We are going to the polls Feb. 26 to vote to either increase our municipal taxes to build some more amenities or to tell council we're not prepared to pay more no matter how council intends to improve the community.
The decision is a difficult one in light of the fact there isn't much information to work from. Coun. Dave Fenn encouraged his council colleagues to offer some nearly unrelated yet relevant information this week to help in the decision making process.
At the end of the regular meeting on Tuesday (Feb. 1) Fenn proposed our local lawmakers set a maximum increase for Squamish's municipal taxes.
"It is important that it is out there in the public and open for debate," Fenn said. "We have to give some indication of where we are heading."
They all quickly agreed it would be nice to match last year's zero per cent increase for the mythical average valued home.
Council endorsed Fenn's suggestion of a 2.5 per cent for a maximum increase.
Through the discussion we learned some encouraging information. New construction is going to bring in approximately $600,000 in new taxation. The sale of B.C. Rail to CN also created new revenue - the rail lands around the community will be taxed to the tune of $500,000, much of which is new-found money because BC Rail, as a Crown corporation, paid a reduced grant in lieu of property taxes.
Out of the gate in this budget process, the community is enjoying more than $1 million of income we didn't have in 2004.
Municipal Hall is telling us that "average home" faces a tax increase of about $160 a year if the referendum result is positive. If council achieves another zero budget increase, those whose homes didn't increase in value beyond the municipal average will only face the extra $160. On the other hand, people with significant increases in assessed value again this year will face the amenities increase plus an increase through the annual municipal budget.
And, looking ahead to 2006 if we have a bunch of new buildings to operate, council might find it very difficult to keep the municipal spending close to what was spent in 2005.
Council has done us a real service by setting the 2.5 per cent ceiling because it at least shows a desire to prevent big tax jumps for homeowners.
The bigger taxation issue is one to consider carefully heading into the referendum. This is especially true for those with expensive homes and a big jump in assessed value. These residents could face tax increases of several hundred dollars if the referendum is positive and council settles on the maximum budget increase of 2.5 per cent.
