2018 Property Tax

[Weitz]

Originally Posted by burn_this_city

Hard not to think the public sector in the city and province will be hit hard in the next few years. There's not enough money flowing around the economy to support the taxation rates, especially on small and medium sized businesses. Even if you shift the burden to homeowners there will be less disposable income to spend. I don't envy council or the province that will need to fight the unions for reductions in staff costs. Everything was so distorted during the 2005-2014 boom that it will take a decade to fix the cost structure.

If you take a look at MD’s and counties they are getting killed these days.

[Slava]

Originally Posted by accord1999

I don't think they do; the three biggest City expenditures are policing, transit and fire. New neighborhoods don't have much transit services (even the Green Line's billions of dollars in new spending will primarily help the inner city in the medium term), and the inner city are much better covered by police and fire stations. The City's crime and fire maps also show that the inner city typically has higher per-capita incidents that require fire or police response (ie the Beltline with roughly the same population as Panorama Hills has 9059 crime incidents vs 795).

Sure, but it doesn’t really work like that, right? I mean as a city we pay for those things and the costs are shared across the city. The service provided is virtually identical, and it all evens out. It’s just that for some strange reason, some people pay more for that than others. There’s nothing factual. There’s no real reason that a few houses on a street are paying more than others, or that particular communities are paying more.

And yeah, I get that it’s based on property values, but I question that. Personally, I think that’s a poor way to make these decisions. There’s no evidence that someone with a million dollar home uses twice the services of someone with a half million dollar home. It’s just silly. Secondly, I question the accuracy of this program in the first place. People are talking about significant jumps in their tax payments, and while some of that is attributed to an increase to begin with, a chunk is due to property values. We know the market hasn’t spiked here though, so pretty clearly it’s not accurate.

I know I’m just bitter and irritated with this whole thing at this point, so I’m probably wrong about some of this. But I still (even if it’s not rational!) think that this system is ridiculous.

[Ducay]

Property tax based on land values is very progressive, however, it is a terrible way of assessing taxes.

Heck if you don't want to look at the points above, or outrage from business owners, look no further than Vancouver where elderly folks have been made to leave their homes simply because the assessed value skyrocketed and could no longer afford the cash property taxes. Sure they look wealthy on paper, but its all tied up in the house they can no longer live in.
They certainly are not using more services than any other dwelling.

And FYI - the argument that the inner city subsidizes the sprawl is/was correct given the amount of new infrastructure costs the city bears on new developments, rather than the building owner (via developer) paying for it all. I know there was calls for some change there, but not sure if the rules ever changed on getting new homeowners to fund their fair share.

[Fuzz]

Slava, I get some of your points, but by using property values it makes it more of a progressive tax. It's obviously far from perfect. But here's the rub...try to think up a better system. Throw out some ideas as to what you think would be more "fair" and not overly burdensome to calculate, and chances are, the logic just doesn't work. I've thought about it a few times and nothing is better than what we have.

[Jason14h]

Up 55$ a month (18%)

[stampsx2]

Originally Posted by accord1999

I don't think they do; the three biggest City expenditures are policing, transit and fire. New neighborhoods don't have much transit services (even the Green Line's billions of dollars in new spending will primarily help the inner city in the medium term), and the inner city are much better covered by police and fire stations. The City's crime and fire maps also show that the inner city typically has higher per-capita incidents that require fire or police response (ie the Beltline with roughly the same population as Panorama Hills has 9059 crime incidents vs 795).

Actually most of your property tax bill goes to education.

Education 36.7%
Police 14%
Public transit 8.2%
Fire 7.8%
Streets 4.5%
Parks and open spaces 2.5%
I.T. Solutions and support 2.3%
Library services 1.9% - we can get rid of this one. We have ebooks and the internet
Facility management 1.9%
Recreation opportunities 1.6%
Specialized transit 1.5%
Sidewalks and pathways 1.3%
Economic decelopment and tourism 1.3%
911 1.2%
Art 0.8% - we can get rid of this one as well. No need for an explanation.

The rest at https://www.calgary.ca/CA/city-manag...&calcInput=245

[DownInFlames]

Originally Posted by stampsx2

Library services 1.9% - we can get rid of this one.

I'm pretty sure you've been told this more than once... libraries are about more than books, and not everyone has access to the internet. The city is getting worldwide attention for the Central Library. The fact that it's easy to get to from the Stampede grounds will bring in even more tourism.

Originally Posted by stampsx2

Art 0.8% - we can get rid of this one as well. No need for an explanation.

We've had a few crappy art projects but they're well done, for the most part, and add to the vibrancy of the city. Changes can be made for sure, but I don't see any good reason to axe it entirely.

[opendoor]

Originally Posted by Ducay

Property tax based on land values is very progressive, however, it is a terrible way of assessing taxes.

Heck if you don't want to look at the points above, or outrage from business owners, look no further than Vancouver where elderly folks have been made to leave their homes simply because the assessed value skyrocketed and could no longer afford the cash property taxes. Sure they look wealthy on paper, but its all tied up in the house they can no longer live in.
They certainly are not using more services than any other dwelling.

Virtually anyone over 55 can defer their property taxes indefinitely in BC, so I don't see why property taxes in Vancouver would drive any elderly people out of their houses.

[stampsx2]

Originally Posted by DownInFlames

I'm pretty sure you've been told this more than once... libraries are about more than books, and not everyone has access to the internet. The city is getting worldwide attention for the Central Library. The fact that it's easy to get to from the Stampede grounds will bring in even more tourism.

