2022 Budget Consultation

All Municipalities in BC must have a financial plan (also commonly known as the Budget) that is adopted annually, by bylaw, before the annual property tax bylaw is adopted. The Budget must set out the proposed expenditures, funding sources, and transfers to or between funds by the Municipality. Part of the process is getting feedback from the community on the proposed Budget.

Check out the timeline below to see what work has been completed to date, and what's next. Anyone can read all of the content in this project, but in order to post comments you have to Sign Up or Log In to your Citizenlab account. It's easy to sign up using your existing e-mail, Google, or Facebook account.

This video provides a simple overview of how the Municipal Budget comes together.

Phases

Phases overview

Phase 1: Staff Budget Development

Staff Budget Development

Phase 2: Council Workshop

Council Workshop

Phase 3: Public Consultation

Public Consultation

Phase 4: Bylaw Development and Adoption

Bylaw Development and Adoption

Public Consultation

April 12, 2022 7:00 AM - April 25, 2022 7:00 AM

Welcome to the 2022 Budget Consultation. We encourage you to read the information presented below, and provide your feedback by:

· Posting your comments and ideas in Citizenlab

· Email your feedback to Budget@bimbc.ca

· Fill out a Budget feedback form, available at Municipal Hall

A Budget Open House was held on Thursday, April 21 to present the proposed 2022 Budget and to provide an opportunity for members of the public to ask questions and provide feedback. This was a hybrid meeting with participants joining in-person and online on Zoom. Read the Presentation

All feedback received will be compiled and shared with Council for deliberation of the 2022-2026 Financial Plan.

You can read a full presentation of the proposed 2022 Budget HERE.

The proposed 2022 Budget

Bowen Island Municipality collects property taxes to pay for the services we provide to the community. We try to keep taxes down as much as possible by looking for funding opportunities such as grants, user fees and other non-taxation funding before resorting to an increase in property tax rates.

The Municipality is required by legislation to collect taxes on behalf of other taxing authorities, such as Metro Vancouver, Islands Trust and Translink. Only about 51% of the taxes on your property tax bill go to the Municipality to pay for the services provided to the community. The remaining 49% is collected on behalf of other taxing authorities. The Municipality has no control over the tax rates charged by other taxing authorities.

The Municipal Budget has three main components: The General Fund, Water System Funds, and the Sewer Fund. Each fund contains both an Operating and Capital Budget. These are the Operating Program Budget and the Capital Project Budget.

Operating and Capital

The Operating Program Budget funds the day-to-day expenditures of the Municipality such as salaries, supplies and services, professional services, contractor services, maintenance, utility costs, and insurance and legal fees. The Operating Program Budget also provides for an annual contribution to Reserves. Property taxation is the largest funding source for ongoing expenditures.

The Capital & Project Budget is mostly made up of Capital Projects, but also includes Operating Projects. Projects are different from Programs because they have a distinct beginning and end, and represent a one-time funding requirement. The most typical Municipal funding source for Projects is Reserves. The majority of Capital Project requests are for the renewal and replacement of existing assets.

Staff are proposing a Budget for 2022 that would require a tax levy increase of $636,900, or 10.4%. The increase can be explained in four parts:

$198,700 increase to the contribution to Reserves
$194,236 for cost-of-living increases to salaries and benefits, based on the collective agreement
$278,000 for Operating Fund items like fuel, supplies, professional fees and the 2022 local government election
$105,000 to pay interest and principal on debts

The increased tax revenue, combined with an increase in development revenue will fund these additional costs. Grant revenue and debt proceeds will be used to pay for specific projects, and are not available to cover most of the ongoing operating expenses.

The following graphic illustrates how a tax levy increase of $636,900 (10.4%) would impact property taxes based on the 2022 average assessed value.

It is important to note that a 1% tax increase on Bowen Island can't be compared like apples to apples with other jurisdictions such as West Vancouver or Burnaby. This is because our tax base (population) is much smaller. For example, a 1% increase in West Vancouver amounts to over a million dollars in revenue. On Bowen, it amounts to $57,100.

