1 / 92

THE BUSINESS THAT MANY DISLIKE DON’T BELIEVE IN DON’T TRUST DON’T THINK MUCH ABOUT AND DON’T REALLY UNDERSTAND

LOCAL GOVERNMENT. THE BUSINESS THAT MANY DISLIKE DON’T BELIEVE IN DON’T TRUST DON’T THINK MUCH ABOUT AND DON’T REALLY UNDERSTAND. MUNICIPAL PLANNING AS SOME SEE IT. THE MUNICIPAL SYSTEM Created in 1849 Baldwin Act – 1 ST Municipal Act. FEDERAL GOVERNMENT CREATES.

zalika
Download Presentation

THE BUSINESS THAT MANY DISLIKE DON’T BELIEVE IN DON’T TRUST DON’T THINK MUCH ABOUT AND DON’T REALLY UNDERSTAND

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. LOCAL GOVERNMENT THE BUSINESS THAT MANY DISLIKE DON’T BELIEVE IN DON’T TRUST DON’T THINK MUCH ABOUT AND DON’T REALLY UNDERSTAND MUNICIPAL PLANNING AS SOME SEE IT

  2. THE MUNICIPAL SYSTEMCreated in 1849Baldwin Act – 1ST Municipal Act FEDERAL GOVERNMENT CREATES PROVINCES CREATE Robert Baldwin CITIES REGIONS COUNTIES TOWNS TOWNSHIPS

  3. THE MUNICIPAL SYSTEM PARLIAMENT OF CANADA LEGISLATURE OF ONTARIO CITYREGIONAL COUNTY TOWN TOWNSHIP COUNCILS COUNCILS COUNCILS COUNCILS COUNCILS

  4. Did You Know . . . ?? • & • HAVE NO • INDIVIDUAL POWER OR AUTHORITY • EACH HAS ONE VOTE • AT THE COUNCIL TABLE • THAT’S IT . . . . COUNCILLORS MAYORS EXCEPT IN A PUBLIC EMERGENCY

  5. FEDERAL & PROVINCIAL PARTY SYSTEMS CANDIDATE HOPEFUL THE PARTY CHECKS OUT FINANCES ‘;;;’ ‘;;;’ PARTY STANDING ‘;;;’ PRESENTABILITY OCCUPATION EDUCATION FAMILY HISTORY ACCOMPLISHMENTS

  6. FEDERAL & PROVINCIAL PARTY SYSTEMS FEDERAL & PROVINCIAL PARTY SYSTEMS SELECTED CANDIDATE SUPPORTED BY AN ORGANIZATION LEADERSHIP THE PLATFORM EXPERIENCE TRAINING THE SUPPORT OF MANY MENTORING CREDIBILITY COMPANIONSHIP – BACK UP

  7. THE MUNICIPAL SYSTEM $$$$$$$ DIRECTION ISSUES PLATFORM DEBATE PREPS SPEECHES ORGANIZATION ALL THE CANDIDATE’S RESPONSIBILITY

  8. THE MUNICIPAL SYSTEM MUNICIPAL SYSTEM 1-DAY SEMINAR (after election) TRAINING UNDEFINED ROLE HIGH HIGH EXPECTATIONS VULNERABILITY Highly Visible . . . Accessible . . . Accountable

  9. OUR MUNICIPALITY SHOULD BE RUN LIKE A BUSINESS ! AN OFTEN-STATED OPINION

  10. IT IS ! EVERY MUNICIPALITY IS AN INCORPORATED BUSINESS BUT. . . IT’S A BUSINESS THAT HAS LITTLE IN COMMON WITH PRIVATE SECTOR BUSINESSES

  11. CUSTOMERS DON’T. . . Get to pick (elect) who’s going to run the business. CUSTOMERS DON’T. . . Have a right to appear at board meetings. CUSTOMERS DON’T. . . Have a say in decision-making. IN THE PRIVATE SECTOR

  12. BOARD & BUSINESS MEETINGS . . .aren’t required by law to be conducted in public. IN THE PRIVATE SECTOR PRODUCTS & SERVICES . . . aren’t mandated by law. THERE’S NO RESTRICTION . . . on sources of income that a private company can access and make free use of.

  13. IN THE PRIVATE SECTOR NOTHING LIMITS PRICES. . . to equal no more than what it costs to bring a product or service to the customer - or less. BUSINESSES ARE FREE TO DECIDE . . . what they will do - and where, when and how they’ll do it . . . OR . . . not to do it at all.

