General Updates and News

[OliverD]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

I'm not so sure that's totally true. Certainly when I was younger only the doctors, lawyers and people who worked in parts of the financial sector, or successful nouveau-riche entrepreneurs were able to afford high-end real estate in the south end. As their offspring grew up, the wealth was shared to allow them to live in the style to which they were accustomed when they in turn were married. Money breeds money very often, nothing new about that.

But we now have many more nouveau-riche people buying expensive property - young software bros, crypto winners, online entrepeneurs, you name it, along with come-from-aways who arrive here. I will not soon forget the convoy of supercars I saw pulled into a parking lot a year or two ago with nobody driving them appearing to be more than 30. Some were clearly from elsewhere judging by the voices I head talking to each other. The people who maintain and sell them those supercars clearly do very well. A million-dollar Ferrari or Lambo must come with a pretty good sales commission. Even if the money comes from China or wherever, that part pumps up the local economy and lets those locals build an affluent lifestyle for as long as it lasts.

Most of those cars are bought in Quebec or Ontario though, and often go back there for servicing as well.

[Jonovision]

An update on the Mumford Terminal Redevelopment has been posted by HRM.
It will now have 4 towers up to 42 stories in height, a good amount of townhouses and a semi enclosed transit terminal.

https://engagehalifax.ca/west-end-mall

https://hdp-ca-prod-app-hfx-engage-files...Annex_Masterplan_-_Conceptual_Design.pdf

[eastcoastal]

Originally Posted by Jonovision

An update on the Mumford Terminal Redevelopment has been posted by HRM.
It will now have 4 towers up to 42 stories in height, a good amount of townhouses and a semi enclosed transit terminal.

https://engagehalifax.ca/west-end-mall

https://hdp-ca-prod-app-hfx-engage-files...Annex_Masterplan_-_Conceptual_Design.pdf

Thanks for sharing - I enjoyed looking through those concept drawings. Interesting that they're going to try and make a normal/nice streetscape amidst what's otherwise a sea of asphalt. I feel like without connecting to other nice streetscapes/public realm, it may be challenging to populate with people as shown in some of the images... but probably better than the current experience no matter the level of success.

[terrynorthend]

Looks good! I'm glad they ditched the underground bus terminal which seemed like a pipedream.

Any word on timelines for the phases?

Originally Posted by Jonovision

An update on the Mumford Terminal Redevelopment has been posted by HRM.
It will now have 4 towers up to 42 stories in height, a good amount of townhouses and a semi enclosed transit terminal.

https://engagehalifax.ca/west-end-mall

https://hdp-ca-prod-app-hfx-engage-files...Annex_Masterplan_-_Conceptual_Design.pdf

[someone123]

Originally Posted by terrynorthend

Looks good! I'm glad they ditched the underground bus terminal which seemed like a pipedream.

This style of bus station can work pretty nicely as it doesn't use up as much development space but the waiting areas can be covered and sheltered from wind. I'd guess it's also going to be nicer in the future with more electric buses and less diesel.

Seems like a big win-win if it can be built. Nicer transit space, more housing, limited disruption to neighbourhoods.

[JET]

Scaffolding on the front of the Royal Bank building on Portland st Dartmouth. Thank goodness it is such a butt ugly building.

[kzt79]

https://www.saltwire.com/nova-scotia/hal...n-new-builds-will-be-passed-to-taxpayers

Ben Young discusses how development fees drive housing costs higher, and of course are borne by owners/renters. This seems obvious to me, but apparently some struggle with this concept.

[Keith P.]

Originally Posted by kzt79

https://www.saltwire.com/nova-scotia/hal...n-new-builds-will-be-passed-to-taxpayers

Ben Young discusses how development fees drive housing costs higher, and of course are borne by owners/renters. This seems obvious to me, but apparently some struggle with this concept.

The charge is apparently being led by Kathryn Morse, who, being an ardent NDPer, only sees an opportunity to rake in more tax money (govt fees are a tax in a different suit) to be spent wastefully by HRM, not the impact those costs have on citizens.

[Drybrain]

I'm not in favour of new development fees, but something has to be done to juice municipal revenue. Property taxes here are on the low side, whatever people believe, as are many user fees. On a per-capita basis, HRM's spending is also on the low side, despite the "spending like drunken sailors" commentary 'round these parts, and now council is being asked to cut more spending.

[someone123]

Many other Canadian municipalities are addicted to development fees and charge way too much, to the point where it undermines affordability.

It is okay if the fees go toward capital improvements serving the new areas but it's an unsustainable mismatch if fees on new construction are used to pay operating costs in older areas (which is how it tends to go since the voters in those areas have so much more weight).

Development fees aside the new development brings in new property tax and should be more efficient service cost wise than the average property in HRM. Little Brooklyn will likely hugely overpay relative to the average large Hammonds Plains house (with 50 m+ of driveway and road frontage) for example.

[Keith P.]

But HRM does indeed spend like drunken sailors. With all the growth in the tax base the last few years, there can be no other explanation for them proposing a tax increase of over 10%.

