Tag Archives: McKellar

wet Dreams? Part 3

04 Sunday Feb 2018

Posted by in Budget/Financial, Parry Sound, Reflections

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , ,

Swimming in Numbers.

In the end it’s about the numbers. There is no question in my mind that there is no one against a pool, aquatic centre or athletic complex on the basis of its contribution to the community. There may have been people for and against the Walmart on principle and not numbers. And there were people for and against fluoridation, and the numbers didn’t really matter. In the case of a pool it’s all about the numbers at the council level.

Let’s start with some numbers. These numbers can be used to tell any number of stories, but we will focus on only a couple that are relevant to a municipal pool.

The numbers in the table above are derived from a few sources, notably StatCan, MPAC, and individual municipal budgets and tax rate bylaws. The Occupied Home figures from StatCan, basically tells you how many of the properties are not used seasonally, that is they are residents and not cottagers. The MPAC Values represent the property values in the various municipalities. To make things a little easier to digest I have normalized the figures with the Town of Parry Sound being set at 1. That means all of the properties in Seguin have about four times the values of those in Parry Sound. McKellar property values total about four fifths that of Parry Sound. Some of these numbers may be surprising. Tax rates are similarly expressed relative to those of Parry Sound. For example, a person in Parry Sound paying $2,000 of municipal tax on their property would pay $540 in Seguin for a property with a similar MPAC assessed property value, $740 in McKellar and $880 in McDougall. This does not include the education tax levy which is the same in each municipality. The education portion represents about 10% of my total tax bill in Parry Sound but would represent about 35% of the tax bill of someone in Seguin or the Archipelago. We pay exactly the same rate for education taxes, but it ‘hurts’ more in a relative sense in the other municipalities.

If this is the financial backdrop for a pool project, it’s important to understand the implications for each of the municipalities. I have a pretty good idea of the more important considerations in Parry Sound and will imagine some of the dynamics and concerns in the other municipalities. At this point Carling, McDougall and the Archipelago have expressed initial interest in a municipal pool project. McKellar has declined to participate. Seguin has not yet responded as far as a I know, and I believe Parry Sound has not committed but is likely to agree to participate in looking at the options.

Town of Parry Sound

Parry Sound Town Council is generally in favour of a pool if it can be done as part of an equitable long-term sharing agreement with the other municipalities. Going alone would increase the Town levied taxes by about 12% as mentioned in an earlier post, and these taxes are already four-times that of Seguin and the Archipelago.

The Town is likely to have other concerns that would need to be addressed in any agreement. It’s obvious the pool would need to be in Parry Sound, if only for access to a secure supply of treated water. None of the other communities would be able to provide this service and the cost of building and operating a treatment facility would make the pool project too expensive. But, the Town has concerns about losing a portion of its water treatment capacity to a project that will not generate revenue. Who pays for additional capacity if at a later date capacity equivalent to that used by the pool is required for development?

There is also the prospect of losing prime real estate to another project that will not generate property taxes. The Town now has more than two dozen facilities occupying prime real estate that don’t pay taxes. This includes churches as well as social service and medical service providers. These groups enhance the quality of life for Parry Sounders, but they also enhance the quality of life of those in the surrounding communities. These facilities make use of, and raise the cost of, tax subsidized services, increasing the load on tax payers of Parry Sound.

Would a consortium of municipalities be willing to give Parry Sound a credit on the tax assessed value of a municipal pool? Assuming an ‘assessed’ value of $11+ million for a pool would suggest that if it were a business or residential property it would pay about $150,000 in annual municipal taxes. Would the consortium be willing to credit the Town that amount against their contribution? Oh, oh, I hear the howls already!

For Parry Sound a pool is not that interesting unless acceptable terms were negotiated. What might be acceptable to Parry Sound might not be acceptable to its neighbours.

The Archipelago and Seguin

I am lumping these two together because they largely share the same interests, although they might not share the same ways of thinking.

Issue one is the tax payer. The majority of Seguin and Archipelago taxes are paid for by seasonal property owners. What they want is limited services and low taxes. They are paying two sets of taxes, one for their home in ‘Hogtown’, and another for their cottage in ‘God’s Country’. They don’t need a pool, they have one they are already paying for back home. These are informed folks who do not want to pay for anything more than is absolutely necessary to ensure a road to their cottage, and rules to prevent their neighbour from building a bigger dock or ‘bunkie’ than they have. And when it comes to roads they are already paying for that last ‘mile’ of driveway to access their ‘cottage’.

There are still folks in both municipalities who live, work, and contribute to the larger West Parry Sound community. In principle, they probably would like a pool, but not if it costs that much. It’s a bit different depending on whether you live in The Archipelago or Seguin. Archipelago residents really have only one choice where to go for shopping and services – Parry Sound. Sudbury, Huntsville and Bracebridge are a bit too far. For Seguinites it’s a bit more nuanced. Given the proximity of Huntsville and especially Bracebridge, it becomes a toss-up as to whether you drive to either one of those towns or Parry Sound. It may not even be a toss-up for those in Rosseau. Once you’re in Bracebridge for a pool you have more options in terms of their recreation centre and shopping. Pay more taxes for a pool in Parry Sound that you won’t use? The eastern Seguinites will probably say no. For those in Orrville a Parry Sound pool might be desirable, if they think they will use a pool. Not all will. The situation for Archipelagians is more obvious if they want a pool. That may be why they have expressed initial interest in a community pool discussion.

Both communities offer their seasonal residents the lowest taxes possible. These are the municipalities that boast multiple multimillion dollar properties. A quick look online revealed numerous, and I mean numerous, properties with valuations in excess of $5 million each in Seguin. That $5 million dollar ‘cottage’ would pay about $18,000 in Seguin taxes (not including education taxes). Raising their taxes 2% would mean an additional $360 in taxes. That might mean foregoing a couple less bottles of fine wine, probably very fine wine. When you make this type of money though, a dollar spent on something you really don’t want hurts more than you might imagine. And if it hurts they squeal. With a ward system they have ears to squeal into.

Carling and McKellar

I’m lumping these together to save words even though McKellar has declined participation. The situation these municipalities share is similar. Heading off to Sudbury or Muskoka for a pool is not really practical. At the same time, they both have more than two-thirds of their property value owned by seasonal residents and face the same issues discussed with regard to Seguin and the Archipelago.

The property values in both of these municipalities approach but don’t come consistently close to the stratified values of the Seguin and Archipelago properties. Seasonal residents of both municipalities are likely to pushback against any increase. Perhaps in anticipation of this McKellar’s council has already declared their lack of interest and retreated to their bunker.

McDougall

McDougall is much like Parry Sound in many ways, but not all. If you have driven along Big Sound Road you realize that there are a number of million dollar plus properties, just not the multimillion properties of Seguin and the Archipelago. Parry Sound does not have these types of properties, which may explain why the ‘rich folk’ who work in Parry Sound don’t live in Parry Sound. Taxes in McDougall are also the highest in the area, but still less than half of Parry Sound’s. It’s an easy ride from McDougall, at least the major population centre of Nobel, to Parry Sound for shopping and making use of a municipal pool.