Some Budget requests were deferred from this proposed Budget to make it as lean as possible, addressing only the highest priorities that require funding in 2022. You can read specifics about these Budget requests and see what is included in the proposed Budget HERE.

You can read a full presentation of the proposed 2022 Budget HERE.

The components associated with the tax levy increase for the proposed 2022 Budget are presented as “Comments” below. Scroll down and take a look at each component where we will explain why each is necessary. We encourage you provide your feedback on each component by leaving a comment.

13 issues

unknown author4 years ago A Reserve Fund is like a savings account. It is money put aside to pay for repairs and maintenance on existing infrastructure assets like roads, buildings, culverts, and service vehicles. Reserves are also used to fund investment in new assets.In 2022, we will resume contributions to several statutory Reserve funds. This provides project leads with clarity around funding for longer-term projects and results in better long-term planning.The contribution to the Civic Facilities Reserve fund is proposed to help fill the $2 million funding gap for the Community Centre project. This can be used to assist with cash flow for the project, in case community fundraising or grant applications are delayed. This is a non-statutory Reserve fund. If the money is not required for construction on the Community Centre, it can be used for some other purpose such as the On-Island Composting Facility, which would reduce the need to take on additional debt.The additional contributions required in 2022 will result in a tax levy increase of $198,700.

unknown author4 years ago In all governments, the biggest expenditure is for its human assets – staff are the ones running the day-to-day operations and providing core services to citizens. There are no additional Full-Time Equivalent (FTE) staff positions proposed in the 2022 Budget, but a 2% increase Cost of Living Adjustment (COLA) is. In 2021, Bowen Island Municipality entered into a collective agreement with CUPE 1004 which requires an annual COLA of 2%. It is typical to extend the same compensation and benefits to all staff whether they are unionized or not. This is necessary to ensure that compensation remains fair, and comparable to other similar communities.For the 2022 Budget, an annual Cost of Living Adjustment of $172,236 for salaries is proposed, in addition to $22,000 for staff and firefighter benefits cost increases. This will result in a tax levy increase of $194,236.

unknown author4 years ago Just like with household bills, the Municipality's annual bills for things like insurance, fuel, legal services, supplies, and maintenance are rising. In addition, we’re proposing to implement new software that will streamline our development and permitting process and help manage public assets. We’ll also need some additional funds for the administrative costs of running the 2022 local election.A tax levy increase of $278,000 is required to address these pressures.

unknown author4 years ago

unknown author4 years ago April 15, 2022Attention: Municipal Councilors and Mayor RE: Proposed Property Tax increase for 2022 and 2023We are writing out of concern for the new proposed 2022 municipal budget. This proposal calls for revenue increases coming from highly inflated rate hikes in property taxes of 10.42% for 2022 and 10.74% for 2023. We would ask council and mayor to take their time and really consider what these increases could mean for local property owners. We are not all wealthy land barons. We do not all come from family money. We are diverse. We are hard-working, yet we are not all capable of surviving the looming financial crises that could be on the horizon. With current levels of inflation, the prime lending rate now raised two times in a two-month period, war, and a complete lack of affordable housing in this community, these increases will add to the financial burden that many of us are facing. This island, as we are currently seeing, will only be attainable for the truly rich. The ‘middle class’ will not be able to live here. One only has to drive across this island to see the level of development that is currently taking place; however, development revenue is only slated to bring in 367,000 in 2022 and 343,000 in 2023. Where are the impact fees, development works agreements, or development cost charges????Our family has worked hard on the front lines of this pandemic, yet we have NOT seen an increase in wages that will match the financial expectations being placed upon us. We are both public sector employees and I highly doubt we will see a 10% wage increase this year or even over the next four years. We do not deserve this further financial burden being placed upon us by a municipality that has not listened or considered how its spending will impact the residents of this island.Instead, we plead with this council to implement fiscal responsibility. Stop current and proposed capital projects. Stop spending just because there was a grant available. Start holding the developers of this island accountable. Stop giving free breaks to those who can truly afford it. Review current municipal staffing levels. Fix the infrastructure that needs to be fixed and start saving for future issues. We do not need to continue to grow to fund this municipality. We need to start looking at where and how we are spending our money. Sincerely,Rebecca Laursen and Andreas Behm1289 Scarborough Rd.

