 |
Councillor Martin Bell's view on the Property Tax System
Nova Scotia has a property tax system that is complicated and in need of some repair. The biggest problem is the lack of accountability built into the system. If a
property owner is concerned about the level of taxes they have to pay, they don’t really know who to blame. The rural municipalities and the towns sometimes have
different arrangements with the province on who pays what or at what shared percentages. That sometimes makes it difficult to compare.
Each spring when property owners open their tax bills, elected officials at both the provincial and municipal levels of government blame the other for the raise in taxes.
At the municipal level there is no control over assessments and council cannot adjust the tax rate to help someone whose property has gained much more value than
someone else’s. The MLAs tell you it’s up to municipal councillors to control spending and spread the savings around by adjusting tax rates accordingly.
The truth is both levels of government need to lower the complexity of the issue. Municipalities receive the majority of their revenues from property taxes, and the
provincial government pulls in tens of millions from the taxation collected on those properties. The biggest share of revenues from property taxes, is passed over to
the province to help pay for services that municipalities have no say on. A good example of that is the cost of education.
A few years back the provincial government of the day put a cap on property assessments giving the municipalities more breathing room. However, the normal inflationary
pressure saw costs rise for both the province and the municipalities. Now we hear that changes need to be made to the cap on property assessments. Both sides say
they need more time to study the matter before bigger changes are made. I feel that indeed the list of problems is complex.
Property assessments are based on real or “market value” of the property and do not encourage individuals to improve their property’s appearance from outside. Why,
you ask? Well sooner or later the property assessor will drive by and note the upgrades that will lead to greater resale value and a higher market value. Another factor
is when one neighbouring home sells successfully for a higher price then all homes in the area are viewed to maybe be worth more. It doesn’t necessarily mean every
other property in the area is worth as much, but according to the assessment office, it probably does.
While the Municipality of the District of Lunenburg supports the cap on property assessments we understand there is a strong move to remove the cap. This will lead
to some property assessments changing wildly. If changes to the property tax system are coming, there needs to be increased accountability and fairness. Sudden
moves like striking out the MOU between municipal units and the province lead to mistrust.
The tax payers want meaningful, long term change that both the province and municipalities must address. If municipalities need to pay for provincial services, they
need to have other revenue sources other than property tax. If the services for each level of government was clearly laid out and based upon a strict set of principles,
then each level of government could clearly state what they were responsible for and how much it would cost. The citizens living in that municipal unit could clearly
state what they wanted for services and only pay for what they asked for.
Posted June 24th 2011
Tax rates set for April 2011- March 2012
I am very glad to report that our 2011-12 tax rate remains the same as last year! The tax rates were approved via a motion of Council on April 30th as follows:
- Residential - - - - - - - - $0.81 per $100 of assessment
- Commercial - - - - - - - - $2.057 per $100 of assessment
- Commercial - Seasonal - $1.543 per $100 of assessment
We expect to maintain existing service levels and are proposing initiatives that are important to Council and our residents to help achieve our mission as outlined in Council’s strategic plan.
We will support an operating budget of $27,729,324.00 and do so with ZERO borrowing. In fact we intend to pay down existing debt. This budget also has no new user fees.
We wanted our 2011-12 budget to be responsive to economic conditions. For that reason we worked hard to keep the rate the same as last year and have kept a compassionate tax policy
for low income households. Here is a comparison of residential tax rates from other municipal units.
| Municipal Unit: | 2006-07 | 2007-08 |
2008-09 | 2010-11 | 2011-12 |
|---|
|
| MODL (Us) | 0.78 | 0.78 | 0.79 | 0.81 | 0.81 |
| Annapolis Co. | 0.95 | 0.95 | 0.98 | 0.98 | 0.98 |
| Colchester Co. | 0.79 | 0.71 | 0.79 | 0.82 | 0.83 |
| Cumberland Co. | 1.01 | 1.01 | 1.01 | 1.04 | 1.05 |
| Hants East | 0.94 | 0.86 | 0.87 | 0.89 | 1.06 |
| Hants West | 0.93 | 0.87 | 0.86 | 0.90 | X |
| Kings Co. | 1.16 | 0.83 | 0.83 | 0.853 | 0.856 |
| Queens Co. | 0.92 | 0.88 | 0.88 | 0.90 | 0.90 |
| Bridgewater | 0 | 1.62 | 1.64 | X | 1.669 |
| New Glasgow | NA | NA | NA | 1.80 | 1.82 |
For me, the Global Sewer Area Rate is helping the rates for Riverside and Shore Drive and they remain at 0.789. This made a reduction on sewer rates two years ago for both Shore
Drive and Riverside Heights residences. In 2011-12 there is an upgrade in the system budgeted for in the amount of $125,000.00. Most of this will be funded by external grants.