Who Pays What?

This will certainly be a point of discussion and probably disagreement. Do you share expenses on the basis of permanent population, seasonal plus permanent population, private dwelling numbers, or MPAC assessment? I’m sure the lower tax municipalities, with higher assessment values and lower populations, would prefer a population-based sharing. Parry Sound would prefer an assessment-based allocation.

Both methods of allocation are currently being used. Belvedere Heights allocates municipal contributions on the basis of MPAC assessed property values. By this measure Parry Sound, The Archipelago, McDougall and McKellar all pay about the same, plus/minus $15,000. Carling pays about $40,000 more and Seguin pays about four-times as much. This is because Seguin in particular has a massive assessment base with all of those multimillion dollar ‘cottages’.

The Reginal Health Unit on the other hand allocates municipal contributions on the basis of the MPAC 2014 population count. This makes the Town of Parry Sound the largest contributor, while the Archipelago pays next to nothing. This makes sense as health services are delivered on a per person basis, although it is likely our ‘summer visitors’ and cottagers make considerable use of the hospital, albeit not so much the health unit services.

Playing Arbitrage

The situation with McKellar is interesting to think about. They have expressed no interest in a community pool, but could we deny McKellar residents the right to use the pool? Probably not. We would just need to charge a premium for those who want to use the pool but whose municipality doesn’t provide support. It’s a tricky situation. We are likely to have visitors interested in using a pool. Some will be tourists with no relation to the community and there will be others who are friends or family of area residents whose municipalities contribute to the pool. Charge too much and the Town looks like a money grabbing community, charge too little and it will make it cheaper for other municipalities and their residents to not participate in supporting the community pool. But then again, any additional revenue is probably ‘profit’. What is the additional cost of ten visitors compared to the corresponding dollars of non-resident income?

Let’s look at the McKellar situation as an example of what communities might want to think about. If McKellar were to participate in the pool they would probably be on the hook for about $85,000 per year (permanent population basis). That would raise their taxes by a bit less than 1.5%. On a property value basis, let’ assume that for a $250,000 property, not a high-end cottage, this would amount to an increase of about $18 per year. In exchange for this the resident could purchase an annual pool pass for let’s say $1,000. Also assume the non-resident rate is $1,400, a 40% premium. For that person having McKellar in the consortium is a big savings. It’s likely that it would be a break-even event for residents if they were only to use the pool twice a year and pay a resident as opposed to non-resident single visit rate.

What about McKellar as a whole. I would be surprised that if more than 30 pool memberships were sold to McKellar residents. That would bring in $30,000 of revenue as a ‘resident’. The non-resident rate would bring in $42,000, a difference of $12,000. That’s not close to the $85,000 it would cost McKellar to participate in the consortium. McKellar would be better off reimbursing pool users the $400 cost of a non-resident membership. It would raise taxes only a fraction of a percent if the amount couldn’t be found in petty cash.

That’s what arbitrage is all about, capturing profit by exploiting the difference between prices in different markets. In theory at least, it could work to the benefit of a community like McKellar to sit outside. It would be hard to refuse McKellar residents access to the pool because McKellar isn’t party to the pool partnership or charge them the appropriate premium to cover the real benefit they are receiving.

Final Thoughts

The numbers and the individual interests of municipalities are what will drive the decision. Understand the numbers and you can perhaps better anticipate and address concerns at your local municipal level.

There is also a social issue that needs to be addressed. A municipal pool is not like roads or health services that we all use in one way or another, even if we don’t have a car or never get sick. I’ll take a look at that in the next and final installment.

 

 

 

 

2016 Sunshine List Mashup

05 Wednesday Apr 2017

Posted by in Budget/Financial, Parry Sound, Reflections

≈ Comments Off on 2016 Sunshine List Mashup

Tags

, , , , , , ,

Or, fun with figures.

I wasn’t going to post about the recently released 2016 Sunshine list, but I was ‘egged’ into it. I really don’t have a problem with what people are paid as long as they are doing their job and they are earning what they are paid. Given my regular interaction with the senior staff in Parry Sound I won’t complain. They seem to be ‘earning their pay’.

More interesting I thought was to look at how the 2016 Sunshine List looks across the West Parry Sound District, and what it reflects. Mashing together the 2016 Sunshine List and the recent 2016 Census figures provided for some interesting insights. Here are the figures, with some explanation. (Apologies to Whitestone for being excluded.)

(Click on any of the tables for a larger view.)

The table above summarizes the combined salaries and benefit figures reported for the area municipalities. Each of the municipalities uses slightly different titles for the various senior management positions so I have associated them to the best of my abilities. In the case of the Archipelago and Parry Sound there are a couple of positions that don’t fit the standard categories, these are Corporate Services and Emergency and Protective Services respectively.

This next table relates the cost for each position as a function of fulltime residences. It reveals a number of significant discrepancies in terms of the cost of all Sunshine List senior staff for municipalities, from a low of $47 per person, to a high of $1,167. But this is really not a fair comparison as some of the municipalities have far more seasonal than fulltime residents. Unfortunately, the census data doesn’t provide information on seasonal resident numbers. So let’s look at the same Salaries & Benefits figures as a function of the total Private Dwellings in each municipality. This includes both fulltime and seasonal properties.

This figure is closer to a reasonable estimate of Sunshine List ‘efficiency’, but it does not include the impact of businesses. If the number of business properties were to be included I suspect that Parry Sound would show a much more favourable ‘efficiency factor’.

So there are the 2016 Sunshine List figures with a little bit of analysis. A set of figures from the 2016 Census report that a I found interesting relates to municipality fulltime population and the number of private  dwellings (below). The numbers range from a high of 5.1 dwellings per person (Archipelago), to a low of 0.5 dwellings per person in Parry Sound. The difference obviously is the large number of seasonal residences in the Archipelago, Carling and McKellar. Those simple figures tell you everything you need to know about why amalgamation will not be something the municipalities spontaneously decide to do. It’s possible to imagine a Parry Sound and McDougall amalgamation, and perhaps an Archipelago and Carling amalgamation if they wanted to get better efficiency. The ‘business models’ are reasonably aligned. But don’t even think about it, much less talk about it. It’s a bit like integration in the U.S. South in the 60s. It took Federal legislation to make that happen. In the case of West Parry Sound it will take Provincial legislation. With Bay Street just a short walk away from the Provincial Legislature it’s – not – going – to – happen. Ever!

Notes:

  1. The 2016 Sunshine list is a bit of a bear to work with. I didn’t come across a simple PDF version as in earlier years. It’s available as a variety of data dumps. The easiest in my opinion was the CSV format file that can be searched with Excel.
  2. The municipalities that have only a single person hitting the Sunshine List may well have personnel just under the $100,000 cutoff, who would not be included in this report.
  3. It’s interesting to see how many police officers are on the Sunshine List. In the end, I think our neighbouring municipalities took the prudent course of action by biting the bullet and continuing on with OPP service.

