Winnipeg City Transit/Rapid Transit

[bomberjet]

Property lines are available here. Select kmz file type and you can down load the property lines for each area to view in Google Earth. It becomes clear who owns what.

The City owns the blank right of way through Darveau and Whittier park. Its when crossing Archibald they don't have land. Then they pick up again with City owned land in Tyne Tees area. It can be done but the City I find is not innovative or is afraid of the cost.

http://mli2.gov.mb.ca/cadastral/inde..._imap_kmz.html

[buzzg]

Originally Posted by Riverman

It's not weakness or fear, it's right of way. The railways have the right to run through the city to support their operations and the city has no say in the matter.

This has been pointed out several times before and it will not change. Why don't you get it?

Well that's actually not quite accurate. Should the city decide they want the land, the city can pay half the cost of relocation, the feds will cover the other half, and the railways have no choice but to move.

[Luisito]

^^^^Lots of room for an LRT.

[bomberjet]

For me the BRT should be separated like to southwest route to move people fast.

The City can still put median bus lanes down Provencher to improve service, that would be great too. Those should be done anyways as local improvements, not an RT network that relies on it as it's too disconnected to downtown. Relying Provencher Bridge to move buses fast or efficiently is not a good plan.

[buzzg]

^Agree with the BRT part, but I think Provencher would be served just as well by putting priority signals/cue jumps at every street, and adding bike lanes. Add more trees to boulevard and turn the median into a sort of linear park – aim for a Broadway-like feel.

[bomberjet]

Ya exactly. They could even just make a diamond lane down the curb if they wanted to. Or make a single median lane that switches direction at rush. I don't know, there's many options.

[Winnipegger]

Originally Posted by windypeg

Huh? Winnipeg has the highest property tax rates in the country. Tax revenue is still low because our property values are low. So Winnipeggers may be lower property tax bills than those elsewhere, but relative to their property wealth they pay among the highest rates. So yes, money is the reason we don't have more shiny things. But not because Winnipeggers are just too cheap to pay more. They're already paying the highest rates around. They can't help it much if their house is only worth 1/3 what the same house would cost in Toronto.

Winnipeg absolutely has some of the lowest municipal property taxes in the country. The claim that we have the highest municipal property tax in the country is 100% false. The only major cities with lower municipal property tax when compared to Winnipeg are Halifax and Regina. Take a look at page 6 in this annual report done by the City of Calgary for proof of that: http://www.calgary.ca/cfod/finance/D...urvey-2017.pdf

If you're going to make the argument that we lack municipal funds to do anything because of low property values, then you better make that case about every city in this country aside from Toronto and Vancouver, because it's only those two cities that have significantly higher property values, and it's only been a recent phenomenon in the last decade or so, well after those cities began planning for significant game-changing infrastructure projects like light rail and subways.

I'm not going to argue that Winnipeggers aren't highly taxed on the whole when we take in to consideration not just municipal taxes, but also high education taxes (which go to the Province) and relatively high Provincial income and sales tax. But high taxes at the Provincial level has crowded out the city's ability to raise taxes at the property level because people already feel tapped out, which means that we lack the funds to do the projects many on this forum want. My point is that these projects, such as LRT or more expansive BRT, are not being held back because "politicians lack foresight or will" - it doesn't take a genius to suggest expensive LRT, freeways, or subways will solve a lot of our transportation issues - but rather we are held back by our inability to fund substantial projects and it's only going to get worse. The root cause of our lack of funds are property tax freezes (and even reductions) in the late 1990's and early 2000's, which has resulted in a severe infrastructure deficit across the entire city.

[Riverman]

Originally Posted by buzzg

Well that's actually not quite accurate. Should the city decide they want the land, the city can pay half the cost of relocation, the feds will cover the other half, and the railways have no choice but to move.

I want to hear all about this magical pile of money.

[bomberjet]

Unfortunately the city doesn't have a magical pile of money for the normal stuff. never mind billions to move the railways. I don't see anything major happening on that front for many decades.

