Monthly Archives: October 2016

Council Agenda Preview – November 1, 2016

30 Sunday Oct 2016

Posted by in Parry Sound, Town Council

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, , , , , , , ,

A not so interesting or controversial agenda except for Item 10.5.1. The item appears for the first time before an Open session of Council as a By-law, although I suspect it has been the subject of repeated discussion in Closed sessions. It seems to suggest that the Town of Parry Sound is willing to relinquish some of ‘our’, that’s yours and my, waterfront access rights along the North Shore Rugged Trail in hopes of stimulating development and tax revenues for private property north of the Smelter Wharf. I have commented previously that the railway tracks north of the Smelter Wharf have largely ‘sterilized’ these properties, although I was later advised that these properties are accessible. I’m not sure exactly what right of way access rights might be provided for the property owner through a waterfront access deal. There is a suggestion in the supporting documents that the public will lose some access to the North Shore Rugged Trail. That is a concern to me. I am on the trail at least once a week, sometimes as often as five. But, I don’t want to get too dramatic, nothing is agreed. There is just the suggestion that the Town will consider relinquishing some of our access rights to support development. Terms in the Council report include “mutually beneficial” and “landlocked”. I suggest people take a look at this item and contact Staff and Council if they have any concerns. My major concern at this point is that this matter is being introduced for the first time as a by-law, and there is no obvious intention to provide more information on the implications to the Public. A note to Council: humour us, let us know what the potential implications might be concerning access. Why not ask for input?

The rest of the agenda is not that meaningful in my opinion. A pair of deputations, 5.2 and 5.3, promise to offer some Reality TV type entertainment. It’s always a shame when neighbors can’t work things out instead of appearing in front of Judge Judy, or the Parry Sound equivalent.

Comments on other agenda items are offered below.

Correspondence

4.4 – FONOM – Federation of Northern Ontario Municipalities
4 updates attached from CN Rail re: Gogama derailment March 2015.

4.5 – R. A. Rosewell, 128 Gibson St. 
Requesting relief from penalty & interest on tenant account
On tonight’s agenda as item 9.3.1.
The Town is denying the request. I guess it’s insisting on making landlords responsible for their tenant’s obligations for water service. It appears a tenant was not paying their water bill for years and the Town wants the landlord to pay up. There are no winners here, except perhaps for the tenant. The Town doesn’t need to be chasing people for payment, and I suspect suspending service may not be a reasonable option given the need for potable water.

Deputations

5.1 – Patti Jenkins, Local Spiritual Assembly of the Baha’is of Parry Sound.

5.2, 5.3 – Christie Hamilton, Re: dirt bike track at 11 Margaret St. Mike Morrison, Re: dirt bike track at 11 Margaret St.
There are two separate deputations on either side of the issue. The council package includes the arguments of both groups if you don’t have the time to attend the meeting.

Resolutions and Direction to Staff

9.2.1 – 2017 Council Meeting Dates. Resolution. That pursuant to By-law No. 2015-6573, Section 3, paragraph 4, Council approves Schedule “A”, as attached, which provides the schedule of dates for the 2017 Regular meetings of Council.

9.3.1 – Request for Interest and Penalty Waiver – 128 Gibson St. Resolution. That the request for relief from penalties and interest on the water account at 128 Gibson from Mr. Rosewell be denied.

9.3.2 – POA Write-offs. Resolution. That Council for the Town of Parry Sound, hereby approves the $44,804.68 in write-offs for the Provincial Offences Act Court outlined in Schedule “A” attached.
This is an old issue reviewed at an earlier meeting. It’s like throwing out old socks with holes in them. In theory they have some value, but not enough to be worth darning.

9.5.1 – Downtown Steering Committee Terms of Reference. Resolution. That Council approve the Downtown Steering Committee Terms of Reference per Schedule “A” attached; and That Council appoint the following to the Downtown Steering Committee for the term ending November 30, 2018: Cllr. Paul Borneman, Gail Burrows, Dan DiNicolo,
Cathy Downing, Susan Hrycyna, Greg Mason, Daryl McMurray, Heather Murch, Chris Pettinger.
It’s nice to see the interest of a new generation of individuals in creating momentum in the downtown.

9.5.2 – Downtown Sustainability Plan. Resolution. That Council receives the Downtown Steering Committee’s recommendation which supports the inclusion of an EDO position, hiring a Public Works summer student dedicated to the Downtown Business Area, and the Façade Improvement Program in the 2017 budget.
The plan suggests the position be established for a three year period. That’s a good idea in my opinion. As much as we would like to believe that results can be delivered Day 1, it takes a year for any individual to properly understand the challenges and opportunities of a position like this and then start to deliver results. That’s one of the problems with the federally supported internship positions. As soon as the interns are capable of making a positive contribution their funding ends.

