Kudos to William Wallace (Letters, April 20) for bringing up the issue of high municipal spending in times of run-away costs, especially food prices and mortgage rates.
If provincial and federal tax rates and rules are clearly specified, progressively applied, and depend on a person’s income, municipal taxes seem to be left to each council’s whim.
First of all, they’re based on a medieval system of property value, which, in turn, is calculated based on a speculative market value (not on the actual rebuilt cost). For example, this year, property assessments were increased by 12 percent, and the previous year by 25 percent.
Second, nobody’s income is taken into account.
Third, in other jurisdictions, residents discuss one property tax rate increase, which includes school and other taxes. While here, the council suggests their tax hike, which is supplemented by 10 others: CRD, school, health, transportation, etc., with their own rate increases.
For example, last year, the district’s increase of 6.3 percent resulted in a 7.6 percent hike for the residents. Likewise, this year’s proposed 6.9 percent hike will result in a more than eight percent increase.
Provincial public servants got a 14 per cent salary increase. Our council increased their salaries by 17 per cent and the mayor by 50 percent. But do other people get a seven to eight per cent income hike yearly?
Why should municipal governments have the right to reduce our welfare annually by whatever percentage they feel like? I think municipal taxes should be limited to the inflation rate. Municipalities, like ordinary citizens, should learn to live within their means and not their dreams.
Nina Leshinskaya
Sooke
editor@sookenewsmirror.com
Like us on Facebook and follow us on Twitter
