Prior to council’s vote on the 2016 operating budget, administration revised its request, reducing the proposed tax increase by one percentage point.
The updated request, presented to council by the municipality’s director of finance Dec. 15, is for a 4.55 per cent tax increase, down from the proposed 5.56 per cent increase presented to council in November.
“After deliberations [following] council and public budget meetings, administration believes council made some valid points and we have put together another option for council to consider,” said Natasha Malenchak.
To create the decrease, which equates to about $78,000, administration proposed that the municipality defer the purchase of a new municipal mini van ($35,000) and the creation of an accounts payable position for the operations department ($33,346 from taxes and $18,197 from utilities).
It also removed a $10,000 line item from the culture and recreation department budget, which was accidentally duplicated from the operations department budget.
Following extensive discussion, council approved the new budget on an interim basis, opting to wait for the 2015 year-end numbers to arrive—likely in early February—before it makes a final decision.
Council’s unanimous decision—with Couns. Vonna Arsenault and Gilbert Wall absent—was made on the condition that in the new year there will be further discussion on administration’s proposal to create three new positions—two in the operations department and one for protective services—as well as further discussion about some of administration’s proposed capital expenses.
In previous discussions, council raised numerous concerns about the necessity of an accounts payable position for the operations department. Currently, the department shares a payables clerk with the finance department, which results in the operations department’s managers doing a significant amount of the work, according to Bruce Thompson, director of operations.
During the Dec. 15 meeting, Thompson said, rather than hiring a full-time clerk this year, he will defer that request and bring in a part-time casual employee to work one day a week. He said at the end of the year he will reassess and determine whether that was sufficient to get the job done.
As well as reducing the tax increase, by deferring the creation of the accounts payable position, there is also a small reduction in the sewer utility rate—because the position was jointly funded. The reduction equates to about a 40-cent decrease in bi-monthly utility bills for the community’s average residential user and a $40 decrease for the average commercial user.
There are three main requests that account for the 4.55 per cent municipal tax increase.
At the top of the list is the cost of repairing and maintaining the municipality’s culture and recreation facilities, including the activity centre, arena and swimming pool. To keep up with its aging infrastructure, culture and recreation is asking for an increase of $169,928—or 2.5 per cent of the 2016 tax increase.
The second big ticket item is the operation and maintenance of the new library and cultural centre, which is expected to open sometime in the new year. Although there isn’t a concrete opening date for the building, administration is requesting $131,918 in anticipation of the centre’s imminent completion—that equates to 1.93 per cent of the tax increase.
The remaining requests are for fleet replacement, equipment and building maintenance, as well as a few other small departmental requests.
With a 4.55 per cent tax increase, properties assessed at $750,000 will see an annual tax increase of $95.48, compared to $117.52 when the increase was 5.56 per cent. That’s a reduction of $22.04 a year.
For commercial properties assessed at $1 million, there is a reduction of $149.34, meaning annual tax bills, with a 4.55 per cent increase, will see a total requisition of $14,870.15.
During the Dec. 15 meeting, council made it clear that it’s not yet content with the budget and still has hopes to find further reductions when the year-end numbers arrive.
By waiting for the actuals from 2015, council will have a better understanding of the overall budget—where administration budgeted too much or too little—presumably allowing for a more accurate budget for 2016.
That could mean a decrease or an increase to the proposed budget, as those actuals could illuminate instances of either over budgeting or under budgeting.
By passing an interim budget in the meantime, council allows administration to continue business as usual until the final bills arrive for 2015.
Nicole Veerman
[email protected]