 

REDAC Regional Market Plan Reflections

10 Saturday Sep 2016

Posted by in Parry Sound, Reflections, Seguin Township

≈ 6 Comments

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , ,

A few thoughts after reviewing the REDAC Regional Marketing Plan issued June 2016.

Positives:

  1. The report was not too shy in identifying some of the issues and challenges facing the region in terms of increasing economic development.
  2. There was a clear understanding that it is one thing to prepare a plan, and another to fund and effectively implement the plan.
  3. The plan appropriately identified the need for monitoring and assessing the effectiveness of any marketing programs.

Oversights:

Several meaningful issues were overlooked in the report. Was it a case of simply not recognizing the issues, or was it a case of ‘sweeping it under the carpet’. My sense of some important points that were overlooked:

  1. Services
  2. Tax differentials
  3. Housing value
  4. Railways

Services:

The services available to homeowners and businesses varies considerably throughout the area studied in the REDAC report (Parry Sound, McDougall, Seguin, and Carling). These include:

  • Municipal water
  • Municipal sewer
  • Natural gas

There was mention of the need for better internet connectivity. For the most part it’s not that big an issue except at the residential level. Wireless service is actually quite good, and for businesses it is not an unreasonable expense if it impacts business and profitability. They aren’t streaming video at work. Businesses out in the backwoods of the region really can’t expect ‘fibre’ type service, and if they really needed it they would not be located where they are. Homeowners who want to stream video at home have an issue as wireless can be expensive. Better, actually mostly cheaper, internet services are a nice to have that would help attract people and businesses to the area.

Real businesses that employ people and serve customers on site, not the retired consultant type shop, need water and sewer service. Yes, a well and septic bed can do the job, but it raises an unreasonable burden of effort for businesses that have other things to think about. Think about the new high school to be built in the area. Will they locate somewhere that depends on wells and sewers? Perhaps, but given their preferences they would rather not be doing weekly water tests to make sure the kids aren’t drinking contaminated water following that big rain. And how big a septic bed is needed for a high school of 1,000 students? Right, just about the size of a football or soccer field.

A bigger issue is the availability of natural gas. Electricity is expensive, especially for uses like heating. Natural gas is remarkably inexpensive, but it requires an infrastructure that is only available in Parry Sound and a relatively select number of addresses in the other municipalities. Propane is an option, but it’s not nearly as cheap or convenient as natural gas. I suspect a large number of people who installed electric baseboards when electricity was cheap regret not putting in more insulation, or installing a furnace and ducting that could be used with propane, a heat pump, or natural gas when it arrived along their road.

Tax Differentials:

The tax rates on property in the five municipalities vary about three-fold, with Seguin at the low end and Parry Sound at the top. Taxes reflect a balance of what services municipal residents and business want to receive and how much they are willing to pay for them. The lower taxes in the surrounding regions do not arise from happenstance, they reflect the interests of the taxpayers.

Municipalities like the Town of Parry Sound are stretched in terms of the taxes they can collect and the services they are expected to deliver. Adding new taxable residents and businesses is a priority as much of the infrastructure is already established and any increased revenues from new residents and businesses would be ‘profitable’, and help support necessary infrastructure upgrades for all. Economic development that leads to increased property values is very much in the interests of Parry Sound. The only real revenue the Town has is from the taxation of property and government grants.

The other municipalities do not have the same needs for more development and greater tax revenues. This is reflected in their lower tax rates. Economic development is something that is nice to talk about, because it reflects positively on councils. But do they really want it? Is it possible that more development will lead to a requirement for new services that might mean higher tax rates? Nobody likes to raise property taxes, especially if your municipality depends on being the low tax provider.

I think the residents of these municipalities would rather not promote development. Many of them like it the way it is. Seasonal residents are complaining about the development of certain lakes and are calling for a moratorium on new cottages. And I’m not sure that people really like the idea of losing the small town, or cottage area, feeling that comes with more development. If permanent and seasonal residents can enjoy low taxes and the services of a town like Parry Sound next door or Bracebridge a little further away, why do they need more ‘economic development’? There is no benefit, only the potential for change and higher taxes.

The tax differential between municipalities drives much more than was ever suggested in the REDAC report.

Substandard Housing Value:

This mostly applies to the Town of Parry Sound. Housing in Parry Sound is by Toronto standards cheap;  but it is a poor value. There are any number of reasons for this, none of which are easily fixed by politicians. In more affluent regions many of these houses would be leveled and replaced with the types of housing that young families need and can afford. The development of well-designed condo facilities offers some hope for better value housing in Parry Sound, but this type of housing will not appeal to those with families who want a backyard. They can get that type of housing in the Barrie, Orillia and Owen Sound areas, where there are also the jobs to support the associated cost of this housing. Chicken and egg, or egg and chicken?

The Railways:

Again mostly a Parry Sound issue. Canadian National and Canadian Pacific together run about twenty or more heavy freight trains through Parry Sound every day and represent a serious deterrent to business investment and residential development. Not surprisingly, the most substantial recent residential development, Silver Birch, is located far from the railway tracks. Bt it comes at a price, Highway 400 with it’s noisy weekend summer traffic. One development in Parry Sound close to the tracks, and subject to crossings that see trains going both ways, has struggled despite offering attractive ‘Southern Ontario’ single family homes. The issue is not just the risk of a Lac Megantic type event, or even the occasional road blockages, it’s the day-in, day-out, sound of air horns blasting at six crossings and the squeal of the wheels as they round the many curves, day and night. Why build a business in Parry Sound if you can build in Seguin or McDougall?  Oh, there’s the issue of services and infrastructure. Why not just go to communities like Orillia, Barrie and the ‘suburban’ areas of Muskoka, where you are not subject to trains in the same manner and you have access to more customers (retail and service), cheaper transport costs (manufacturing), and a larger employment pool?

 

Parry Sound Bay and Beyond can become an attractive destination for both people and businesses. The trouble is that there are too many other Southern Ontario municipalities that are already much more attractive. Once these destinations reach their limit to host businesses and new homes people will begin to look at Parry Sound Bay and Beyond. That is unless we can get our act together, work together, and create the infrastructure to compete. But area municipalities, with the exception of Parry Sound have more than enough money to continue operating as they have for the last twenty years, for another twenty years, without attracting any new residents or businesses. These municipalities have little motivation to do anything new. They just need to pretend to be interested lest permanent residents and businesses think they don’t play nicely with others.

