Budget wrap: what council said

Here's a look at how council viewed the 2009 operating and 2009-11 capital budgets. Council approved the budgets late Monday, meaning homeowners will see a 4.55 per cent increase in municipal property taxes next year. Non-residential property owners face a 5.28 per cent increase.

Mayor Nolan Crouse
"Four and a half per cent is OK," he said in an interview. "I call it OK. I do, however feel that because of the [provincial] MSI grant money we're still able to do a lot of good things for the future. Without the MSI money we'd be scrambling for some improvement projects. But with the MSI money it's been a lot easier to show continual improvement for residents."

"Residents are going to see improved services, improved quality of life for a modest tax increase. I still want us to keep the pedal to the metal for Servus Place performance. I still think that's an area of watch for us."

"There's something in it for generally everybody, without it being a 10 per cent tax increase. It's an OK budget."

The mayor isn't about to lose sleep because the budget approval was not unanimous. (Coun. James Burrows voted against). "That's democracy."

Coun. James Burrows
"In all good conscience I will not be supporting this," said Burrows, who was disappointed to see council cut funding for nine new firefighters. The decision means firefighters will have to log more overtime.

"The decision of not hiring these firefighters is a huge, huge mistake. In all good conscience I cannot support the budget because of that decision. I know that if I was a parent [of a child] involved in a car accident and someone was coming off a 14-hour shift who was fatigued, over-worked … that the city council would not be prepared to spend half a million dollars to perhaps save the life of a child is something that just floors me."

Coun. Lorie Garritty
"It's a reasonable tax increase. It's not what some people will be happy with it but I think most people would recognize — particularly if they get into what exactly we're spending the money on, if they take the time to analyze that — I think it's fair. 

"It's a compromise We started out at 8.97. We worked hard to get it down to 4.55, with a lot of hard work and good ideas from a lot of people. Mr. Mayor, I think this is a darned good budget."

Coun. Carol Watamaniuk
"Being the only woman in the group here, we've finally given birth to the 2009 budget. It was a well-planned, well-thought out, well-scrutinized, well-analyzed and well-nurtured offspring that I think we came up with. 

"I applaud the staff and my colleagues on council. I don't think I have ever witnessed, in all my years on council, such an incredibly hard bunch of work that went into a budget. I applaud all of you."

Coun. Len Bracko
"It's one of the toughest budgets I've ever sat through. I sat through some in the early 90s when we were going through some tough times also."

Bracko was pleased with council's decision to add an extra $1 million for road maintenance. 

"It's key that we spend less money now than we do later on in maintaining our road infrastructure."

Coun. Roger Lemieux
"As far as I'm concerned, we took a passionate, intelligent business-like approach [to the budget], especially with the dramatic change in the economy right in the middle of the budget."

Coun. Gareth Jones
Jones made no closing remarks before the final budget vote. However, earlier in the meeting he applauded administration's list of recommendations to cut spending by one percentage point. Jones had indicated he wouldn't support the budget if the tax increase came in above five per cent.

"This is a very positive response to council's request."

Budget curtain call: 4.55% tax hike

The average St. Albert homeowner will see a 4.55 per cent increase to municipal property taxes next year. 

Council wrapped up weeks of debate when it approved the 2009 operating and 2009-11 capital budgets late Monday.

The increase means the owner of a typical $400,000 home will pay $2,442 in property taxes, up $106 from current.

Council approved a 9.5 per cent increase to utility rates. The change represents another $7.06 per month per household.

Commercial, industrial jump 5.28%

Non-residential property owners face an average 5.28 per cent tax increase. 

For the owner of a $900,000 warehouse, that represents a tax bill of $9,887, up $515 from current. The tax bill for a $1.8-million restaurant will come to $19,774, up $1,029 from 2008.

Read more about the tax increase Tuesday morning at www.stalbertgazette.com

4.83% proposal

Council will get a look tonight at administration's recommendations to reduce next year's property tax increase by one percentage point. 

