The 2015 Budget and Business Plan is on the agenda for 1/26 Council. I continue to believe that the proposed property tax increase which amounts to $79/yr on the average house in King (assessment of $614,000) is the right decision. I am aware that very unfortunately, for a few people, this increase will be a hardship. Clearly, if I did not believe that the proposed business plan (i.e. how the new money will be spent) was appropriate I would not support the tax increase. Or, if I thought that the work could be done without hiring the new staff or purchasing the new asset I would not support it. As I reviewed with more detail in an earlier posting I support the recommended 3.99% property tax increase.
Question: Why are tax increases are required when there is so much new development?
Answer: The new development does provide a significant portion: (70%) of the business plan is funded by our new assessment growth. 52% of the capital projects (i.e. buying new trucks, building playgrounds) is funded by Development Charges
But, its not enough. We have a significant backlog of work which should have been done earlier. Roads have not been repaired when they should have been and we can no longer delay. We have avoided hiring permanent staff and have managed with contract staff. The latter appears to save us money but there is lack of continuity which ultimately means loss in productivity. We have understaffed some roles in Parks & Recreation and have missed opportunities to have paying customers for programs.
Here is the Staff report for the 1/26 Council meeting.
And here is the link to see the details of the budget and business plan.
You are very welcome to come to Council and tell us your point of view. And, of course, contact me directly or make a comment on my blog.
While I appreciate the great efforts of Council and staff to improve and maintain services in King, I wonder if we are looking a bit higher than we should. The average inflation rate of Canada in 2014 was 1.95 % and the proposed tax increase for the King Township portion of our municipal taxes is twice this amount. Pensions are either at a fixed rate or may include provision up to the inflation rate. Salaries are often similar. If all levels of government increased by 3.99% the average resident will clearly have less income for other purposes. I believe inflation rates, and pension and salary income need to be considered strongly in the budget plan at all levels of government.
Hi Bruce, I really appreciate that you have commented on this very important issue. Often budget makers use inflation rate as a guide for an increase. Personally I think that is too simplistic as not all activities track inflation; some are more sensitive, others less. Even if I knew what was happening with residents’ incomes & pensions that would not provide good guidance. I believe one needs to look at what is being delivered; in this case, to respond to your comment we would need to determine what are we prepared to forgo. And I don’t think it is a question of what can we delay until next year as I believe there will be the same situation; we have so many roads in bad condition because we didn’t fund them when they should have been repaired. We have missed revenue opportunities in our summer camp programs because of lack of staff.
Hi Debbie,
Thanks for your response. I appreciate that budgets are a real balancing act of many considerations. Roads are definitely a relatively high priority, and I do know there are times when we need to increase both individual and municipal budgets to meet specific needs and priorities.
While it is impossible to answer this question now, would Council keep in mind the increase this year, and consider a much smaller or no increase next year?
All the best, Bruce
Hello Bruce, I will provide more information in a post in a couple days (and I am sure the local papers will also provide perspective) but in the interim I do want to let you know that majority of Council last evening (1/26) were generally supportive of the points you made in your 1st comment to me. After considerable good discussion budget was shaved to a property increase of 2.99% which will translate to a reduction to the increase seen by a tax payer of $20/yr (average property assessment of $614,000. I share your desire to be able to look into the future to understand what’s ahead; Finance is committed to proposing a infrastructure reserve strategy this year. Plus I hope to see us getting to a strategy for funding the 10 year capital plan.