unknown author4 years ago It is my understanding that Development Cost Charges /Levies are imposed by municipalities on new development to fund /grow the related capital projects, ie ‘growth pays for growth’ so that the financial burden is not borne by existing tax payers. These charges typically pay for the expansion of regional sanitary sewer works (required to meet the demands of a growing population, such as the additional lines, pumping stations and wastewater treatment plant expansions etc etc.) as well as wear and tear on the use of existing infrastructure.Where do these DCC’s appear as revenue in your budget? I see Development Revenue as a line item but you’ve broken down Development Permit Revenue and Total Revenue on your Planning Department slide deck so it’s hard to determine the components of this revenue stream. The difference between the two isn’t significant.Could you clarify and perhaps publish an Actual vs. Budget for the last few years (as well as the projected revenue in your five year plan)? Combining the property tax with the parcel tax you can see the home owner continues to be hit hard by increased individual ‘levies’, and while no doubt any DCC is eventually passed on to the new homeowner, perhaps the pressures we find ourselves under currently (with critical infrastructure at capacity) should give us pause?Perhaps scale and scope should be reviewed before this becomes a continuous and expanding cycle?ie, An expanded tax base = Increased need for more/ upgrade of utilities, infrastructure and services = Additional spending (capital costs / operating costs) = Strain / squeeze on municipal treasury = Needs more housing for higher taxes / expanded tax base = Increased pressure on infrastructure, services, utilities – and on it goes.Please direct me to where I can see these Development Cost Charges (YoY $ and %). Where those funds have been expended to date and how they are factored in with your projected five year plan (YoY $ and %.) With thanks.

unknown author4 years ago Jean & Jim Coker April 19, 20221277 Scarborough Rd.Bowen Island, BCV0N 1G1April 18, 2022Bowen Island Municipality981 Artisan LaneBowen Island, BCV0N 1G2Attention: Mayor and CouncillorsWe write to you today to share with you our concerns for this community that we have loved for 17 years and the proposal to increase taxes that will make it unaffordable. Council has proposed a 10.4% increase in property taxes for 2022 and 10% for 2023, these increases will have dramatic effects on the fabric of this community.With today's post-pandemic world seeing increased costs across the board, we think it is important for the council to take a hard look at what this community truly needs and what we can truly afford. In our family, we have been forced to re-evaluate our past standards of what is necessary and what is a luxury, and change our spending to fit our budget. We ask that the municipality do the same thing. As a community, there are infrastructures like roads and emergency services that are required, and there is spending associated with a new community centre and increased staffing; in what seems to be an already highly staffed municipality, these seem like a luxury.The proposed property taxes will have a considerable effect on our family as we already struggle in today's world with cost increases to provide for our large family. We are a middle-class family that works hard and feels we are being pinched for every cent, we resent this when we are being expected to pay for luxuries that we do not need nor want. These increases will affect our most vulnerable community members, people who do not own their homes, and that are constantly worried about their ability to find affordable housing. Property owners can not move the additional expenses of taxation and other costs to long term rental leases as they can only increase at a rate of 1.5% per year, this will force homeowners to look at other options for their properties with fewer restrictions and higher revenues, such as Air BnB’s. This is going to continue to impact this communities ability to house many people we count on to work in our community services.We ask that the council stop the community centre construction and re-evaluate what type of community we want to become. The increased costs tied to this project and increased staffing are making this island we love unaffordable. Do we want to be a diverse community that families of all social-economic classes can live in and enjoy, or are we aiming to be a community for the wealthy only? Bowen has been an amazing charming community built on the character of the people that live here, not the structures in the community, please re-evaluate and prioritize the community members over projects.Sincerely,Jean and Jim Coker1277 Scarborough Rd.