If approved, homeowners would see their taxes increase by 4.83 per cent, down from the current 5.91 per cent hike.

The proposal, which council asked for two weeks ago, includes changes on both the revenue and expense side.

Here are some highlights:

- Lower investment income by $732,000

- Save $540,000 by not hiring nine new firefighters 

- Add $240,000 in overtime costs for fire department

- Add $286,000 in revenue from higher than expected assessment growth

- Save $150,000 by cutting fuel budget  (on top of $375,000 already cut)

- Lower staff benefit budget by $250,000 

- Cut $188,900 in operating costs that can be eliminated because capital spending was not approved.

- Drop insurance premiums by $100,000 (the city would be assuming higher risk)

- Cut $87,400 for RCMP staffing from budget to more closely reflect actual officers on staff.

- Save $66,600 by hiring new staff on May 1, instead of April 1.

There are a few more suggestions to cut spending by a few thousand here and a couple thousand there.

Interestingly, the 1.08 point reduction includes the $540,000 for the new firefighter staff. When I spoke with Mayor Nolan Crouse last week about this list of recommendations, he felt the firefighter business case should be separate.

"My guess is [the $540,000] is outside that one per cent," Crouse said. "And it kind of  better be."

Council meets tonight at 4 p.m.

Be fair to business: Lemieux

Coun. Roger Lemieux does not want to see businesses pay more than their "fair share" for the Servus Place tax levy.

Starting in 2009, commercial and business owners will be asked to pay more per $100,000 of assessment than homeowners. The plan, to be phased over three years, would see business owners pay $55 per $100K of assessment by 2011, compared to $29 for homeowners.

The split levy follows the 86-14 "tax burden ratio" city administration uses to calculate the remainder of municipal property taxes. The ratio ensures homeowners contribute 86 per cent of city tax dollars, despite the fact residential property makes up 91 per cent of all assessment. 

Just last week, St. Albert Chamber of Commerce chair Rob LeLacheur called the tax burden ratio a "tax grab," before he urged council to keep the current one-to-one ratio for the Servus Place levy.

Lemieux plans to introduce a motion next week that would accomplish just that. He said a split levy flies in the face of the 2004 plebiscite that authorized Servus Place construction.

"Businesses should pay their fair share, but we shouldn't, in the middle of it all, change the game plan," Lemieux said today. "The game plan is to take away from the residential burden and give it to the business and burden them."

Lemieux, a former business owner himself, believes homeowners will support the idea of sticking up for local businesses, even if it means slightly higher taxes.

If his motion is approved, the residential tax increase would jump to 6.04 per cent, up from 5.91 per cent. 

Business owners would see their tax increase fall to 6.83 per cent from 7.55 per cent.

Council will debate the motion once it's formally moved on Dec. 22.

Dollars and (per)cents

St. Albert's percentage tax increase of 5.91 per cent might be lower than Edmonton's 7.3 per cent, but when looking at actual dollar amounts, taxpayers here stand to pay more. (That's what happens when St. Albert taxes are already the highest in the region).

Here's what St. Albert taxpayers would pay in municipal property taxes, should the 5.91 per cent residential and 7.55 non-residential increases hold up. 

Municipal taxes in St. Albert would be $2,473.84 for a typical $400,000 home in 2009, up $138 from current.

According to the Edmonton Journal story, municipal taxes would be $1,470 a year for a $400,000 home in Edmonton, or an extra $50 compared to 2008. 

Without a tax rate for Strathcona County it's tough to make a similar comparison. The Sherwood Park News story says the "average household" would pay an extra $105 annually in municipal taxes.

St. Albert commercial and industrial

The owner of a commercial or industrial property worth $900,000 would pay $10,395.40 in 2009, up $729.76. For a $1.8-million property that works out to $20,790.79 in taxes next year, up $1,459.

St. Albert council continues budget deliberations on Dec. 22.

Edmonton, Strathcona County at 7.3%; Morinville at 5.5%

Edmonton city council has completed its budget deliberations, with the majority approving a 7.3 per cent tax increase. See story in today's Edmonton Journal.