9.6.1 – RV Pumpouts. Direction. That the Director of Public Works be directed to prepare a report and recommendation on recreation vehicle pump-outs at the Waste Water Treatment Plant including past experience, and past and proposed user rates.

By-laws

10.3.1 – Amending By-law for New Multi-Residential Property Tax Class. Being a By-law to amend By-law 2006-4898 A By-law to create a New Multi-Residential Property Tax Class for the Town of Parry Sound.
The obvious follow up to last meetings discussion.

10.5.1 – Waterfront Development. Being a By-law to execute the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the Corporation of the Town of Parry Sound and William Beatty Lands and Timber Limited, per the attached Schedule “A”.
Let’s keep an eye on this. I would be very disappointed to lose access to the full North Shore Rugged Trail. I’m happy to share.

10.5.2 – Request for Deeming By-law – 3 Avenue Road. Being a By-law to deem certain lots in the Town of Parry Sound not to be part of a registered Plan of Subdivision (Drummond – 3 Avenue Road).
Nothing strange here, it seems to be a tidying up exercise.

There is more on the agenda than what is covered in this report. Take a look at the full agenda to see if there ae issues that you feel are important. As always, contact staff and Council before the meeting if you want to have your input considered on any issue  before Council.

I won’t be at the meeting this week. It’s not a lack of interest, but rather I will be out of town that evening.

I Won’t Be the Only One Crying the Blues, as well as the Pinks, Yellows, and Oranges if we Lose North Shore Rugged Trail Access.

redwood1890-20150822-_ds69314

 

 

 

 

 

 

Fact Check – Energy Prices and Norm Miller Petition

20 Thursday Oct 2016

Posted by in Reflections

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

, ,

‘There are three kinds of lies: lies, damn lies and statistics.’ A saying Popularized by Mark Twain and attributed to Benjamin Disraeli, misses the more obvious issue, sometimes people simply fail at middle school arithmetic, or choose to compare apples with oranges, or apples with orangutans.

I am referring to the Norm Miller petition on the subject of Ontario hydro rate increases. The petition asks people to express their support by signing and forwarding to the Ontario Legislature a petition critical of hydro prices under the current Liberal Government. I received the petition as part of an email from the Parry Sound and Area Chamber of Commerce. Reviewing the petition the numbers seemed strange and I decided to contact Norm Miller’s office for the details. They were helpful and sent me the URLs for the hydro rates then and now. Unfortunately, the numbers don’t work out as presented in the petition. It seems to be a case of both an incorrect point of reference (apples and oranges) as well as an inappropriate and self-serving analysis.

I sent a note to Mr. Miller’s office with my concerns last week. I received a call from Adam a couple of days later. He did not dispute my analysis, and suggested that they were responding to Kathleen Wynn’s remarks about the large increase in hydro rates. There was no sense that the numbers or the language in the petition would be changed. That would of course be embarrassing and possibly compromise their point.

I realize that politics is a non-contact sport where interference is required, expected, and not penalized. My issue is that the numbers as presented in the petition are wrong. The point the petition makes is reasonable, and there is enough of an increase in hydro prices for people to be concerned and complain. But the numbers have to be properly analyzed and presented. Is a 150% increase in prices any more acceptable than a 300% increase? A little, but still too much for most people to easily swallow.

The political campaigns south of the border have made it hard to trust anything that is being said. Truth is seemingly no longer part of the standard toolbox of politicians. It’s all about leverage and spin. Truth and accuracy be damned.

I’m not sure what the people in Mr. Miller’s office were thinking when they put together the numbers. Perhaps they felt a little massaging would help their point. Do we need to suspect the veracity of everything coming out of Mr. Miller’s office? Using the Washington Post’s Pinocchio Scale the claims in the petition rate Two Pinocchios.

Mr. Miller has a very reasonable point to make but undermines his position with sloppy and self-serving analysis.

Here is the relevant portion of my email to Mr. Miller’s office, including my analysis. It is followed by Mr. Miller’s petition.

Email – October 9, 2016 to Mr. Miller’s Office“

“I received an email on October 7th from the Parry Sound and Areas Chamber of Commerce that included a petition from Mr. Miller. It opens with: “WHEREAS Electricity rates have risen by more than 300% since the current Government took office;” and continues on.

My interested was piqued by the statement “risen more than 300%”. While rates have risen, to the distress of many, especially those who chose the cheaper alternative of installing electric baseboard heating, the 300% figure seemed a bit high. That was the reason for my call. I expected that Mr. Miller’s office would have the supporting information. Thank you for forwarding me the relevant URLs.