unknown author4 years ago Mayor and Council, Bowen Island Municipality, April 18, 2022The following is my feedback on the 2022 Five-Year Budget plan submitted for community review.The proposed property tax increases of 10.4% for 2022 and 10.7% for 2023 are unsustainable for residents and inconsistent with current inflation rates of 3.4% in 2021 and 5% to date in 2022. In other words, I think the proposed property tax increases are outrageous.I understand the rationale that small population communities like Bowen raise comparatively less revenue per person from property taxes than highly populated municipalities do. But this does not validate a higher tax rate. Rather, it demands that small municipalities like ours curb their infrastructure and amenities appetite commiserate with the reasonable capacity of taxpayers to fund projects. Many of us pay our own costs for water, septic and private road access and even snow plows. The services we receive from the municipality are important but limited. Yes, we need parks and trails, a planning department, and road maintenance. And most of us don’t object to separate assessments for important garbage, police, and emergency services; schools, transit and Islands Trust benefits. When parsing out the proportion of the budget that funds various categories, I am struck by the cost of personnel; the “emergency response” approach to infrastructure maintenance and replacement; and the sheer number of major projects underway (Snug Cove Water, Firehall, Health Centre, Community Centre/Municipal Hall, Wastewater Treatment, Culvert & Road replacements, MUT, Composting). I believe there are too many simultaneous projects for our limited taxpayer base and staff capacity. From the outside, it looks like Council makes decisions on the basis of which “idea” managed to fit an available grant opportunity rather than on planned priorities. Bowen's small population cannot support a large bureaucracy and a community is made stronger when volunteers play a significant role. My observation as both a volunteer and an Advisory Committee member, is that the Council is increasingly dismissive of volunteers while concurrently lamenting the time restraints of Muni professional staff. If this is valid then it is time for Council to seriously examine the many ways in which community members can be meaningfully utilized to augment overwhelmed staff.Like many islanders, I am dismayed by the cacophony of emergency fixes that are draining our budget. Do we have a robust maintenance planning and funding protocol? For example, I am far from confident that the current approach to the wastewater treatment plant is the most preventative or economical solution. Instead, it appears to be an expedient choice that flouts the cost to taxpayers. The cost sharing of the Wastewater Treatment Plant fix is also perplexing. I understand assigning an island-wide share of costs for public amenities like the library or firehall, but I cannot see why the new rental apartment building and Foxglove properties are “public amenities.” Bowen does need more robust rental housing. But using Island-wide taxes to subsidize Foxglove and the Cove apartments simultaneously shifts the burden to pre-existing rental units on the island that will ultimately see rent increases to cover the tax hikes or transition to more lucrative B&Bs.I’m also disturbed by the reliance on dipping into Reserve funds to cover project shortages. This strategy normalizes using emergency funds for predictable situations that should have been planned for. It unfairly shifts user-pay liabilities to island-wide responsibility. If Council insists on using the Reserve funds in this manner, then replenishment of the Reserve funds must be detailed and transparent to ensure that users who solely benefit from amenities funded in this manner shoulder their fair apportionment.Finally, the draft five-year budget frontloads project costs in the first two years. This strategy with its rapid tax hikes places an extraordinary property tax burden that outpaces any reasonable expectation a resident could have when planning how much rent or mortgage they can afford or how far fixed retirement incomes can stretch. A strategy that spreads out and slows down implementation of high-cost projects would minimize the extraordinary property tax burden on residents. The current fiscal conundrum Council faces is not limited to one particular Council or Staff but it would be a great benefit going forward if the current Council can develop a 5-Year Budget solution that acknowledges that the “too much, too fast, too ambitious” approach is inappropriate for our small population, and finalizes a property tax assessment that is not completely outside the capacity of most residents’ ability to pay.RespectfullyBetty Morton594 Holdings Road, Bowen Island

