The 2019 Thunder Bay
municipal budget has arrived, and the proposed budget projects a total increase
in the municipal tax levy of 3.25 percent. The proposed levy is $195.9 million
which represents an increase of $6.2 million over last year’s budget of $189.7
million. You can get a nice summary of
the proposed changes in this summary
article by Jeff Walters given that the actual executive
summary document released by the City of Thunder Bay is really quite
lengthy and as usual a rather opaque document with its summary of total tax
supported(gross) spending, tax supported (Net), rate supported (Gross) and rate
supported (Net) spending all of which include capital spending and government grant
supported spending and are all well in excess of the $195.9 million tax levy
which is not mentioned until the second page.
This first budget is
an important test of the new Mayor and City Council in that it will provide an
indication of their approach to municipal fiscal matters. Indeed, the incoming Mayor in his assessment
of major
issues facing the City noted that taxation levels were one of his top three
priorities (along with infrastructure and
crime). There is of course a difference
between the level of taxation and the size of a rate increase – reducing the
level of taxation actually means having a negative rather than positive change to the
net municipal levy. However, as Figures 1 and 2 show, the trend over the last
two decades has been one of constant increases with a median increase in the
levy of 3.1 percent. That is to say, half of increases were above 3.1 percent
and the remainder below with the lowest increases being for the years 2000 at
1.1 percent and 2010 at 1.2 percent.
Hopefully we will not again see years like 2004 and 2006 as given the current levels of taxation they would represent an economic disaster for many local households.
An important issue for
Council to ponder is the recent tendency for municipal budgets to generate large
surpluses as was the case with the 2018 budget which was on track for a $3.6
million surplus as of October 2018. While
such surpluses are often used to replenish reserve funds, it remains that it
becomes easy to budget when one overshoots with spending estimates and banks
the savings at taxpayer expense. Given
that the increase in the municipal tax levy in 2018 was $5.75 million, it
suggests that one could have had a much smaller tax increase and still run a
modest positive variance in the $1-$2 million range. And the fact is that 2017 also saw a
budget surplus in the range of $8 million as a result of “one-time costs”
that were lower than expected. Essentially, municipal services - some of which are more regional than local it is to be noted - are being funded by local ratepayers as well as a broader range of cultural and social services and added to that a municipal "savings program" designed to build up reserves. Moreover, the residential ratepayer has been bearing a rising share of the tax burden given the decline in the city's industrial base.
I suppose whether you think using municipal property tax revenues to hit such a wide range of targets is a good idea depends on whether you believe the purpose of property taxation is to fund local services or whether it has a broader range of goals. Municipal taxation is traditionally supposed to be "benefit" taxation - that is it is to be used to fund local services to residential property and property owners - rather than a form of wealth taxation - which is actually how the tax is levied. If benefits and services to property are tied to the value of the property, then the current approach works. However, we all know that there is a wide variation in services to property. As well, the aim should be for prudence in the budgeting to provide services with some effort to maintain reserves for unforeseen expenses. At the same time, the municipal ratepayer should not be treated as a sort of unlimited liability insurance provider when it comes to budgeting by being used to generate large surpluses that result in taxes higher than needed to fund operating service and needed capital projects.
I suppose whether you think using municipal property tax revenues to hit such a wide range of targets is a good idea depends on whether you believe the purpose of property taxation is to fund local services or whether it has a broader range of goals. Municipal taxation is traditionally supposed to be "benefit" taxation - that is it is to be used to fund local services to residential property and property owners - rather than a form of wealth taxation - which is actually how the tax is levied. If benefits and services to property are tied to the value of the property, then the current approach works. However, we all know that there is a wide variation in services to property. As well, the aim should be for prudence in the budgeting to provide services with some effort to maintain reserves for unforeseen expenses. At the same time, the municipal ratepayer should not be treated as a sort of unlimited liability insurance provider when it comes to budgeting by being used to generate large surpluses that result in taxes higher than needed to fund operating service and needed capital projects.
So, what should this
year’s increase in the municipal levy be?
Well, increases in levy supported spending should not exceed the rate of
growth of population and inflation.
Given inflation in the rate of 2 percent and population increase of zero
you are looking at 2 percent rather than 3.25 percent as the upper bound for
this year’s increase. True, unforeseen circumstances could cause
more spending than anticipated later on in the year rather than a reduction but
then that is what reserve funds are for and they have seen some healthy
replenishment over the last few years.
Going ahead with the 3.25 percent increase is an indication of business
as usual as 2017 and 2018 also saw increases in the total levy of over three
percent. Council will need to go through
the list of proposed increases and ask for a pretty good justification of why
they are needed. Onwards and upwards is
simply not a good option this year.