The Official Saint John, NB Project Thread

[MountPleasant]

[/QUOTE

Saint john actually boast a comparatively low debt servicing costs as well. The real issue is the amount of tax dollars from industry that are drained from the property tax for industry in the City that is funnelled to other parts of the province meanwhile the City supports the infrastructure used by that industry from residential tax dollars. No other city in NB has this issue to this extent. Being industrial helps the province but hurts the City.[/QUOTE]

Couldn't have said it better myself. something has to be done. it has been this way for far too long. SJ needs to see more of the revenue it generates.

[Whaler]

I can tell you also that all the LSD's in the province cost 90 million.
That means the citys and towns pay for the 90 million dollar shortfall of the LSD's.
Let's fix that too!!

[JHikka]

Originally Posted by Whaler

I can tell you also that all the LSD's in the province cost 90 million.
That means the citys and towns pay for the 90 million dollar shortfall of the LSD's.
Let's fix that too!!

This would be a discussion better suited to the rural thread. I posted a few interesting stats on the rural v. urban situation in NB in the NB Stats Thread a week or two ago.

But, just because they cost $90M doesn't mean there's automatically a shortfall of $90M, unless you're implying they cost higher and don't bring in similar revenue.

As a comparison, the base tax rate in an LSD is something like 0.435, whereas Saint John is 1.785 and Moncton 1.633.

The Provincial PC Party had campaigned on restructuring the municipal system in NB in 2010. Although they haven't done enough to my liking they have altered some of the structure and openly encourage amalgamations such as what occurred in Tracadie-Sheila. In instances where you have surrounding LSDs such as is the case in Sussex they are never going to willingly vote to either join the Town or form their own regional municipalities. These are people that like living in rural communities at the cost of rural communities. In the case of Sussex, that's an unfortunate downside of taxpayers using Sussex infrastructure despite not living and paying taxes in Sussex. The same can be said for Saint John, Moncton, Fredericton, and just about any city.

The unfortunate part is that there is usually a lack of knowledge and simply a very short-sighted look at taxes when it comes to people voting on amalgamation or a centralization of services and revenue. The Anti- side is almost always stronger in these cases.

[sjuser23]

Originally Posted by JHikka

This would be a discussion better suited to the rural thread. I posted a few interesting stats on the rural v. urban situation in NB in the NB Stats Thread a week or two ago.

But, just because they cost $90M doesn't mean there's automatically a shortfall of $90M, unless you're implying they cost higher and don't bring in similar revenue.

As a comparison, the base tax rate in an LSD is something like 0.435, whereas Saint John is 1.785 and Moncton 1.633.

The Provincial PC Party had campaigned on restructuring the municipal system in NB in 2010. Although they haven't done enough to my liking they have altered some of the structure and openly encourage amalgamations such as what occurred in Tracadie-Sheila. In instances where you have surrounding LSDs such as is the case in Sussex they are never going to willingly vote to either join the Town or form their own regional municipalities. These are people that like living in rural communities at the cost of rural communities. In the case of Sussex, that's an unfortunate downside of taxpayers using Sussex infrastructure despite not living and paying taxes in Sussex. The same can be said for Saint John, Moncton, Fredericton, and just about any city.

The unfortunate part is that there is usually a lack of knowledge and simply a very short-sighted look at taxes when it comes to people voting on amalgamation or a centralization of services and revenue. The Anti- side is almost always stronger in these cases.

Of course the anti side always wins. Why would they want to change? If you told me that I get a PB&J sandwich that costs $2 to make for $1 why would I volunteer to pay more just because people in the city pay $3 for the same $2 sandwich?

We are not mature enough as a society to discuss fairness of taxation, we are very selfish and we only look at our own cost. In reality, it costs more to deliver services like policing, health care, social programs etc.. in rural areas than urban and in reality the tax rates should be reversed with the lowest rates being the urban areas, followed by suburban and rural with the highest tax rate.

The problem with politicians is politics. They can't have that adult conversation when it comes to voters and oppositions parties (no matter who is in power) just focused on getting votes to get in power and not constructively working to better our society.

[Helladog]

I currently reside in an LSD, and I can honestly say I'm surprised how low the property taxes are here. I moved here for work, not to avoid the taxman. I'm currently paying 1/4 what I was paying in tax in SJ for a similar property, and still get garbage pickup, plowing, etc.

On the other hand, plowing service isn't great, the nearest hospital is 45 minutes away, and the population is dwindling. I wouldn't want to pay city taxes for what I get, but I think there is a bit of room to move on the rural property tax rate.

