Reader Response Forum
09/11/2009 02:13
Local Businesses Want Lower Taxes Too
In a move that
surprises no one but council and
administration, local businesses have had
enough when it comes to raising their taxes.
The St. Albert Taxpayers Association have been fighting high residential taxes for over a year now and finally have some support from the business community.
A story in the weekend edition of the Gazette entitled, “Businesses call for lower taxes” had this to say in part on the issue:
“Many business owners throughout the community are urging city council to trim the proposed non-residential tax increase for 2010.
As council gets set to enter budget deliberations this week, city administration is proposing a 2.95 per cent increase for non-residential taxes, which would amount to about $291 a year or $24.25 per month for a property assessed at $900,000.
Last year the non-residential rate jumped by 5.28 per cent.
Ivan Mayer, president of the Riel Business Park Association who also runs several businesses throughout the city said that, while his auto glass repair-replacement businesses have managed to weather the turn of the economy fairly well, he knows it hasn’t been the same for several other businesses throughout the community, especially those in the food and lodging industry.”
Read the entire story on the Gazette’s web site.
It is beginning to look like not only local residents, but business too has had their fill of the antics of Robbing Hood And His Merry Band Of Men raising taxes far too high, year after year.
A tax revolt is in the wings and if council and administration don’t sit up and pay attention, it will enter the stage as a full blown protest.
And that folks, is exactly what this overtaxed city needs.
St. Albert Town Hall, Tonight, Grandin Mall, 6:30 p.m.
Hi All:
We hope you are able to attend the Town Hall meeting the City is holding on the new Budget. It is the only time you will be able to ask administration and Council questions on the budget.
We need to let them know that we are concerned about their spending.
In preparation, I've listed some questions you may want to consider asking of them tonight.
Budget Questions: St. Albert Town Hall, November 9th, Grandin Mall, 6:30 pm.
-
If the provincial government is able to freeze
management salaries, why can't St. Albert?
-
If the provincial government is asking departments
to find 10% savings, why can't you ask City
Departments to cut back this amount? How can we
expect the other levels of government to continue
with funding for our excessive
spending?
-
City staff has increased by over 50% in the last 7
years to 534, yet this does not include casuals.
Your recreation area has 150 casual staff
delivering programs and probably public works has a
lot of casuals too. What is the real FTE count when
it includes these staff?
-
With So many staff, why does the city continue
hiring so many consultants and experts. What is the
staff doing?
-
In your data, you have lots of comparisons with
other cities. Yet Lethbridge for example, has a
electric utility, its own police force, and transit
drivers. We do not. Most of the other cities are
also not next to a huge city that provides many
services so this increases their costs. Why don't
you take these numbers out of the calculation so we
can see the true comparisons?
-
St. Albert fire department is manned to the same
level as it was when it provided ambulance service.
The standards say that fire rescue requires 4 staff
per pumper, you have 6. This is 50% over-manning
and costs over $1 million extra taxation. What is
wrong in the budgeting process that allows these
over-expenditures to continue?
-
You are trying to say that tax increases will be
kept to under 3%, yet our utility fees are going up
over 28% (over 31% compounded) over the next 3
years. Other fees are going up do. What are the
true total tax increases to the
taxpayer?
-
When we look at the total increases of user
fees/sales + property taxes, there have been huge
increases in the last 7 years. Why hasn't Council
asked the city managers to cut as much as they have
to, to make sure ALL increases are less than the
CPI?
-
The budget for St. Albert more than doubled over 6
years. In 2009 the Budget was $127.7 million. Yet
you talk about not being able to maintain service
levels we had in 2002. Who is responsible for this
terrible record and why have they not been held
accountable?
-
You have capital projects that are aimed at growth.
Our population growth is going no where because
people can't afford to live here. How are you going
to cut costs so that St. Albert becomes affordable
to live in, rather than an elite community for the
few?
-
We don't need growth projects in either the
municipality or utility capital budgets given our
slow growth. We still have land available for
commercial/industrial and residential without doing
anything in the annexed lands. Why do you insist on
keeping these projects in the
budget?
-
Why do we have huge expenditures on “Founders
Walks” and Birthday parties? Businesses and people
are tightening their belts trying to get through
this recession why isn't the
City?
-
Why can't Arts and Heritage spending be reducted
until the city can afford these luxuries? Why isn't
the city doing this to either reduce our taxes or
shift these dollars to maintain our service
levels.
-
Ray Gibbon Drive was built to open up the annexed
lands in the NW. It also provides a dike for the
Genstar lands. If you say others get benefit...then
surely that is justified by the other 75% of the
costs. Why would the city then contemplate letting
the developers off the hook for their 25% of the
costs of this road?
-
The next phase of the recyling plan hasn't been
approved. This looks like it is a fait accompli,
even though we now know we won't have to truck our
refuse over 100KM. It also seems that a large part
of the justification for the organic step of
recycling was to decrease the amount going to
landfill because of the future costs of trucking
it. With this change, why can't the city cut the
next phase of recycling and its huge impact on what
the taxpayer will pay, including the $5 million for
garbage trucks in its 2010-2012 capital budget and
let us continue to take our yard waste to the
yard?
-
Why is the city hanging on to its “gold-standard”
or “world class” mentality. We can't afford
expenditures like a $8 million Riel Park football
field to be used by 300 people, or the “proposed”
Heritage Park, or to continue pouring money into
Servus Place—a facilty loosing the taxpayer almost
$5million a year, or a fancy BMX site, or recycling
plans. We need to get back to the basics and cut
these types of expenditures. So when will you end
this fixation on providing a cadillac when a
bicycle will do?
- Why does the city keep pouring money into the “Downtown”, when it has a policy of encouraging commercial development along the transit corridors. These are two opposing policies.
- Lynda Flannery
- President
- St. Albert Taxpayers Association
The Things That People Send Me
Life in four bottles . . .