The petition refers to “the current Government”. I believe the current government assumed office in February of 2013. I suspect that this is not the baseline referred to in the petition. I expect that the petition is making reference to the Liberal Party forming a government in October of 2003. But the wording in the petition would suggest the former not the latter and infers an even more dire situation.

Reviewing the references you provided, especially http://www.ontario-hydro.com/historical-rpp-rates, I created the following table of hydro prices then and now.

February 2013 – Blended Rate $0.07938 per kWhr. October 2016 – Blended Rate: $0.11 per kWhr. By my calculation this amounts to a 38.6% increase, large by any measure but certainly not 300%

October 2003 – Blended Rate: $0.043 per kWhr. October 2016 – Blended Rate: $0.11 per kWhr. By my calculation this amounts to a 155.8% increase, even larger, but once again not 300%.

It is possible to get to a 300% increase if one goes back to the start of the McGuinty led Liberal government, and only uses the blended rate from that time ($0.043 per kWhr) and the On Peak value of today ($0.18 per kWhr). That figure would be an increase of 318.6% over the 2003 rate, but not the 2013 rate. Using the 2013 On Peak rate, to properly capture the ‘performance’ of the “current Government”, the increase would be 52.5%. Again not the 300% mentioned in the petition.

Comparing On Peak with a Blended rate from 2003, which was the only rate structure at the time, seems to be a bit disingenuous. One could make the case that for consumers the introduction of On Peak, Mid Peak and Off Peak was a benefit for householders who consume the majority of their electricity Mid Peak and Off Peak on weekdays, and Off Peak on weekends.

If one uses the same On Peak to Blended Rate ratio for electricity in 2003 as was first introduced in 2006, the 2003 On Peak base rate would be $0.0824 per kWhr. The increase then over the last thirteen years would be 118%, not 300%.”

 

TO: THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ONTARIO

WHEREAS Electricity rates have risen by more than 300% since the current Government took office; and WHEREAS over half of Ontarians’ power bills are regulatory and delivery charges and the Global Adjustment; and

WHEREAS the Global Adjustment is a tangible measure of how much Ontario must over-pay for unneeded wind and solar power, and the cost of off-loading excess power to our neighbours at a loss; and

WHEREAS the market rate for electricity, according to IESO data, has been less than 3 cents per kWh to date in 2016, yet the Government’s lack of responsible science-based planning has not allowed these reductions to be passed on to Ontarians, resulting in electrical bills several times more than that amount; and

WHEREAS the implementation of Cap-and-Trade will drive the cost of electricity even higher and deny Ontarians the option to choose affordable natural gas heating; and

WHEREAS more and more Ontarians are being forced to cut down on essential expenses such as food and medicines in order to pay their increasingly unaffordable electricity bills; and

WHEREAS the ill-conceived energy policies of this Government that ignored the advice of independent experts and government agencies, such as the Ontario Energy Board (OEB) and the Independent Electrical System Operator (IESO) and are not based on science have resulted in Ontarians’ electricity costs rising, despite lower natural gas costs and increased energy conservation in the Province;

WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, PETITION THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ONTARIO AS FOLLOWS:

To take immediate steps to reduce the total cost of electricity paid for by Ontarians, including costs associated with power consumed, the Global Adjustment, delivery charges, administrative charges, tax and any other charges added to Ontarians’ energy bills.

Even Prettier When Fallen?

redwood1890-20161018-_ds65394

New Multi-Residential Property Class By-law (edited 2016-11-10)

18 Tuesday Oct 2016

Posted by in Parry Sound

≈ Comments Off on New Multi-Residential Property Class By-law (edited 2016-11-10)

Tags

, ,

The Town of Parry Sound has asked for comments to a proposed by-law creating a new property class for the purpose of setting tax rates. Here is my read and take on the proposal.

A couple of weeks ago in one of my council meeting previews I discussed the issue of property assessments, levies and tax rates that caused me to post a revision as I had improperly used the terms tax rates and levy. You might want to read that revised post for background.

This draft by-law intends to amend By-law 2006-4898 that created a new property class for the purpose of taxation. It seems to apply to affordable housing properties that offer housing at below market rates. In the original by-law this type of property class only applied to twenty units at the old hospital redevelopment complex.

By-law 2006-4898 created a New Multi-Residential Property Tax Class and set the tax rate as the same as the standard Residential Class rate. In terms of tax rates the Residential ratio is set as 1.00, and other properties, for example, Commercial, Industrial, Multi-Residential, are set as a ratio of this 1.00. The 2016 ratio for Commercial is 1.664617, which means these properties are taxed at 1.66 times that of a Residential property for the same assessment value. In general, almost all tax rates on properties in Parry Sound are higher than the Residential rate, exceptions are Pipelines, Farmlands and Managed Forest property. And of course there is the railway infrastructure, rail lines and trestles worth millions of dollars, that is not taxed at all.

