Development charges are complicated . It's easy to surrender to advice from experts. But not wise.
To calculate the charge , the town has to figure out , five years in advance, facilities and equipment needed to maintain a prescribed "standard of service "
If a facility included in the calculation doesn't get built within the five years, the standard is reduced The facility is deemed not to have been needed because the standard was exaggerated.
USE IT OR LOSE IT is the driving principle.
In the GTA , billions are collected from developers.....AKA the housing inductry.
DCs are the geese that laid the golden eggs.
There's no public sympathy for developers. Nor do I suggest there should be.New growth should not be a burden to existing residents.
And yet, taxes keep rising.
At the same time, it's the height of foolishness to imagine the housing industry bears the cost of
DCs.
It wouldn't surprise me if fifty per cent of cost of a new home in the GTA are taxes collected under the radar by all three levels of government.
The homebuyer pays the freight.
Five years ago when DC's were established developers delegated to Council. The economy was down. Building had halted. There was a financial crisis.
Since then , an Ontario Municipal Board appeal succeeded against Orangeville.. Funds inappropriately collected must be returned.
Aurora and others also have to return inappropriately collected funds to developers.
In the last DC calculation ,an amount was included for a joint parks and works facility.
About a fifth could be charged to new growth in accordance with projected population growth.
The cost of the facility forecast would be a fraction of the $26 million approved on Tuesday .
We didn't build it. We managed without it. We had the hydro building for a while.
Service level was reduced by the failure to build.
It cannot be included again in the next DC calculation.
I therefore do not accept the advice of the CFO that cost of the joint facility can be financed from DC s calculated for the five years ahead.
That gate has already clanged shut behind us.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
5 comments:
Debt financing is not acceptable if our taxes & service charges are already too high. And I do not want to hear Councillor Thompson compare us to Mississauga. We do not have the same infrastructure or demands.
Debt financing is one of the reasons how the crisis happened in 2008. It’s also how the Region is in $2.2 +Billion in debt to which the S&P may downgrade their credit rating. And what will the cost be to maintain such a building? Has that been factored in at all?
Can someone post the recorded vote. I understand it was 4 councillors yes and 4 no with the Mayor breaking the tie.
I am sure Abel was a yea and Buck a nay. I would like to have clarity on the how the remainder voted.
A lame duck council has no business tying the hands of councils to come with split decisions or bad ones. They really have to back off and do some serious thinking. I think the attempt at that Heritage mess was the final straw for taxpayers.
Why is the council lame duck in February / March? There is still a lot of opportunity to make progress.
Post a Comment