  14. EVERY MUNICIPALITY is a“CREATURE OF THE PROVINCE” CREATED BY THE PROVINCE EMPOWERED BY THE PROVINCE CONTROLLED BY THE PROVINCE ACCOUNTABLE TO THE PROVINCE ALTERED BY THE PROVINCE - AT WILL

  15. Did You Know . . . ?? • WHILE PRIVATE BUSINESSES • ARE FREE TO BORROW • AS MUCH AS LENDERS • ARE WILLING TO LEND • THEM • MUNICIPALITIESARE RESTRICTED IN HOW MUCH THEY CAN SPEND ON DEBT REPAYMENT IT’S KNOWN AS • THE • ANNUAL • REPAYMENT • LIMIT

  16. THE PRIVATE SECTOR is in the SELF-DIRECTED BUSINESS of producing and delivering SELF-DETERMINEDED PRODUCTS & SERVICES to an unlimited range of customers FOR PROFIT

  17. MUNICIPALITIES are in the PROVINCIALLY- MANDATED BUSINESS of producing and delivering services to citizens living within their boundaries AT COST

  18. MANDATED =No choice AT COST = No profit TO THE PRIVATE SECTOR = NO THANKS !!

  19. PRIVATE BUSINESS AND SO . . . Creates communities and keeps them running Delivers services that promote the community’s health, safety & orderly development MUNICIPAL BUSINESS ● THEY’RE NOT RIVALS ● ONE IS NOT SUPERIOR TO THE OTHER ● THEY’RE DIFFERENT . . . BUT BOTH ARE Inter-related Inter-dependent Necessary and Worthwhile

  20. RUNNING OUR MUNICIPALITY TOWNSHIP OF LANARK HIGHLANDS

  21. OUR TOWNSHIP BASICS • DARLING LANARK • LANARK • LAVANT/ DALHOUSIE/ • NORTH SHERBROOKE • ONE OF MUNICIPALITIES MAKING UP LANARK COUNTY • POPULATION = 5,180+ 3,672 SEASONAL = • PEOPLE PER SQ. KM. (Prov. Av. = 13.5 Per sq. km) AMMALGAMATED TOWNSHIPS OF + VILLAGE OF 1997 8 8,852 8.6

  22. 0UR GEOGRAPHIC SIZE LARGEST WE’RE THE MUNICIPALITY IN LANARK COUNTY TAY VALLEY 554 SQ KMS MISSISSIPPI MILLS 500 SQ KMS DRUMMOND NORTH ELMSLEY 365 SQ. KMS MONTAGUE 283 SQ KMS BECKWITH 242 SQ KMS PERTH 10SQ KMS CARLETON PLACE 9 SQ KMS LANARK HIGHLANDS 1033 SQ KMS

  23. OUR GEOGRAPHIC SIZE COUNTY 3020 SQ. KMS PERTH ½ % CARLETON PLACE ½ % BECKWITH 8 % LANARK HIGHLANDS 1033 SQ. KMS. OF THE COUNTY’S LAND MASS MONTAGUE 9% 34% DRUMMOND N. ELMSLEY 12% MISSISSIPPI MILLS 17% TAY VALLEY 18 %

  24. WE ARE 35% OF COUNTY’S LAND MASS 34%

  25. PROPERTY ASSESSMENT OUR ASSESSMENT BASE IS ALMOST TOTALLY RESIDENTIAL RESIDENTIAL ASSESSMENT - 95% FARM & FOREST ASSESSMENT - 3% COMM./INDUSTRIAL ASSESSMENT - 2% A VERY RESTRICTIVE FINANCIAL BASE HEAVY BURDEN ON RESIDENTIAL TAXPAYER

  26. PROPERTY ASSESSMENT ASSESSMENT PER SQ. KM. – IN MILLIONS OF DOLLARS TOTAL AREA ASSESSMENT ASSESSMENT SQ. KMS. PER SQ. KM. CARLETON PLACE $ 752 9 $ 84 BECKWITH $ 620 242 $ 2. MISSISSIPPI MILLS $ 1,071 500 $ 2 DRUMMOND N. ELMSLEY $ 716 365 $ 2 MONTAGUE$  255 283 $ 1 PERTH $ 510 10 $ 51 TAY VALLEY $ 816 554 $ 1.5 LANARK HIGHLANDS $   528 1033 $ .5 LOWEST DISTRIBUTED ASSESSMENT SAME COST TO DELIVER SERVICES