[JHikka]

Originally Posted by sjuser23

The problem with politicians is politics. They can't have that adult conversation when it comes to voters and oppositions parties (no matter who is in power) just focused on getting votes to get in power and not constructively working to better our society.

Politicians are only a byproduct of the electorate that votes for them. If more of the electorate were educated (or even cared) about rural tax reform and made it a priority issue and really pressed politicians/government on the issue perhaps something would arise. The political system in NB is a harsh place presenting an either/or option, which is unfortunate, and it would be difficult for a martyr to rise up and begun 'bettering' society because the electorate, as a whole, wouldn't trust them from the outset. It's very difficult for these things to occur.

In saying that, Helladog probably pays about less than 1/4th the amount in property taxes compared to if he was living in SJ, unless my numbers on LSD tax rates are off. If Saint John keeps this city council and continues moving in the right direction economically then that tax rate should decrease slightly. However, raising taxes in the LSDs would be a difficult task for any politician as that is something you never want to hang your hat on. It's difficult to convince people in LSDs that their taxes are being raised because it's unfair to people in the city, which is a terrible comparison to make to begin with.

[RR Drummer]

Happy New Years to all. Looking forward to great things for Saint John & area in 2014 and hoping for some big announcements/developments this year.

[OliverD]

Originally Posted by sjuser23

We are not mature enough as a society to discuss fairness of taxation, we are very selfish and we only look at our own cost. In reality, it costs more to deliver services like policing, health care, social programs etc.. in rural areas than urban and in reality the tax rates should be reversed with the lowest rates being the urban areas, followed by suburban and rural with the highest tax rate.

That would make sense only if rural areas received the same services that urban areas do, but they don't. I recently moved from the city of Fredericton to the LSD of Hanwell. The property tax rate is approximately 40% higher in Fredericton vs Hanwell. I've lost the following services:

- municipal sewer and water (quarterly bill doesn't cover the entire expense of this infrastructure)
- sidewalks
- street lights
- fire station is 15-20 minutes away instead of 2
- same with other emergency services
- monthly instead of weekly recycling pickup

There is no doubt that some services are more expensive for rural residents. But we also lose a lot of services completely.

[OliverD]

Originally Posted by Helladog

I currently reside in an LSD, and I can honestly say I'm surprised how low the property taxes are here. I moved here for work, not to avoid the taxman. I'm currently paying 1/4 what I was paying in tax in SJ for a similar property, and still get garbage pickup, plowing, etc.

This would suggest that the assessments in rural areas are too low vs the cities, unless you paid about 1/2 of what a similar property would go for in the city.

[MountPleasant]

One of NB's most trying issues is how anti-city people are here. I literally can't understand why people would live in outlying areas— especially if they work in urban areas.

But then I think about the lack of community engagement we have here and it makes so much sense. Generally people don't feel any allegiance to NB. Community has been lost on us

[thefishingnut]

Originally Posted by MountPleasant

One of NB's most trying issues is how anti-city people are here. I literally can't understand why people would live in outlying areas— especially if they work in urban areas.

But then I think about the lack of community engagement we have here and it makes so much sense. Generally people don't feel any allegiance to NB. Community has been lost on us

It's not an NB thing at all, all the major cities in Canada have a large geographical drawing area. Many of us grew up in small towns, and are only around cities because of work. But that doesn't mean that we necessarily want to do city activities, or live in the city. I'd rather go geocaching or biking or to a beach with my son, rather than go to a movie or the aquatic center. We'd rather bbq a good steak and eat out on the deck, than to go out to dinner. We'd rather have a fire in the back yard with the neighbors than go to the Imperial. I haven't been downtown to a bar in years, did quite a bit of it at one point, and couldn't care less if I ever do again. Some people can't imagine not having street lights, other people can't imagine living with the light pollution and don't want them. And it's not that there is something wrong or right with either lifestyle, it's just personal choices. I can't imagine given a choice, to live in a multi-tenant building. Other people can't imagine living someplace you have to cut the grass. There is always going to be city folk and non-city folk, and it's not trivial things like property tax rate that will define one of the other. Get a balance in what people pay (for what they use), sure, makes sense.

BTW, I don't think people leave the city because they've lost their sense of community, I think they leave the city to smaller places to find it.

[OliverD]

Originally Posted by MountPleasant

One of NB's most trying issues is how anti-city people are here. I literally can't understand why people would live in outlying areas— especially if they work in urban areas.