This year we have set a Special Recreation Tax at $0.025 per $100.00 of all taxable property. This rate is the same for both residential and commercial. This will pay towards our share
of the Lunenburg County Multi-Purpose Centre. The LCLC will be located in Bridgewater between Wentzell Drive and Cook Road, off of York Street in the Town of Bridgewater.
I am a member of the RCM Police Advisory Board. The MODL have 23 individuals helping to provide policing to our communities. Our 2011-12 priorities are to contribute to community safety,
contribute to safer roads, and crime reduction. The Board also wants to contribute to employee wellness. I attended several community meetings to listen to concerns from the general public
on policing matters. It’s hard to understand why we removed over 75 impaired drivers from our roads last year. These drivers endanger themselves and others on our highways. If you drink,
then don’t drive, it’s just common sense. I serve as vice chair of the RCM Police Advisory Board.
This year I am serving my second term as chairperson of the Municipal Audit Committee. I am serving a tenth term on the Fire & Emergency Services Committee. After serving ten years
on the Bluenose Coastal Action Foundation and three of those as an executive member, I am stepping down to take on other duties. We need to protect our waters.
This is a good budget that will protect existing service levels with no additional debt being incurred.
Thank you,
Councillor Martin E. Bell, District 11, MODL
Published on May 27th, 2011, 16:00h
Councillor Martin Bell's Fall-Winter report 2010
Conquerall Bank, NS - November 5th 2010 - For the second year the Council for the Municipality of the District of Lunenburg did a series of community meetings.
We visited twelve communities throughout the municipality and at each meeting there were several Councillors in attendance. However, this did not change my
effort in getting out and meet those who live in District 11 as I have done each of the previous ten years.
This year (2010) we as a Council did raise the property taxes and I am very much aware of the impact of tax rates on residents within the Municipality of the District
of Lunenburg. This came after several years of a frozen tax rate unchanged with a series of cut backs within our own operations. Each year your Council struggles
with approving a budget that meets the needs of our residents which is matched with a tax rate that is affordable. However, I have taken the stand, as has some
others in this Council, that we want to reduce the current MODL debt by about ten percent in this current year. I believe that is achievable if we reduce current
spending, be more aggressive on paying down our $6.5M debt, and not take on a single cent of new debt. I plan to work towards this goal and I will be serving on
the Audit Committee. I plan to watch how we do business with sewer costs, waste-site operations, and policing.
Over the past few years the Municipality has invested in economic development initiatives at exit 12. These were primarily through infrastructure such as sewer,
water, and road construction and road improvements. Most of the funds for these infrastructure improvements came from borrowing. This is no different than a
private individual getting a mortgage on a new home. There are immediate costs which are principle costs and then there is interest due which is done as payments.
I do want to point out that tax revenue generated from these new businesses at exit 12 has been used to pay for Municipal Operations and to provide services to
residents of the Municipality. I see this as an investment in our region and an investment in our future. The Osprey Village is being built on a 200 plus-acre
commercial development that is strategically located near the Exit 12 interchange on Highway #103. We have worked hard bringing in Wal-Mart, Canadian Tire,
Mark’s Work Wearhouse, Best Western Hotel, Harvey’s & Swiss Chalet, Staples, and Boston Pizza.
Many of our increased costs are from mandatory contributions that the Municipality is required to give to the Province for education, corrections, assessment and
police protection. These costs account for a significant part of the municipality’s expenses. Another area where we have seen some significant cost increases is
waste collection and disposal. We are looking at other ways to do business at the Compost and Recycling – Solid Waste Facility.