The current Multi-Residential tax ratio is 1.514485, so people in those properties, I imagine this includes Silver Birch and Granite Harbour and other properties, pay about 1.5 times the Residential Rate on the assessed value of their units. (Correction – this does not apply to units in Silver Birch or Granite Harbour as they are individually owned and subject to the standard 1.00 ratio!) This why a New Multi-Residential property class was established in 2006 for the twenty old hospital units. Setting the New Multi-Residential rate the same as the Residential rate rather than the Multi-Residential rate offered the developers a savings of about one-third in taxes. This was a benefit that was to run for 20 years, or until 2026 in the case of the old hospital units.

So the intent now is to extend or perhaps expand this New Multi-Residential Class to the housing being built on Gibson Street in the old William Beatty School. The By-law uses the language “qualifying affordable housing units”. I have no issue with the change, but if you do please send your comments to the Town of Parry Sound, attention Trevor Pinn.

An aside regarding tax rates and the levy. With the reassessment of properties, the Town will need to reset tax rates for the different property classes. The levy is simple; I imagine it will go up one or two or three percent this year. But the MPAC reassessment of all properties has increased the property values of Multi-Residential properties, lowered Residential a little and lowered Commercial considerably. If the tax ratios from 2016 were applied to the 2017 tax year it is likely that Commercial properties would see a drop in their taxes, Residential might see a slight increase, and Multi-Unit Residential would receive a more than small increase, at least over the next four years. Interestingly, drops in assessed value are applied immediately, while increases in assessed value are phased in over four years. Let’s see how the Town handles the 2017 tax ratios. Because tax ratios are applied only to classes of properties and assessments are made on individual properties, there are sure to be some inconsistencies. Check your assessment now, and tax bill when it arrives next year, to see if you have been unfairly treated. I understand that appeals to assessments can only be made in a limited window of time, so review your assessment now, and be prepared to appeal the decision should you feel it is out of line with your neighbours. Making an appeal after the window has closed is tough, if not impossible, until the next four-year reassessment is conducted. And that is in four years.

Here Today, Gone in a Week

redwood1890-20161016-_dsc4053

 

Council Agenda Preview – 2016-10-18

15 Saturday Oct 2016

Posted by in Parry Sound, Town Council

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, , , ,

It’s a very, very light agenda this week and I have identified in the section below those items that are of most interest, to me at least, with a few comments.

I’ll use the introduction to discuss an issue that is not on the agenda but came out as a news item. Fool me once shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me. It’s about the toilets on Seguin Street almost directly across from Parry Sound Town Hall being vandalized for what seems to be the fifth time in the past year. The last time we had an ongoing issue like this, vandalizing of the pumping station across from the high school, the Town took action and set up a camera. Along with discussion and education, it brought results. I think it’s time to do that once again, only this time the setup would be much easier. I wonder if these individuals are also responsible for the damage at Tower Hill, the baskets on the bridge, and the Waubuno Beach toilets. I realize that common wisdom is to just fix the damage and that with time the individuals will either grow up, leave town, or grow tired of the activity. But I believe enough is enough. Let’s invest a little bit of time and effort to sort this out.

On another topic I read in the North Star on Wednesday the 12th that the CN Police have jurisdiction 500 metres on either side of the railway track. I guess that is so they can pursue individuals and make an arrest. A bit like in the southern police TV shows where the sheriff and deputy were restricted to conducting chases only as far as their county line. But, if we do have CN Police jurisdiction out to 500 metres perhaps we can reduce our OPP service and save a few bucks. (Just kidding of course. But it means all of my property is under the jurisdiction of the CN ‘brown shirts’. Presumably they can trespass at will. Authority but no real responsibility is not a desirable situation.)

The agenda items with comments follow.

Correspondence

4.2 – Wendy Pegahmagabow, Executive Director, Harvest Share Re: Reinstatement of Charitable Status for Harvest Share. I’m glad to see that this has been fixed up. It’s a good organization that deserves our support, and the tax deduction makes it a no-brainer.

4.6 – Dianna Allen, resident. Re: Request for Council to consider amendments to the Zoning By-law to allow Parry Sound residents to have backyard hens. I think I support this even though I have no intention of taking advantage of any by-law change. Let’s just make sure the number of chickens is limited, perhaps as a percent of the property square footage. The next question of course is, what about ducks and geese? Lambs and goats? I think it’s manageable but needs some reasonable limits. Will it attract wildlife is another question that needs to be addressed.

