Well it is coming last night first reading was done on increasing our Water/Sewer rates by 4.5% and our garbage by an additional 3%.
Plus another first reading was also done on increasing our electrical rates by 6%.
Councilor Gallant gave a little speech about having keep pace with the rate of inflation, does anybody know of an area in Canada that saw that kind of inflation rate increase last year? If you do please let me know.
Showing posts with label Taxes in the Crowsnest Pass. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Taxes in the Crowsnest Pass. Show all posts
Wednesday, June 6, 2012
Sunday, August 22, 2010
How to push people away from your community. Taxes and more Taxes
Over the years I have always taken the position that Taxes should not be raised by more than the cost of living. Governments at every level need to look at areas of waste and inefficiencies and do every thing than can to be more efficient, before they increase the burden on the average taxpayer.
In this day and age communities are in competition to attract new people especially rural communities, the mines have hired a lot of people who have had the option to live here or in the Elk Valley, one of the important factors that plays in to that decision is Taxes, the cost of living in their chosen community.
The District of Sparwood has been tracking the cost of Taxes and Utilities between themselves and the surrounding communities. They used a typical, similar 1200 square foot home from each community.
Crowsnest Pass Taxes $2,352.04 Utilities $712 .44 for a total of $3,064.48
Fernie Taxes $2529.30 Utilities $ $539.79 for a Total of $3,069.09
Elkford Taxes $2063.73 Utilities $375.00 for a Total of $2,438.73
Sparwood Taxes $1,657.95 Utilities $663.60 for a Total of $2,321.55
That puts the Crowsnest Pass at a disadvantage versus Sparwood and Elkford, with our Taxes and Utilities being a full 32% higher than Sparwood and 26% higher than Elkford.
We as a community must be prudent financially to lessen this gap, we need to give people reasons to come here, not to choose elsewhere.
Every candidate in this coming election should be asked their position on raising Taxes, and anybody that as previously sat on council should be asked how they voted when there was tax increases much higher than the cost of living on the table.
In this day and age communities are in competition to attract new people especially rural communities, the mines have hired a lot of people who have had the option to live here or in the Elk Valley, one of the important factors that plays in to that decision is Taxes, the cost of living in their chosen community.
The District of Sparwood has been tracking the cost of Taxes and Utilities between themselves and the surrounding communities. They used a typical, similar 1200 square foot home from each community.
Crowsnest Pass Taxes $2,352.04 Utilities $712 .44 for a total of $3,064.48
Fernie Taxes $2529.30 Utilities $ $539.79 for a Total of $3,069.09
Elkford Taxes $2063.73 Utilities $375.00 for a Total of $2,438.73
Sparwood Taxes $1,657.95 Utilities $663.60 for a Total of $2,321.55
That puts the Crowsnest Pass at a disadvantage versus Sparwood and Elkford, with our Taxes and Utilities being a full 32% higher than Sparwood and 26% higher than Elkford.
We as a community must be prudent financially to lessen this gap, we need to give people reasons to come here, not to choose elsewhere.
Every candidate in this coming election should be asked their position on raising Taxes, and anybody that as previously sat on council should be asked how they voted when there was tax increases much higher than the cost of living on the table.
Wednesday, June 23, 2010
Update Crowsnest Pass on Municipal Finances
The audited financial report is in for the Municipality, this year the audit was conducted by Young Park and McNab out of Lethbridge.