The Sherwood Park News reports taxes will go up 7.37 per cent next year in Strathcona County. County councilllors cut the hike from an original 9.03 per cent. Read more here.

Want to bet at least one St. Albert councillor will make reference to these figures when budget proceedings wrap up here on Dec. 22? St. Albert's increase is down to 5.91 per cent, by the way.

Meanwhile, just north of St. Albert, Morinville town council has approved a 5.5 per cent tax increase. That represents an extra $129 next year for the typical $300,000 home. (Full details can be found in Wednesday's print edition of the Gazette).

And, Sturgeon County council has cut the tax hike there to 4.28 per cent, down from 7.9 per cent. Budget proceedings are almost complete, with Mayor Don Rigney calling for more cuts. (See Wednesday's Gazette as well).

NABI half-flip

It did not take long for city council to reverse course (half way) on a decision to cut funding for the Northern Alberta Business Incubator (NABI). They agreed to provide a $25,000 operating grant, half the amount originally requested.

It was just last week that council agreed to cut the $50,000 subsidy. Several members objected to the funding in light of NABI officials admitting they do zero fundraising. 

"Every organized non-profit in our community is required to [fundraise]," is how Coun. Carol Watamaniuk put it. "Surely an organization that shows businesses how to run a business can come up with $50,000." 

Mayor Nolan Crouse said council gave enough earlier in the year when it helped finance NABI's new building in Campbell Business Park.

Council flip-flopped on the subsidy Monday, after feeling the pressure from NABI directors. Jeanette Bancarz of ATB Financial threw out several noteable stats to help with the persuasion.

Of the 61 businesses that have graduated from NABI, 39 still operate in St. Albert. Bancarz said that represents more than 200 jobs. Those businesses will pay $88,000 in taxes, while NABI itself will pay close to $50,000.

If council wants to achieve its economic development goals, members should "let NABI do its thing," she said.

The speech convinced several councillors to change their minds (Roger Lemieux, Gareth Jones and Lorie Garritty). Well, they agreed to provide a half the subsidy, at any rate.

Councillors Len Bracko and James Burrows continued their support for NABI. Watamaniuk and Crouse opposed the subsidy. 

5.87 per cent - UPDATED

Homeowners face a 5.87 per cent increase on their property tax bills next year, after council made several spending cuts and a few additions on Thursday. Commercial and industrial property owners face a 7.51 per cent increase next year.

The residential increase is down three full percentage points from the hike proposed in the original draft 2009 operating and 2009-11 capital budget.  

Next year's operating budget is largely set, save for one request to hire nine new firefighters. Council won't debate that $540,000 expenditure until Dec. 22, when the fire chief is available.

In theory, the tax increase could fall to 5.03 per cent if council turns down the staffing request.  (And boy is that one complicated decision — read more in Saturday's Gazette). If the positions are approved, the increase will remain at 5.87 per cent.

During the same Dec. 22 meeting, council will also decide whether to put the AltaLink power line into the unfunded list in the 2009-11 capital budget. That has no tax implications.

Here are a few highlights from Thursday:

• Add $425,000 in spending over 2009-10 to build washroom facilities in Riel Recreation Park

• Cut $50,000 from the contract and general services budget at Servus Place

• Cut $60,000 for an RCMP internal review

• Cut $50,000 from the Servus Place sponsorship renewal program

• Cut $154,000 from staff training and development (corporate-wide)

• Use grants to pay for $135,000 in environmental master plan initiatives

Several motions were defeated:

• Hold council salaries to 2008 levels

• Cut tax-supported capital funding by $650,000

• Cut $200,000 from the materials budget at Servus Place

• Add $173,000 in revenue at Servus Place

After considerable fussing about wordsmithing, Coun. Gareth Jones withdrew a motion to cut the base budget by 1.5 per cent.

Finish line in sight

Four visits to the mall.

Twelve council meetings.

100 motions.

Zero fist fights.

Equals one civic budget.

