Why do taxes go up?

[HiTempguy1]

I figured this was a question for the Finance section as I don't want this to get political (is that possible)?

My question is simply: why do taxes go up (city taxes)? If the service hasn't changed, or hasn't gotten better, why does the service cost more?

I can understand inflation, but over and above that I don't get it. Very rarely (if ever) is there a tax cut for city taxes. You would almost think that as a city grew, taxes would go down due to more efficient use of taxes concentrated in a greater area. :dunno:

[Cos]

Couple things:

- Growth
- Maintenance (roads, sewers, etc)
- Inflation
- Staff retention
- Buiness changes (can you imagine the initial costs when cell phones and computers became big?)

[Xtrema]

Originally posted by HiTempguy1
You would almost think that as a city grew, taxes would go down due to more efficient use of taxes concentrated in a greater area. :dunno:

That may be true if everyone move into condo around the core instead of to the burbs.

That's why cities where people get stuffed into 500sqft apartments have kick ass public transit systems.

The problem is we are not charging enough tax to reflect the sprawl. The further you expand, the more it cost to maintain.

I would love to see a bill/law that a developer will have to pay the city X amount before starting a new burb. Say if road+sewer+transit take $50M of cap spending, developer can't build shit until city get at least 1/2 of that to start, the other 1/2 yearly til the burb is completed.

[whiskas]

^^^^ Xtrema said it best.

Calgary has a very low population density given our total land area. If anything, it is very inefficient.

Every time our taxes go up, blame the people living in buttfuck no where in their shitty wooden cookie cutter homes.

[roopi]

Originally posted by whiskas
^^^^ Xtrema said it best.

Calgary has a very low population density given our total land area. If anything, it is very inefficient.

Every time our taxes go up, blame the people living in buttfuck no where in their shitty wooden cookie cutter homes.

Is your home made of carbon fibre?

[Crymson]

But it's the guys who live nearer to downtown, who pay more taxes because of their highter property values even though their infrastructure has been paid off for 35 years!

[Tik-Tok]

Originally posted by Xtrema

I would love to see a bill/law that a developer will have to pay the city X amount before starting a new burb. Say if road+sewer+transit take $50M of cap spending, developer can't build shit until city get at least 1/2 of that to start, the other 1/2 yearly til the burb is completed.

How about charging new houses in the burbs with more taxes?

I live in a 50's neighborhood, barely outside what is considered "inner city". Nothing here has been improved in decades, with the exception of the recycling program (which we pay for seperately), and road repaving which happens once a decade as well.

Why the fuck am I going to be paying 23% more in taxes so other people can live out in the burbs, when Nenshi supposedly hates urban sprawl?

[ACURA dreamin]

Capital Expenditures and Funding

For decades the City and the development industry have used the Standard Development Agreement as the document that sets out what the industry (and ultimately the new home buyer) will be financially responsible for. This agreement, which is reviewed and renegotiated regularly, provides certainty to all parties about who is responsible for what in the development of new communities.

It must be clear that the development industry is responsible for and funds all new infrastructure in new communities. This includes: local, collector and major roads, and alleys; curbs, gutters, sidewalks; medians and boulevards including landscaping; street lighting and signage; water distribution systems, sanitary and storm water systems, including storm ponds and landscaping; and electric system feeder mains. In addition, the developer gifts to the City 10 per cent of developable land as municipal reserve for schools and parks, as well as any lands considered environmental reserve.

The developer also makes significant financial contributions to offsite or downstream infrastructure costs through the payment to the City of acreage assessments and development levies. These contributions are used by the City to build freeways and expressways, regional storm water and storm management facilities, regional parks, libraries, recreational facilities, transit facilities as well as fire halls and police stations.

All of these costs both within the community and offsite are included in the cost of a new home and are ultimately paid for by the homeowner. Any increase in the cost of development such as increases in acreage assessments or development levies therefore impacts the price of housing.

The infrastructure costs for electric, gas, telephone and cable are paid by the utility provider, and recovered through utility rates and monthly bills. Prior to 2000, the development industry made contributions to offsite water and sewer costs. However, in 2000, at the request of the City, these levies were transferred to a transportation levy and increased significantly since additional funding for transportation infrastructure was a City priority at the time. The City has, since 2000, operated its water and sewer services like a utility. Water and sewer infrastructure costs are therefore paid for by the City, and recovered from the user through utility rates and monthly bills.



Taken from
http://www.votecalgary.ca/full_article.php?aid=813

From the sounds of that new home owners out in the burbs are putting up dollars for the services that they need.