Here's the highlights, the first number will be year end 2009 the second number year end 2008:
Municipal Taxes Collected $6,359,661 versus $6,115,266
User Fees and Sales of Goods $4,195,220 versus $4,205,213
Taxes and grants in place of Taxes Receivable $357,519 versus $268,407
Employee Benefit Obligations $342,193 versus $358,071
Long Term Debt $1,751,989 versus $1,894,731
Reserves $1,371,184 versus $1,326,757
Requisitions
Alberta School Foundation Fund $2,234,452 versus $2,134,806
Crowsnest Pass Senior Housing $167,766 versus $152,515
Salaries Wages and Benefits $4,572,803 versus $4,339,524
Salary and Benefits for Council $102,210 versus $102,220
Chief Administrative Officer $114,438 versus $120,921
Designated Officers $250,959 versus $239,993
Debt Limit as set by the MGA $18,710,717 actual debt $1,751,989
Consolidation of Controlled Corporations
Crowsnest Centre Revenue $274,382 Expenses $402,776 Loss of $128,394
Libraries Revenue $152,600 Expenses $144,266 Profit of $8,334
Unrestricted Surplus $234,061 versus $65,332
Copies of the financial statement are available at the Municipal Office
Here's the highlights, the first number will be year end 2009 the second number year end 2008:
Municipal Taxes Collected $6,359,661 versus $6,115,266
User Fees and Sales of Goods $4,195,220 versus $4,205,213
Taxes and grants in place of Taxes Receivable $357,519 versus $268,407
Employee Benefit Obligations $342,193 versus $358,071
Long Term Debt $1,751,989 versus $1,894,731
Reserves $1,371,184 versus $1,326,757
Requisitions
Alberta School Foundation Fund $2,234,452 versus $2,134,806
Crowsnest Pass Senior Housing $167,766 versus $152,515
Salaries Wages and Benefits $4,572,803 versus $4,339,524
Salary and Benefits for Council $102,210 versus $102,220
Chief Administrative Officer $114,438 versus $120,921
Designated Officers $250,959 versus $239,993
Debt Limit as set by the MGA $18,710,717 actual debt $1,751,989
Consolidation of Controlled Corporations
Crowsnest Centre Revenue $274,382 Expenses $402,776 Loss of $128,394
Libraries Revenue $152,600 Expenses $144,266 Profit of $8,334
Unrestricted Surplus $234,061 versus $65,332
Copies of the financial statement are available at the Municipal Office
Thursday, April 1, 2010
Good Editorial in the promoter today
Check out the editorial in today's paper, I feel its a good reflection of where the community feels the council should be going.
http://www.crowsnestpasspromoter.com/ArticleDisplay.aspx?e=2514386
http://www.crowsnestpasspromoter.com/ArticleDisplay.aspx?e=2514386
Wednesday, February 3, 2010
Where does my tax dollars go in the Crowsnest Pass
A while back a number of local residents wanted to know what some of the costs were for different services that we provide in the Crowsnest Pass. All of these numbers were for 2009 unless otherwise stated.
1/Spring Clean up-$105,241.43
Which is made up of the following
Wages and Benefits $69,133.05
Postage and Copying $643.26
Tipping Fees $28,985.12
Fuel 216 trips @ $30 per trip $6,480
2/Toxic Roundup-$6,435.41
Advertising $499.60
Contract costs $5,935.81
3/Snow Removal-$202,584
Wages $179,518
Benefits $23,066
We do not track equipment costs and fuel
4/Fire Departments-$327,000
This was the average amount for the last three years
5/Rum Runner Days-$46,072
Police $10,000
Traffic $6,572
Events $22,500
Garbage $7,000
The total of the above comes to $748,436.84
If anybody has any comments about the above please either post them or send me an email, any other questions about costs of various programs or services let me know I would be glad to get the answers for you.
This does not include any municipal wage cost.
6/Summer Games-$61,104
1/Spring Clean up-$105,241.43
Which is made up of the following
Wages and Benefits $69,133.05
Postage and Copying $643.26
Tipping Fees $28,985.12
Fuel 216 trips @ $30 per trip $6,480
2/Toxic Roundup-$6,435.41
Advertising $499.60
Contract costs $5,935.81
3/Snow Removal-$202,584
Wages $179,518
Benefits $23,066
We do not track equipment costs and fuel
4/Fire Departments-$327,000
This was the average amount for the last three years
5/Rum Runner Days-$46,072
Police $10,000
Traffic $6,572
Events $22,500
Garbage $7,000
The total of the above comes to $748,436.84
If anybody has any comments about the above please either post them or send me an email, any other questions about costs of various programs or services let me know I would be glad to get the answers for you.
This does not include any municipal wage cost.
6/Summer Games-$61,104
Wednesday, November 25, 2009
If you say it is true enough times, will people really believe you?
If you say it is true enough times, will people really believe you?
Over the last number of years the debate as raged in the Crowsnest Pass over the Crowsnest Centre.
My position as always been that we do not need and cannot afford two community centres. My position was confirmed numerous times in the recent corporate review, which talks about us needing to rationalize services and facilities, that we have numerous areas of duplication.