unknown author4 years ago After many years of the Bowen Island Municipal portion increase in property taxes well above the CPI or COLA, this year and prediction for 2023 at over 10% is astounding, and not sustainable for the average property owner. New revenue sources could (and should) include Development Cost Charge Bylaws for all new development on Bowen (roads, sewer, water, parkland acquisition and parkland development). These are charged by avery other municiplaty within Metro Vancouver.Additional federal and provincial grants may be available for the Community Centre/Municipal Hall, Fire Hall/EOC, and Compost facility. These should be vigorously pursued by staff and Council.There is a large amount of new debt built into the muicipal budget as well, with minimal capital repayment. Unless the repayment interest rates are locked in for more than a few years the Municipality could have even larger carrying costs just for the debt incurred now.Large municpal property tax increses year after year do not demonstrate good management, and are not sustainable. Too many families in my area have sold and left Bowen for more affordable (and predictable) locations.Thank you for the opportunity to comment.Bill GrangerLenora Road, Bowen Island

unknown author4 years ago I was unavailable until 7:30 pm, but then wished to join in the Budget 'Open House'. At this time (now 8 pm), I was still awaiting the moderator to allow me in, and I suspect the discussion has wrapped up despite the 6-8pm meeting description.Others have commented on how outrageous two projected 10% budget increases are. When compounded, the increase for the 2 years of the fiscal plan is actually 21.77% relative to 2021. I add my voice to that. Where could efficiencies be found- eg deferral of new fire vehicle purchases ($1 million in 2 years 2022/23!)?Or refurbishment, as is done in other jurisdictions?The allusion to FTE costs, and how many West Van. or Burnaby might hire with each 1% hike, is utterly fatuous. Bowen is 1/10th the size of West Van. so should be hiring commensurately fewer employees. The burden per taxpayer is the measure to observe.I have not received any clarification as to where the monies from sale of community lands (a reputed $830,00) have gone. The clear intent, as stated in 2005 when those lands were purchased, was that such money was to pay down the debt of $2million. To that debt was added all of the development/design costs for the community centre. So my question is- where exactly is the money now and for what is it earmarked?Similar question about the money provided by Snug Cove House for sewer hookup. As that is seemingly not to be offered in the near future, what compensation is to be given?I wonder why parks and environment expenditures are being reduced, when almost all other departments are going up.The FTE count does not include consultants nor contract workers. The garbage/recycling contract necessitates the equivalent of at least 4? FTEs and that impact is not clearly spelled out. Given that at the incorporation study, it was expected there would be 12 FTEs within five years (2006), and then the increase rate would taper off. That included outside workers once MOTH no longer provided highway maintenance services. Why was this projection so wildly wrong?Why does Bowen have youth recreation AND adult programmers, in addition to their supervisor and a Community Services Director? Colleen Huskission pointed out that on the North Shore, each jurisdiction runs many more programs without that delineation.In 2010, BIM Council approved using funds from reserve and stabilizations for the $721,000 contribution to the $2.1 million Cove sewer upgrade. The rationale was clear and simple- such monies were primarily to allow for sewer hookups for community land developments- including the fire hall and community centre, but also for Lots 2 &3 plus parts of Lot 1 (across from BICS) and Foxglove. Instead there have been hookups for private development outside of those areas and now there is deemed insufficient capacity to include those 2010 identified areas. Just why were latecomer fees not applied to all hookups since 2010, up to and including those new lots at Rivendell? In fact why was the Snug Cove Sewer Boundary adjusted to allow for the inclusion of those approx. 10 lots? Will they now be assessed retroactively?One of the line items reflects increases in finance and administration departments far out of line with other increases. It is ironic, at the very least, that of the BIM functions and supposed thrift with taxpayer monies, are the worst examples of municipal profligacy.I will end there, though I still have a number of other questions. Suffice to say that the budget process has resulted in excessive impacts, far beyond normal inflation, and that opportunities to defer or reduce expenses have not been taken.Peter Frinton

