YORKTON - Yorkton Council took its first public look at the city’s 2025 operating and capital budgets last week.
To the surprise of almost no one the budget which will return to Council in March for final approval sits at present with another increase.
Overall the proposed budget includes increases of 2.06 per cent for capital, and 1.84 per cent for operation, for a combined increase of 3.9 per cent.
It was noted at the special meeting of Council last Thursday the impact of the tax hike would be somewhat minimal with the average residential homeowner seeing an increase which would equate to $7.10 a month.
Of course working with an average means some will pay more – those with higher value houses who may be better able to absorb the increases, and those in lower value homes paying less, but perhaps with less ability to absorb any increase.
To his credit Councillor Quinn Haider noted the question was not so much about the single year impact of the 2025 increase, but the impact of the longer terms impact of continuing tax increases.
“I don’t think that is sustainable anymore for some of our residents,” he said.
And of course therein has to lie a concern, how long can taxpayers pay more?
This year it’s roughly $85 for an average house. In 10 years that is suddenly near $1,000 more than paid today with similar annual increases each year, and the fact the increases compound on each other too.
That thousand dollars might come from wage increases, but not likely for lower income earners.
So it either bites into many set aside for retirement – again likely limited for lower income earners, or trimmed out of the budget; less restaurant visits, less theatre movies, less Junior Terrier games, less of something that impacts the local economy.
Now there is of course the flipside of the situation for Council too. Yorkton like almost all municipalities is in a massive infrastructure renewal deficit. Asphalt, sidewalks, underground water and sewer lines are decades old and will be decades older before all of it can be replaced, even with small tax increases annually going to capital.
Coun. Greg Litvanyi noted Thursday he sees little option to year after year tax hikes, adding that when past Councils held the line with zero per cent increases it only contributed to the infrastructure deficit being faced today.
Like Haider, Litvanyi made a valid point.
So what is Council to do, if more dollars need to be spent, and continual tax increases are not viable?
Well to start with you can spend more on infrastructure renewal if you spend less elsewhere in the same budget.
Ashley Stradeski – Director of Finance, with the city explained the budget was generally prepared with a service level status quo budget as the starting point.
That may simply not be sustainable. At some point Council may need to boldly cut the level of service provided knowing it will be widely unpopular but still needed.
Or, Coun. Randy Goulden’s suggestion has to gain traction. She said the solution might be found in how municipalities raise revenues, noting the current system goes back to Canadian confederation terming it “a Queen Victoria hand-me-down.” New tools for municipalities to generate revenue would help hold property tax increases to a minimum and offer new dollars for the much-needed infrastructure renewal.
Certainly continual hikes – when added to water rate increases and other municipal costs – are well beyond at least a portion of residents to pay, so a solution is needed soon, rather than when it’s too late for some who won’t be able to absorb forever property tax increases.