Save for a few motions left for Dec. 22, council tonight could pretty much wrap up the 2009 operating and 2009-11 capital budget. 

All but a handful of outstanding motions remain, most of them focused on Servus Credit Union Place. Mayor Nolan Crouse wants to raise revenues and cut spending, removing the "conservatism" he says administration built into the budget.

Crouse also wants to use surplus dollars from 2008 to fund $125,000 of the $150,000 in next year's budget for 150th anniversary celebrations.

There's also a motion about what to do with the AltaLink power line.

Cut capital?
The last motion up for debate should be interesting. The mayor wants to change how capital projects are funded, using as many unallocated grants as possible instead of tax dollars (also called pay-as-you-go).

Crouse said his goal is to lower the property tax increase. The only way he do that is by eliminating the annual infusion of tax dollars that go into the capital fund. That creates problems for the entire 10-year capital plan.

Let me explain. Every year the city transfers about $12 million from operating (taxes) into the capital fund. The city calls this tax infusion the "capital envelope."

Of the $12.6 million in 2009, roughly $3 million will go toward actual capital projects, $4 million into reserves for future projects, while $5 million will pay off debt.

Administration has already advised against cutting the capital envelope for a one-time tax savings. Dean Screpnek, the city's CFO, says such a move would set back the entire 10-year capital plan.

The capital plan, by the way, lists $730 million worth of projects. The city only has $475 million in identified funding.

The mayor will have to make a mighty convincing pitch to convince three other council members to vote his way. Given how Crouse was outvoted recently on the extra $1 million for road maintenance, one might argue he'll be in tough.

The budget meeting starts at 4 p.m. I'll post an updated tax increase as soon as proceedings wrap up.

Tax-o-meter at 6.31 per cent - UPDATED

Next year's property tax increase has be lowered to 6.31 per cent.

The city's tax-o-meter — a gimmicky term city hall uses to describe what really is an updated spread sheet and bar graph — spit out the latest figure after city council continued its cutting ways Tuesday.

Council formally cut fuel costs by $375,000 and eliminated some $304,000 in Alberta Health Care premiums. They approved another three dozen changes to the operating budget, many smaller cuts or additions.

Here are some highlights:

• Increase police revenue by $200,000 via photo radar (could be through more photo radar operators, increased patrols, lower tolerances, etc.)

• Cut $87,800 from the Riel Recreation Park operating budget, reducing it to $118,000

• Cut $50,000 grant for Northern Alberta Business Incubator, reducing it to zero

• Cut $35,000 from Alberta 55 Plus Games Winter Games budget, reducing it to $150,000

• Cut mayor and council training budgets by $1,000 each

• Cut $5,000 from council's travel budget to attend Federation of Canadian Municipalities conference

• Cut $5,000 for idle-free bylaw public awareness campaign, reducing it to zero

As one reader pointed out, council did also endorse new culture and recreation fee rates. Arts guilds will see increases next year, but will not pay more than 65 per cent of full operating costs. The fees are as follows:

Potters' guild, $7,500; Painters' guild, $2,000; Floral arts, $600; Quilters, $1,200; Paper arts, $500.

Council defeated a motion to charge $2,000 for studio space used by the Profiles Public Art Gallery for children's art classes. Profiles will continue pay nothing.

Council still has some significant motions to debate Thursday, including whether to cut Servus Place expenses and raise revenues.

The debate over delaying the addition of nine firefighters has been put over until Dec. 22, when the fire chief is available.

Tax hike at 6.99 per cent

St. Albert homeowners face a 6.99 per cent tax increase next year, after council trimmed away at several staffing positions Monday.

Next year's property tax hike officially sits at 8.05 per cent, down from the 8.97 per cent first proposed.

Council is expected to reduce that to 6.99 per cent when they approve revised fuel forecasts and delete Alberta Health Care premiums for staff. Both are considered formalities. 

The property tax relief came after council cut eight budget requests for staffing at Monday's budget meeting. The cuts affect everything snow and ice removal and road maintenance in public works to fundraising for Servus Place, the 150th anniversary and other events.