The tax rate is eighty one cents per one hundred dollars worth of assessment which translates into a two cent increase this year. The tax calculation is based on
the assessed value of the property divided by 100 multiplied by the applicable (o.81) tax rate. How does that rate compare to some other municipal Districts in
Nova Scotia? Well, the rate in Annapolis District is 0.98, the rate in Shelburne District is 1.30, the rate in the County of Kings is 0.85, and the rate in Antigonish
County is 0.88 cents. So when you compare our rates to other municipal units in Nova Scotia, we are reasonable in our impact of tax rates on the residents that
we serve.
The Municipality of the District of Lunenburg is undertaking a service capacity and operational review. The reason for this review is to ensure that we are delivering
services in the most efficient and effective way possible. The Council recognize that we have a very good staff, but we also understand that there are always
changes in how one can do business. Considerations could include using the latest software or changing how we deliver services. This project is looking for the
newest solutions for our community’s future success. One example is being able to pay one’s tax bill monthly via auto debit to fit into your personal household budget.
I recently passed the ten year mark serving as a municipal elected Councillor and served as the Deputy Mayor during this past year. It was an exhilarating
experience to have met so many new friends and to be part of building a new future for the residences of MODL and beyond. I look forward to the year ahead.
Sincerely,
Councillor Martin E. Bell, PCP, EMD-Q, CMG
Bridgewater, NS - March 10th 2010 - Public Meeting at Days Inn for Lunenburg County Lifestyle Centre.
I am pleased to say a few words about the Lunenburg County Lifestyle Centre. This truly is an exciting and much needed project for our area.
Municipal Council is excited about this project. It is a must for our area. This is a huge investment in our community by all levels of government.
It is one that will better the economic, social and overall health of our community.
By now most of you have heard that the project budget for the Centre has increased from the original estimates. You will receive a presentation
tonight from Lydon Lynch, the project's Architect that will explore this further.
While the increase in costs were anticipated, it still poses some difficult decisions for each Municipal unit to make. Over the next several weeks
decisions with respects to what components will be included within the facility will be made jointly by the two municipal units. While the decisions
will be difficult to make they will be made with the best interest of our community in mind.
While to some of you the amount of time that has been consumed in planning for this project appears to be excessive, this is the largest project
of it's kind for the MODL and the TOB. It is important that we do things right, and make as few mistakes as possible. Taking the time now will be
worth it in the end.
I am excited about where we are going and look forward to the facility opening and being a community facility that can be enjoyed by all. Thank you
Tax rates set for 2009-2010
I am very glad to report that our 2009-10 tax rate remains the same as last year!
The tax rates were approved via a motion of Council on April 30th as follows:
> Residential - - - - - - - $0.79 per $100 of assessment
> Commercial - - - - - -- $1.92 per $100 of assessment
> Commercial - Seasonal - $1.44 per $100 of assessment
We expect to maintain existing service levels and are proposing new initiatives
that are important to Council and our Residents.
We wanted our 2009-10 budget to be responsive to economic conditions. For
that reason we worked hard to keep the rate the same as last year and are
adding a compassionate tax policy for low income households. Here is a
comparison of residential tax rates from other municipal units.
| Municipal Unit: | 2006-07 | 2007-08 | 2008-09 |
| MODL (Us) | 0.78 | 0.78 | 0.79 |
| Annapolis Co. | 0.95 | 0.95 | 0.95 |
| Colchester Co. | 0.79 | 0.71 | 0.74 |
| Cumberland Co. | 1.01 | 1.01 | 1.01 |
| Hants East | 0.94 | 0.86 | 0.87 |
| Hants West | 0.93 | 0.87 | 0.86 |
| Kings Co. | 1.16 | 1.16 | 1.16 |
| Queens Co. | 0.92 | 0.88 | 0.88 |
| Bridgewater | 0.00 | 1.62 | 1.64 |
For me, the area rates for municipal sewer rates is a big accomplishment.
I have fought for a Global Sewer Area Rate for the past six years and finally got
that in place. The rates for Riverside dropped from 0.78 to 0.698 and the
rates for Shore Drive dropped the flow rate from the tax analysis to a flat
rate based upon 0.698. This will make a reduction on sewer rates for both
Shore Drive and Riverside Heights residences.
