Skip to content

Banff to see rise and fall in tax rates

Banff residents can expect their tax bills in the mail soon, with a slight increase in residential taxes and a small decrease in commercial taxes.

Banff residents can expect their tax bills in the mail soon, with a slight increase in residential taxes and a small decrease in commercial taxes.

On Tuesday (April 26), town council passed its 2011 tax rate bylaw, using a 6:1 commercial-residential tax split, meaning the commercial tax rate is six times higher than the residential.

As a result, the average residential tax bill will increase 0.05 per cent and the average commercial tax bill will decrease by 3.35 per cent.

This does not include new fees for collection of garbage and recycling, which, beginning this year, no longer appear on the tax bill and are now charged as a separate utility.

Council also decided to transfer $510,000 of the $855,000 in provincial school tax savings to capital reserves, opting to use the balance of those education tax savings to lighten the tax burden.

Councillor Leslie Taylor managed to convince most of her colleagues to support this scenario, which still respects a long-standing and prudent policy to decrease the infrastructure gap.

“I’m trying to look for the most we could send to capital reserves, while still being conscious of the difficulties of the tax burden on our community at this time,” she said.

“It gives us a lot of money in capital reserves, but still keeps tax rates at something I see as fair and reasonable.”

An average residential property, assessed at around $618,750, will see an increase of $30 on this year’s tax bill, while an average non-residential property assessed at $3.42 million will see a decrease of $2,500,

This year’s tax rate bylaw was considered complex, in part because of the new utility for garbage and recycling collection, which is being phased in over four years.

If the waste utility were factored back in for comparison’s sake, the average residential payment would be 1.92 per cent greater than last year, while the average commercial payment would be 0.82 per cent less than in 2010.

This year’s tax rate debate was made even more complex given significant changes to the taxable property assessments and the substantial decrease in the Alberta government’s education tax requisition.

Because Banff’s overall assessment decreased more than expected this year – down 5.6 per cent to $1.82 billion – the provincial education tax requisition was also down, by $855,000.

Council’s past practice has been to continue absorbing any decreases in the amount that would have gone to the province, and to dedicate the balance to capital reserves.

It’s part of a plan to close the infrastructure gap so there’s enough money in the future to pay for roads, streetlights, playgrounds, vehicles and equipment and so on.

Coun. Chip Olver spoke of the importance of continuing to dedicate money to capital reserves, noting it is unclear what the future holds for provincial and federal infrastructure grants.

“Our capital plans depend on that money and it’s prudent of us to take any chance we have to look at what we can do,” she said. “I think the harder choice in the short-term is what’s the right thing to do in the long-term – and that’s to put money into capital reserves.”

While she supported putting some money towards capital reserves, Mayor Karen Sorensen was the only one to vote against this scenario.

“In the past, we occupied the education tax room because Banff was significantly below average on taxes in comparison to 41 other municipalities, but this is no longer the case. We are now average and may go beyond in that same comparison,” she said.

“For that reason, and in an effort to have taxes come in even lower, I can’t support the $510,000 going to capital reserves. I can support some of those dollars going to capital reserves – as much as a third – but I am not comfortable with $510,000.”

Coun. Stavros Karlos tried to convince his colleagues to go with a 6:1 commercial-residential tax split and set aside $285,000 of the $855,000 to capital reserves.

His motion was lost, however, on a tie 3-3 vote. Counc. Paul Baxter was absent from the meeting.

“I fully believe capital reserves are underfunded. I’ve always been concerned about capital reserves,” said Karlos, who ended up supporting Taylor’s motion. “I’m just struggling here. I would have preferred a lower level.”


Rocky Mountain Outlook

About the Author: Rocky Mountain Outlook

The Rocky Mountain Outlook is Bow Valley's No. 1 source for local news and events.
Read more



Comments

push icon
Be the first to read breaking stories. Enable push notifications on your device. Disable anytime.
No thanks