Moose Jaw Forum

With the operating budget now set the next big shock for city council to deliver to property owners is going to be the Hospital Levy.
We all know it is going to be going up, the only problem is how much and how will council collect the money?
Personally as it stands I believe that the levy is going to be increased to at least three-fold from the present $40 annually to at least $120 and I am sorry to say maybe even more than that.
The big problem I have with what is going to happen here is that this increase is really going to hit people of lesser economic means really hard.
For pensioners - many that are really struggling to get by - as well as those earning lower incomes this is going to be a major blow to their wallets.
I personally am predicting that for many prople in the more affordable home class that the combined property tax increases added to the upcoming hospital levy is effectively going to wipe out the tax relief received when the Wall government made moves in educational taxes.
With that said I wonder how council is going to approach all of this?
Is council going to maintain the status quo and collect the levy on a per property basis which we all know is going to be a hardship for those on limited incomes or will council move to what many might view as a more progressive levy system and simply assess it on a percentage basis?
For example, lets say a person's annual property tax - the city portion - is $1000. Now add to that a hospital levy increase of $120 plus the 3.92 percent already decided and what you have here is an effective city levied tax increase of just under 16 perrcent.
Now lets say your property tax is - the city portion - is $2000. If you add in the 3.92 percent property tax increase plus a hospital levy increase of $120 then you are looking at a city levied tax increase of approximately 10 percent.
Of course my figures are out but percentage-wise and assuming that the poorer and fixed income property owner is in the least assessed home, then percentage-wise the poor are going to really bear the blunt of the property tax and potential hospital levy increase.
The big thing to remember is that for many of the homes in areas where many people are pensioners and those earning smaller incomes the actual property tax increase on a percentage basis (city portion) is going to be much, much higher.
If a person is an advocate of a progressive system then moving to a levy based upon a percentage is the more fairer system.
If a person believes that fairness is based upon everyone being assessed the same in a dollar-wise amount tben any moves towards a levy based upon a percentage of property value is going to be viewed with disdain.
Personally I am predicting that there are forces on city council that are going to move towards the percentage levy structure. The big question is, is there enough will and the numbers to do it?
whether people believe me or not, the hospital levy and how to collect it could be a real problem for the mayor.
If the more progressive Councilor Mitchell can get enough community support behind him, then I think you are going to see some major headaches for Mayor Hagel.
Will the mayor be swayed into abandoning his NDP roots and the progressive nature it places upon taxation or will he sell them out to a more right wing philosophical bend?
Personally I think it is going to be very interesting.

Excuse me, but Mitchell is not progress he is a Socialist! And if we wanted a truly fair application of the Hospital Levy it should be based on Income not the regressive, archaic, attitude that having a nice house makes one rich or more able to pay/cope with the levy or tax increases! There are many residents who have worked hard over the years to have a nice retirement home, as their priority, but they are struggling to make ends meet with these unconscionable property tax increases becoming a major fiscal issue!! While there are others who didn't put a priority on owning a nice home and spend their money on other material items of choice like: new vehicles, expensive toys, trips, etc. which are not subject to an annual tax, but that doesn't mean they should pay less for the Hospital Levy!! The nice house should not be the determining factor; however, a system based on percentage would be appropriate, but it should be based on A PERCENTAGE OF INCOME!

Sledge wrote:Excuse me, but Mitchell is not progress he is a Socialist! And if we wanted a truly fair application of the Hospital Levy it should be based on Income not the regressive, archaic, attitude that having a nice house makes one rich or more able to pay/cope with the levy or tax increases! There are many residents who have worked hard over the years to have a nice retirement home, as their priority, but they are struggling to make ends meet with these unconscionable property tax increases becoming a major fiscal issue!! While there are others who didn't put a priority on owning a nice home and spend their money on other material items of choice like: new vehicles, expensive toys, trips, etc. which are not subject to an annual tax, but that doesn't mean they should pay less for the Hospital Levy!! The nice house should not be the determining factor; however, a system based on percentage would be appropriate, but it should be based on A PERCENTAGE OF INCOME!

You make a good point Sledge.
I am just wondering though how the city could access income statements.
I use my own situation and will tell you that the house I live in here now is small and my taxes are just over $1000 but yet I would get a break on the levy despite having an income that although fluctuating is above average.
For myself I do know that the mayor is right about one thing and that is that hospital levy is going to hurt a lot of people.
What I do know though is that the city does have the power to assess levies based upon a percentage of assessed property valuations.
Chow tried to go the other way and shift the tax burden down onto lower assessed properties but there were enough voters out there to stop that one.
Whether they would get the same result doing things on a percentage value for this levy is yet to be seen. But it is right now the system we use for the actual property taxes.
I hope by putting this out there it does generate more discussion in the community.