[headhorse]

^ CPR should pay for it. they have been given free land to build their rail line and have received upwards of $11 billion in public funds since 1916. they can pay for it themselves. apparently there was even a study that showed it made economical sense to move... they're just waiting for some public dollars to do it.

[Andy6]

Originally Posted by Winnipegger

Winnipeg absolutely has some of the lowest municipal property taxes in the country. The claim that we have the highest municipal property tax in the country is 100% false. The only major cities with lower municipal property tax when compared to Winnipeg are Halifax and Regina. Take a look at page 6 in this annual report done by the City of Calgary for proof of that: http://www.calgary.ca/cfod/finance/D...urvey-2017.pdf

If you're going to make the argument that we lack municipal funds to do anything because of low property values, then you better make that case about every city in this country aside from Toronto and Vancouver, because it's only those two cities that have significantly higher property values, and it's only been a recent phenomenon in the last decade or so, well after those cities began planning for significant game-changing infrastructure projects like light rail and subways.

I'm not going to argue that Winnipeggers aren't highly taxed on the whole when we take in to consideration not just municipal taxes, but also high education taxes (which go to the Province) and relatively high Provincial income and sales tax. But high taxes at the Provincial level has crowded out the city's ability to raise taxes at the property level because people already feel tapped out, which means that we lack the funds to do the projects many on this forum want. My point is that these projects, such as LRT or more expansive BRT, are not being held back because "politicians lack foresight or will" - it doesn't take a genius to suggest expensive LRT, freeways, or subways will solve a lot of our transportation issues - but rather we are held back by our inability to fund substantial projects and it's only going to get worse. The root cause of our lack of funds are property tax freezes (and even reductions) in the late 1990's and early 2000's, which has resulted in a severe infrastructure deficit across the entire city.

Winnipeg has always had low property values, not just in the last decade. You can’t raise property taxes much because incomes are too low. In an old city with decaying infrastructure, what money there is has to go mainly toward non-glamorous projects like sewer renewals and back lane reconstructions. Also, people are quite used to the idea of leaving Winnipeg, so raising taxes will chase the most productive people out of the jurisdiction.

[rrskylar]

Originally Posted by Andy6

Winnipeg has always had low property values, not just in the last decade. You can’t raise property taxes much because incomes are too low. In an old city with decaying infrastructure, what money there is has to go mainly toward non-glamorous projects like sewer renewals and back lane reconstructions. Also, people are quite used to the idea of leaving Winnipeg, so raising taxes will chase the most productive people out of the jurisdiction.

Bolded, already has big time, in my group of friends I'm about the last guy left living in Winnipeg itself. Drove through St. Clements last week and couldn't believe the amount of new home construction everywhere....Bowmans tax on new construction is driving people to build elsewhere as most developers said it would!

[rrskylar]

Originally Posted by Winnipegger

Winnipeg absolutely has some of the lowest municipal property taxes in the country. The claim that we have the highest municipal property tax in the country is 100% false. The only major cities with lower municipal property tax when compared to Winnipeg are Halifax and Regina. Take a look at page 6 in this annual report done by the City of Calgary for proof of that: http://www.calgary.ca/cfod/finance/D...urvey-2017.pdf

If you're going to make the argument that we lack municipal funds to do anything because of low property values, then you better make that case about every city in this country aside from Toronto and Vancouver, because it's only those two cities that have significantly higher property values, and it's only been a recent phenomenon in the last decade or so, well after those cities began planning for significant game-changing infrastructure projects like light rail and subways.