Well the supporters of the centre have stated over the last two years that the place as gone through a massive turn around and that the place is profitable and paying its own way. In fact, at a Council Meeting held on Dec 16, 2008 the Chairperson of the board stated “we do not need financial assistance from the municipality for 2009”. All of this despite the fact that the place as been heavily subsidized by taxpayer’s dollars for twenty years, and as had more failed business plans than GMC. Over the last ten months every time the issue as been raised the “Block of three on Council” that supports the centre as cried shame on anybody that dares to challenge the Centre, how dare we challenge this facility when it is doing so well and making money?
Last night November 24,2009 council is presented a bill from Nexen for $12,000 told that it was not up to date its now more like $18,000, a Telus bill for $3,700 and a Epcor bill for $6,700 with these balances only being to the end of September. It was only back on June 2 of this year that we were presented a Nexen bill that the Mayor claimed was only a problem because it had been sent to the wrong address.
So much for being profitable, when I questioned the Council member who used to be on the board, who as spent the last ten months telling us the Centre is profitable, as to why the bills have not been paid he tells me that he was removed from that board and can not explain why.
In the Crowsnest Pass we have to change the way we do business we can not (as indicated by our Corporate Review) continue doing business the way we have. The taxpayers of this community have to make a decision if we continue on this path we will have to accept that we are going to pay a lot more in Taxes. If we are going to maintain everything we have, and then we must adequately support all of these facilities, both from an operational point of view and investing the dollars we need to upkeep these facilities. The Corporate review talks about us needing to spend $7.8million a year for the next ninety years just to replace what we have today, let alone doing anything new.
Over the last number of years the debate as raged in the Crowsnest Pass over the Crowsnest Centre.
My position as always been that we do not need and cannot afford two community centres. My position was confirmed numerous times in the recent corporate review, which talks about us needing to rationalize services and facilities, that we have numerous areas of duplication.
Well the supporters of the centre have stated over the last two years that the place as gone through a massive turn around and that the place is profitable and paying its own way. In fact, at a Council Meeting held on Dec 16, 2008 the Chairperson of the board stated “we do not need financial assistance from the municipality for 2009”. All of this despite the fact that the place as been heavily subsidized by taxpayer’s dollars for twenty years, and as had more failed business plans than GMC. Over the last ten months every time the issue as been raised the “Block of three on Council” that supports the centre as cried shame on anybody that dares to challenge the Centre, how dare we challenge this facility when it is doing so well and making money?
Last night November 24,2009 council is presented a bill from Nexen for $12,000 told that it was not up to date its now more like $18,000, a Telus bill for $3,700 and a Epcor bill for $6,700 with these balances only being to the end of September. It was only back on June 2 of this year that we were presented a Nexen bill that the Mayor claimed was only a problem because it had been sent to the wrong address.
So much for being profitable, when I questioned the Council member who used to be on the board, who as spent the last ten months telling us the Centre is profitable, as to why the bills have not been paid he tells me that he was removed from that board and can not explain why.
In the Crowsnest Pass we have to change the way we do business we can not (as indicated by our Corporate Review) continue doing business the way we have. The taxpayers of this community have to make a decision if we continue on this path we will have to accept that we are going to pay a lot more in Taxes. If we are going to maintain everything we have, and then we must adequately support all of these facilities, both from an operational point of view and investing the dollars we need to upkeep these facilities. The Corporate review talks about us needing to spend $7.8million a year for the next ninety years just to replace what we have today, let alone doing anything new.
Wednesday, September 16, 2009
Budget parameters have been set in the Crowsnest Pass
Typically budget process in the Crowsnest Pass has gone along the following lines.
Department heads, and all outside groups present their list of priorities and financial requirements for the coming year to our Chief Financial Officer by the end of September. The first draft of budget is presented to council usually in late October with numbers driven by a huge tax increase.
Everybody comes in front of council and justifies there requirements with typically good arguments. But everybody understands that we cannot pay for and do everything so we spend the next two to three months and numerous meeting getting close to a realistic number.
Then the political maneuvering begins where the very vocal minority attempts to ensure that their pet projects are looked after. Suddenly we realize that we are in the month of April and panic sets in because the municipality is getting very tight on cash. So everybody takes a big gulp and passes a budget that they may not be totally satisfied with but its done.