Is it really that hard to believe that some of us want to enjoy the privacy and space that rural living offers?

The nice thing about NB's smaller cities is that you can live in a rural area but can still easily commute to work in the city. In many places this simply isn't an option.

[Nashe]

That's really it. Most people who grew up in NB aren't accustomed to living in big cities, and small ones are a stretch. I also is someone who likes backyard fires, hiking, and being close to the water. At the same time, the city is where the work is. I'd really have to LOVE city living to move right into it. That would take only about 10 minutes off my commute (if that) and double my property taxes, so there isn't much incentive.

[UptownJeff]

Originally Posted by thefishingnut

It's not an NB thing at all, all the major cities in Canada have a large geographical drawing area. Many of us grew up in small towns, and are only around cities because of work. But that doesn't mean that we necessarily want to do city activities, or live in the city. I'd rather go geocaching or biking or to a beach with my son, rather than go to a movie or the aquatic center. We'd rather bbq a good steak and eat out on the deck, than to go out to dinner. We'd rather have a fire in the back yard with the neighbors than go to the Imperial. I haven't been downtown to a bar in years, did quite a bit of it at one point, and couldn't care less if I ever do again. Some people can't imagine not having street lights, other people can't imagine living with the light pollution and don't want them. And it's not that there is something wrong or right with either lifestyle, it's just personal choices. I can't imagine given a choice, to live in a multi-tenant building. Other people can't imagine living someplace you have to cut the grass. There is always going to be city folk and non-city folk, and it's not trivial things like property tax rate that will define one of the other. Get a balance in what people pay (for what they use), sure, makes sense.

BTW, I don't think people leave the city because they've lost their sense of community, I think they leave the city to smaller places to find it.

It really doesn't matter in my opinion whether you live in a city or a small town when it comes to having a sense of community. I grew up in a very small town in Ontario before moving to Toronto - I found a thriving community in both. Prior to our move to Saint John, we lived in the heart of Toronto - 5 minutes to The Eaton Centre and Yonge and Bloor. Our neighbourhood was a vibrant, culturally diverse mecca that promoted neighbourhood festivals and a rich arts community. Saint John has ALL of the ingredients for this and in the 5 years we have been here I have seen major strides but we still have a ways to go. Personally, I haven't quite figured out exactly what we can do to change attitudes - there will always be those who want to live in the suburbs or small towns for whatever reasons - whether here or in Ontario. I completely agree with "thefishingnut" in that people leave to find it when it is possible to stay right here and make it happen!

[MountPleasant]

There are areas within SJ city limits that offer what people enjoy about rural life— Redhead, Loch Lomand, Millidgeville etc..

I grew up in West Saint John and would often have backyard bonfires in the summer, BBQ's etc. so saying that you live in rural areas because you want this lifestyle is somewhat of a copout. I would actually argue that SJ has the best areas for hiking and also any sort of water activities in NB ie our two rivers and the Bay of Fundy

If you want NB to succeed you need to realize working together is the only way. The further a population is dispersed the further the cost. It's bad enough we are so polycentric already

[thefishingnut]

Originally Posted by MountPleasant

There are areas within SJ city limits that offer what people enjoy about rural life— Redhead, Loch Lomand, Millidgeville etc..

I grew up in West Saint John and would often have backyard bonfires in the summer, BBQ's etc. so saying that you live in rural areas because you want this lifestyle is somewhat of a copout. I would actually argue that SJ has the best areas for hiking and also any sort of water activities in NB ie our two rivers and the Bay of Fundy

If you want NB to succeed you need to realize working together is the only way. The further a population is dispersed the further the cost. It's bad enough we are so polycentric already

Sure, but the challenge within SJ limits is the space to put the extra 35,000 people from GB/Rothesay/Quispamsis in a rural context within it's footprint. We looked for waterfront on the SJ/Kenn River all through the region, and would have bought in Saint John if there was some available at a reasonable cost and not at the top of a 100 foot cliff. There isn't much available, and if the rest of the SJ river basin outside SJ boundary was off limits to housing, it would cost about a million dollars a lot and there would be a waiting list 5 centuries long. Things from a taxation standpoint could shift on a dime with some redrawing of boundaries, frankly that K Park isn't in Saint John but the airport is is pretty bizarre as far as I'm concerned.