Provincial and Federal civil servants are quite happy to facilitate and fund discussions of economic development in the West Parry Sound area. It their job to do it. And they are well paid jobs. By gosh they will do their best to get it done, regardless of the odds. It reminds me of the continuous negotiations in the Middle East between the Israelis and the Palestinians facilitated by the United States. The US State Department is tasked with getting a real agreement between these two parties and they try their best. It’s their job, even though there is no prospect of any type of agreement. At this point Israel has everything it needs in the region. It has the wealth, military strength and political influence to ensure nothing is taken from them. It is not in their interest to negotiate. Any appearance of willingness to negotiate is strictly a function of making nice with the President of the United States who gets it in their mind every now and then that they want to gain statesman status by brokering a grand peace agreement.

Final Thoughts

I started out this review of the REDAC Regional Marketing Plan expecting to be critical of Whitestone, McKellar and The Archipelago for not participating in the REDAC economic development process. Looking at things a little more closely I have come to realize that they are perhaps the only honest brokers in the region, willing to admit that not only do they not need regional cooperation, they are actually better off without it. I will give a pass also to the Town of Parry Sound. I believe they do support regional economic development because they desperately need the increased tax base to manage tax rates and support additional infrastructure necessary for the larger community.

Even Parry Sound tax rates are on the low end for Northern Ontario as was presented in a survey of Northern Ontario municipalities. I visited Elliot Lake in August and was impressed by the upkeep of the town and the facilities it offers. But it benefits from a population base about twice that of Parry Sound, a much larger geographic area (715 sq. km, versus 13 sq. km), and a tax rate 40% higher.

Regional economic development is something to keep Municipal, Provincial and Federal employees busy, and employed. If Ontario and Canada really want to see additional economic development in the area they need to provide incentives to McDougall and Seguin to hand over enough land to Parry Sound to allow for real economic development, by a municipality that is interested in economic development, and with established infrastructure. Incentives to McDougall and Seguin might include support for policing expenses, and/or broadband infrastructure, and/or an area athletic complex. But that would be a bribe I suppose. Given America’s experience with the billions they have pumped into the Middle East, I expect it wouldn’t work too well here. Take the money and run.

Aside: reading yesterday’s Beacon Star I saw that Seguin has started thinking about their 2017 budget. Their high priority items are summer weekend support for a nursing station in Rosseau, taking responsibility for unassumed roads, and a tennis court. All this with a potential 0% increase in taxes. Seguin is doing just fine with their current business model. Why take on development that might mean responsibility for building the services accompanying business and non-seasonal resident growth? It might mean tax increases and unfamiliar faces. That’s okay, the area municipalities have their cake and are able to eat it as well. They  seem to be riding as high on property values as were the Middle East oil kingdoms were when oil was $100 a barrel. As long as property valuation stay high, and seasonal residents don’t become permanent residents and expect Toronto level services, it’s all okay.

Mismatched Objectives, Taking Off and Heading to Port.
(Best to just get out of each other’s way.)

redwood1890-20160809-_dsc2893

Update: tracking down a link for the Beacon Star article I came across a squabble between Carling and the The Archipelago about phone bills. Yup, sure, let’s invest more in regional cooperation. (Not!) The Town of Parry Sound needs to take on a Singapore or Hong Kong frame of mind. Small is beautiful. It may not be cheap but it offers great value. Can we erect borders?

 

 

Council Agenda Preview – March 1, 2016

26 Friday Feb 2016

Posted by in Parry Sound, Town Council

≈ Comments Off on Council Agenda Preview – March 1, 2016

Tags

, , , , , , , ,

We’re not going to take it anymore. That seems to be one theme before Council this coming week. It concerns the last minute announcement by the Province that facilities such as the Lake Land Long Term Care facility are exempt from property taxes. Further information is available in the proposed resolution below, Item 9.5.1, as well as the full agenda package which is available from the Town or at ParrySounds through the agenda page. The Town is also proposing to support a resolution from the Manitoulin Centennial Manor regarding long term care funding, Item 8.3.

There are a couple of deputations and letters noted below. I expect that I will make a deputation regarding Item 9.2.1, Town Dock Gazebo. It appears that Staff is asking Council for approval to demolish the existing structure on the Town Dock and build a new structure. I have spoken to several people who are not happy with this proposal. I am neutral on this point, but I think that the Waterfront Committee needs to present the residents of Parry Sound with a comprehensive plan regarding the planned changes to, and vison for, the Waterfront. Changes to date have been limited to signage, painting the Town Dock ‘railing’ gray, and painting the benches along the dock and trails. Replacing the gazebo seems to be a big step that will remove one of the visual elements that has defined Parry Sound for a few decades now. And it will come with a significant cost, about $38,000. The proposed design is not unlike what currently exists, so perhaps this isn’t an issue. But I think that Staff and Committees have a responsibility to report to the residents of Parry Sound and solicit their input before implementing removal of heritage type structures. More information is available in the full agenda package.

A reminder – there is a Wednesday, March 2nd, budget meeting to address the Province’s last minute assessment surprise. It starts at 6:00.

A last thought, it concerns Item 4.4. I can see why McKellar Council meetings provide the best entertainment value in the District, especially if you can just shake your head and walk away from it. No, the numbers mentioned in the letter don’t make sense. Parry Sound makes that pretty clear in their response. In my opinion, shared project rates should be set according to property assessment values, not what is required to support a municipality’s services. Just because you spend the money doesn’t mean you are necessarily the wealthiest, or spend it on yourself. Young families spend much more of their income to raise children than seniors who just need to support themselves. Property is wealth and McKellar does pretty well in that regard as a function of their population. This is something that people need to wrap their head around. It’s not how much you earn that will be taxed in the future, it’s what you are worth. That’s the whole idea behind downloading costs to the municipalities. And you know what? It’s probably a fair way to do it. That way we don’t burden people who earn money, or spend money that supports jobs, with the greatest responsibility to support our country. The letter is included in the full agenda package. Enjoy. Perhaps McKellar should consider building a wall so as to avoid contamination from the surrounding municipalities. Walls are pretty popular with populists nowadays.

Correspondence

4.1 – Gary McNabb, G & B McNabb Lumber Company Limited. Re: Water billing concern.

4.2 – Louise Ramsay and Neil Douglas Hammell. Re: Comments about removing fluoride from the water and a thank you to Mayor and Council their continued hard work and dedication. – Response attached.

4.4 – Gord Zulak, McKellar resident. Re: Disposition of Area Financial Allocations – Response attached.

Deputations

5.1 – Anne Bossart, Resident. Re: Update on the activities on Tower Hill.

5.2 – Daryl McMurray, Chair of the DBA. Re: An update on the Downtown Sustainability initiative.