Resolutions and Direction to Staff

9.5.2 – Tender – Snow Removal. Resolution. Tender – Snow Removal. That Council accept the tender from Weeks Construction Inc. for snow removal on town streets during the 2016/2017 winter season, including traffic control and labour costs to clear around infrastructure including tree pits and hydrants, as follows: Tandem dump truck: $ 95.00 per hour. Wheeled loader: $105.00 per hour. Blower and control unit: $105.00 per hour. This tender is the lowest tender of three tenders received.

9.6.1 – Feasibility of Establishing a Compost Facility. Direction. That the Director of Public Works be directed to prepare a report and recommendation on the feasibility of establishing a commercial, institutional and multi-residential composting facility for consideration during 2017 Budget deliberations. This makes sense to me, especially with the bear issues we are facing and the attraction of backyard composting. But a central composting facility would be gull and bear magnet. There are never any easy answers, even if intentions are good.

By-laws

10.1.1 – Rezoning Application – Z/16/5 – 84 Bowes Street (Breault). Being a By-law to amend By-law No. 2004-4653 (The Zoning By-law), as amended, for 84 Bowes Street (Breault).

10.1.2 – Site Plan Approval Application – The Parry Sound Affordable Housing Development Corporation – 82 Gibson Street. Being a By-law to grant Site Plan Approval and authorize the execution and registration of a development agreement with The Parry Sound Affordable Housing Development Corporation – 82 Gibson Street. This is the William Beatty School redevelopment.

I may not attend this week’s meeting given the light agenda and the rapidly disappearing evening light.

Friday Evening at the Champaigne Street Boat Launch

friday-evening-champaigne-street

 

The Parry Sound Finance Calculator

09 Sunday Oct 2016

Posted by in Budget/Financial, Parry Sound

≈ Comments Off on The Parry Sound Finance Calculator

Tags

, , ,

The Town of Parry Sound unveiled an online budget survey a couple of weeks ago to solicit public input as to where residents and businesses would like to see their tax dollars apportioned, and where there should be more, or less, invested.

You can access the calculator through this link.

I have completed the survey and submitted my results. There have been very few responses to date and I would encourage you to take a few minutes, less than ten, to look at the site and submit your thoughts. I think there are opportunities to improve the survey methodology, but it still offers Staff and Council some sense of what people are thinking.

Once you complete and submit your survey results, you will be presented with the results to date. A survey of this sort shouldn’t be a black hole where only the insiders see the results so I’m happy that the public is getting realtime access.

Take a few minutes between innings, or at half time, to check out, and fill out, the survey.

 

 

Deputation to Town of Parry Sound Council – 2016-10-04

05 Wednesday Oct 2016

Posted by in Budget/Financial, Parry Sound, Reflections, Town Council, Urban Development

≈ 6 Comments

Tags

, , , , , ,

It was a rather short meeting last night, with only three people in the audience. It may have been because of the prospect of my deputation, or it might have been the Blue Jays playoff game. Here is the text of my deputation last night.

“This deputation relates to Item 9.3.3 on the agenda – Review of New Multi-Residential Tax Class

I have come to think of Parry Sound as an island municipality in that it sits on a very limited piece of land with essentially no opportunity for expansion. This means as a community we need to carefully consider how we develop what limited land is available in the best manner possible so as to provide residents and businesses with the best value for their municipal tax dollars.

What is obvious is that despite the limited land resources of our island municipality we are required to provide the majority of the community and social services for the West Parry Sound District. In most cases these services are located in prime locations and are not subject to property taxation, even though they make use of Town services, and in some cases require services above and beyond what is supplied to most residential and business property owners. A simple drive from the Town Office past the Mall provides evidence of the many properties that are exempt from property taxation on their assessed value, including churches, schools, social services organizations and colleges. In some cases, when they are taxed, it is far below what other businesses and residents pay. Add to this the home for the aged, the hospital, the brown field properties, the railways, the District Museum, and even the assessment reductions provided to properties directly adjacent to the rail line, and the loss in tax revenue is considerable. Yet these organizations provide critical services and support to neighbouring municipalities who carry none of the financial burden in terms of lost tax revenue, despite having a much, much larger land area and a far higher assessment base. Parry Sound currently has by far the highest tax rate in the district, in part as a result of the revenues lost because of these taxation exempt institutions. I estimate that these tax exempt properties account for between 10 and 15% of the Town’s total assessment, and add a similar amount to every residents and businesses property tax bill.