I'm not going to argue that Winnipeggers aren't highly taxed on the whole when we take in to consideration not just municipal taxes, but also high education taxes (which go to the Province) and relatively high Provincial income and sales tax. But high taxes at the Provincial level has crowded out the city's ability to raise taxes at the property level because people already feel tapped out, which means that we lack the funds to do the projects many on this forum want. My point is that these projects, such as LRT or more expansive BRT, are not being held back because "politicians lack foresight or will" - it doesn't take a genius to suggest expensive LRT, freeways, or subways will solve a lot of our transportation issues - but rather we are held back by our inability to fund substantial projects and it's only going to get worse. The root cause of our lack of funds are property tax freezes (and even reductions) in the late 1990's and early 2000's, which has resulted in a severe infrastructure deficit across the entire city.

The root cause is a spending problem and how the money is spent, increasing WPS and WFPS budgets to almost double in a decade was a recipe for disaster. Easy to advocate for an increase in taxes which our politicians have no problem doing and avoiding the heavy lifting of cutting waste and finding ways to save!

[optimusREIM]

Originally Posted by esquire

^ There is tons that can be done to improve transit without needing to involve the railways. Maybe at some point they will pull out of the city, but who knows, that could be 100, 200 years off. I certainly wouldn't make any short term plans that involve railway relocation.

FWIW I'm of the view that for better or for worse, we have BRT and we might as well make the best of it. That means ensuring the network has plans and funding for consistent growth, and for making the experience as good as possible. Right now it's a long way from that, with inconsistent, inconvenient service, the crap peggo fare payment system, the annoyance of not having fare paid zones to speed up boarding, the gaps in the BRT network (no plans to complete the segment from River Ave to Graham Ave), etc.

There is a hell of a lot that can be done to elevate the BRT experience. We've barely scratched the surface.

That I can agree with. Fare zones would really polish the feel of the system nicely, as would some sort of central hub station. I still think all bus routes need to be reworked so we dont have random point to point bullshit and crazy redundancy. I'd rather see I high capacity high frequency service on certain routes than 6 routes following what is essentially the same path. Small local collectors, higher frequency main lines. It's so much better for getting around and more efficient too. Imagine being able to rely on the buses to get you places.

Not only that but I bet that centralizing the bus network would have a similar effect on properties near busy bus corridors as would other big TOD. Hell it may even cause people to develop something useful.

[windypeg]

Originally Posted by Winnipegger

Winnipeg absolutely has some of the lowest municipal property taxes in the country. The claim that we have the highest municipal property tax in the country is 100% false. The only major cities with lower municipal property tax when compared to Winnipeg are Halifax and Regina. Take a look at page 6 in this annual report done by the City of Calgary for proof of that: http://www.calgary.ca/cfod/finance/D...urvey-2017.pdf

If you're going to make the argument that we lack municipal funds to do anything because of low property values, then you better make that case about every city in this country aside from Toronto and Vancouver, because it's only those two cities that have significantly higher property values, and it's only been a recent phenomenon in the last decade or so, well after those cities began planning for significant game-changing infrastructure projects like light rail and subways.

I'm not going to argue that Winnipeggers aren't highly taxed on the whole when we take in to consideration not just municipal taxes, but also high education taxes (which go to the Province) and relatively high Provincial income and sales tax. But high taxes at the Provincial level has crowded out the city's ability to raise taxes at the property level because people already feel tapped out, which means that we lack the funds to do the projects many on this forum want. My point is that these projects, such as LRT or more expansive BRT, are not being held back because "politicians lack foresight or will" - it doesn't take a genius to suggest expensive LRT, freeways, or subways will solve a lot of our transportation issues - but rather we are held back by our inability to fund substantial projects and it's only going to get worse. The root cause of our lack of funds are property tax freezes (and even reductions) in the late 1990's and early 2000's, which has resulted in a severe infrastructure deficit across the entire city.

I guess you didn't read my post, or have a little bit of trouble with math. Those numbers from the Calgary study are all showing the total taxes paid, not the tax rate. Property tax rates in Winnipeg are 50% higher than the Canadian average - see below.

A rate is a portion of the base amount. A high tax rate might not mean a large tax bill, if the base amount is low. If I make $30k a year and pay 50% income tax, I pay $15k in tax. If you make $100k and pay 25% income tax, you pay $25k in tax. So even though I'm taxed at a much higher rate, I end up paying less in total than you, because I have less to begin with. This is easy math.

