MF YYC Politics - there, I mega did it

[The Fisher Account]

Thinking you can run this city on 0% tax increases every year is just asinine.

I'm glad we got some progressive candidates who are committed to the things they ran on and funding the things they feel will make Calgary a better place to live.

[Slava]

Oh I knew that would be the response, but it’s still my opinion. It’s a few percent from the city, a few from the province and the feds and I guess we can’t be unhappy with any of them. Of course, it was a few percent last year and the years before that, and as you all know it’s all coming out of the same wallet.

[timun]

Property taxes went down last year, Slava...

[Slava]

Originally Posted by timun

Property taxes went down last year, Slava...

Well we should make up for that right away.

[TorqueDog]

Originally Posted by MoneyGuy

As much as I think Chu is a PoS and shouldn’t be there, I disagree that Muni Affairs should get involved. That sets a dangerous precedent. Remove an elected official and where does it stop. (Relevant: I was a city councillor for many years and am now a consultant to councils and municipalities.)

Would you consider calling a byelection a removal of an elected official?

[Bring_Back_Shantz]

Originally Posted by Slava

As the city goes through it's budget deliberations, this is kind of what I hoped to avoid. I want to vote for progressives, because I want to see things built and generally see a vision for the city of optimism and progress. But, the downside to voting those types of candidates in seems to be that taxes are only going higher. So far, we're looking at a hair under 3% increase for next year and they're not done yet.

So if you want to see things built and improved, how do you propose we pay for that without raising taxes?
If you say you're all for something, but don't want to pay for it, you aren't really all for it are you?

[Slava]

Originally Posted by Bring_Back_Shantz

So if you want to see things built and improved, how do you propose we pay for that without raising taxes?
If you say you're all for something, but don't want to pay for it, you aren't really all for it are you?

Sure, that’s fair. So, what are we building or what new services are we seeing come down the line?

[MoneyGuy]

Originally Posted by TorqueDog

Would you consider calling a byelection a removal of an elected official?

Unless he resigns, yes. How else do you have a byelection?

[Bring_Back_Shantz]

Originally Posted by Slava

Sure, that’s fair. So, what are we building or what new services are we seeing come down the line?

I don't know, I haven't seen any budget or proposed projects.

You're the one that said you want to see progressive candidates and see things get built, but are apparently against the associated tax increases.
I was just pointing out that if you're going to say you're all for something, and then say you don't want to pay for it, then you aren't really for it are you?

[Slava]

Originally Posted by Bring_Back_Shantz

I don't know, I haven't seen any budget or proposed projects.

You're the one that said you want to see progressive candidates and see things get built, but are apparently against the associated tax increases.
I was just pointing out that if you're going to say you're all for something, and then say you don't want to pay for it, then you aren't really for it are you?

Because it appears that these people are unable to say no to spending increases. I like to think that being progressive and fiscally responsible doesn’t have to be an either/or decision, but apparently that’s where we are.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by Slava

Oh I knew that would be the response, but it’s still my opinion. It’s a few percent from the city, a few from the province and the feds and I guess we can’t be unhappy with any of them. Of course, it was a few percent last year and the years before that, and as you all know it’s all coming out of the same wallet.

Someone complained about not getting all their leaves picked up, so the city is responding by raising taxes so they can fund more trucks.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by Slava

As the city goes through it's budget deliberations, this is kind of what I hoped to avoid. I want to vote for progressives, because I want to see things built and generally see a vision for the city of optimism and progress. But, the downside to voting those types of candidates in seems to be that taxes are only going higher. So far, we're looking at a hair under 3% increase for next year and they're not done yet.

4.5% inflation with a disproportionate portion being energy cost actually means the city got more efficient year over year.

[Slava]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

Someone complained about not getting all their leaves picked up, so the city is responding by raising taxes so they can fund more trucks.

Haha, that guy should be mayor if he has that much influence!

[Slava]

Originally Posted by GGG

4.5% inflation with a disproportionate portion being energy cost actually means the city got more efficient year over year.

I don’t know if this is the thread for this, but that’s 4.5% year over year. Long term, we’re not actually much off the usual inflation rate.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by Slava

I don’t know if this is the thread for this, but that’s 4.5% year over year. Long term, we’re not actually much off the usual inflation rate.

Yeah so if taxes go up 3% in a 4.5% inflation environment that is a 1.5% tax cut.

Edit - or are you saying that last year we were deflationary therefore this years higher increase puts us back to say a 5 year average?

[bizaro86]

Originally Posted by TorqueDog

Would you consider calling a byelection a removal of an elected official?

Yes. What would you call it?

He said he isn't going to resign, the only way you have a bye election is if he is removed.

[Slava]

Originally Posted by GGG

Yeah so if taxes go up 3% in a 4.5% inflation environment that is a 1.5% tax cut.

Edit - or are you saying that last year we were deflationary therefore this years higher increase puts us back to say a 5 year average?

Yeah that’s what I’m saying. The media likes to say the inflation rates are astronomical, and they give that one year figure. But when you look at the longer term trend, and include that we had some deflation last year, we’re in that 2-3% increase sort of thing. It doesn’t mean we can’t see inflation get out of hand (although hyperinflation is not likely), but it’s really not that high at this point.

Anyway, I think the tax hike is 3.88%.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by Slava

Yeah that’s what I’m saying. The media likes to say the inflation rates are astronomical, and they give that one year figure. But when you look at the longer term trend, and include that we had some deflation last year, we’re in that 2-3% increase sort of thing. It doesn’t mean we can’t see inflation get out of hand (although hyperinflation is not likely), but it’s really not that high at this point.

Anyway, I think the tax hike is 3.88%.

Makes sense, 3.88 isn’t bad given that fuel cost for the city is fixed and up significantly more than CPI. It’s where the municipal price index instead of CPI is better.

[TorqueDog]

Originally Posted by bizaro86

Yes. What would you call it?

He said he isn't going to resign, the only way you have a bye election is if he is removed.

I mean... if he wins then he was never removed.

If he loses the byelection, then it was the will of the voters that removed him, not Municipal Affairs.

[MoneyGuy]

Originally Posted by TorqueDog

I mean... if he wins then he was never removed.

If he loses the byelection, then it was the will of the voters that removed him, not Municipal Affairs.

There can only be a by-election if he’s removed from office.