Mission’s proposed new budget, which includes a tax increase of 4.62 per cent, didn’t receive a lot of public feedback on Tuesday night.
As part of its regular council meeting, the district invited the public to express their views or questions on the proposed budget – which is also calling for increases to the drainage levy (9.75 per cent), water utility user fees (one per cent) and sewer utility user fees (five per cent) – but only two people came to the podium to speak.
Former councillor Jim Hinds told council that he had some concerns.
READ MORE: Breaking down Mission’s proposed budget
“If this tax increase of approximately 4.62 per cent is allowed to go ahead as written, this will be the highest tax increase we have seen in this community in the last eight to nine years,” Hinds said.
While he understood the need for an increase due to the newly announced payroll tax and the need for Mission RCMP to add staff to help speed up the process of getting people to court, Hinds said some of council’s requests could be put off for another year.
“If you have to have these new positions … then you need to find some other revenue source other than going after the residential taxpayer.”
In its proposed budget, Mission requires $340,312 (an increase of 1.08 per cent) just to maintain existing services.
Add to that another $1,082,846 (an increase of 3.43 per cent) for proposed increased service levels, and that brings the total to $1,423,158.
However, new property tax revenue generated from new construction is expected to be $300,000 (a reduction of .96 per cent), which would diminish the amount needed to $1,123,158 (a net increase of 3.55 per cent).
Finally, the district needs $338,095 (1.07 per cent) to offset the increase in payroll overhead caused by the new BC Payroll Tax. That brings the total amount required to $1,461,253, an increase of 4.62 per cent.
Hinds suggested lowering the amount of money going to the various reserve funds for one year and redoing the business licence bylaw to bring licence fees in line with other communities.
The only other speaker, Mrs. McLeod, said she was unhappy with the proposed increase, especially considering the increase in property assessments.
“We are going to get hit extremely hard … I don’t know how necessary these new positions are. I don’t know if you are understaffed that greatly. If you could postpone that for another year, it would help.”
The public has also had the opportunity to fill out an online survey regarding the new budget.
Those results will be compiled and presented at the March 6 special meeting of council.
Council will then decide if any alterations are required before approving the proposal.