This is a good budget. It is responsive to the needs of our municipality.
Thank you,
Councillor Martin E. Bell, District 11, MODL
Published on April 30th, 2009, 17:00h
MOL Wastewater Management – Reflecting, Prudence, Fairness and Equality
Wednesday, April 30, 2008
To: Warden Jack Wentzell, and Council Members
Municipality of the District of Lunenburg
Good government has the ability to change. Change is needed to address changes in time and
conditions and outside forces that require our ability to seek solutions to address these changes.
From time to time one must step back and look from the outside and see if what was set up is
still working and is it the best arrangement for today to handle our goals and objectives.
An example might be the national railroad where it was seen as being the tool to give everyone a
standard of living that could deliver goods and supplies at a reasonable cost. In the early 1800’s
you had the Atlantic Railroad and it extended to the Grand Trunk Railroad in Upper Canada. But
profits could only be made in the east as smaller rail systems in the west cost too much to
maintain or operate. Canada in 1850 was a patchwork of discontented colonies, groping their
way toward united nation-hood. But Canadians then, as they do today, faced the future with
confidence in themselves and faith in their destiny. By working together and setting rates at
reasonable levels along all the lines and the sharing of resources it helped with continued growth
westward. Canada today is a power among nations, with a great and growing influence in world
affairs because of the railroads of the past. Then in the 1970’s when the eastern lines started to
lose money, some in Ottawa and the office towers of Toronto and Montreal decided to lift the
tracks in many areas of eastern Canada. Now in the early 2000’s we see that decision was wrong
as we all pay more for goods and services like food, and industries prefer to locate in Quebec and
Ontario where rail service is still available. Here we see change was needed to address changes
in time and conditions and outside forces but the government failed to seek solutions to address
these changes and took the easy way out. Our nation was founded on the principles of sharing
the wealth and working towards solutions that gave all areas a reasonable level of service at a
reasonable level of cost.
Another example is when Canada was young and Nova Scotia was considered rich we used our
resources to fund growth west. Companies like Cunard Shipping and Bank of Nova Scotia
provided resources that gave Nova Scotia the “have province” ability to fund Ontario and Alberta.
Then suddenly areas like Nova Scotia and Newfoundland fell upon hard times and were the “have
not” provinces and people in Ontario soon forgot about the help they got from the east. Well,
now in year 2008, Newfoundland is moving back to the “have status” and Ontario is falling to the
“have not” status. So, do we as Canadians fairly address capital resources and operating funding
of these provinces, and if not do citizens living in these areas encounter hardships?
On Wednesday, April 9th, the Federal Government of Canada (Hon. Baird) stated that they would
ban the dumping of sewage into rivers and oceans, even sewage that has been partially treated.
As we know many of our villages like Dayspring, Lahave, and Riverport now dump raw sewage
into the river and our citizens will inevitably face increased taxes through Area Rates or sewage
fees because of the new federal rules. This is an example of why more than ever this Council
must go to a Global Rate for wastewater treatment or the MOL are going to have to get use to
the idea of using General Taxes to help fund Area Rates.
Our own Provincial Environment Minister the Hon. Mark Parent said Atlantic communities, many
of which don’t even have primary sewage treatment, lag behind the rest of the country, where
many communities are doing secondary treatment. Look at how many straight pipes don't allow
for any treatment right now. We have several Shore Drive style areas that the MOL are going to
have to address. There are also areas like Turner Heights in Lower Branch and areas off the Pine
Grove Road area where future requests may come for assistance to develop municipal
wastewater treatment facilities.
I have been saying for six years now that in developing any policy it is prudent to establish a
framework of principles or goals which will form the basis against which that policy is
implemented or applied. Some of those ideas I was able to get passed as you already know.
Fiscal responsibility, prudence, fairness and equality should be the cornerstones of this process
regardless of what community you reside in.
In considering a sanitary sewer policy, it should be noted that only a few areas of the
Municipality are served by central sewer systems but under new incoming Federal laws there may
be many more. While the majority of properties have private on-site sewage systems, Municipal
Councils have determined that the public interest would best be served by developing a public
sewer system in certain communities. The wastewater sanitary sewer policy should fairly address
capital and operating funding of these public systems and should not be sidetracked by the
reality that most property owners in the Municipality bear the cost of their individual private onsite
systems.