  27. PROPERTYASSESSMENT TOTAL ASSESSMENT PER HOUSEHOLD MISSISSIPPI MILLS 4,860 $ 211,700 TAY VALLEY 3,736 $ 209,100 MONTAGUE 1,367 $ 207,600 BECKWITH 2,752 $ 203,400 DRUM. N. ELMSLEY 3,360 $ 192,300 CARLETON PLACE 3,927 $ 191,000 PERTH 3,079 $ 190,000 HOUSEHOLDS ASSESSMENT LANARK HIGHLANDS 3,541 $ 136,000 Source: 2010 Provincial OMPF Reconciliation – Rounded to Nearest $100

  28. PROPERTYASSESSMENT BREAKDOWN BECKWITH 95.8 % 1.6% 2.5 % 0 .1% CARLETON PLACE 82.6 % 17.2% 0 0 .2 % DRUM. N. ELMSLEY 92.7 % 2.7 % 4.3 % 0 .3 % MISSISSIPPI MILLS 87.9 % 5.2 % 5.0 % .2 % 1.7 % MONTAGUE 92.0 % 3.5 % 4.0 % .1 % .4 % PERTH 77.9 % 21.9 % 0 0 .2 % TAY VALLEY 90.7 % 5.8 % 3.2 % .3 % 0 RESIDENTIAL COMMERCIAL FARM FOREST PIPELINE INDUSTRIAL LANARK HIGHLANDS 94.7 % 1.6 % 2.8 % .9 % 0

  29. Did You Know . . . ?? • EACH YEAR • AS OUR • PROPERTY • ASSESSMENTINCREASES • OUR GRANTS • INCOME DECREASES (GROWTH)

  30. PROPERTY ASSESSMENT NEW INCOME FROM INCREASED PROPERTY ASSESSMENTS INCREASED OMPF ACTUAL ASSESSMENT GRANT NEW POTENTIAL NEW INCOME REDUCTION INCOME 2008 $ 40,056 - $ 40,056 2009 $ 230,002 $ 65,900 $ 164,102 2010 $ 255,770 $ 63,600 $ 192,170 Eventually – the OMPF grant will reduce to zero We depend on growth income to meet increasing costs The Township doesn’t receive the full financial benefit of annual increases in total property assessment

  31. PROPERTY TAXES HOW PROPERTY TAXES ARE CALCULATED COUNTY TAX RATE PROPERTY TAXES ASSESSED PROPERTY VALUE x TOWNSHIP TAX RATE = EDUCATION TAX RATE PROPERTY ASSESSMENT VALUES ARE PROVIDED BY THE MUNICIPAL PROPERTY ASSESSMENT CORPORATION

  32. PROPERTY TAXES DISTRIBUTION Retained to provide services to you Sent to the County COUNTY 33% TOWNSHIP 47% EDUCATION 20% Sent to School Boards

  33. 2008 TAXES FOR MUNICIPAL PURPOSES ONLY Not including County & Education Levies PERTH $ 6.0 MILLION CARLETON PLACE $ 5.9 MILLION MISSISSIPPI MILLS $ 5.0 MILLION TAY VALLEY $ 3.4 MILLION DRUMMOND NORTH ELMSLEY $ 2.4 MILLION BECKWITH $ 1.9 MILLION MONTAGUE $ 1.1 MILLION LANARK HIGHLANDS $ 2.9 MILLION SOURCE: 2008 FINANCIAL INFORMATION RETURNS OUR SERVICE LOAD SURPASSES MOST OF OUR NEIGHBOUR MUNICIPALITIES

  34. PROPERTY TAXES HOW RETAINED 2009 TAX $$ WERE ALLOCATED COUNCIL 3% PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT 1% 2008 DEFICIT 4% CORPORATE OVERHEAD 6% PUBLIC WORKS & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 52% COMMUNITY SERVICES 6% ADMINISTRATION 11% PROTECTIVE SERVICES 17%

  35. PROPERTY TAXES 38 % OF TSWP ●393 SQ. KMS ● 32,900 ACRES CROWN LANDS NON TAXABLE 206 PROPERTIES & PART PROPERTIES MANAGED FORESTS TAXED AT 25 CENTS ON THE DOLLAR 644 PROPERTIES & PART PROPERTIES FARMS TAXED AT 25 CENTS ON THE DOLLAR