The tax hike could be reduced even more following tonight's budget meeting, when council begins debating the rest of the operating budget.

The meeting starts at 4 p.m.

Mayor appeals for cuts

The mayor is the public face of city council. He chairs the meetings, works full-time and attends pretty much every event of significance in St. Albert.

But when it comes to trimming next year's near 8.97 per cent tax hike, Nolan Crouse is just one vote among seven. 

Sometimes the votes don't go your way.

That was the case Saturday, when council approved $1 million to top up road maintenance next year. The extra spending — which city engineers did not request — will be funded with a mix of grants and tax dollars.

In the lead up to Saturday, council had managed to trim $245,000 worth of tax-funded projects from the 2009-11 capital budget. In theory, that's money they could have cut from the capital fund to reduce next year's tax increase by 0.4 per cent.

Coun. Len Bracko had other ideas when he said council should increase infrastructure spending by $1 million. With some $3 billion in infrastructure assets, the city doesn't put near enough dollars into maintenance, he argued.

Crouse, however, strongly objected to putting dollars into a pot "without any level of specifics."

But aside from Carol Watamaniuk, the mayor was alone on this one, and clearly frustrated.

Just minutes later, while defending a motion to cut $200,000 for a backup disaster recovery site, Crouse delivered a pointed speech.

"We must, sooner or later, make some tough decisions," he said. "We were at 8.9 per cent and any of the pay as you go (tax dollars used for capital projects) we freed up, we continue to find ways to spend."

He later added this lecture: "I need to remind council of our priorities. I clearly think we need to make tough calls."

Council begins debating staffing requests on Monday. They'll resume committee of the whole budget deliberations after the regular council session.

Reserves aren't free

With $130 million at stake, it's a heady task to prioritize which capital projects deserve to be in the 2009-11 budget. Sometimes the funding source is the deciding factor in the debate.

During capital budget debates this week, council members scrutinized how each project could be funded. Capital projects and equipment are funded with a mix of government grants, reserves, property taxes, offsite levies and, in rare instances, debt.

Council took keen interest in whether projects could be funded with grants, reserves or pay as you go (a fancy term for tax dollars that are set aside annually for capital projects).

Coun. Lorie Garritty defended the construction of a $140,000 dog park, arguing it won't cost taxpayers because the money is coming from reserves. (And a $10 hike to dog licence fees will eventually replenish the account).

Alternatively, reserves sometimes come into play when council does not want to support a project.

Mayor Nolan Crouse used reserves as part of his rationale for not approving two projects this year — extra funding for the St. Albert Housing Society's $19-million apartment building project, and the AltaLink relocation. Of the later, he said council would have to raise taxes to replace the $450,000 needed.

(I do not mean to single the mayor out, but those are the two most recent examples. And by the way, council did give the housing society $150,000 for that project, about $90,000 less than requested).

The whole idea behind a reserve is to accumulate cash to avoid a large single-year tax hit. Depending on the type of project, reserves are funded through developer levies, utility fees or taxes. Some $2.7 million in property tax dollars will be transferred to reserves next year for future capital needs.

Crouse and Garritty both have a point. Reserves do not immediately cost the taxpayer, but in the long term there can be a cost impact.

Reserves are not free.

Fuel savings

Declining fuel prices could save the city $375,000 in 2009. That could lower next year's 8.97 tax increase by about 0.6 of a percentage point.

The savings is due to the administration revising its fuel forecast, lowering it by 25 cents to $1.25 per litre. The original estimate was calculated several months ago, before the price of crude went into the tank.

The $375,000 in savings are based on 1.5 million litres of consumption.

Mayor Nolan Crouse introduced a motion at tonight's budget meeting to make the fuel forecast official. It still needs to be debated, likely next week, but really is  just a formality.

Mirror, mirror

Residents are facing an 8.9 per cent tax increase and a hike to utility rates that is near double digits.

We're talking about St. Albert, right? 

Nope, Strathcona County.

