HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Alberta & British Columbia > Calgary > Calgary Issues, Business, Politics & the Economy


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #1  
Old Posted Nov 14, 2018, 11:42 PM
DizzyEdge's Avatar
DizzyEdge DizzyEdge is offline
My Spoon Is Too Big
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Calgary
Posts: 9,191
Calgary Budget 2019-2022

Mods, please delete the Calgary Budget 2018 thread

A few things from Scott Dippel with the CBC:

The City's new four year budget is out. The proposal is for a 3.45% property tax increase for 2019. It calls for a 3% increase in each of 2020, 2021 and 2022. #yyccc

The City admin plans to find $40 m in savings with the potential of an additional $60 m for a total of ... $100m. #yyccc

Money is not available for new light rail vehicles. So this means over the four yr life of the budget, four car LRT service will be reduced to three cars. #yyccc

And speaking of transit, adult fares on Calgary Transit are proposed to increase by 10 cents in 2019... 10 cents in 2020, 10 cents in 2021 and 15 cents in 2022. #yyccc

Heritage Park asked for $1m to help it with its financial troubles. One option for #yyccc is to give it an add'l $491,000 by 2022. But no sign it will get what it's looking for.









City manager Jeff Fielding says City management exempt staff will have their salaries frozen for another year. That saves 1 percentage point on tax bill he says. #yyccc

City is still in contract negotiations with 11 unions/work groups. City mgr won't reveal what assumptions on labour costs are built into this budget. Zero? Inflation? No one knows. #yyccc

Farkas says he'll signal in budget debate to rollback spending by 5%. He wants admin to start working on that plan now so it's ready for the budget debate. #yyccc
__________________
Concerned about protecting Calgary's built heritage?
www.CalgaryHeritage.org
News - Heritage Watch - Forums
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2  
Old Posted Nov 15, 2018, 12:25 AM
suburbia suburbia is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 6,271
Quote:
Originally Posted by DizzyEdge View Post
Farkas says he'll signal in budget debate to rollback spending by 5%. He wants admin to start working on that plan now so it's ready for the budget debate. #yyccc
Given Alberta's inflation numbers, the proposed increases are not bad, particularly when noting the cuts being made to get to those numbers. I agree that Heritage Park needs to take the lumps here. Mismanagement and exorbitant spending over the last decade has got them where they are. Plus, what's the worst that can happen - their buildings will look a year older?

Regarding Farkas' suggestion to rollback spending a full 5%, that seems a lot considering that this would be a total reduction of around 8% when counting inflation, and when noting that you can't "easily" reduce salaries even of exempt, and the union side will be locked in for increases I'm sure. Salaries make up a massive portion of budgets, meaning to achieve what he's talking about, it would be a huge axe to other things that would be material items. Did he at least suggest which limbs should be cut, or was this just a photo-op statement?

Certainly glad the Flames facility proposal did not gain any legs. Can you imagine what this would look like with a billion dollars on top of the current load (without any external funds coming in).
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3  
Old Posted Nov 16, 2018, 3:35 AM
milomilo milomilo is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Calgary
Posts: 10,499
It's going to be pretty sad if we have to go back to 3 car trains after increasing them. Means extending the platforms was a waste of money (for now), and they'd have been better off just scrapping the oldest U2s as soon as the new trains came in.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4  
Old Posted Nov 16, 2018, 4:12 AM
suburbia suburbia is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 6,271
Quote:
Originally Posted by milomilo View Post
It's going to be pretty sad if we have to go back to 3 car trains after increasing them. Means extending the platforms was a waste of money (for now), and they'd have been better off just scrapping the oldest U2s as soon as the new trains came in.
Things aren't final yet, but I lament with you on this one because with Farkas in there, there is no way they will not cut funding to transit. He's been aggressive anti-transit from day one. I'll bet he's looking for even more drastic cuts.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #5  
Old Posted Nov 16, 2018, 4:13 AM
milomilo milomilo is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Calgary
Posts: 10,499
Farkas is a muppet, no doubt. But he's only one vote.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6  
Old Posted Nov 16, 2018, 2:01 PM
suburbia suburbia is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 6,271
Quote:
Originally Posted by milomilo View Post
Farkas is a muppet, no doubt. But he's only one vote.
He's not one vote - he's a slate, including Chu, Mags, Gondek, etc. If you can, go back and find all of the city councilors that were backed by Jay Westman.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7  
Old Posted Nov 16, 2018, 4:00 PM
DizzyEdge's Avatar
DizzyEdge DizzyEdge is offline
My Spoon Is Too Big
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Calgary
Posts: 9,191
Quote:
Originally Posted by milomilo View Post
It's going to be pretty sad if we have to go back to 3 car trains after increasing them. Means extending the platforms was a waste of money (for now), and they'd have been better off just scrapping the oldest U2s as soon as the new trains came in.
It is, but with the downtown vacancies do we even need 4 car trains at the moment?
__________________
Concerned about protecting Calgary's built heritage?
www.CalgaryHeritage.org
News - Heritage Watch - Forums
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #8  
Old Posted Nov 16, 2018, 4:25 PM
milomilo milomilo is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Calgary
Posts: 10,499
'Need', probably not, but while I don't ride the train to work any more, the trains certainly look full at peak times.