unknown author4 years ago Dear Mayor & CouncilBudget 2022 & Proposed Property Tax IncreaseI was somewhat surprised to be informed that Council were considering a 10.4% increase in Property Taxes in order to cover the proposed Budget 2022.My curiosity at this arbitrarily presented figure stems from the following, each of which I have discussed in detail further on:- Reported CPI (Consumer Price Index) for British Columbia 2018 to 2021 from Statistics Canada - Analysis of Property Tax billing 2018 to 2021 for Residential and Business- Use of Bylaw Parcel Tax- The “Your Property Taxes and How They Are Spent” section within the 2021 Property Tax Information sheet accompanying the 2021 billingStatistic Canada - British Columbia CPI 2018 to 2021 The Consumer Price Index is the generally accepted, although admittedly imperfect, measure of inflation suffered by Canadians in respect of their cost of living.Regardless of its drawbacks the CPI gives a reliable indicator of price trends over this year period within BC. An extract from Statistics Canadas of the annual average CPI for 2018 to 2021 in respect of BC is as follows: Year CPI 2018 127.62019 130.72020 131.62021 135.4 In essence, the average cost of living for a resident of BC (excluding property purchase prices, alcohol & tobacco) has risen by 6.1% across the 4-years. Although it is easy to point at various costs (vehicle fuel for example) that have recently increased by a far more dramatic amount than 6.1%. Focus in this case should be on the 4-year trend as this provides a stable and unemotional view unaffected by the distorting effect of COVID or the situation in Ukraine.The Bank of Canada forecast for inflation for 2022 & 2023 and adjusted CPI are currently as follows: Year CPI (extrapolated) 2022 142.6 2023 146.6 In simple terms, costs are predicted to be 11.8% higher in 2022 than 2018 (and 14.9% higher in 2023 over 2018). These forecasts do by necessity reflect the true cost of the Ukraine crisis and Bank of Canadas estimate of its effect on food & oil prices. In summary, for 2022 it is projected by the Bank of Canada that cost of living will have increased by 11.8% over 2018. Property Tax Billing Analysis 2018 to 2021 If we consider Residential and Business Property Tax bills over the years 2018 to 2021 as follows: Year Residential Business 2018 $4,237 $8,4572019 $4,567 $9,7942020 $5,476 $7,6582021 $5,992 $11,197Over the period 2018 to 2021 the real increase in Property Tax billing has been 41% Residential and 32.4% Business. This is the actual percentage increase in real terms as suffered by the property owner. For the purposes of this comparison the assessable value increases are irrelevant. This begs the obvious question: If the costs of goods & services within BC increased by 6.1% over the period 2018 to 2021 then why did Property Tax billing require an increase over that same period of 41% Residential & 32.4% Business? It is appreciated that the Property Tax billing is comprised of both Municipal and Metro Vancouver and that BIM has no control over the latter’s financial requirement in practical terms. However, the question of the size of increase over 2018 to 2022 is still valid and requires a transparent and specific answer please?Use of Parcel Tax Bylaw The Parcel Tax legislation within BC government is an accepted and appropriate method of defraying the cost of specific and relevant capital projects across the direct beneficiaries. It is however of some concern that Property Tax billing for 2022 will include (at least in relation to Snug Cover properties) a further two Parcel Tax charges, bringing the total to five. I am understandably curious if the arbitrary 10.4% Property Tax increase that I have heard so much about is in respect of the overall Property Tax Bill, just the Municipal portion or if there will be amendments to the existing or proposed Parcel Taxes? I would also appreciate your comments as regards the apparent lack of an opportunity to assist the Municipality by settling a properties Parcel Tax commitment in a single up-front payment (commutation). This might not be widely taken up, but any reduction or mitigation of long-term debt commitment and consequential reduction in loan costs suffered by the Municipality would surely be a benefit. Given that capital projects being dealt with by Parcel Tax legislation are a more accurate method of attributing cost to beneficiary. It again raises the question of the need over the last four years for a 32.4% to 41% increase in Property Tax billing when you consider that capital projects have been financed by the separate Parcel Tax route. The “Your Property Taxes and How They Are Spent” section within the 2021 Property Tax Information sheet accompanying the 2021 billing A minor but worrying feature of the notes enclosed with the Property Tax 2021 billing is the contradictory elements that purport to explain the charges but that instead cause confusion. The example enclosed shows the breakdown of a typical Property Tax bill of $5,032 between Municipal $3,249 & Other Authorities $1,784 (split of 65% & 35% respectively). The notes unfortunately refer to a split of 57% & 43% between Municipal & Other Authorities. Although this might be true of overall spending of total Property Taxes collected Summary In light of the following observations: - Increase in last 4 years Property Tax billing of 32.4% to 41%- Actual CPI increase over the same 4 years of 6.1%- Forecast CPI increase for the five years 2018 to 2022 11.8% How is an increase of 10.4% in 2022 over 2021 Property Taxes justified? It should also be noted that between 2018 to 2022 there will have been an increase in properties on Bowen Island subject to Property Taxes. Would you kindly confirm the additional number of these and their overall contribution to Property Taxes by comparison to the additional cost of services they required as provided by the Municipality during the period 2018 to 2022? I look forward to your answers and comments on the above points.Thank you,Oydis NickleUnion Steamship Co