Winnipeggers pay among the highest property tax rates in the country. Their total tax bills are still relatively low because the average property value is lower than all other major cities, not just TO and Van. Homeowners in other cities pay lower rates on much higher base amounts, so they end up with higher bills, but they also have more wealth built up in their homes. Their tax bill relative to their assets is much smaller than ours.

https://www.altusgroup.com/wp-conten...ark-Report.pdf
https://www.zoocasa.com/blog/how-pro...a-infographic/

[Winnipegger]

Originally Posted by windypeg

I guess you didn't read my post, or have a little bit of trouble with math. Those numbers from the Calgary study are all showing the total taxes paid, not the tax rate. Property tax rates in Winnipeg are 50% higher than the Canadian average.

A rate is a portion of the base amount. A high tax rate might not mean a large tax bill, if the base amount is low. If I make $30k a year and pay 50% income tax, I pay $15k in tax. If you make $100k and pay 25% income tax, you pay $25k in tax. So even though I'm taxed at a much higher rate, I end up paying less in total than you, because I have less to begin with. This is easy math.

Winnipeggers pay among the highest property tax rates in the country. Their total tax bills are still relatively low because the average property value is lower than all other major cities, not just TO and Van. Homeowners in other cities pay lower rates on much higher base amounts, so they end up with higher bills, but they also have more wealth built up in their homes. Their tax bill relative to their assets is much smaller than ours.


https://www.altusgroup.com/wp-conten...ark-Report.pdf
https://www.zoocasa.com/blog/how-pro...a-infographic/

These sources are factually wrong because the people making these graphs are morons and don't take the time to familiarize themselves with each individual city's tax model. Winnipeg's municipal tax model is not the same as every other city's, so when you compare them, you wind up with incorrect values.

The biggest thing that your two sources don't take in to account is the fact that in Winnipeg, you only pay tax on 45% of the assessed value of your home, unlike other jurisdictions. So if your home is assessed at $300,000, you only pay tax on 135,000 of it. This rule is set by our Provincial Government. The fact is that your two sources/graphs do not take this in to account.

So on your first graph, it says that Winnipeg has the highest tax rate (i.e. Mill rate) on $1,000 of assessed property, at $12.15 per $1,000 of assessment. Yes, this is true and in fact in 2018, it's slightly higher at $12.99 per $1,000 of assessment. But again, the key issue here is that our mill rates are artificially inflated because the mill rate only applies to 45% of your assessed value. So sure, our mill rate is the highest, but it's applied to less than half the properties value. If you adjust our mill rate to be the same as other cities in the graph (i.e. take 45% of the mill rate), our mill rate is $5.85 per $1,000 of assessed value, which is second lowest, with only Vancouver being lower.

On your second graph, the math is completely wrong. There's nothing hidden or transparent about our tax applies to property owners. You take the assessed value of a home, multiply it by 0.45, then multiple it by the mill rate divided by 1,000. It's all on the city's website. So by the city's formula, the municipal tax rate on a home assessed at $1million is: 1,000,000*.45*(12.987/1000) = $5,845, which is less than half the $12,487 displayed on those graphs.

As you can see, the media (and many people) don't understand how the system of taxation varies by city, so numbers are mis-represented and it builds incorrect assumptions across Canada. Many people, including yourself, believe that municipal taxes in Winnipeg are the highest in Canada, and rightfully so based on what you've seen in the media. But what the media reports is factually incorrect, but no one takes the time or effort to try to correct them, and even if they did, the media has no incentive to correct their erroneous analysis. The end result is that people believe something that's not true and attempts to show them the truth are disregarded.

[borkborkbork]

"wow, it's amazing that everyone who lives in hamilton hasn't fled to toronto for the cheaper taxes!" /s

obviously % rates alone and average $ totals alone don't tell the whole story.