  36. PROPERTY TAXES COUNTY LEVY What It Pays For SOCIAL SERVICES Ontario Works Children's’ Services Adult Protective Services LONG TERM CARE Homes for the Aged PLANNING APPROVALS Severances Subdivisions EMERGENCY SERVICES Planning & Prep Fire Dispatch Ambulance Rescue 911 PUBLIC WORKS Roads Bridges Yards Gravel Pits COUNTY COUNCIL 16 Members 2 from each municipality

  37. PROPERTY TAXES THE COUNTY LEVY 2009 MISSISSIPPI MILLS $ 4,950,282 19.9 TAY VALLEY $ 3,858,097 15.5 CARLETON PLACE $ 3,851,495 15.4 DRUMMOND N. ELMSLEY $ 3,187,481 12.8 PERTH $ 2,821,197 11.3 BECKWITH $ 2,758,844 11.1 MONTAGUE $ 1,140,855 4.6 DOLLARS % OF CONTRIBUTION LEVY LANARK HIGHLANDS $ 2,369,725 9.5 TOTAL COUNTY LEVY $ 24,937,976

  38. Did You Know . . . ?? COUNTY LEVY 33% OF OUR BUDGET EDUCATION LEVY 20% OF OUR BUDGET CONS. AUTH. LEVY .5% OF OUR 53.5% BUDGET Calculated on assessment / taxation of PERMANENT + SEASONAL properties HOWEVER . . . OUR REPRESENTATION ON CONS. AUTHORITY & REGIONAL HEALTH UNIT Calculated on PERMANENT POPULATION only Disadvantage to communities with seasonal populations FULL TAXATION PARTIAL REPRESENTATION

  39. REVENUE - INCOME OUR 2009 SOURCES OF INCOME FEES & CHARGES 4% LANARK COMMUNITY CENTRE 3% GRANTS 27% PROPERTY TAXATION 66%

  40. Did You Know . . . ?? OCTOBER 2008 AFTER SPENDING 4 YEARS AND ALMOST $200,000 WE WON AN ASSESSMENT DECISION POTENTIALLY WORTH ABOUT $1 MILLION IN BACK TAXES + $200,000 IN NEW ANNUAL TAXES DECEMBER 2008 PROVINCE PASSED BILL 114 . . . AND WIPED THOSE GAINS AWAY DECEMBER 2008 NO Consultation NO Compensation

  41. REVENUE - INCOME PROVINCIALLY - OWNED (CROWN) LANDS IN 2008 PROVINCE PAID US $ 46,400 WE PAID THE COUNTY $ 19,200 32,900 ACRES CAN’T BE DEVELOPED CAN’T BE TAXED TOWNSHIP PROVIDES ACCESS ROADS FIRE PROTECTION ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 38% OF OUR TWSP NET TO US $ 27,200

  42. DEBT LONG TERM - 2008 MISSISSIPPI MILLS $ 5,359,516 BECKWITH $ 3,711.516 PERTH $ 2,915,046 CARLETON PLACE $ 1,635,343 DRUMMOND N. ELMSLEY $ 540,115 MONTAGUE 0 TAY VALLEY 0 LANARK HIGHLANDS $ 1,780,784 SOURCE - 2008 Financial Information Returns

  43. DEBT + OTHER LIABILITIES LONG TERM OTHER DEBT DEBT & TOTAL LIABILITIES MISSISSIPPI MILLS $ 5,360,000 $ 4,543,000 $ 9,903,000 CARLETON PLACE $ 1,635,000 $ 4,649,000 $ 6,284,000 PERTH $ 2,915,000 $ 3,029,000 $ 5,944,000 BECKWITH $ 3,712,000 $ 1,174,000 $ 4,886,000 TAY VALLEY 0 $ 1,040,000 $ 1,040,000 DRUMMOND N. ELMSLEY $ 540,000 $ 797,000 $ 1,337,000 MONTAGUE 0 $ 356,000 $ 356,000 LANARK HIGHLANDS $ 1,781,000 $ 762,000 $ 2,543,000 SOURCE - 2008 Financial Information Returns

  44. PERTH $ 5,456,000 CARLETON PLACE $ 5,342,000 MISSISSIPPI MILLS $ 3,793,000 TAY VALLEY $ 3,393,000 BECKWITH $ 2,444,000 DRUMMOND N. ELMSLEY $ 2,260,000 MONTAGUE $ 2,127,000 RESERVES + RESERVE FUNDS $$ PUT AWAY FOR FUTURE AND/OR SPECIFIC PURPOSES LANARK HIGHLANDS $ 2,931,000 RESERVES SHOULD BE KEPT HEALTHY