According to the Sherwood Park News, Strathcona County is looking at an 8.9 per cent property tax increase, and 9.9 per cent utility rate hike.

That's rather close to St. Albert's 8.97 per cent tax hike and 9.0 per cent utility rate increase.

One wonders if the parallel is due to similar budget assumptions, such as sharing the same municipal price index.

Given the 13 per cent Edmonton is facing, it appears times are tough in the region.

Taxes and pitch forks

If it's action you crave, you likely won't find it at city hall.

Don't get me wrong, council makes hundreds of important decisions a year from inside chambers. The work at St. Albert Place keeps our roads in good order, and city programs operating.

But when it comes to thrills and spills, the polite parliamentary proceedings at city hall will not exactly jolt spectators from their seats.

Of course, St. Albert has had its share of hot-button issues. Emotions flared last spring during rezoning hearings for Amacon's proposed redevelopment of Grandin Park Plaza.

The spring also saw the plaza in front of St. Albert Place turn into a stomping ground for fed up taxpayers who petitioned steep increases driven by haywire changes in property values.

There was plenty of backlash about Servus Place's $2.2-million deficit last year. The Gazette received angry letters blasting council and administration for poor oversight. But when the public had an opportunity to sound off at a town hall meeting, all but a few choice criticisms were levelled. Measured emotions and well-meaning suggestions ruled the day.

Word has it a few f-bombs were thrown council's way at a recent budget open house at St. Albert Centre. But that incident aside, no one at the Gazette remembers a time when accusations of a "dictatorial rule" were hurled the mayor's way.

Through all the ups and downs, cheering and hissing from the public has, for the most part, stayed in check during St. Albert council business.  Credit for the decorum goes to the mayor, both present and past, along with residents who usually stop themselves at "mild" finger pointing.

As the Calgary Herald reported in the above link, that was not the case in southern Alberta over the weekend. Tempers were in overdrive over a proposed 25 per cent property tax hike over three years.

The griping was not limited to the public, with Calgary Ald. Diane Colley-Urquhart leading a petition to return to single-year budgeting.

The petition and extreme insults aside, it sounds familiar, doesn't it?

Just one month ago St. Albert residents were looking at a 28 per cent tax hike compounded over three years. After much debate, council opted only to look at 2009 an a proposed 8.97 per cent tax hike.

The decision was partly driven by the shifting economic landscape. However, as Coun. Roger Lemieux astutely observed, it doesn't look good to go to the public with three years of tax increases exceeding 25 per cent.

Who knows the kind of public reaction that might have ensued had council gone ahead with its three-year budget.

St. Albert and Calgary are two completely different cities, but they, like all places have something in common. When taxpayers are pushed far enough, long enough, some are bound to push back.

Taxes v2.0

St. Albert homeowners are looking at almost a 28 per cent property tax hike compounded over three years, after the 2009-11 budget was released Friday. That's up slightly from figures released earlier this month.

The budget calls for proposed tax increases of 8.97, 8.41, and 8.60 for 2009, 2010 and 2011, respectively.

The owner of a $400,000 home can expect to pay $209 more next year, and a combined $660 over all three.

The hike translates into an extra $130 a year for the owner of a $250,000 condominium. That's $411 over three years.

Utilities could go up 9.5 per cent a year for all three budget years.

Business pay more

Business owners face the largest tax increases: 10.47, 10.66 and 9.59 per cent for 2009-11.

The difference? For the 2009-11 budget, non-residential operations are being taxed at a higher rate than in past years. It's part of a "tax burden ratio" that's being worked into financial policies. The idea would use an 84/16 split, meaning 84 per cent of all tax revenues would come from homeowners, while 16 per cent would come from non-residential. (Those were the numbers used over the summer, which may or may not have changed).

According to the budget overview, the proprosed increases actually could have been worse for business had the city not held back on the Servus Place levy. Businesses will gradually pay more for the capital levy in the coming years.