[Tik-Tok]

Originally posted by ACURA dreamin



Taken from
http://www.votecalgary.ca/full_article.php?aid=813

From the sounds of that new home owners out in the burbs are putting up dollars for the services that they need.

Good to know. I retract my angry statement, lol. Though I still think higher taxes in the burbs would curb the urban sprawl a little.

[project240]

Originally posted by Tik-Tok


Good to know. I retract my angry statement, lol. Though I still think higher taxes in the burbs would curb the urban sprawl a little.


I live outside the city and pay nearly $3500/year for property taxes on a 2600sq ft bungalow.

I think Calgary taxes need to get jacked 23% this year, lol.
:rofl:

[broken_legs]

UNIONS.

[revelations]

Originally posted by Xtrema


That may be true if everyone move into condo around the core instead of to the burbs.

That's why cities where people get stuffed into 500sqft apartments have kick ass public transit systems.

The problem is we are not charging enough tax to reflect the sprawl. The further you expand, the more it cost to maintain.

I would love to see a bill/law that a developer will have to pay the city X amount before starting a new burb. Say if road+sewer+transit take $50M of cap spending, developer can't build shit until city get at least 1/2 of that to start, the other 1/2 yearly til the burb is completed.

:werd:



Originally posted by broken_legs
UNIONS.

No.

While there is waste and inefficiency in all levels of government, the unions are not the chief cause of higher taxes.

[broken_legs]

Originally posted by revelations


:werd:




No.

While there is waste and inefficiency in all levels of government, the unions are not the chief cause of higher taxes.

To be honest, I don't know enough to challenge that in Canada or Calgary. However, in the USA, I can say that it is Unions - or at least a major contributing factor. Specifically the ridiculous unfunded pension liabilities to public unions.

Does anyone know what the city of calgary pays their unionized workers? Do they have a massive pension that the city is obliged to pay even if the pension fund loses value in the stock market?

[dawerks]

What I don't get is how it's 'more fair' to charge higher property value areas more tax. How does that work? Do these areas get more services? Or is it another 'rich man tax'?

I live in St. Albert, so yes, I'm whining about taxes :)

[revelations]

Originally posted by dawerks
I live in St. Albert, so yes, I'm whining about taxes :)

Did you vote in the last municipal elections?

[Redlyne_mr2]

Sprawl is killing us all

[core_upt]

Sprawl is a factor in taxes increasing, without a doubt. Detroit is an interesting case on how sprawl helped kill a dying city.
But even in compact cities, there are upgrades that are needed (ie West LRT) which can cause a spike in property tax.
One problem with 'taxing the suburbs' is that it could encourage people to move out one step further - to non-city areas, ie, Cochrane, Okotoks, Chestermere, Airdrie, etc.
If you want more bang for your tax buck, we need to encourage a more compact city through better use of existing city land and bettering our inner city communities. Schools need to stop closing in the inner city so that families don't need to go to the 'burbs for their kids. The downtown core needs to offer something to everyone all the time, not just during office hours. Inner city areas need to be affordable and attractive - the east side of the Stampede grounds for example - where former industrial land can be reclaimed and redeveloped in to mixed use areas.
Denser cities may not mead to 'less taxes' but services are sure to go up.

[codetrap]

Originally posted by core_upt
Sprawl is a factor in taxes increasing, without a doubt. Detroit is an interesting case on how sprawl helped kill a dying city.
But even in compact cities, there are upgrades that are needed (ie West LRT) which can cause a spike in property tax.
One problem with 'taxing the suburbs' is that it could encourage people to move out one step further - to non-city areas, ie, Cochrane, Okotoks, Chestermere, Airdrie, etc.
If you want more bang for your tax buck, we need to encourage a more compact city through better use of existing city land and bettering our inner city communities. Schools need to stop closing in the inner city so that families don't need to go to the 'burbs for their kids. The downtown core needs to offer something to everyone all the time, not just during office hours. Inner city areas need to be affordable and attractive - the east side of the Stampede grounds for example - where former industrial land can be reclaimed and redeveloped in to mixed use areas.
Denser cities may not mead to 'less taxes' but services are sure to go up.

The single biggest reason that I moved to the burbs was to get away from high density housing. When I had a condo downtown I had to listen to all the noise, hustle, bustle, sirens, traffic, crime and all the other fun stuff that goes with high density housing.

Since moving to the burbs 6 years ago, I can count on one hand the amount of times I've seen a police car in my neighborhood. Crime here is almost nonexistent. It's a nice, quiet neighborhood where I can sit in my garage and have a beer and listen to the wind. That simply isn't possible in the "inner city".