Hosting these organizations is part of our contribution to making West Parry Sound a better place to live for everyone, and I do not begrudge the additional tax costs. I do feel going forward that Council needs to carefully consider the cost to businesses and residents of attracting and supporting additional tax exempt organizations. These organizations often occupy prime real estate that could be used for commercial and residential purposes, both of which provide the taxes to support the required infrastructure build, upgrades, and maintenance. It has been argued that these organizations bring additional population who live in Parry Sound and directly support the Town through property taxes. It is my experience that many of these people, notably the higher earning folks, actually live in the surrounding communities, enriching the tax base of these communities because they want to be by a lake or the bay, have a large piece of land, all while paying lower taxes. And what services they need can be sourced in Parry Sound. A number of our neighbours are even suggesting Parry Sound should build a swimming pool so that they won’t be forced to drive to Bracebridge. Like Donald Trump has said, it’s legal and it’s smart business to keep your taxes low. But of course someone has to pay for services and the required support.

The Town is interested in extending Parry Sound Drive up to Old Highway 69, but the business model is hard to rationalize because the Town only is able to tax properties on one side of the road. Once again Parry Sound pays and our neighbours derive considerable benefit.

As we enter the 2017 budget discussions and Council considers Item 9.3.3, which I consider to be a very reasonable request and a relative ‘drop in the bucket’ in terms of lost revenue, I suggest the Town carefully consider how it can strike a reasonable balance between being the go-to resource for District social services while not burdening Parry Sound businesses and residents with the increasingly high cost of the required support.

One last thought. The location of the K-12 school is yet to be decided. I would suggest that the Town do what it can to support having the school built in one of our neighbouring municipalities, McDougall or Seguin. Foregoing the school would allow for the existing high school property to be adapted for commercial and/or residential purposes that would expand the assessment base and provide for additional tax revenues with little or no need for additional infrastructure. Any new school would not only occupy a valuable part of our little island municipality, but it would also come with additional costs. Beyond the expected costs to Parry Sound to fund supporting infrastructure upgrades for any new K-12 school, there would likely be additional, unexpected costs down the line, that will be the burden of the Parry Sound taxpayer. Witness the new Parry Sound Public School, in addition to the debentured costs for required infrastructure there is now talk of additional road changes and extensions to ease a parking problem, at the expense of Parry Sound residents and businesses, and to the great annoyance of local residents.

As a municipality we need to be smart. It is not our responsibility to provide resources and services for our rich neighbouring municipalities at the cost of our local residents and businesses. Supporting the unfortunate and needy is something we should do. The rich folks know how to take care of themselves.”

Island? This is an island.

redwood1890-20160908-_dsc3382

 

 

Correction – Council Agenda Preview – October 4, 2016

02 Sunday Oct 2016

Posted by in Budget/Financial, Correction/Clarification, Town Council

≈ Comments Off on Correction – Council Agenda Preview – October 4, 2016

Tags

, ,

It has been pointed out to me that I incorrectly interchanged the words tax levy and tax rate in my recent post under Item 9.3.2. The corrected text is provided below.

If the Town levy is $15 million (for example) and the 2017 levy increase is 2%, then the total levy will be $15.3 million, regardless of any assessment changes. But your tax rate may be going up by 7%, 2% for the levy increase and 5% for the drop in the assessed value of your property (if that is the case for your property). In theory you should see your taxes only go up 2%, not the 7% of your tax rate increase. If however, your assessment went up 2% it is likely that your taxes will go up 2.5% (2% levy increase, plus a phased in assessment increase of about 0.5%), assuming that the Town is able and willing to segregate the assessment changes and apply them individually. I guess this shouldn’t be a problem as the drop in assessment for most properties was based on property class, i.e., residential, or multi-residential, or farm or commercial, etc. But a few property taxes may still be screwed up with the assessment value changes, and cases could fall ‘between the cracks’. I suspect that it will mean a bunch of work for the Finance Department and a new set of property class tax rates.

Although the Town may prefer to use the concept of levy and levy increase rather than tax rate and tax rate increase, it will still need to tax properties using a tax rate. I suspect that since assessments in Parry Sound dropped more than our neighbours the difference in tax rates will be even greater.

Corrected version with the earlier text crossed out and added text underlined.

9.3.2 – Revision to the Budget and Financial Controls Policy. Resolution. That Council hereby approves the Budget and Financial Controls Policy, attached as Schedule A, for the Corporation of the Town of Parry Sound; and Further that Council rescind Resolution 2015-139.

This is a big issue, with a rather mundane title. The net/net is that with the new property assessments the Town will lose about 5% of its tax revenues due to lower assessments on the existing properties if it uses the existing tax rates. There is interest in recasting the concept of taxes from a municipal tax levy rate to a municipal tax rate levy. To recoup the loss of revenue from the reassessment the Town will need to raise the tax levy rate by 5%, but the tax rate levy would stay the same. Get it? It’s not really smoke and mirrors, it’s trying to manage the optics of a situation. There will be any number of issues related to the revised property assessments. This Resolution seemingly attempts to change little in terms of overall financial costs to the town residents but make the make the process a little more palatable. “Town of Parry Sound intends to raise tax levy rate 5%. Residents freak, Stay tuned.” Much ado about not much.

