With a draft budget slated for presentation at a public open house on Jan. 14, township council trimmed a proposed levy increase from 20.3 per cent, to 17.85%.
That reduction lowers the proposed levy increase over the amount raised by taxation in 2015 to about $895,000, from the $1.03 million under consideration prior to a special budget meeting on Jan. 6. The move also lowers the increase in the total tax bill (including county and school taxes) on a residence assessed at $300,000 from around $215 to $184.
The changes mean a combined tax rate increase of 4.87%, rather than the 5.75% hike proposed earlier.
CAO Brad McRoberts said the reductions were achieved by:
– deferral of a $50,000 reserve contribution for the PMD arena to 2017 and 2018;
– correction of totals for projected Ontario Municipal Partnership Fund grants from the province;
– obtaining firmer numbers for anticipated conservation authority levies; and
– removal of principal and interest payment for a $1.7-million loan for 2015 road projects.
McRoberts explained council directed staff to proceed with road improvements without borrowing until financing and funding for major water and wastewater projects can be finalized. That means the township will be relying on capital contributions from taxation, gas tax and Ontario Community Infrastructure funding to fund road projects. OCIF funding will increase from $800,000 in 2016 to $1.5 million in 2020.
“To support our current road infrastructure capital needs we need approximately $2 million on an annual basis. This is separate from bridge and fleet capital requirements,” McRoberts explained in an email to the Community News.
At the Jan. 6 meeting, councillor Michael Martin argued the 20% levy increase proposed at that point was too high for taxpayers to bear.
“A 20 per cent levy increase is a monstrosity to swallow,” said Martin, who pointed out, “Our levy that we’re looking for is up a million from last year, which is up $600,000 from the year before.”
Mayor Neil Driscoll explained council hasn’t been putting enough money into reserves for infrastructure projects, noting that with contributions of $200,000 a year, “it took five years to replace the average bridge.”
“How much should you have in reserves?” wondered councillor Dennis Craven, adding council has to ask themselves “is there a point to having so much money sitting there doing nothing for you? It’s important to have reserves but how much do we need in reserves?”
“I don’t want you to get a sense you’re putting money away into reserves and not really using it,” responded McRoberts.
“Right now you need to be putting away $350,00 a year into your fleet reserve so you don’t have to borrow money,” to replace vehicles. He added councillors must also ask themselves, “do you just let those bridges deteriorate until they are no longer rehabilitatable?”
McRoberts explained that since reserves are constantly being used and replenished, money earmarked in this fashion “is not really going to reserves because you’re so far behind in terms of your (infrastructure) deficit.”
He cautioned council, “If you carry on the way we have been you really will have roads that are deteriorating in terms of service level. Some of your roads may have to go back to gravel.
“I realize we can’t go from $200,000 to $1.5 million in one year, but we’ve got to get that built up.”
Councillor Lori Woodham suggested council should “shave one per cent or two per cent off what we want to put into each reserve, just this year,” in order to get the 2016 levy increase down.
However, McRoberts said he didn’t feel the proposed increase represented “just one big step.
“These are little steps. The idea is to get to the point where you guys have $2 million in annual contribution (to reserves) to maintain your infrastructure,” he said. Any deferral of contributions just delays the point at which the township catches up with its infrastructure deficit, he added.
“These are pretty small steps right now. What you’re suggesting is just going to push that out there even further,” said McRoberts.
Woodham said, “The reality is, I don’t think we ever will catch up. I think that we need to recognize that we’re going to do the best we can. We are 90 per cent rural, that’s the hard fact.”
Driscoll cautioned councillors against thinking about the tax increase in terms of percentage, rather than actual dollars.
“Is $356 too much for a family to afford? Is $1,500 too much for a business?”
Craven expressed concern about the impact of the increase on senior citizens “who don’t have an opportunity to increase their income.”
“Even for the people that work every day, they don’t get a five per cent increase. But does the value of their property go up?” asked Driscoll, reminding council municipalities tax residents on the value of their property.
“If we taxed our residents on their income we’d be in a totally different situation today,” he observed.
“We’d have a lot more gravel roads,” said Craven.
“We’d have gold roads in some cases,” Driscoll replied.
Driscoll told council residents should understand the proposed increase “is the number that you have to pay if you want to keep the services they have.”
Martin said, “We all want to get to the same place. How do we get buy in from the public then?” Otherwise, he suggested, “you might have a new council in here that’s going for zero per cent.”
“How happy were you with the infrastructure in Mapleton in the past when increases were between zero … and two per cent?” asked Driscoll. “Are you content we might have to shut down our arena because the floor is failing?”
Driscoll suggested, “I think the way that we can prove it to our residents that this is worth it is that they are going to see asphalt going down, and they want to see asphalt that lasts – not shave an pave. If you can explain to them why we’re doing that project, why can’t they understand?’
Martin said, “I’m not asking for zero per cent. We’ve got 52 per cent laid out (over five years) and we’ve got two thirds of that over the next two years. I’m just saying maybe there are opportunities to spread it off a bit.”
“I think we just have to bite the bullet and do what needs to be done now,” said councillor Marlene Ottens. “I think we just have to tackle it head-on and take the hit.”
“For too many years this council’s been a do-nothing council. I don’t want to be a part of a do-nothing council,” stated Craven.
“If you do a zero per cent every year, you’re actually in the negative … costs go up,” McRoberts pointed out.
After going through the budget account by account, council agreed to make reductions to take the levy increase down to 17.85%.
An open house to present the draft budget to the public was scheduled for Jan. 14 at 6pm at the Maryborough Community Centre in Moorefield.
Driscoll said the budget will probably be presented for approval at the Feb. 9 council meeting, “unless we hear some major feedback at our open house.”