[cheswick]

Originally Posted by Winnipegger

These sources are factually wrong because the people making these graphs are morons and don't take the time to familiarize themselves with each individual city's tax model. Winnipeg's municipal tax model is not the same as every other city's, so when you compare them, you wind up with incorrect values.

The biggest thing that your two sources don't take in to account is the fact that in Winnipeg, you only pay tax on 45% of the assessed value of your home, unlike other jurisdictions. So if your home is assessed at $300,000, you only pay tax on 135,000 of it. This rule is set by our Provincial Government. The fact is that your two sources/graphs do not take this in to account.

So on your first graph, it says that Winnipeg has the highest tax rate (i.e. Mill rate) on $1,000 of assessed property, at $12.15 per $1,000 of assessment. Yes, this is true and in fact in 2018, it's slightly higher at $12.99 per $1,000 of assessment. But again, the key issue here is that our mill rates are artificially inflated because the mill rate only applies to 45% of your assessed value. So sure, our mill rate is the highest, but it's applied to less than half the properties value. If you adjust our mill rate to be the same as other cities in the graph (i.e. take 45% of the mill rate), our mill rate is $5.85 per $1,000 of assessed value, which is second lowest, with only Vancouver being lower.

On your second graph, the math is completely wrong. There's nothing hidden or transparent about our tax applies to property owners. You take the assessed value of a home, multiply it by 0.45, then multiple it by the mill rate divided by 1,000. It's all on the city's website. So by the city's formula, the municipal tax rate on a home assessed at $1million is: 1,000,000*.45*(12.987/1000) = $5,845, which is less than half the $12,487 displayed on those graphs.

As you can see, the media (and many people) don't understand how the system of taxation varies by city, so numbers are mis-represented and it builds incorrect assumptions across Canada. Many people, including yourself, believe that municipal taxes in Winnipeg are the highest in Canada, and rightfully so based on what you've seen in the media. But what the media reports is factually incorrect, but no one takes the time or effort to try to correct them, and even if they did, the media has no incentive to correct their erroneous analysis. The end result is that people believe something that's not true and attempts to show them the truth are disregarded.

Actually the mill rate for 2017 was 13.063, so your explanation of their incorrect calculation is in fact incorrect. As is your explanation for the second graph. The second graph CORRECTLY calculated taxes owed, including school taxes for the Winnipeg school division.

[1ajs]

city cant use taxs for sewer and water repairs of any sort. as waterworks has to pay for its self.

i knoew as ive been fallowing a bullying situation of the pub up in lynn lake

[Winnipegger]

Originally Posted by cheswick

Actually the mill rate for 2017 was 13.063, so your explanation of their incorrect calculation is in fact incorrect. As is your explanation for the second graph. The second graph CORRECTLY calculated taxes owed, including school taxes for the Winnipeg school division.

You are correct in that the mill rate for 2017 was 13.063, but I was using the 2018 mill rate of 12.987. Regardless, a 0.076 difference in the mill rate is not going to result in a substantially different calculation. I can re-run through the scenario in my previous post with the slight change, but I'm sure your capable of doing the simple mathematical exercise yourself.

As for including school division taxes, then sure, the chart then becomes accurate for Winnipeg. But it then makes Winnipeg look disproportionately taxed because not all city's levy education taxes from properties. So in cities that have a different tax structure where education tax is not charged on the home owners property tax bill, it makes it appear as though those cities are significantly cheaper to live in. The truth is that the education system is funded out of provincial money one way or another, so those people end up paying regardless, just perhaps not on their property tax bill.

On this particular subject though, we are talking about revenues the municipality receives. So when doing this, we need to compare apples to apples, which means looking strictly at municipal taxes, excluding education or whatever other levies are applied that don't go to a municipality. To do this, the Calgary Property Tax survey does the best job, not some garbage from media outlets who can barely do math correctly, let alone understand each major city's unique property tax structure.