The simple fact is that you'll never get rid of urban sprawl. Period. Human nature will continue to drive people to the burbs until it becomes so unaffordable that it's simply impossible to do. Some people do like living stacked above and below each other like lab rats in a cage, however I don't.

Btw, show me where the west LRT caused a spike in property taxes?

[codetrap]

Oh, and I forgot. If suddenly everyone wanted to move into bridgeland, or mount royal. Where exactly would they live? You're talking 60,000 that live up here. What possible incentive could you provide to someone like me who has a nice house, a yard, a dog, garage, space to stretch etc.. to move to high density housing that's going to cost me almost as much?

What is a 1800sq foot condo worth? Condo fees? Taxes on that? Will I get a little tiny deck that I can put my bbq on, and look across the 40m gap into 60 other apartments?

I always get a kick out of people that start complaining about "urban sprawl" and how it's so evil and going to be the death of us all. It'll never change, because the urban sprawl people outnumber those inner city people by a whole lot.

[Feruk]

Originally posted by codetrap
What possible incentive could you provide to someone like me who has a nice house, a yard, a dog, garage, space to stretch etc.. to move to high density housing that's going to cost me almost as much?

Simple, tax the crap out of you. Have property taxes be decided by a combination of property value and distance from services and tax appropriately. As a starting point, I think the C-Train should cost a different amount depending on how far you're going like in almost all other major cities.

[89coupe]

felt this was appropriate...LOL

ZCIP7VKTSYc

[codetrap]

Originally posted by Feruk

Simple, tax the crap out of you. Have property taxes be decided by a combination of property value and distance from services and tax appropriately. As a starting point, I think the C-Train should cost a different amount depending on how far you're going like in almost all other major cities.

It'll never happen. The sun loving suburbanites grossly outnumber the inner city cave dwellers. I think it's also far to late to retrofit the C-Train for graduated fares. It was never designed with that in mind, and would so expensive to retrofit that it would vastly outweigh any potential gains in fare revenue.

[core_upt]

Originally posted by codetrap


It'll never happen. The sun loving suburbanites grossly outnumber the inner city cave dwellers. I think it's also far to late to retrofit the C-Train for graduated fares. It was never designed with that in mind, and would so expensive to retrofit that it would vastly outweigh any potential gains in fare revenue.

What would need to be retrofitted for a zoned pay system? Many cities run a multiple zone system. You buy your ticket for the zones you need, and if you're traveling outside of the zone your ticket/pass covers you for, you're fined. The problem wouldn't be in the zoning, it is in the lack of enforcement prevalent throughout Calgary's transit system.

Inner city living, as I said, can be increased by at least giving people an opportunity to consider it as an option, and right now I agree with you, for most people it isn't. Schools aren't available, housing is expensive or shitty, and for a home buyer with 350,000 to spend, 700 sqft in a downtown condo can't compare to 1600 sqft in Copperfield.

But, if the city can work with developers on reclaiming industrial sites, and increasing density in aging neighbourhoods, such as those built in the 60s-70s where services exist, it would help in reducing the sprawl. Relaxing secondary suites and making more lots R2/R4 are good steps. Also, the city cut transition some transportation spending from continuous road expansions to public transit and non-private car transport. An unpopular decision, but one that would make people rethink how important their big suburban home is when they spend 90 minutes commuting every day.

[Zhariak]

On all this stuff...

I had some family out from Hamilton Ontario visiting us here in Calgary. We were talking about home taxes, etc...

I was shocked when I found out their city taxes were over 4 times what ours were.


I don't own a home, but I've heard people bitch and complain about the taxes. When I heard what they paid, I kinda realized we are bitching about nothing.


I'm not sure why we pay way less, but I'm wondering if it has something to do about the small businesses, and the revenue the city makes off business licensing, etc...

[Tik-Tok]

Originally posted by Zhariak


I was shocked when I found out their city taxes were over 4 times what ours were.

When I heard what they paid, I kinda realized we are bitching about nothing.

I'm not sure why we pay way less,

Do they own a mansion? I just looked up a house for sale in Hamilton, that is about the equivalent in size/age/condition/neighborhood to my house here. The asking price is about 3/4 of what I would ask for my house, and the taxes are 3/4's what I pay as well.

So I'd say it's pretty equivalent between the two cities as far as property taxes go.

[codetrap]

Originally posted by core_upt
What would need to be retrofitted for a zoned pay system? Many cities run a multiple zone system. You buy your ticket for the zones you need, and if you're traveling outside of the zone your ticket/pass covers you for, you're fined. The problem wouldn't be in the zoning, it is in the lack of enforcement prevalent throughout Calgary's transit system.