  45. EXPENDITURE PER HOUSEHOLD 2008MUNICIPAL PURPOSES ONLY PERTH 3,079 $ 6.0 MILLION $ 1,949 CARLETON PLACE 3,927 $ 5.9 MILLION $ 1,502 MISSISSIPPI MILLS 4,860 $ 5.0 MILLION $ 1,029 TAY VALLEY 3,736 $ 3.4 MILLION $ 910 MONTAGUE 1,367 $ 1.1 MILLION $ 805 DRUM. N. ELMSLEY 3,360 $ 2.4 MILLION $ 714 BECKWITH 2,752 $ 1.9 MILLION $ 690 HOUSEHOLDS 2009 BUDGETED MUNICIPAL EXPENDITURE BUDGET PER HOUSEHOLD LANARK HIGHLANDS 3,541 $ 2.9 MILLION $ 819

  46. EXPENDITURE PER CAPITA 2008 MUNICIPAL PURPOSES ONLY PERTH 7,182 $ 6.0 MILLION $ 835 CARLETON PLACE 9,998 $ 5.9 MILLION $ 590 MISSISSIPPI MILLS 11,784 $ 5.0 MILLION $ 424 TAY VALLEY 9,318 $ 3.4 MILLION $ 365 MONTAGUE 3,418 $ 1.1 MILLION $ 321 DRUM. N. ELMSLEY 8,540 $ 2.4 MILLION $ 281 BECKWITH 6,948 $ 1.9 MILLION $ 274 POPULATION 2008 TAXES EXPENDITURE MUNICIPAL PURPOSE ONLY PER CAPITA LANARK HIGHLANDS 8,852 $ 2.9 MILLION $ 326

  47. MUNICIPAL COUNCILS COMPOSITION MISSISSIPPI MILLS 11,784 MAYOR 10 11 3 TAY VALLEY 9,318 REEVE DEP. REEVE 6 8 3 CARLETON PLACE 9,998 MAYOR DEP. MAYOR 5 7 PERTH 7,182 MAYOR DEP. MAYOR 5 7 BECKWITH 6,948 REEVE DEP. REEVE 3 5 DRUM. N. ELMSLEY 8,540 REEVE DEP. REEVE 3 5 2 MONTAGUE 3,418 REEVE DEP. REEVE 3 5 POP. MAYOR DEPUTY MAYOR COUNCILLORS TOTAL WARDS REEVE DEPUTY REEVE LANARK HIGHLANDS 8,852 MAYOR DEP. MAYOR 5 7 6

  48. $ COUNCIL REMUNERATION A COST PER PERSON MONTAGUE 3,418 5 $ 57,120 $ 16.71 CARLETON PLACE 9,998 7 $ 156,637 $ 15.67 MISSISSIPPI MILLS 11,784 10 $ 151,965 $ 12.90 PERTH 7,182 7 $ 82,800 $ 11.53 TAY VALLEY 9,443 6 $ 102,704 $ 10.88 BECKWITH 6,998 5 $ 63,768 $ 9.11 DRUM. N. ELMSLEY 8,558 5 $ 65,799 $ 7.69 POP. NUMBER OF TOTAL ANNUAL COST PER PERSON MEMBERS REMUNERATION OF POPULATION LANARK HIGHLANDS 8,852 7 $ 102,500 $ 11.58

  49. $ COUNCIL REMUNERATION COST PER HOUSEHOLD MONTAGUE 1,367 5 $ 57,120 $ 41.79 CARLETON PLACE 3,927 7 $ 156,637 $ 39.89 MISSISSIPPI MILLS 4,860 10 $ 151,965 $ 31.27 PERTH 3,079 7 $ 82,800 $ 26.89 TAY VALLEY 3,736 6 $ 102,770 $ 27.50 BECKWITH 2,752 5 $ 63,768 $ 23.17 DRUM. N. ELMSLEY 3,360 5 $ 65,799 $ 19.58 HOUSEHOLDS NUMBER OF TOTAL ANNUAL COST PER MEMBERS REMUNERATION HOUSEHOLD LANARK HIGHLANDS 3,541 7 $ 102,500 $ 28.95

  50. ADMINISTRATION

More Related