Hopefully this is more of a kick in the ass to remind those in power that if new trains aren't bought, a very visible reduction in service will need to be made.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #9  
Old Posted Nov 16, 2018, 4:33 PM
suburbia suburbia is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 6,271
Quote:
Originally Posted by DizzyEdge View Post
It is, but with the downtown vacancies do we even need 4 car trains at the moment?
That's a good point that I hadn't considered. But I also know of situations where when people have lost their jobs, they've actually reverted to public transit whereas previously they used cars. Are there monthly ridership numbers available somewhere?

Of course, when you budget for purchasing major items like train cars, those are things that do not arrive for "years" so the fact there is commercial vacancy now may not be enough of a reason to defer purchasing train cars that would arrive years from now.

Last edited by suburbia; Nov 16, 2018 at 4:51 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #10  
Old Posted Nov 16, 2018, 6:41 PM
DoubleK DoubleK is offline
Near Generational
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Calgary
Posts: 1,447
This tax increase is after 3.8% in 2017, if I recall correctly.

Is this what YYCCC calls 'sustainable growth'???
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #11  
Old Posted Nov 16, 2018, 6:43 PM
milomilo milomilo is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Calgary
Posts: 10,499
AFAIK we have almost the lowest property taxes in the country. If raising them slightly helps balance the books, I don't think we have any case to complain.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #12  
Old Posted Nov 16, 2018, 6:50 PM
suburbia suburbia is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 6,271
Quote:
Originally Posted by milomilo View Post
AFAIK we have almost the lowest property taxes in the country. If raising them slightly helps balance the books, I don't think we have any case to complain.
Fully agree with milomilo here.

The framework of how municipal taxes are formulated also needs to be taken into account. While personal income tax generally goes up with inflation (because as a whole, all the salaries of the workers in the country go up) that is not the case for a city. In effect, a base level increase is required just to keep up. Freezing a rate municipally would in effect be decreasing the purchase power of the taxed amount substantially.

Further, if someone wants to reduce the increase, they should highlight where exactly. Farkas style drama queen moves of "lets cut 5%" without actually saying where are not helpful.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #13  
Old Posted Nov 16, 2018, 8:10 PM
jawagord's Avatar
jawagord jawagord is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Calgary
Posts: 1,703
Quote:
Originally Posted by suburbia View Post
Fully agree with milomilo here.

The framework of how municipal taxes are formulated also needs to be taken into account. While personal income tax generally goes up with inflation (because as a whole, all the salaries of the workers in the country go up) that is not the case for a city. In effect, a base level increase is required just to keep up. Freezing a rate municipally would in effect be decreasing the purchase power of the taxed amount substantially.
Do either of you pay City taxes? I know Calgary's taxes are lower than some of the smaller Alberta towns and cities BUT those places get more services for free whereas we are charged user fees and access fees. As far as large cities go we are not the lowest.

Between 2016 and 2017, for example, Calgary and Edmonton saw the biggest increases in property tax rates, as the municipalities tried to offset the impact of softer home prices, according to the 2017 Canadian Property Tax Rate Benchmark Report by AltusGroup, a real estate services provider.

Vancouver and Toronto, on the other hand, had experienced residential tax rate cuts for 14 and 9 consecutive years, respectively, as of 2017, according to the study.

Indeed, Vancouver has the lowest residential property tax rate among Canada’s largest cities, with the city charging just $2.55 for every $1,000 in assessed home value. Toronto comes in third from the bottom, with a rate of $6.62, only marginally higher than Calgary’s $6.50 for every $1,000 in value.