Fiscal responsibility and prudence, when sensibly applied, suggests that capital funding recovery
should be placed as fully as possible on those who directly benefit from connection to the
sanitary sewer system. However, the level of capital recovery should not be so high as to drive
existing property owners from their home or business or stifle any reasonable prospect for new
development or renewal within the sewer system catchment area.
The cornerstones of fairness and equality should recognize that while there is uniformity to the
sewer service provided, there are considerable variables in both the capital and operating costs
of each Municipal sewer system. It is further noted that the principle of universality forms the
foundation of many government policies. For example, postage for a letter is constant
irrespective whether the letter goes just a mile or across the country. So, should there be wide
variations between area rates levied for the various sewer systems in our Municipality? The lack
of size and scale in all our sewer systems has produced wide variations in costs to build and
operate each sewer system, but in actuality a common level of service is provided within all
serviced areas like New Germany, Conquerall Bank, Hebbville, or Cookville.
It should also be noted that the benefits of a central sewer system extend well beyond the
system's service or catchment area. For example, businesses in serviced areas benefit from their
connection to the sewer system, but their customer base is much larger. Is it a coincidence that
the overwhelming percentage of our retail and service businesses are connected to public sewer
systems. A prudent sewer policy may also be a factor in economic development like it was in
Osprey Village or exit 12 area. We as a Council know the importance of further development of
the serviced area at Osprey Village.
While the service level is consistent across the various sewer systems, the unit costs to build and
sustain each system varies widely due to an array of topographic factors, density of service
connections and the proportion of commercial to residential assessment within the service
catchment area. The Hebbville system, as an example, is doubly blessed by having a significant
revenue stream guaranteed by an agreement with the Bridgewater Public Service Commission
(which also paid a substantial portion of the last upgrade to the system when the water
treatment plant was built) and by the fact that the Hebbville system is only a flow-through
system with no treatment component. While it is true that an annual fee is paid to the Town of
Bridgewater, that cost is very favorable relative to the capital and operating costs that would be
incurred by property owners within this system area if this Municipality were required to operate
its own sewage treatment plant to service the Hebbville system.
The Municipality needs a sewer policy that requires as much of the cost as possible; both capital
and operating; to be levied on those properties connected, or capable of being connected, to a
public sewer system. Given the small scale of our systems, however, some capital costs may
have to be carried on the general tax rate at least until adequate reserve funding is put in place.
All properties within a public sewer catchment area should share a similar level of cost for this
same service level irrespective of which sewer service area they are within. We do this with
other services, like solid waste. In that case, the cost to collect and transport waste is higher
from more distant communities such as Lapland than from Oakhill, but the cost base for this
service is per stop, irrespective of the location of that stop. So someone who lives in Dublin Shore
or Baker Settlement pays the same General Rate even if it costs the MOL more to collect their
garbage than say Dayspring’s or Oakhill’s. A similar blended rate should apply to at least
operating cost recovery for all Municipal sewer systems.
Another example of fiscal responsibility, prudence, fairness and equality was a letter from our
very own Council to Mr. Lyle Goldberg, of the UNSM in March of this year. In that letter we
stated that the capping of assessment has had a positive impact on reducing the cost of services
from the Province to municipalities with high assessment growth, such as the MOL. The example
we used is if the CAP were to be eliminated, the MOL could lose over $600,000 to extra
education payments next year. The CAP prevents further shifts to the MOL in education and
other provincial service costs that are based on uniform assessment. With the CAP in place we
have a level of certainty for our property owners. We also understand there are residents that
have difficulty paying their tax bills due to rising assessments. If we added an Area Rate of
anywhere from 18 cents to one dollar and forty seven cents we would increase difficulty for these
same residences but yet are providing them all the same type of service. Let’s provide for that
same positive impact on reducing the cost of services when those services are the same and give
a level of certainty for our property owners.
Thank you for taking time to read my comments and I would be glad to provide additional
comparisons for your consideration.
Regards,
Councillor Martin E. Bell, PCP, EDM-Q, CMG
|
|
|
|