Resolutions and Direction to Staff

8.3 – Long Term Care Funding Support. Resolution. Whereas the Manitoulin Centennial Manor passed a resolution regarding the lack of long term care funding from the province and circulated it to all municipalities and First Nations on Manitoulin Island; and Whereas Belvedere Heights CEO provided an excerpt from the Manitoulin Centennial Manor newsletter which highlights the need for better Long Term Care Funding from the province; and Whereas the Town of Northeastern Manitoulin and the Islands circulated their support of this resolution to, among others, the Town of Parry Sound; Therefore, Be It Resolved that the Council of the Corporation of the Town of Parry Sound supports the following resolution of the Manitoulin Centennial Manor and will forward a copy of this resolution on to the Minister of Health, Dr. Eris Hoskins, MPP Norm Miller, MPP Michael Mantha; the Town of Northeastern Manitoulin and the Islands, Shawanaga First Nation, Wasauksing First Nation and the West Parry Sound Municipalities and the District of Parry Sound Municipal Association for support: Whereas funding requests from member municipalities was frozen from 2010-2011 resulting in a zero growth budget; And Whereas funding increases from the Ministry of Health and Long Term Care has been increased but not kept pace with increases in costs to Long Term Care Facilities including staff salaries and benefits; And Whereas Long Term Care facilities are one of the most important aspects of eldercare in the Province’s care scheme; And Whereas capital renewal funding needs to be provided to ensure facility standards are maintained; And Whereas additional funding is required by the LTC’s to meet increased costs for Behavioral Services Ontario (BSO) to better manage dementia and mental health care; And Whereas funding has not been provided to provide Alternate Care for complex health conditions requiring specialized staff and equipment such as IV therapy or tube feeding especially in smaller facilities; And Whereas attracting and maintaining adequate staff requires recognition of the partnerships that exist between the L TC’ s and the health sector; And Whereas fundraising campaigns have not met the needs of the Manitoulin Centennial Manor in its efforts to maintain superior care for its residents; Be it resolved that the Board request its member municipalities support a request to the Province to increase funding to Long Term Care Facilities in keeping with the foregoing; And Further that this request be forwarded to the Manitoulin Municipal Association for whatever action they deem necessary.

9.2.1 – Town Dock Gazebo. Resolution. That upon the recommendation of the Waterfront Development Advisory Committee, Council support in principle the proposal received from Cedarland Homes Ltd. for a Town Dock gazebo; and That Council direct the Waterfront Development Advisory Committee to discuss design of the gazebo with Cedarland Homes Ltd. with a recommendation to come forward to the March 15, 2016 Council meeting. I offer comments in the introductory portion of this post. It may be a good idea, but let’s get some information out to the Public for comment.

9.2.1 – Visitor Information Centre – Stockey Centre. Resolution. That Council include the delivery of Visitors’ Information Centre (VIC) services as a core service of the Department of Development and Leisure Services; and That the VIC be operated from the Charles W. Stockey Centre for the Performing Arts and Bobby Orr Hall of Fame, commencing May 1, 2016; and That staff provide Council with a quarterly report on VIC operations for the first year of operations. I’m glad to see this initiative, it will benefit visitors and regional businesses.

9.5.1 – Exemption from Property Taxes for Non-Profit Long-term Care Facilities. Resolution. Whereas the Assessment Act, RSO 1990, c A.31 S.3 (1) states that all real property in Ontario is liable to assessment and taxation, subject to the specified exemptions from taxation; and Whereas S.3 (1) paragraph 7.2 indicates that land used as a non-profit long-term care home, is exempt if certain conditions are met; and Whereas the conditions for exemption were released on December 18, 2015 effective January 1, 2016; and Whereas this short time frame, in the middle of the preparation of the municipal budget has resulted significant loss of revenue to the Town from property taxes; and Whereas the Province paid for 85% of the property taxes for these facilities and therefore the exemption is in essence a download to the municipalities; and Whereas the impact of this lost revenue to the Town is approximately $230,000 which approximates an additional 2% tax rate on the general tax rate; and Whereas these properties do not meet the definition of a Public Hospital under the Public Hospitals Act and therefore are not required to pay the “Heads and Beds” tax that publicly funded hospitals pay to the municipality; and Whereas the Province of Ontario has not updated the “Heads and Beds” rate since 1987; Now be it resolved that the Council for the Corporation of the Town of Parry Sound requests that the Province of Ontario require that Non-Profit Long-Term Care Facilities pay the “Heads and Beds” tax similar to publicly funded hospitals; and Further that the Province of Ontario increase the current “Heads and Beds” rate to reflect inflation from 1987 and index the rate so that it is reflective of current value; and Further that the Province commit to providing 12 months notice on changes in regulations that impact the revenue generation for municipalities; and Further that a copy of this resolution be sent to the Premier of Ontario, the Ontario Ministry of Finance, Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing, the Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care, the Association of Municipalities of Ontario (AMO), the Federation of Northern Municipalities (FONOM), the Northwestern Ontario Municipal Association (NOMA), the Ontario Small Urban Municipalities (OSUM), MPP Norm Miller, the City of Toronto, the Municipal Finance Officers Association of Ontario (MFOA), the Ontario Municipal Taxation and Revenue Association (OMTRA). My comments are offered in the introduction to this post.

9.5.2 – Parry Sound Water Financial Plan. Resolution. That Council for the Town of Parry Sound hereby accepts and approves the Town of Parry Sound Water Financial Plan prepared by Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. dated February 24, 2016, attached as Schedule “A”; and Further, that staff are directed to advertise notice of the availability of the PS Water Financial Plan to the public; and To forward the Water Financial plan and resolution approving the Plan to the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing; and To forward the Water Financial Plan and resolution approving the Plan to the Ministry of the Environment, satisfying the requirements under the Safe Drinking Water Act.

By-laws

10.3.1 – Wasauksing Fire Protection Agreement. Being a By-law to authorize the Mayor and Clerk to execute and affix The Corporate Seal to a Fire Protection Agreement between The Corporation of the Town of Parry Sound and Wasauksing First Nation for a portion of Wasauksing First Nation.

See you Tuesday night, and Wednesday night. I have no sense of how things will go on Wednesday at the Budget meeting. It’s uncharted territory.

Sunset Sky Over Zhiishiib Rock As Seen From the North Shore Rugged Trail

Redwood1890-20160225-_DS73920

 

 

Council Agenda Preview – May 5, 2015

04 Monday May 2015

Posted by in Parry Sound, Town Council

≈ Comments Off on Council Agenda Preview – May 5, 2015

Tags

, , , , , ,

It seems to be a light meeting this week with nothing that should be controversial. There certainly won’t be the fireworks that seem to go on at the McKellar Council meetings. I’ll have to see if I can get a seat there, it looks like an entertaining evening. For the most part things have really been quiet and business-like at Parry Sound Council meetings. There doesn’t seem to the undercurrent of disdain that was apparent at times during the last term of Council.

Correspondence

4.1 – Letter – Glen Murray, Minister, Ministry of Environment and Climate Change (MOECC) Re: Thank you letter for the Town’s delegation at Ontario Good Roads Association Conference regarding the remediation of the Brownfield sites at the former Imperial Oil properties and the Waterfront Development Concept Plan. This seems to be good news, the Town is starting to move on the development of the waterfront property. The Town has limited leverage but it needs to keep pushing, especially the Imperial Oil people. How about not buying gas at their stations? While Shell seems to be willing to remediate their site the Imperial Oil people, that’s Esso/Exxon, seem to believe they have an imperial right to do nothing. How about we raise their taxes 10-fold? That way they can really pay for the privilege of doing nothing.