Typically hate to use that word again but because we hold municipal elections every three years and politicians rely on the public having a short memory, the first year is a large increase (11%), the second year a moderate increase (3.8%) and the last year a low one (?%).
Well thanks to having a number of councilors that would prefer to do things differently this year, last night (Sept 15th) the majority of council voted to direct administration to present to council prior to Oct 30 a budget with a maximum increase in expenditures of 3%.
Certainly a good start should shorten the process up by a number of months which only makes sense when your budget year starts Jan 1.
While we are talking about money, we should take a look at municipal reserves. Came across some very interesting information in the last few days. The municipal reserves for the Crowsnest Pass are roughly $1.3 million we have 5700 residents that works out to $228 per person in reserves. How does that compare to the rest of the province?
Broken down by the various types of categories recognized in the province of Alberta here are the numbers.
Cities-$1199 per person
Special Municipalities-$3090 per person
MDs and Counties-$7300 per person
Towns-$1977 per person
Villages-$1257 per person
Summer Villages-$3068 per person
Department heads, and all outside groups present their list of priorities and financial requirements for the coming year to our Chief Financial Officer by the end of September. The first draft of budget is presented to council usually in late October with numbers driven by a huge tax increase.
Everybody comes in front of council and justifies there requirements with typically good arguments. But everybody understands that we cannot pay for and do everything so we spend the next two to three months and numerous meeting getting close to a realistic number.
Then the political maneuvering begins where the very vocal minority attempts to ensure that their pet projects are looked after. Suddenly we realize that we are in the month of April and panic sets in because the municipality is getting very tight on cash. So everybody takes a big gulp and passes a budget that they may not be totally satisfied with but its done.
Typically hate to use that word again but because we hold municipal elections every three years and politicians rely on the public having a short memory, the first year is a large increase (11%), the second year a moderate increase (3.8%) and the last year a low one (?%).
Well thanks to having a number of councilors that would prefer to do things differently this year, last night (Sept 15th) the majority of council voted to direct administration to present to council prior to Oct 30 a budget with a maximum increase in expenditures of 3%.
Certainly a good start should shorten the process up by a number of months which only makes sense when your budget year starts Jan 1.
While we are talking about money, we should take a look at municipal reserves. Came across some very interesting information in the last few days. The municipal reserves for the Crowsnest Pass are roughly $1.3 million we have 5700 residents that works out to $228 per person in reserves. How does that compare to the rest of the province?
Broken down by the various types of categories recognized in the province of Alberta here are the numbers.
Cities-$1199 per person
Special Municipalities-$3090 per person
MDs and Counties-$7300 per person
Towns-$1977 per person
Villages-$1257 per person
Summer Villages-$3068 per person
Monday, February 23, 2009
Why has the Crowsnest Pass budget not been passed yet? Questions and Answers
A local newspaper asks the question is the council taking to long to pass a budget? Well if the taxpayers are ok with a 7.5% increase the answer is yes but I certainly would not agree to an increase of that amount.
Why is it taking so long to pass a budget with a lower rate of increase?
Simple councilors must be willing to make cuts to bring the increase down to a reasonable level.
Why has this not happened? well I can only speak for myself, being a member of council means one must be willing to bring forth suggestions, make motions and decide on tough choices. Is council prepared to do that? I am.
How much money are we talking about? roughly $150,000 just to get down to 5%
Are there ways to close that gap? of course there always is ways to be more efficient, do we have a choice if I or you was spending more money than we had coming in we would have to make tough choices?
What are some of the suggestions? The following are some of the ideas that have been thrown out for debate. I would welcome other ideas if somebody wished to present them. But here are the options presented so far.
Advertising in one local Newspaper would save $25,000 a year minimum.
Seniors rebate, a couple of years back council put in place a policy that tax rates for seniors on lower income levels would be maintained at 2006 levels. The problem with that is twenty years from now those folks would still be at 2006 levels. By going to 2007 levels $10,000 would be saved.
Marketing Consortia/Economic Development
We have in the budget $37,500 for these areas, do we need to leave all that money there? we have not had a Economic Development officer for almost a year, we also have formed a new adhoc committee to look at this area and make some recommendations, by the time this new board does that, a good chunk of the year will be gone by.