But that would require thought-which appears to be a foreign concept to 3 out of 4.It (along with last few years increases) will hurt pensioners-my mom already pays 15 % of her income(on taxes) for the privilege of living in her own home.2013 is a reassessment year-presumably it will show another spike in mid-range house values(and taxes).Add to it water/sewer increases,hike in insurance & power rates...pretty soon the older parts of the city will be a ghost town.Living within the city's means would have prevented a lot of it-don't know what the answer is now.

I recognize that the City has no authority to tax based on Income as they are not entitled to the information and I'm not convinced they ever should have that right given the current sophistication of some of our chosen Councilors! However, I really grow tired of this old perception that a nice house means you are richer than others when in reality it is a more case these days of personal fiscal priorities . Perhaps a better solution might be to have funding provided to the Cities by the Province based on the income of the residents, but that is another topic for discussion. As it is now there is no right answer to making the Levy "fairer"; however, given the Universal free nature of the Hospital/medical I'm more inclined to "user pay" with an equal levy rather than, again off loading the cost onto Property assessment. Paying some directly for this service, considering the actual value in return, is really a small price in the long run.

Tired wrote:But that would require thought-which appears to be a foreign concept to 3 out of 4.It (along with last few years increases) will hurt pensioners-my mom already pays 15 % of her income(on taxes) for the privilege of living in her own home.2013 is a reassessment year-presumably it will show another spike in mid-range house values(and taxes).Add to it water/sewer increases,hike in insurance & power rates...pretty soon the older parts of the city will be a ghost town.Living within the city's means would have prevented a lot of it-don't know what the answer is now.

You raise a good issue here and that is for many seniors - I will assume in both the older and newer areas of the city - a substantial portion of what is a fixed income is going just to pay taxes to the city and the school divisions.
Somehow in the mix it seems that a lot of people - including those in positions of power - have forgotten about those people who worked hard all of their lives and now are facing a financial wall.
I also believe you are correct that if the city had done more in the area of fiscal restraint and better allocation of tax resources that many people's financial situation would not be so strained.

Sledge wrote:I recognize that the City has no authority to tax based on Income as they are not entitled to the information and I'm not convinced they ever should have that right given the current sophistication of some of our chosen Councilors! However, I really grow tired of this old perception that a nice house means you are richer than others when in reality it is a more case these days of personal fiscal priorities . Perhaps a better solution might be to have funding provided to the Cities by the Province based on the income of the residents, but that is another topic for discussion. As it is now there is no right answer to making the Levy "fairer"; however, given the Universal free nature of the Hospital/medical I'm more inclined to "user pay" with an equal levy rather than, again off loading the cost onto Property assessment. Paying some directly for this service, considering the actual value in return, is really a small price in the long run.

The ironic thing about all of this that the Premier is now on the Federal Government's case not to welch on their responsibility for health care funding when the case could be made that the Province has in many ways off-loaded onto the local taxpayer to fund the new hospital.

Could this be the case of funding shortfalls at higher level of governments now being compounded by council's financial decision making?

“How to assess the hospital levy,”, , with pledges the same way they built the multimess. The levy stays at the same level but for an extended period of time not condensed down to 4 years or whatever they`re looking at. If they can accept pledges (with no time frame allotted) to build a skating rink, they must certainly be able to accept pledges to build a hospital. If not then it will be very transparent of where this city`s administration`s priorities lie.

Unfortunately the Cities priorities were established by McBain, Chow and the rest of the incompetent crew when they refused to clearly identify, years back when Swanson pushed it, that the Hospital was Moose Jaws NUMBER ONE PRIORITY!! The Fab-5 wanted their their hockey rink, no matter what, and we are stuck with their self serving, illogical decision. Now we are left with making the best out of a bad fiscal mess!! It would seem that there is no easy, taxpayer friendly decision, it will just be the lesser of evils; however, I can see the NDP/socialist mentality at City Hall winning another vote and the Levy changing to the a Property Tax addition!

But those who use the facility most (ie the TH's favorite "to the editor" author) won't be paying the same level of taxation-hardly seems fair.