wise of any community in Alberta.
thanks again i did realize that councillers would take different approaches to their decision making process especially during an election year that is probably why we see the variation in tax increases. i think it is commendable when a counciller sticks to his game plan and doesnt yield to public pressure. my only hope is the public will wake up to these types that flip flop and try to look like they are on the right side of every decision.
Post a Comment