I completely agree that the long commutes that some folks do aren't practical, but people choose to live with the inconvenience for their personal reasons, and this being a country where you can choose where you live, there is nothing that can be done about it. And if SJ for example could do something about it, people would just move away. I moved here from Ontario for the lifestyle, if it was taken away from me I'd just move (along with my business and the jobs it created) somewhere else.

[MountPleasant]

Over half of SJ boundaries are essentially empty (rural) the city's boundaries should be redrawn indeed. Rid the limits of the empty lands to encompass those which are populated.

Anyone who thinks this is some sort of infringement on 'freedom' should think about how much the province and SJ taxpayers compromise so that people in the suburbs (Rothesday, Quispamsis, Grand-Bay) can live essentially at the expense of city taxpayers

Much more disturbing is that these suburbs encompass much of SJ's working and/or wealthy populations— AND City employee's.

As German Sociologist, Georg Simmel said, "the deepest problems of modern life flow from the attempt of the individual to maintain the independence and individuality of his existence against sovereign powers of society, against the weight of the historical heritage and the external culture and technique of life."

[RR Drummer]

Originally Posted by MountPleasant

Over half of SJ boundaries are essentially empty (rural) the city's boundaries should be redrawn indeed. Rid the limits of the empty lands to encompass those which are populated.

Anyone who thinks this is some sort of infringement on 'freedom' should think about how much the province and SJ taxpayers compromise so that people in the suburbs (Rothesday, Quispamsis, Grand-Bay) can live essentially at the expense of city taxpayers

Much more disturbing is that these suburbs encompass much of SJ's working and/or wealthy populations— AND City employee's.

As German Sociologist, Georg Simmel said, "the deepest problems of modern life flow from the attempt of the individual to maintain the independence and individuality of his existence against sovereign powers of society, against the weight of the historical heritage and the external culture and technique of life."

I don't disagree although many opinions can be shared on this topic. I firmly agree that some hard decisions need to be made for our region.

[sjuser23]

Originally Posted by OliverD

That would make sense only if rural areas received the same services that urban areas do, but they don't. I recently moved from the city of Fredericton to the LSD of Hanwell. The property tax rate is approximately 40% higher in Fredericton vs Hanwell. I've lost the following services:

- municipal sewer and water (quarterly bill doesn't cover the entire expense of this infrastructure)
- sidewalks
- street lights
- fire station is 15-20 minutes away instead of 2
- same with other emergency services
- monthly instead of weekly recycling pickup

There is no doubt that some services are more expensive for rural residents. But we also lose a lot of services completely.

I've heard this argument many times about the loss of services, using less and paying less when living outside a city. But this also assumes you never use the services a city provides. Cultural activites, the roads, the shopping etc... and also the support a City gives to industry, hospitals, schools etc.. that an LSD does not. It's entirely about paying for what you use and the recognition that you use more than just want is in your LSD. Does it cost less to have police and fire ready to respond if you live closer to a station rather than farther away? Isn't the cost really about being there when needed, not about response time?

Take a minute to think about the commuters into a City versus those who commute from it. Every commuter is taking advantage of infrastructure and support paid for by a taxpayer living in the City. The industries that are the economic drivers are supported by City taxpayers but the beneficiaries are largely those who live outside the city in entirely other parts of the Province thanks to our equalization program that drains the tax dollars away. For example, the Cities build the roads into industrial parks which in turn employ people who can then choose to pay property taxes to another municipality and they pay income to the province. City sees no benefit. Also the vast majority of property tax paid by the industry is also kept by the province, yet the City supports the infrastructure.

Look at this in an abstract manner and we have an imaginary line between two neighbours, one lives in Fredericton, the other New Maryland but their houses are 100 feet apart, assessed the same and they work in the same place, kids go to same school, enjoy the same medicare, education, recreation. Basically consume the same goods, shop in the same places, use the same government services but one pays far less property tax because the one living inside the City boundaries is expected to support the industry which drives the economy while the other does not. What is the natural response? The one should move outside the City but in the end where does that leave us? At the breaking point we've now reached in NB!

[sjuser23]

So what's the answer?

Let's imagine there were no current towns/City in SJ region, how would you draw the lines? Should there be lines? What about taxation? How do design a system with responsible and equitable taxation keeping in mind some do receive more services but other services such as hospitals, schools and such are also supported from property tax revenue? What about cost sharing for regional facilities? Industry? Do we look at an economic region as a whole? how do we promote responsible planning?

Interesting question to think about from the ground up, assuming no limits, no preconceptions, just recognizing that taxation is inevitable, how do we design it to be fair and responsible?