I apologize for the confusion. Nothing is really changing, it’s how it’s being spun. But your taxes will be going up in 2017, but probably not as much as your tax rate would suggest.

 

Council Agenda Preview – October 4, 2016

02 Sunday Oct 2016

Posted by in Budget/Financial, Parry Sound, Sights, Town Council

≈ Comments Off on Council Agenda Preview – October 4, 2016

Tags

, , , , , , ,

There are a number of interesting items on the agenda and I direct your attention to 4.2, 9.3.2, 9.3.3 and 9.4.1. I offer comments for many of the agenda items in the text below.

Item 9.6.1 – Highway signage, deserves some upfront commentary. The issue was also featured in Friday’s Beacon Star. It was about three years ago that signs started to proliferate along the 400. By now I estimate that there are about 1 or 2 per kilometre between Parry Sound and Mactier. About two years ago I was thinking about taking a photograph of each of the signs and then hosting an ‘ugliest sign’ competition. Enough qualified to make it a real contest. I didn’t get around to it in the end, but still feel they are eyesores in what is a very attractive part of the 400. I prefer to keep an eye out for the Inuksuks that pop up along the 400. My complaint about the signs is that not only are there too many of them, for the most part they look ‘cheesy’, cheaply done and poorly considered. Who is it that thought anyone driving at 100 km/hr, more likely 120 km/hr, can read more than a brand name and perhaps a URL? These signs are like the junk flyers that we resent receiving in our mail and email. I’m not sure there is any way to make these signs more aesthetically appealing, so I would rather they just disappeared. But it seems too many crappy signs are the price of today’s society. One would have thought that with the internet and social media that there would be less need for physical billboards. Part of the problem is that they are so cheap to rent that it is a no-brainer to take several if you can. I’ll let the sign companies, the businesses, and the MTO work it out. I’d rather pay attention to the proliferation of crappy signs in Parry Sound. Everyone talks about how nice the flowers are in other tourist towns, but they never mention that these same towns are not littered with ugly signs and unattractive storefronts. You can’t hide ugly with flowers. I can understand it’s hard to say no to people and businesses that squeal when you don’t let them do what is in their  business interests even if it impacts negatively on Parry Sound as a whole.

Letters

4.1 – Donald Sanderson, Chief Executive Officer, WPSHC & Lakeland Long Term Care. Re: Request for Contribution and Deputation before Council

4.2 – R. James Chapman, 139 William Street. Re: Concerns about the application for the extension of the current land use on the property owned by Dean and Deborah Adams, 114 Williams Street.
An interesting letter that raises a number of important considerations in terms of regulations and enforcement. The correspondent asks for the Town to provide a response to his very reasonable questions. None is offered in this council meeting package. I hope we will see one forthcoming. Why have regulations if they are not enforced? There will always be those who push the boundaries, and those that regularly step over them. That’s why we have elected officials and public servants, to review and enforce existing laws and regulations to ensure that people are protected from those who step over the line. It takes courage to step up and complain publicly about a neighbour who seems to be ignoring town by-laws, much less common consideration.

Resolutions and Direction to Staff

9.3.1 – 2017 Audit Services RFP. Direction. That Staff proceed to prepare an RFP for External Audit Services for the Town of Parry Sound’s Fiscal Years 2017 to 2021; And that Staff contact all of the boards and committees consolidated into the Town of Parry Sound’s financial statements to get their support for a group RFP.
It’s that time when audit services need to be reviewed and a request for proposal be issued. In this case the intention is to roll up a couple of other Town of Parry Sound organizations into the same audit for the purpose of convenience and cost savings.

9.3.2 – Revision to the Budget and Financial Controls Policy. Resolution. That Council hereby approves the Budget and Financial Controls Policy, attached as Schedule A, for the Corporation of the Town of Parry Sound; and Further that Council rescind Resolution 2015-139. This is a big issue, with a rather mundane title.
The net/net is that with the new property assessments the Town will lose about 5% of its tax revenues due to lower assessments on the existing properties. There is interest in recasting the concept of taxes from a municipal tax levy to a municipal tax rate. To recoup the loss of revenue from the reassessment the Town will need to raise the tax levy by 5%, but the tax rate would stay the same. Get it? It’s not really smoke and mirrors, it’s trying to manage the optics of a situation. There will be any number of issues related to the revised property assessments. This Resolution seemingly attempts to change little in terms of overall financial costs to the town residents but make the make the process a little more palatable. “Town of Parry Sound intends to raise tax levy 5%. Residents freak, Stay tuned.” Much ado about not much.