unknown author4 years ago 22nd April 2022Dear Mayor & CouncilProposed Budget 2022 – Observations of a Business Property Owner In reference to the Bowen Island Municipality 5 Year Financial Plan 2022 to 2026 presented to Council on 11th April 2022.It is surprising that the public consultation period for such an important topic is very short and not advertised to the public well. If I had not been signed up for the BIM Newletter and happened to catch this it could have come and gone. As a dutiful reader of the Bowen Island Undercurrent & News from Municipal Hall it was frustrating to read in the 21st April issues of each that the only public/council interaction was to be that evening, a whole 6 hours warning. The Union Steamship Co. along with many other businesses & business property owners on Bowen Island are essential and permanent fixtures of the fabric of this community.You are undoubtedly aware of the contribution made by businesses on Bowen to not only necessary services & business to business trade but also the significant employment opportunities provided to island residents of all ages and qualifications.We trust there is not the mistaken belief that only seasonal tourist trade would foot the bill for any cost increases imposed on the local businesses of Bowen Island though Property Taxes. The cost increase referred to in this case is the inconclusive and rather vague section of the presentation of 11th April on page 63 to 75 of 88 (attached). The implication of this section is that business property owners, and consequently the occupying businesses that ultimately pay for costs incurred by the owners are somehow undercharged Property Tax.The rationale behind this argument is seemingly based on a table that compares the Tax Class Multiples of various municipalities across BC. Would you kindly provide answers to, or copies of the following? - Your analysis report of the similarities/differences between the tables’ municipal areas that justifies the argument for Tax Class Multiple parity between Bowen and the others. - Your report on the likely financial impact on the Bowen Island business & non-business communities of the implementation of a 100% increase in the Tax Class Multiple - A definitive statement on the intentions & motivations of Council and the advice received in relation to this matter - Concerning the calculation page showing the Businesses Average Municipal Taxes Charged of $1,315 increasing to $2,583 in the event of doubling the Property Tax Multiple.o This computation by extrapolation shows that the 91 Business Property Taxpayers contribute a total of $119,665 (91 * $1,315) or 1.8% to the total of Property Taxes collected. An increase of 100% for a number of Bowen Island businesses in order to reduce Residential Property Taxes by $50 per average property is an unduly harsh assault on those already attempting to recover their trade post COVID.Please explain the logic behind a limited number of taxpayers, 91 in fact, being subjected to an extreme tax increase just to provide $50 public relations focused tax discount. This attempt at defusing the justifiable annoyance of a 10.4% Property Tax increase for 2022 and further 10.72% in 2023 is crude at best. As businesses on an island it is ridiculous to assume that they will only be passing these costs on to seasonal tourists and that it will have no financial impact on the local community of customers and non-business property owning trades. o Utilising the assessed values by property category on page 5 & applying the base tax rate of 1.923911 and adjusted using the Distribution of Municipal Tax Ratio to Residential on page 66 as follows: Category Value Rate Ratio Property Tax $million $ Residential 3,424.6 1.923911 1:1 6,588,626Utilities 1.9 1.923911 4.16:1 15,207Light Ind. 1.0 1.923911 4.16:1 8,003 Bus. & Oth. 62.2 1.923911 1:1 119,667 Rec. & NP 9.4 1.923911 1:1 18,084 Farm 0.1 1.923911 0.5:1 96 $3,499.2 million $6,749,683 o Although the above neatly corresponds with the Property Tax 2022 figure shown on page 50 of $6.75 million (rounding up to the nearest $10,000) it does however raise a question concerning the nature of the difference between the Residential value of $3,424.6 million used in the above and the figure of $2,969.8 million stated in the Property Tax Multiple calculations. Please explain the nature of the difference of $454.8 million in Residential Property values.On s final point, I would like to comment on the statement made by Councilor Wynen in the Bowen Island Undercurrent of 21st April in relation to the under-consideration Business Property Tax Multiple.“With more tourists coming, businesses are obviously benefitting from that, but we’re not getting the benefit tax wise… That’s a huge difference there,” said Councillor Rob WynenThe above statement shows a breathtaking lack of comprehension of the contribution of business to our local community. In addition, the description of extorting an extra 1.8% of the overall Property Tax as a “huge difference” is at best an example of hyperbole and at worst the sign of a worrying inability to understand finances. Foremost, the employment provided to the local residents, thereby enabling them to live and work on the island as opposed to relocating to the mainland for work and thereby reducing its demographic diversity.The island-based businesses to which Councilor Wynen refers provide income to numerous local traders that are completely unconnected to seasonal tourism, from construction to mechanics to the local gym. Your comments and answers to the above would be much appreciated.Thank you, Oydis NickleUnion Steamship Co.