[Dartguard]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

But HRM does indeed spend like drunken sailors. With all the growth in the tax base the last few years, there can be no other explanation for them proposing a tax increase of over 10%.

I have heard that HRM pensioners have a very nice deal in that there is no clawback when said pensioners apply for CPP. Provincial pensioners and Feds get the dollars clawed back. Depending on years served and post retirement life span these HRM folks are in a very sweet spot. HRM is apparently one of the few Taxpayer funded entities that allows this.

[Keith P.]

Originally Posted by Dartguard

I have heard that HRM pensioners have a very nice deal in that there is no clawback when said pensioners apply for CPP. Provincial pensioners and Feds get the dollars clawed back. Depending on years served and post retirement life span these HRM folks are in a very sweet spot. HRM is apparently one of the few Taxpayer funded entities that allows this.

Yes, that is very true, although it is seldom a topic of discussion. As you note, most pensions, either public-sector or private, are "harmonized", so that when the recipient turns 65, the pension fund payment is reduced by the amount the individual will now receive from CPP. That is not the case with the HRM pension plan.

The result is that many pensioners receive more in retirement than they did while employed with HRM, a remarkable situation that, as you note, is almost never found anywhere else.

For public sector employees, there is a distinct hierarchy of places one would want to work:

HRM: full annual indexing, no CPP clawback: $$$
Govt of Canada: full annual indexing, CPP clawback at 65: $
Province of NS: partial or no indexing every 5 years, CPP clawback at 65: -$


If you intend to spend a career in the public sector, HRM is the choice for the long-term.

That would also be why, when HRM hires senior people like police chiefs from other govt jurisdictions, those individuals would be eager to transfer their existing pension plan contributions from their previous plan into that of HRM to enjoy the full benefits of that gravy train despite only working here for a short time.

[Drybrain]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

But HRM does indeed spend like drunken sailors. With all the growth in the tax base the last few years, there can be no other explanation for them proposing a tax increase of over 10%.

Unfortunately, the cost of providing the same level of services to those new residents is below the level of revenue they bring in. Plus there has been a period of significant inflation which we're only now coming down from.

[kzt79]

Originally Posted by Drybrain

Unfortunately, the cost of providing the same level of services to those new residents is below the level of revenue they bring in. Plus there has been a period of significant inflation which we're only now coming down from.

Then it's time to cut some of those "services". For example the endless, useless consulting where they pay hundreds of thousands for a powerpoint regurgitating exactly what they want to hear - which an undegrad could make in half an hour with chatGPT. The provincial government is guilty of similar waste.

There is room to reduce and rationalize government spending at all levels, while maintaining and even improving legitimate public service. Unfortunately this would be anathema to most Nova Scotians.

[Drybrain]

Originally Posted by kzt79

Then it's time to cut some of those "services". For example the endless, useless consulting where they pay hundreds of thousands for a powerpoint regurgitating exactly what they want to hear - which an undegrad could make in half an hour with chatGPT. The provincial government is guilty of similar waste.

There is room to reduce and rationalize government spending at all levels, while maintaining and even improving legitimate public service. Unfortunately this would be anathema to most Nova Scotians.

Cutting consultants is constantly brought up, because it's something that's visible to people and appears wasteful. And, actually, I do think HRM probably spends too much on these kinds of things. But it's not a very significant line item in the budget. I woud love to hear a list of actual services, which have a material impact on the budget, that you think could actually be easily cut.

[kzt79]

Originally Posted by Dartguard

I have heard that HRM pensioners have a very nice deal in that there is no clawback when said pensioners apply for CPP. Provincial pensioners and Feds get the dollars clawed back. Depending on years served and post retirement life span these HRM folks are in a very sweet spot. HRM is apparently one of the few Taxpayer funded entities that allows this.

No question the HRM pension is one of the most generous around. To be fair, I understand the contributions are relatively high and it is not indexed (or at least not fully). But yes, unusually generous.

[Keith P.]

Originally Posted by kzt79

No question the HRM pension is one of the most generous around. To be fair, I understand the contributions are relatively high and it is not indexed (or at least not fully). But yes, unusually generous.

They keep the indexing top secret, but my understanding is that they have indeed indexed benefits for the last several years.

[Keith P.]

Originally Posted by kzt79

Then it's time to cut some of those "services". For example the endless, useless consulting where they pay hundreds of thousands for a powerpoint regurgitating exactly what they want to hear - which an undegrad could make in half an hour with chatGPT. The provincial government is guilty of similar waste.

There is room to reduce and rationalize government spending at all levels, while maintaining and even improving legitimate public service. Unfortunately this would be anathema to most Nova Scotians.

I’m fairly sure you could cut HRM spending by a significant percentage and citizens would notice little difference.

[Arrdeeharharharbour]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

They keep the indexing top secret, but my understanding is that they have indeed indexed benefits for the last several years.

LMAO! So sinister! God forbid they get a return on what they paid for. Let's just thank god that they no longer get to spin the birthday wheel. Remember that silly news story?