Community Organizations Funding
What has been thrown on the table is a 20-25% reduction in funding for such things as the Bellevue mine, Allied Arts, Museum, Thunder in the Valley weekend etc. Which would generate a savings of between $42-52,000
Eliminate a Part time personnel position
Would save $35,000.
Eliminate the Corporate Review
When you are in a difficult financial position it becomes evident that you need to look within, using a totally unbiased non political approach to determine where you could be more efficient. A number of councilors including myself have recommended that we hire a consultant to do this, cost $65,000
Municipal Development Plan
It has been suggested that we start a municipal development plan this year, it has been a quite a few years since we did this, does it need to be done? of course, should it be now? Strategy #1 of the Land Use Framework states "Municipalities, other local authorities and provincial government departments will be required to comply with each regional plan" When will we know what are regional plan is? next year. Do we spend $50,000 this year and find out next year that our development plan does not conform with the regional plan? tough choice.
None of the above suggestions have been decided on by council yet, but they certainly do give us options to reduce the burden on the taxpayers the choices are indeed tough, but never the less must be made.
Why is it taking so long to pass a budget with a lower rate of increase?
Simple councilors must be willing to make cuts to bring the increase down to a reasonable level.
Why has this not happened? well I can only speak for myself, being a member of council means one must be willing to bring forth suggestions, make motions and decide on tough choices. Is council prepared to do that? I am.
How much money are we talking about? roughly $150,000 just to get down to 5%
Are there ways to close that gap? of course there always is ways to be more efficient, do we have a choice if I or you was spending more money than we had coming in we would have to make tough choices?
What are some of the suggestions? The following are some of the ideas that have been thrown out for debate. I would welcome other ideas if somebody wished to present them. But here are the options presented so far.
Advertising in one local Newspaper would save $25,000 a year minimum.
Seniors rebate, a couple of years back council put in place a policy that tax rates for seniors on lower income levels would be maintained at 2006 levels. The problem with that is twenty years from now those folks would still be at 2006 levels. By going to 2007 levels $10,000 would be saved.
Marketing Consortia/Economic Development
We have in the budget $37,500 for these areas, do we need to leave all that money there? we have not had a Economic Development officer for almost a year, we also have formed a new adhoc committee to look at this area and make some recommendations, by the time this new board does that, a good chunk of the year will be gone by.
Community Organizations Funding
What has been thrown on the table is a 20-25% reduction in funding for such things as the Bellevue mine, Allied Arts, Museum, Thunder in the Valley weekend etc. Which would generate a savings of between $42-52,000
Eliminate a Part time personnel position
Would save $35,000.
Eliminate the Corporate Review
When you are in a difficult financial position it becomes evident that you need to look within, using a totally unbiased non political approach to determine where you could be more efficient. A number of councilors including myself have recommended that we hire a consultant to do this, cost $65,000
Municipal Development Plan
It has been suggested that we start a municipal development plan this year, it has been a quite a few years since we did this, does it need to be done? of course, should it be now? Strategy #1 of the Land Use Framework states "Municipalities, other local authorities and provincial government departments will be required to comply with each regional plan" When will we know what are regional plan is? next year. Do we spend $50,000 this year and find out next year that our development plan does not conform with the regional plan? tough choice.
None of the above suggestions have been decided on by council yet, but they certainly do give us options to reduce the burden on the taxpayers the choices are indeed tough, but never the less must be made.
Municipal Taxes in the Crowsnest Pass
Well the results are in from another poll, from 24 people that voted the numbers came out to the following:
17 felt 5% was to high
5 felt they could live with 5%
0 felt that 7.5% is ridiculous
2 felt they could live with 7.5 if that what it took to maintain all services
It's pretty clear to me where the taxpayers sit, and I am not basing that judgement just on this poll. All one has to do is talk to folks around town.
17 felt 5% was to high
5 felt they could live with 5%
0 felt that 7.5% is ridiculous
2 felt they could live with 7.5 if that what it took to maintain all services
It's pretty clear to me where the taxpayers sit, and I am not basing that judgement just on this poll. All one has to do is talk to folks around town.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)