unknown author4 years ago

Filters

Total posts: 13

There are 13 projects available.

Selected zero tag filters.

Upcoming and ongoing events

0 events have loaded.

No upcoming or ongoing events are currently scheduled.

Past events

Bylaw Consideration by Council
Event date: May 3rd, 2022 from 12:00 AM to 1:00 AM.
Municipal Hall
Read more
Budget Open House
Event date: April 22nd, 2022 from 1:00 AM to 3:00 AM.
Municipal Hall
Read more
Council Workshop
Event date: April 11th, 2022 at 11:00 PM to April 12th, 2022 at 1:00 AM.
Municipal Hall
Read more

3 events have loaded.

2022 Budget Consultation

Phases

Public Consultation

13 issues

Contributions to Reserves

Salaries and Benefits

New Operating Fund items

Impact of new debt

budget proposal 2022

Development Cost Charges

Proposed Property Tax Increases

Unsustainable and inconsistent property tax hikes

New sources of revenue

Obvious disconnect with financial realities reflected in this budget

Budget 2022 Concerns

Business on Bowen Concerns

budget increases for departments

Filters

Upcoming and ongoing events

Past events

Bylaw Consideration by Council

Budget Open House

Council Workshop

2022 Budget Consultation

Phases

Public Consultation

13 issues

Contributions to Reserves

Salaries and Benefits

New Operating Fund items

Impact of new debt

budget proposal 2022

Development Cost Charges

Proposed Property Tax Increases

Unsustainable and inconsistent property tax hikes

New sources of revenue

Obvious disconnect with financial realities reflected in this budget

Budget 2022 Concerns

Business on Bowen Concerns

budget increases for departments

Filters

SORT BY

TAGS

STATUS

Upcoming and ongoing events

Past events

Bylaw Consideration by Council

Budget Open House

Council Workshop