Have you ridden on any of the other systems where they use zoned fares? Generally, the only way to make them work is you get on, then you pay when you get off. That requires booths. It also requires some sort of pay system like a cash card. In order to enforce that, you need people stationed at each exit in a closed system, with controlled access/egress points. The open style design of the Calgary system could not support that without HUGE retrofitting.

One other thing to remember, that system cost them over a Billion dollars to build in the 60's, and it was all funded entirely by the local taxpayers.

[core_upt]

Originally posted by codetrap


Have you ridden on any of the other systems where they use zoned fares? Generally, the only way to make them work is you get on, then you pay when you get off. That requires booths. It also requires some sort of pay system like a cash card. In order to enforce that, you need people stationed at each exit in a closed system, with controlled access/egress points. The open style design of the Calgary system could not support that without HUGE retrofitting.

One other thing to remember, that system cost them over a Billion dollars to build in the 60's, and it was all funded entirely by the local taxpayers.

The multi zone systems I have used were in Berlin, Copenhagen, Prague, Malmo, Lisbon and a few others. In each one, you pay up front by purchasing a ticket from a automated machine (which actually gives change!) or from a driver with cash (who also gives change!). You pay for how far you are traveling. There is an honesty system at play, but the enforcement is much stricter too. I have been checked for valid fares in every city except Brazil. I will say that they are confusing at first, but they are easy enough to figure out within a few minutes.

Some systems even allow you to pay via text message and your phone is then your ticket - no cash, no cards, no tickets.

It undoubtedly costs money to initiate, but it is by no means a major overhaul.

[Xtrema]

Originally posted by core_upt

What would need to be retrofitted for a zoned pay system? Many cities run a multiple zone system. You buy your ticket for the zones you need, and if you're traveling outside of the zone your ticket/pass covers you for, you're fined. The problem wouldn't be in the zoning, it is in the lack of enforcement prevalent throughout Calgary's transit system.

Our ticket system has to change from voluntary/enforcement to pay per entry. It's pretty tough.

Remember, the L in LRT stands for Light.

I think we are running into the limits of what this system can do. And we can't really afford a REAL metro system.

[Tik-Tok]

Originally posted by codetrap


Have you ridden on any of the other systems where they use zoned fares? Generally, the only way to make them work is you get on, then you pay when you get off.

Yes, Vancouver has had zoned fares for years. You buy whatever zone level you need (1,2, or 3) at the ticket machine just like Calgary, jump on the train, jump off at your destination.

There's no need for booths, or "exit fares". Only more transit police to catch the people going past their zone ticket.

[codetrap]

Fair enough. I just don't see how well that would work when the train arrives downtown packed to the gills during rush hour. Are you going to put an army of cops there to check everyone's ticket?

The way I see it, there's going to be thousands of people not paying already, and then the city goes and implements zoned fares, with all the associated costs to it, and you're still going to have thousands of people not paying. Only now you're millions (mostly likely) in the hole because of rolling out all the infrastructure to support zoned fares, plus advertising, plus additional cops for enforcement. It just doesn't make sense. I'm not disagreeing that system that we have now isn't flawed, but I don't see any reasonable way to implement a better system using what we have as a foundation.

core-upt.. were any of the systems you used as packed as the C-Train heading to McKnight during rush hour? Was there any enforcement there?

Edit:
Tik Tok, I just read that Vancouver has either started implementing fare gates. It'll be fully installed by 2013. They started it in 2010.


It took until Jan. 27, 2011 to finally announce a contract with San Diego-based, New York Stock Exchange-listed Cubic. The company gets $84 million to design, build and install the smart card and fare gate system by 2013. Cubic gets $13 million a year for a decade plus a five-year option and a $6 million, one-time “transition cost.”
http://blogs.canoe.ca/vancouver2010/tag/fare-gates/

[core_upt]

Originally posted by codetrap
core-upt.. were any of the systems you used as packed as the C-Train heading to McKnight during rush hour? Was there any enforcement there?


I can't recall taking them at rush hour, but they were packed at times (i.e. after a hockey game in Prague). Enforcement there works by having undercover transit cops asking to see your ticket, and a few people on platforms as well. Not perfect, but still present.

I do agree that enforcement is difficult, but I think Calgary lacks enforcement with the system we have now, which could be easily corrected. From what I've understood, the fines in the cities I listed for not having a ticket are a little lower than Calgary (maybe $20-200) but compliance is much higher. Some places have tickets that are payable on the spot.

I think Calgary could step up enforcement now - more people being checked on platforms, leaving platforms, entering platforms. If the platforms are packed, it makes it easier to corral people to inspect for fares.

Sorry for pulling this so far off topic!