Coldstream Municipality "cherry-picks" data to support 5% tax increase

"Municipal operating expenditures in British Columbia continue to increase at an unsustainably high rate. This overspending comes at the expense of families, small businesses, and other commercial ratepayers through property tax increases, user fee hikes, and higher transfer payments from senior levels of
government."

Source: B.C. Municipality Spending Watch, 2nd Edition (Heather Tilley, Policy Analyst B.C.)

So, grab an air-sickness bag and settle into the Lazyboy for the spin, which even the local media can't seem to resist.

A Morning Star article December 16, 2009 headed "Coldstream braces for tax hike" stated the chief reason for the increase is "to fund infrastructure projects and the legal fees from the ongoing water devolution disagreement with the City of Vernon."

Seems road improvements top the list. "That will pay off in the long term not only in terms of road rehabilitation, but we won't have to spend money (in the future)," Coun. Pat Cochrane is quoted as saying.

So, before taxpayers can argue the point, we'll have to wait and see if Coldstream plans to spend money on roads in a year or two, or three. Hmmm, note to self...mark the calendar "no roads spending in future!"

Arguable now, however, is Coldstream's cherry-picking of data contained in the Canadian Federation of Independent Business report published in November, 2009, that noted Coldstream was the least-taxed municipality of its size.

What the CFIB reported in its entirety should be of concern to Coldstream's 10,218 inhabitants.

While Coldstream's per capita spending of $501 is the lowest of 25 similar-sized communities, its Fiscal Sustainability Gap of 2.28 indicates spending growth increased more than two-and-a-quarter times as fast as population and inflation. Note also that the $501 does not include spending on capital infrastructure, adds the CFIB.

But roads (see above) are capital infrastructure!

Where IS that incredulity smiley??

The Spending Watch document adds: By law, municipalities cannot run a budget deficit. In order to pay for the 43% increase in
operating spending between 2000 and 2007, municipalities across British Columbia have increased revenues 62% to cover both the growth in operating and capital spending.
Property taxes are up 42%, user fees up 95%, and transfer payments from governments are up 121% between 2000 and 2007. These increases are far above what would have been necessary had municipalities held operating spending to population and inflation growth.

Naturally the CFIB didn't tell Coldstream to stop cherry-picking its report, but they did have quite a few recommendations for municipalities in B.C.:

• Introduce taxation and expenditure limitation laws to constrain the growth in government operating spending to no more than population and inflation growth.

• Introduce zero-based budgeting with meaningful performance targets.

• Focus on core municipal services.

• Restrict full-time-equivalent employment and wage growth by limiting the growth in employees to the growth in population.

• Ensure that capital projects are fully financed up front by including lifetime operating and maintenance expenses in the initial cost estimates.

And didn't the Federal government's community infrastructure fund (your taxpayer dollars again) kick money into Coldstream's coffers for roads and bridges as capital improvements?

Four levels of government, one taxpayer...

"It makes me dizzy," intones Kia.