Deputations
5.1 – Bernadette and Erick Phillis, residents of Seguin. Re: Lack of public transportation in Parry Sound. They’re back again. I hope they are able to tell us what Seguin is doing in this regard. I suspect that Seguin’s contribution is limited to their financial support for the transportation services provided by the Belvedere retirement facility. But let’s see what they have to say.

5.3 – Howard Wesley. Re: Booth Street Park. This concerns the rehabilitation and upgrade to the park and is on the agenda as Item 9.1.1.

Resolutions and Direction to Staff
9.1.1 – Booth St. Park Transformation. Resolution. That the proposed plan for the transformation of Booth St. Park as presented to Council at its May 5, 2015 meeting be approved. Also see Item 5.3 above. A number of community groups and the Town are pitching in with volunteer labour and financial support to the tune of about $26,000 to improve the park.

9.4.1 – Parry Sound Beerfest: Noise By-law relief. Resolution. No Ribfest this year, we have moved on to a Beerfest. It’s June 27th.

9.4.2 – Joint Promotion/Marketing Plan – Former Shell Property. That upon the recommendation of the Waterfront Advisory Committee, Council direct staff to work with the owner of the former Shell property to develop a joint marketing/promotion plan in an effort to attract development to the site. Direction. Good news, any step forward is a step forward. This is related to Item 4.1 above.

9.5.1 – EMS Operational Review. That as recommended by the EMS Advisory Committee the Evidence Based Review of System Planning & Deployment (Operational Review) by Performance Concepts be accepted by the Town of Parry Sound, as attached Schedule “A”. Resolution. This is a complex issue of EMS service allocation for the West Parry Sound District. I have not read the report and encourage others to do so. The summary suggests the recommendation is to implement an easy first step followed by consideration of subsequent actions in line with the consultant report after consultation with area municipalities.

By-laws
10.4.1 – FedNor Funding Agreement: Regional Marketing Plan. Being a By-law to authorize the execution of a funding agreement with Industry Canada/FedNor for the development of a Regional Marketing Plan. of 2015 Budget By-law.

10.4.2 – Festival of the Sound: Lease Agreement/Stockey Centre. Being a By-law to authorize the execution of a lease agreement with the Festival of the Sound for the Charles W. Stockey Centre for the Performing Arts. The Festival has undergone some wrenching changes of late but I’m glad to see they are renewing their lease for an additional five years.

10.4.1 – By-law to Prohibit Smoking. Being a By-law to prohibit smoking in and within twenty (20) metres from any entrance or exit of a building owned or leased by the Town of Parry Sound and in or within 20 metres of any municipal outdoor public place as defined in Schedule A to this bylaw and to repeal Bylaw 2012-6087. This tidies up the Town’s smoking by-law and aligns it with recent Provincial updates. It does show consideration for both non-smokers and smokers. As a non-smoker who grew up in a smoking household I understand the need of some to smoke, but at the same time resent being subjected to second-hand smoke. This by-law seems to tread a reasonable course between the interests of all parties.

I won’t be there on Tuesday, I have meeting in Queen’s Park, but I will post up a summary based on the Town’s meeting minutes.

Keeping an Eye on Things. (Parry Sound in Glorious Colour)

Redwood189020150318-_DSC8767_DxO

Cut and Run for the ‘Burbs’?

15 Sunday Feb 2015

Posted by in Budget/Financial, Parry Sound, Reflections, Seguin Township, Town Council

≈ 5 Comments

Tags

, , , , , , ,

Recent editions of the North Star and Beacon Star report some residents are claiming that they intend to sell their home in Parry Sound and head out to the ‘suburbs’ where the taxes are lower.

But is the cost of living really lower? Nah! You’re just swapping one set of expenses for another. If you want to move to the ‘burbs’ do it for quality of life, not to save money.

The ‘burbs’ do offer lower taxes, and there is no charge for water, but it all comes at a cost. About $10,000 for real estate fees to sell, the cost of a mover, the cost of driving to high-priced Parry Sound for shopping, appointments, work and school/social activities. The ‘burbs’ do provide additional mosquitos and black flies, bears, a septic bed, a well and water testing, and …. You don’t get affordable internet access, gas utilities, easy access to medical and dental resources, a two-minute drive to the hospital, grocery stores, …

The only real reason to live in the ‘burbs’ is because it makes for a much shorter commute, or you want to enjoy nature up close and personal. It’s not a money saving proposition in any way, shape or form for the average person. I guess it would be cheaper if you were willing to channel your inner hermit, but that probably doesn’t apply to most of us, at least not those of us who still need to work.

A bunch of Parry Sounders are getting their ‘knickers in a twist’ about a potential 5% tax rate increase, which has recently been lowered to a targeted 3.8%. A 2% increase last year, instead of a 0% increase, and a 2% increase this year would have pretty much led to the same effective increase as is now being proposed.

Parry Sound Council is facing a little bit of a ‘perfect storm’ in terms of budget challenges. The storm is not their fault, but they could have been much better prepared.

I remember the proposal for a 2% rate increase last year was rejected by a majority of the Councillors. There was a minority who wanted the increase, but it was an election year and the ‘no tax in 2014’ group perhaps wanted to offer the residents a bit of a break. In no way did the decision to not raise rates have any impact on Councillor’s electability. It was just a Council who at that time felt that life was good and they were in a position to pass on a tax break.

So how much does a 2% tax increase impact taxes? The current residential tax rate is .011 (2014), not including the school board taxes. This translates into a property tax of $2,200 for a property with a $200,000 assessment. A 2% increase is an additional $44 per year, 3.8% means an additional $83.60. Not a trivial amount, but certainly not a life changing increase.

The same $200,000 property in Seguin would carry a tax rate of .035, about a third of Parry Sound’s. (Some of that is because until 2015 they carried very little OPP expense.) So a $200,000 property in Seguin would pay about $700 in municipal property taxes, a savings of $1,500 per year versus Parry Sound. A move to Seguin, after selling your property, would probably pay off in about 8 years and be cheaper thereafter. But expect taxes to go up, or services to go down, with the phasing in of higher OPP charges over the next five years. Seguin is the ‘property tax haven’ in the area, McKellar taxes would be about 23% higher, McDougall about 47% higher and Carling would be about 6% higher than the Seguin rates.

But unless you don’t work in Parry Sound, or shop here, or have kids in school in Town, a bigger issue is the cost of gasoline and the added vehicle mileage. For some perspective a $0.10 per liter increase in the price of gas adds up to an additional $5.00 to 6.00 or so per fill up, or perhaps $300 per year. And gas bounces around that much on what seems like a weekly basis. If you are planning to move to the ‘burbs’ the price of gas, and vehicle depreciation, are more important cost considerations than a 2% or 5% increase in your property taxes.

