The Wellington Federation of Agriculture (WFA) and a number of local farmers are voicing opposition to the township’s proposal to impose development charges on new agricultural buildings.
Mapleton’s current development charges bylaw includes a 100 per cent exemption for buildings constructed for “a bona fide farm use.”
A proposal presented at a public meeting on Oct. 11 would see the exemption reduced to 75%. That would mean someone building a new barn, for example, would pay 25% of the non-residential rate of $2.65 per square foot of gross floor area.
The proposed 66 cents/ft2 charge would add $15,000 to $20,000 to the cost of a typical barn project, noted Mapleton resident Jeff Krul.
He also told council he felt the legislation unfairly targets livestock producers, because their barns tend to be larger than other types.
“We need a large square footage under new requirements and housing rules – it really adds a lot of costs,” said Krul. “We’re not the only ones using the roads with large pieces of machinery.”
Mayor Neil Driscoll replied the charge, if implemented, would apply to any building, “whether it’s a shed or a dairy barn or a pig barn.”
Driscoll said the charge is designed to pay for future maintenance of roads necessitated by additional traffic that accompanies growth.
“We have to pay for it somehow. We don’t know how to pay for it so we’re proposing this,” said Driscoll.
“The reason we’re focusing on farms is the size of the equipment you use on these roads.”
Driscoll said the township struggles with the cost of rehabilitating Mapleton’s network of roads and said the provincial government’s approach to taxing farmland is a big part of the problem.
Prior to 1998, properties assessed as farmland paid 100% of their assessed tax to the local municipality, then filed an application with the province to receive a 75% rebate paid directly by the province.
Since then, farmland, other than the farm residence and one acre, has been allocated a tax ratio of 25%, meaning farmers pay property tax on only 25% of the assessed value of their property.
That means the cost of providing the rebate, once shared province-wide, now falls on the non-farm municipal tax base, a policy that hits heavily-agricultural municipalities like Mapleton hard.
Driscoll said township representatives have taken up the issue unsuccessfully with provincial officials.
“We asked that the farm property tax rebate be given back to Mapleton and it’s not going to happen. For this municipality that’s $1.52 million,” said Driscoll.
Janet Harrop, president of the Wellington Federation of Agriculture (WFA), called Mapleton’s proposed changes “unacceptable” in a letter to council.
“Imposing additional costs to farm capital projects will slow agricultural growth within the municipality, which is your number one economic driver and job creation engine,” Harrop stated.
She added, “The people who live on the land already pay development charges when they build their residential dwelling.”
WFA vice president Ruby Lennox was at the meeting and noted Driscoll’s comments and a presentation by consultant Dan Watson of Watson and Associates clarified a number of issues.
However, she said farmers are also concerned about other issues, including the impact of the charges on environmental farm projects.
Driscoll pointed out projects such as manure pits and silos would be considered accessory structures, which would remain exempt from development charges.
Lennox noted some farm buildings have life expectancies as low as 20 years and she wondered if farm owners “would have to pay development charges over and over again.”
Watson explained, “If you demolish a 10,000 square foot building and rebuild at 10,000 square feet the redevelopment credit would equal the charge so it nets to zero.” However, he added, “if you expand … you would have to pay on the expanded amount.”
Mapleton farmer Liz Samis said council should leave the exemption for bona fide farmers as it is.
“I’ve been in agriculture in this township for over 37 years and I see how much we’ve contributed to the success of the township,” she stated, adding Mapleton is home to a number of younger farmers.
“They have to be able to learn to manage debt and … cash flow on their farms.”
With many fixed costs for farmers already going up, Samis said, “We were shocked when we read this development charges study and saw the township wants to remove the exemption.”
Neighbouring municipalities, including Wellington North, Minto and Centre Wellington exempt farm buildings from development charges, Samis said.
“They do not have developmental charges on farm structures and their roads are as good as ours. Why are we even considering this?”
Under the current bylaw, in addition to bona fide farm buildings and accessory buildings, discretionary exemptions also include:
– places of worship;
– temporary structures without a foundation on a site which development charges or lot levies have previously been paid; and
– an 18% exemption for all services on non-residential development in areas currently serviced for water and wastewater services.
Under the proposal, the latter exemption would be revised to provide:
– up to 50% exemption on commercial development in areas not serviced, equivalent to the exemption for industrial development;
– other types of non-industrial development in serviced areas would receive a 20% exemption on the roads, fire protection, parks and recreation and administration services portion of the charge; and
– a credit for redevelopment that would eliminate development charges on non-residential constructions of the same size.
The proposal would also change the rates for residential development in serviced areas, adding an additional wastewater charge of $2,153. For non-residential construction, the wastewater charge will go from $0.61 to $1.29/ft2 of gross area.
Contractor and farmer Jeff Duimering said any increase in Mapleton building costs “makes it harder to compete with Elmira.”
Driscoll stressed the Oct. 11 meeting was strictly for information purposes and said it would be “the first of many I am sure.”
Council is reviewing input and aiming to adopt a bylaw on Nov. 22.