Winnipeg, Halifax and Ottawa, on the other hand, posted the highest rates, at $12.15, $11.98 and $10.68 for every $1,000, respectively.

https://globalnews.ca/news/4311558/p...cities-canada/

__________________
The human ability to innovate out of a jam is profound. That's why Darwin will always be right and Malthus will always be wrong - K.R.Sridhar

‘I believe in science’ is a statement generally made by people who don’t understand much about it. - Judith Curry, Professor Emeritus GIT
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #14  
Old Posted Nov 16, 2018, 8:17 PM
milomilo milomilo is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Calgary
Posts: 10,499
Come on, I'm confident you know the reason why Vancouver and Toronto have 'the lowest rates in the country'. You can't compare the mil rate, as it will make cities with high property values look better than cheaper markets.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #15  
Old Posted Nov 16, 2018, 8:49 PM
Corndogger Corndogger is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Calgary
Posts: 7,727
Quote:
Originally Posted by milomilo View Post
AFAIK we have almost the lowest property taxes in the country. If raising them slightly helps balance the books, I don't think we have any case to complain.
But when you include all of the mandatory fees, etc. our overall tax burden is nowhere near the lowest. Don't buy the propaganda Nenshi is trying to sell you, look at the facts.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #16  
Old Posted Nov 16, 2018, 9:00 PM
Corndogger Corndogger is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Calgary
Posts: 7,727
Quote:
Originally Posted by milomilo View Post
Come on, I'm confident you know the reason why Vancouver and Toronto have 'the lowest rates in the country'. You can't compare the mil rate, as it will make cities with high property values look better than cheaper markets.


Source: https://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2018/0...es_a_23496904/

If you include items that we have to pay for through mandatory fees that are "free" in other cities we move higher up on the list, i.e., we're even further from being the lowest.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #17  
Old Posted Nov 16, 2018, 9:58 PM
CrossedTheTracks CrossedTheTracks is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 354
Quote:
Originally Posted by Corndogger View Post
But when you include all of the mandatory fees, etc. our overall tax burden is nowhere near the lowest. Don't buy the propaganda Nenshi is trying to sell you, look at the facts.
Got any facts to share? Not saying you're wrong, I just want some numbers

Thanks for including a useful graph in your second post, as opposed to the pointless comparison of tax rates.
__________________
"Skyscraper, skyscraper, scrape me some sky..." - Dennis Lee
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #18  
Old Posted Nov 16, 2018, 10:00 PM
milomilo milomilo is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Calgary
Posts: 10,499
What I thought was an authoritative voice had backed up what I said, but it may not have been correct. I'd also be interested in some like for like comparisons.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #19  
Old Posted Nov 16, 2018, 10:13 PM
jawagord's Avatar
jawagord jawagord is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Calgary
Posts: 1,703
Quote:
Originally Posted by CrossedTheTracks View Post
Got any facts to share? Not saying you're wrong, I just want some numbers

Thanks for including a useful graph in your second post, as opposed to the pointless comparison of tax rates.
Are you incapable of doing your own research? If you don't think something posted is sufficient, look it up yourself. Stop asking to be spoon fed.

Again anyone who pays City property taxes and pays Enmax water and power and gas and garbage bills know what "extra" fees Calgarians pay and they are multitudinous.

There's a huge credibility gap here with people who call for tax increases when they don't pay the taxes.
__________________
The human ability to innovate out of a jam is profound. That's why Darwin will always be right and Malthus will always be wrong - K.R.Sridhar

‘I believe in science’ is a statement generally made by people who don’t understand much about it. - Judith Curry, Professor Emeritus GIT
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #20  
Old Posted Nov 16, 2018, 10:35 PM
Corndogger Corndogger is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Calgary
Posts: 7,727
Quote:
Originally Posted by CrossedTheTracks View Post
Got any facts to share? Not saying you're wrong, I just want some numbers

Thanks for including a useful graph in your second post, as opposed to the pointless comparison of tax rates.
It's hard to present a table of numbers as you need to do a number of different comparisons using data for the same year. Back in 2010 the City of Edmonton conducted such a study to get a more accurate picture of how they compared to other cities in the nation. Have a look at the criteria they used to get a good idea of why you can't just use property tax when doing these comparisons.

https://postmediacalgaryherald2.file...nal_report.pdf

There was another such study done about three years ago or so but I can't recall who did the research. That study claimed Calgary had the fourth highest costs for homeowners among large Canadian cities.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Alberta & British Columbia > Calgary > Calgary Issues, Business, Politics & the Economy
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 11:08 AM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.