The ‘perfect storm’ I mentioned earlier is a product of two issues, one of which should not have caught Parry Sound Council by surprise. This is the drop in revenue from our ‘big box’ stores. They have been protesting their assessments provincially for the past five years or so and are on the verge of getting a large reduction that will impact Parry Sound to the tune of a couple hundred thousand dollars per year in lost revenue. And on top of that the Town will be required to refund their overpayment for the last four years, an amount on the order of $1 million in total. Ouch, ouch, ouch. But this should not have been a surprise to Council and their deliberations on tax rates last year. There should have been an accrual for a portion of the likely repayments; but there wasn’t.

Also hurting is the reality that the OPP savings are not what was expected. The Province is phasing in the savings to municipalities like Parry Sound over a five-year period and on top of that limiting the actual amount of annual savings. And those limited savings we were hoping to enjoy have been offset in a large part by the addition of Provincial Court costs to the Parry Sound OPP bill. That can fairly be called a surprise, but it doesn’t represent an additional cost for the Town, it’s just not as much of a savings in costs as was expected.

Don’t like the taxes? Get involved and let the Town know where the cuts should be made. Cut back snow removal? Stop cutting grass in the parks? Close the Stockey Centre and/or the Bobby Orr Community Centre? Delay infrastructure repairs and updates? It will all save money and lower taxes. A dirty secret is that it’s not the annual capital investments that cost the most in Parry Sound; it’s the costs related to the day-to-day operation of the Town. But those are figures that are discussed behind closed doors. There is nothing nefarious about this, the figures are available to all of us, it’s just more convenient to have Staff review and propose an operational budget as a package. And given the attendance at council meetings and budget discussions I’m pretty sure people don’t really care enough to invest their time and effort in the issue. They just prefer to bitch and moan.

Don’t like the proposed tax increase? There are three realistic options:

  1. Get over it and pay your taxes and consider them a bargain for the services you receive.
  2. Get involved and help the Town and your fellow townsfolk understand where we can reasonably hope to cut costs and reduce taxes.
  3. Move to the ‘burbs’ and let Parry Sound Council know why you moved.

But most people will prefer to pay their taxes and bitch and moan about them. But I wonder: why make yourself miserable if you aren’t going to do anything about it. Lead, follow or move out of town!

On the Water! Walk to Town! No Taxes! (Parry Sound in Black & White)

Redwood1890-20150130-_DSC7836_DxO

The Smart Community

16 Friday May 2014

Posted by in Parry Sound, Reflections, Seguin Township

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

, , , , , , , , ,

I was invited to attend a West Parry Sound Smart Community presentation yesterday evening that provided an update on the project. In short the project is intended to provide most, if not all, West Parry Sound municipality residents with access to reliable high speed internet. With the exception of Parry Sound most of the communities have limited access to affordable higher speed internet services such as cable and rely on a patchwork of services that include cellular, satellite and DSL. In general these services are not particularly reliable, fast or reasonably priced. One Seguin resident noted that they pay $105 per month for 15 GB of data through one of the cellular providers. Service can be very spotty and unexpectedly change if one of the suppliers decides to reorient one of its towers. The arrival of summer with cottagers and campers in the provincial parks means what was reasonable service is likely to be swamped with the influx of these seasonal users.

There is a definite need for better internet service for communities outside of Parry Sound. The West Parry Sound Smart Community has the objective of developing and implementing a plan to provide this type of service. Vianet has agreed to work with the West Parry Sound Smart Community and provide high-speed fiber service. This service will depend on the installation of infrastructure that is estimated to cost on the order of $30-$40 million. The status of the plan was the topic of last night’s discussion. Rather than summarize the presentation I’ll add my thoughts on the realities of the plan. There is a short summary of the presentation at parrysound.com (no they are not a sister or brother blog to parrysounds.com ;-).

Key Thoughts/Points:

  1. The plan is to provide fiber from end to end with speeds on the order of 100 Mbps. This is very fast and more than almost any residential and most business infrastructure can fully exploit, like your car that can hit 200 kph but you are limited to 100 kph. Right now cable provides about 10-25 Mbps, and cellular 2-5 Mbps (LTE can be higher).
  2. The cost will be split 1/3 Vianet (~$10 Million) and 2/3 regional municipalities (~$25 million). The regional municipalities will look to provincial and federal governments to cover the cost.
  3. The case is being made that high-speed internet is a necessity to attract businesses. That may be the case for ‘onesy and twosy’ type high tech entrepreneurs. Real businesses will also require additional infrastructure, i.e., water and sewer service, that only Parry Sound currently provides. It seems that better internet service really will have its greatest impact on residential satisfaction. The municipalities will be able to offer low taxes and cheap high-speed internet service. Businesses will be interested but unlikely to bring in a 50 person business that depends on septic systems.
  4. Doing some back of the envelope calculations it seems the creation of a Smart Community high-speed internet service will cost about $1,500 to $3,000 per potential user. I have not included Parry Sound in the calculations because we already have reliable internet service in most of the town (cable, DSL and cellular). And we are likely to have higher speed fiber based internet service by the early 2015, without any additional federal or provincial funding.

I’m happy to see this initiative being undertaken by the West Parry Sound District municipalities, but I don’t want to see the Town of Parry Sound paying for it. We carry the burden of providing significant infrastructure services for Town residents, visitors and the outlying communities. We will be ‘wired’ at no cost to the Parry Sound residents regardless of whether the Smart Community initiative succeeds or fails. We are big enough and concentrated enough to be able to attract these services without federal or provincial support and subsidy.

It’s the outlying municipalities that depend on Parry Sound for many of their services who need to find the resources to pay for this type of infrastructure upgrade. Parry Sound has been investing heavily in infrastructure, we don’t need to be subsidizing our neighbouring municipalities’ wish for faster and more reliable internet services. By most any definition Parry Sound already is a “Smart Community”.

Show me the fiber! (Parry Sound in Black & White)

ParrySights-3200-1195

Parry Sound – Investing for the Common Good

28 Monday May 2012

Posted by in Budget/Financial, Events/Activities, Parry Sound, Suggestions, Urban Development

≈ Comments Off on Parry Sound – Investing for the Common Good

Tags

, , , , ,

I read in the Beacon Star on Friday about how McKellar Township is once again debt free. Again and again I hear criticism from the surrounding municipalities about how Parry Sound has ‘soooo’ much debt. I’m getting tired of it.

Debt by definition is not inherently bad. If we as individuals never took on debt we would never be able to buy a house, or a cottage, or even a car until well after we were able to make the best use of them. Imagine not being able to take a job a few miles away because you refused to take on the debt to purchase a car. Or imagine a nation of renters where the only person who cared about property improvement was the landlord. We’d be controlled by mega-corporations because a private landlord couldn’t or wouldn’t take on the debt to purchase and develop a property. Debt is not bad, poorly managed debt is bad.

