Taxpayers in Yorkton are again facing an increase in their property taxes.
At the regular meeting of Yorkton Council the combined operating and capital budgets will see a hike of 3.9 per cent, if the budgets are passed as presented Monday. The twin documents were tabled until the Jan. 11, meeting of Council, a good decision as it provides the public the opportunity to provide feedback, although that may be limited as the next few weeks are the primary holiday season for many.
The majority of the increase (three per cent) is being dedicated to capital expenditures, and indications are taxpayers should get ready for similar increases moving forward as the demand of infrastructure renewal continues to grow.
The biggest issue facing all municipalities is the large infrastructure gap.
Assets are wearing out faster than we can replace them. Insufficient funds are available for capital and grant funding is almost non-existent for smaller municipalities, said City Manager Lonnie Kaal at the regular meeting of Yorkton Council Monday.
But that puts real pressure on the operating side of the budget.
Cost of living alone would suggest an increase of near three per cent, and that would only reasonably maintain the status quo in terms of services.
“The City of Yorkton is committed to providing services that its citizens require while at the same time recognizing that we need to provide them in the most efficient and economical manner. All businesses need to react to economic downturns and the City is no exception. The 2016 budget has addressed the various lower revenue streams and has adjusted spending accordingly,” stated a Report circulated to Council Monday.
But Council doesn’t have the appetite to serve up a six per cent tax hike, opting for 3.9 per cent, at least in 2016.
And that means sharpening the pencil on the operating side of things.
“Over the past three years the City has seen operating costs increase between four per cent and six per cent even though property taxes have only increased between one per cent and 3.2 per cent for operating purposes,” said Shannon Bell, director of finance.
“We recognize that large increases in property taxes cannot continue so management was tasked with ways to conduct the same business in a different manner."
A step in that process will be a far-reaching review of services through 2016.
In conjunction with 2016 budget deliberations, Council directed administration to reduce operating budget expenditures by finding efficiencies and looking at doing business differently, explained Kaal Monday.
The review will be a two-pronged one.
The first aspect will be to look for efficiencies in the way existing services are provided, and where costs might be trimmed.
If such efficiencies are found, at least significant ones, the first question taxpayers should be asking is why it took until now to find them?
Property taxes have been climbing every year of late, and if a money-saving efficiency is suddenly found, it will leave residents wondering how much of past tax hikes went to feed the inefficiencies.
Granted, in some cases new methods of doing things may have emerged, and ultimately any savings is good whenever found, but it should not take a year of tight budgetary numbers to have the City scouring for operational efficiencies.
The review is also supposed to ask if existing services are even needed.
There has already been press regarding the review of the City’s Fire Protective Services, with the idea of changing from paid professional firefighters to a volunteer force at least supposedly on the table for Council to consider.
The list of services being looked at is supposed to be inclusive of everything the City does.
How much is the bus service worth to the community? Could it be changed to reduced? Or simply eliminated?
What about the costs at the airport? Or, snow removal?
These are big picture questions, and cutting any long-running service is going to have a backlash. With Council elections next fall, this is a gutsy effort by sitting members, but the budget numbers don’t lie.
There are only two options, and neither particularly palatable, raise taxes year-over-year-over-year, or convince taxpayers to accept less services.