Worldwide attention? You mean people visit from all over the world to see the central library? Kind of like the eiffel tower, big ben or the Statue of liberty?

Have you been to the new library? I have. Waaaaaay overhyped.

What else are libraries being used for other than borrowing books and providing internet for those who can’t afford it (yet somehow all have better cell phones than i have)?

[Slava]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

Slava, I get some of your points, but by using property values it makes it more of a progressive tax. It's obviously far from perfect. But here's the rub...try to think up a better system. Throw out some ideas as to what you think would be more "fair" and not overly burdensome to calculate, and chances are, the logic just doesn't work. I've thought about it a few times and nothing is better than what we have.

Yeah I know, but this is one of those “not my job” scenarios. I hate saying that but it’s really true; I have no expertise in knowing how to structure a tax system.

But giving that caveat, how about this. The city budget is X amount of dollars. There are Y amount of properties. X/Y gives you the taxable figure that property owners pay, and we’re done.

[Fuzz]

^
Here comes the hole punch... is it fair that an condo or row house pays the same as a mansion taking up 3 average lots, that if divided would raise tax dollars from several payers, as opposed to one?

[Slava]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

^
Here comes the hole punch... is it fair that an condo or row house pays the same as a mansion taking up 3 average lots, that if divided would raise tax dollars from several payers, as opposed to one?

I guess it depends on what the point of taxation is, right? Are we trying to even things out so that people “who can afford it” pay more, or are we trying to cover the civic budget?

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Slava

Yeah I know, but this is one of those “not my job” scenarios. I hate saying that but it’s really true; I have no expertise in knowing how to structure a tax system.

But giving that caveat, how about this. The city budget is X amount of dollars. There are Y amount of properties. X/Y gives you the taxable figure that property owners pay, and we’re done.

I did propose the 'Wheel of Property Tax' system but nooooo...you all shot that down!

We could've gotten a used wheel from Wheel of Fortune for a huge bargain! But nooo.....you all wanted some sort of structured system based on measured values.

Well dont blame me! I tried!

[DownInFlames]

Originally Posted by stampsx2

Worldwide attention? You mean people visit from all over the world to see the central library? Kind of like the eiffel tower, big ben or the Statue of liberty?

Have you been to the new library? I have. Waaaaaay overhyped.

What else are libraries being used for other than borrowing books and providing internet for those who can’t afford it (yet somehow all have better cell phones than i have)?

You're being a tad hyperbolic. I mean like it's been featured in architectural publications and the New York Times travel section. I didn't imply it's in the same league as the places you mentioned, but it's bringing positive attention to the city.

The Central Library has interactive and educational exhibits. There are games and multimedia materials. There are meeting spaces and theatres for conferences and performances. There is art by local artists. If you've really visited you'd know that.

[Cecil Terwilliger]

Originally Posted by Slava

Yeah I know, but this is one of those “not my job” scenarios. I hate saying that but it’s really true; I have no expertise in knowing how to structure a tax system.

But giving that caveat, how about this. The city budget is X amount of dollars. There are Y amount of properties. X/Y gives you the taxable figure that property owners pay, and we’re done.

I’m also far from an expert but I know enough to know that if a system like that was introduced, Calgary would be a ghost town in no time.

It’s not far off from saying people from all income levels should pay the same $$ amount in income taxes.

[Slava]

Originally Posted by Locke

I did propose the 'Wheel of Property Tax' system but nooooo...you all shot that down!

We could've gotten a used wheel from Wheel of Fortune for a huge bargain! But nooo.....you all wanted some sort of structured system based on measured values.

Well dont blame me! I tried!

Isn’t this what we have already?

I’ve just read two articles about the business taxes and how council failed to come to an arrangement to deal with those. One was Don Braid saying that the province should use their authority to fire the council and hold an election. That’s drastic, but I wonder how much support there would be at this point. The truth is that there are a lot of businesses who have had taxes rise astronomically in the past few years. At some point something’s got to give; you can’t just have every level of government raising all these taxes and not showing some signs of restraint on spending.

[Slava]

Originally Posted by Cecil Terwilliger

I’m also far from an expert but I know enough to know that if a system like that was introduced, Calgary would be a ghost town in no time.

It’s not far off from saying people from all income levels should pay the same $$ amount in income taxes.

Well I’m not entirely opposed to that either, but maybe I’ll leave that alone and we can hit that in another thread some day.

[DownInFlames]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

^
Here comes the hole punch... is it fair that an condo or row house pays the same as a mansion taking up 3 average lots, that if divided would raise tax dollars from several payers, as opposed to one?

My building has a combined assessed value of about $30,000,000. So we pay just under $200,000 in property taxes. I don't know if that's fair or not based on the services we receive but I'm just putting those numbers out there.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Cecil Terwilliger

I’m also far from an expert but I know enough to know that if a system like that was introduced, Calgary would be a ghost town in no time.

It’s not far off from saying people from all income levels should pay the same $$ amount in income taxes.

Well, that might be a topic for another day, but in Nenshi's defense, he has mentioned on multiple occasions that the Property Tax system in this province is broken.

Now, he was referring to it in regards to parasite communities not paying their fair share, this is in reference to Airdrie, Okotoks, Rockyview, Dewinton, etc. Which is a very serious problem.

But also as to the issues of collection and redistribution of funds.

[Smartcar]

Originally Posted by Slava

Well I’m not entirely opposed to that either, but maybe I’ll leave that alone and we can hit that in another thread some day.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poll_tax

Just no. And here I thought you were progressive.