So Parry Sound has more debt that the surrounding municipalities. So what? If we can afford it there shouldn’t be any criticism. But people like to suggest that the town’s debt has been taken on for frivolous purposes. I guess this would include the renovation of town hall and the Bobby Orr Community Centre and construction of the the Stockey Centre a decade ago. I suppose they think the town would be better off with a couple thousand septic tanks next to Georgian Bay and a couple thousand wells drawing water rather than a first class water treatment plant.

My sense is that people feel Parry Sound has been extravagant in its capital investments. If things were done properly there should be little or no debt. But as I have noted above debt is not only not a bad thing, it actually can be a good thing. The Great Depression was caused not so much by the stock market crash as it was by the precipitous drop in spending and the clamping down on the money supply. If no one was taking on a prudent amount of debt there would be a much higher level of unemployment.

So what have these ‘frivolous’ expenses contributed to Parry Sound and the surrounding communities? If you live in Parry Sound you surely have a sense of the value of the many investments the town has made in infrastructure and quality of life facilities. But let’s take a look at how the surrounding communities have benefited from the generosity of Parry Sound.

For starters McDougall would not have their municipal water supply if it were not for Parry Sound. There is no way they could afford to build and operate a similar first class water supply operation.

How popular would the West Parry Sound area be for permanent and seasonal residents if the closest retail centre was Bracebridge or Huntsville? For Carling, McDougall, McKellar and most Seguin residents it would mean an 80 km drive one-way to get more than the most basic of supplies or a restaurant meal and entertainment. That would really increase the cost of living here. And do you think these retailers would be willing to locate in areas where they had to depend on wells and sewers and there was not a core population to service and draw employees from?

And what would the local cottagers and residents do for entertainment on a wet weekday or weekend, or a fine spring, summer or fall weekend? You can take only so much of the outdoors in black fly and mosquito season. I wonder how many of the people attending the free events at the Stockey Centre (Bands on the Bay) and the town dock, or using Wabuno Beach, or free skating at the BOCC, or launching their boats at municipal ramps, are the people who pay Parry Sound taxes. At other towns they charge $5 to $10 to launch a runabout. And how about the ‘out of town’ seasonal residents who drop by to pick up a few gallons of drinking water from the Parry Sound municipal taps? The tourists who stay at the hotels, motels and campgrounds in the surrounding municipalities probably would not be staying there if it weren’t for the availability of Parry Sound’s investments.

So get over it McKellar, McDougall, Carling, Seguin and Archipelago. If you are able to deny reasonable services and facilities to your permanent residents in order to keep your seasonal residents from complaining about taxes, go ahead and do it. But please don’t shake your head in dismay about the debt that Parry Sound is carrying.

I have an idea, how about the bunch of you get together and build a regional swimming pool? We can’t afford it but we would be more than happy to use yours for free, or for a nominal charge, the same way you use many of our facilities. We’d be delighted to drive a few kilometers to use it. We promise not to chastise you for your debt. We will actually thank you for helping to stimulate the local economy, some of which might even trickle down to Parry Sound.

We’re Getting Bigger and Better

18 Saturday Feb 2012

Posted by in Parry Sound, Urban Development

≈ Comments Off on We’re Getting Bigger and Better

Tags

, , , , , , ,

The recent Official Plan presentations to the public and town council provided a wealth of information on the opportunities and challenges facing Parry Sound as it looks toward the next 5, 10 and 20 years. The Official Plan is currently in the review and draft stages with the intention that a final draft of the plan will be provided to the public in the May/June time frame. A draft of the talking points related to the plan is available now, and the opportunity exists to provide your input. The official plan documents are available on the Town of Parry Sound website homepage. Here is a link to get there directly.

While there is much to say about the official plan and what it implies I will focus on some of the new figures that are included in the supporting documents and what they might imply for Parry Sound.

Parry Sound faces a number of challenges. With a relatively small population, and reasonably high service demands, per capita administration and public service costs can be high. This higher cost is not related to extravagance, it’s a function of increasing public expectations. The town is somewhat penalized by providing a number of services and facilities for the surrounding municipalities for which it receives limited compensation.

Let’s look at some encouraging numbers that will impact the thinking of town council and staff as they prepare and review the Official plan. We have achieved population growth. After a decade of seeing the population figures for Parry Sound drop, the 2011 census figures show a strong increase from 2006 to reach a total of 6,191 (+6.4%). We currently have 3,037 private dwellings, of which 94% are occupied on a permanent basis. This translate into an average of 2.2 persons per permanent residence. It’s worth noting that population figures do not include seasonal residents, these individuals are considered residents where they declare their ‘usual residence’. This gets to be important as we look at the surrounding municipalities which have a very high proportion of cottagers.

While Parry Sound grew, Seguin’s permanent population dropped from 4,276 in 2006 to 3,988 in 2011. While there are 4,348 residences in Seguin, only 37%, or 1,627 are permanent residences. This translates to 2.4 residents per permanent household. The drop in population may be an ominous sign for the permanent residents in Seguin. As the tax base becomes more and more concentrated in seasonal residents there is likely to be pressure on the elected officials to reduce services that are not needed by seasonal residents in an attempt to reduce costs and taxes. And with a majority of the residences, and the ability to pretty much declare as many ‘residents’ for voting purposes as they wish, it seems the seasonal population in Seguin will be able to dictate to council what they will and won’t accept in terms of local improvements that would primarily serve the permanent resident population.

McDougall showed no change in this period with a population of 2,705 permanent residents in 2011. About 65% of the residences in McDougall are occupied on a permanent basis, with an average 2.5 persons per residence.

McKellar showed an increase in permanent residents, rising from 1,080 in 2006 to 1,144 in 2011 (+5.8%). Permanent residences accounted for 36% of all residences, a figure similar to that for Seguin, suggesting again that there will be pressure to limit services so as to limit tax increases. The average persons per permanent residence was 2.2.

Carling showed the largest percentage population increase, 11.1%, rising to 1,284 permanent residents in 2011. The proportion of permanent residents was 33%, again suggesting a much larger proportion of seasonal (cottage) residents relative to the permanent population. The average persons per permanent residence was 2.5.

The Archipelago had the lowest permanent population of the surrounding municipalities, 566 in 2011, a slight drop from 2006. About 9% of the residences were considered to be permanent or primary residences. The average persons per permanent residence was 2.2.

So if you are a Parry Sound resident the population figures are good news from a services and taxes basis. More people and more residences mean a larger tax base to support current services. But this will come with more activity in town as we add people on a permanent basis. I see this as a benefit. More people mean more energy, and more energy leads to greater opportunity. If you want a quieter, less expensive place to live you may want to consider one of the nearby municipalities. But then I’m sure we’ll still be seeing you on a regular basis because Parry Sound has what you want and need, even if it’s a half-hour drive away.