9.3.3 – Review of New Multi-Residential Tax Class. Direction. That Staff review the current requirements for admission into the New Multi-Residential Tax Class and bring back a new by-law subject to Option 1 (Open the class to new affordable housing projects) outlined in this report.
This is part of a much larger issue related to tax rates in Parry Sound, especially requests for reduced tax rates to support affordable housing. While this does have considerable merit from a social perspective, it comes at the expense of higher tax rates for those who do not live in affordable housing. With a very limited footprint, Parry Sound is home to an exceptionally high proportion of provincially and federally funded service organizations, hospitals, churches, schools, and affordable housing projects when compared to neighbouring municipalities. This diverts valuable tax revenue properties to no tax, or low tax uses, that still make use of all of the Town’s services, and in some cases require even more services. The Town needs to perform an audit of these no tax / low tax uses and share this with the public so residents can understand if there is a ‘fair’ balance. What is the real cost to property owners in Parry Sound of hosting these not-for-profit organizations? On the surface there appears to be many lost lost opportunities to expand the tax base and lower taxes for residents and businesses? Are some of these organizations better located in the surrounding municipalities? I will suggest that the new school be built in McDougall or Seguin, and the current high school be sold for business and/or residential development, preferably not lower revenue generating not-for-profit or affordable housing.

9.3.4 – Review of Water and Wastewater Rates. Direction. That Staff review the current water & wastewater rate structure and prepare a report for Council on a recommended rate structure.
This is another interesting bit of ‘housekeeping’. There is interest in reviewing the cost structure for water billing and use. I suggest people read the full R&R in the agenda package. The Town, for metered users, charges about $74 per month for water supply and wastewater, and allots 1,000 gallons, with additional usage charged at about $10 per 1,000 gallons. Unmetered residential users are charged about $116 per month. What is interesting is the estimate that the average household of four people uses about 6,000 gallons per month. With metered water this would cost on the order of $124 per month, versus the $116 charged for unmetered users. Not all that different, but I wonder if people would stop washing their driveways if they were paying by the gallon. A review is appropriate in my opinion of both rates and parity. One suggestion – how about we use litres instead of gallons. Gallons is so 1960s, or American. Your choice.

9.4.1 – Clean Water and Wastewater Fund – Waubeek Street Reconstruction. Resolution. That Council resolve that the highest priority for the Clean Water and Wastewater Fund (CWWF) is the rehabilitation of Waubeek Street from Avenue Road to Wood Street, including roadwork, water main, sanitary, force main and storm sewer replacement, and further; That Council directs staff to proceed with the funding application submission.
This probably would include a much needed rebuild of Waubeek Street as well. Luck favours the prepared.

9.6.1 – Highway Signage. Resolution. Whereas small business drives the economy not only in the West Parry Sound area but across the province of Ontario; and Whereas small business operators and the local economy depend on those travelling to the area and signage is invaluable to provide both advertising and direction particularly on restricted access roadways such as Hwy 400; and As such, The Town of Parry Sound would ask the Ministry of Transportation to review their highway sign regulations looking to provide reduced costs, greater opportunity and increased stability for small business tourism operators and others with respect to its signage regulations on highway right-of-ways; and Further that this resolution be forwarded to the Honourable Kathleen Wynne, Premiere, the Honourable Steven Del Ducca, Minister of Transportation, Norm Miller, MPP for Parry Sound-Muskoka, the Association of Municipalities of Ontario, the District of Parry Sound Municipal Association, the Federation of Northern Ontario Municipalities and Ontario Small Urban Municipalities.
Sure let’s continue to junk up the scenery on Hwy 400 and make it consistent with the ‘quaint’ junked up signs of Parry Sound. If you want to impress at a job interview and you are a guy you usually show up showered and shaved, or trimmed. You only have one chance to make a good first impression. Continue to look sloppy and you will be considered sloppy, unless of course you are a star athlete or actor. In those cases appearances can be deceiving, but not when it comes to towns. 

By-laws

10.1.1 – Fire Dispatch Agreement. Being a By-law to authorize the execution of an agreement between the Town of Parry Sound and West Parry Sound Health Centre for the provision of Fire Department Dispatch Services.

10.3.1 – Approval of funding agreement with the Province of Ontario for the Ontario Community Infrastructure Fund – Formula Based Component Spokesperson: Being a By-law to authorize the execution of an Ontario Community Infrastructure Fund Formula-Based Component Agreement between Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Ontario (as represented by the Minister of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs) and the Corporation of the Town of Parry Sound.

I’ll probably be at the council meeting on Tuesday evening. I may make a deputation regarding Item 9.3.3, I’m concerned that the proliferation of low-tax and no-tax development in Parry Sound is hurting our ability to fund critically important initiatives.

October Arrives at the Parry Sound Waterfront. Colour to Follow.

redwood1890-20161001-_ds65033