St. Albert budget: council's reaction Part 2 of 2

St. Albert homeowners face property tax hikes of 8.39, 8.42 and 7.84 per cent over the next three years, according to draft budget figures. (Full details won't be released until Oct. 27).

Here's what council had to say:

Coun. Roger Lemieux
"My first thoughts are I'm pleased," he said. "Just look around you, our society is having increases left, right and centre. Energy prices are going up. We're not immune, as a municipality, to those increases."

Lemieux said other municipalities are worse off than St. Albert, according to feedback from municipal peers at the recent Alberta Urban Municipalities Association convention.

"Medicine Hat, Calgary, Lethbridge — everybody was talking about double digits. As a matter of fact, places like Beaumont and Fort Saskatchewan are closing in on 15 per cent. Now, this is what the councillors are saying … they might find it will go down. We know for a fact Edmonton will be in double digits."

Lemieux, who celebrated the birth of his ninth grandchild on Thanksgiving Day, said he's sensitive to the plight of seniors and families on limited income. 

"Our provincial and federal governments have to come to their rescue. They're the people that built this country. They're our fathers and grandfathers."

Coun. Len Bracko
"This is what council asked (administration) to do, to come up with … an operating budget that keeps us operating at the same level of service that we had in 2008, with minimum increases. What we need to emphasize is the municipal inflation factor, compared to the (consumer price index)."

"In the city we have certain fixed costs — the agreements have been worked out. The municipal inflation costs hit us harder. That has to be looked at carefully."

Bracko said most members of the public understand the cost pressures municipalities are under. Council must emphasize how budgeting practices have "come from the dark ages" in recent years.

"We have our 100-year utility plan, we have our 10-year capital plans. we have our three-year budget plan and everything feeds into it … we're very well set up compared to 20 years ago. We're very transparent with it."

Coun. Gareth Jones
"This is just a sketch," he said of the figures released with the budget preview. "There's a lot of paint to go on it yet."

Like others on council, Jones found it difficult to comment on the proposed increases without know more about the details.

"Until we start plowing through the details, I don't know really how to comment about it. It still seems a little high to me. Until we see the details I don't know what to say."

Jones said it will be interesting to hear the public's initial comments at Saturday's mall visit in St. Albert Centre. 

"Even during election time, one of the major concerns raised by people was the tax increases. Going into the three-year budget they're obviously going to be very concerned. I'm one of them that's going to be very concerned as well, just from a citizen point of view."

"I can understand the problems everybody's facing right now — personal, business-wise or the city. Costs have gone up and there's not much we can do about that. Those are external costs that we do not have any control over. Those kind of costs are the ones that we have to look at closely. I don't know what we can do to adjust that."

St. Albert taxes, services and Servus

An interesting bar graph jumps off the page of a city budget backgrounder. The graphic breaks down how much of the tax increase is needed for various city functions.

Here's the breakdown:

Protective services (fire, ambulance, police, bylaw): 2.31%

Corporate services (HR, finance, assessment, taxation, legal, communications, IT) : 1.95%

Land use/developments: 1.75%

Roads: 1.67%

Transit: 1.35%

If you're doing the math those percentage points combined equal 9.03 per cent, which is above the proposed 8.39 per cent increase for 2009.

The same bar graph shows the following:

Culture/recreation/FCSS (Servus Place levy): -0.64% (yes, that's a negative)

Could Servus Place really be responsible for bringing the tax rate down? Technically, yes.

City administration attributes the tax drop in that category to Servus Place's improved deficit situation, which spells good news for this year and beyond.

Don't break out the confetti just yet. It's important to remember St. Albert's budget does not start from scratch every year. Council reviews new spending.

Just six months ago council approved a $2.2-million subsidy for Servus Place that added 3.68 percentage points to the 2008 tax increase. (Council later cut spending elsewhere to bring the total increase down to 5.9 per cent).

So while the Servus Place subsidy could actually decrease next year and reflect well on the 2009 tax increase, there's still a lot of tax dollars supporting the facility.

Progress has been made, but take it with a grain of salt.

8.39%, 8.42%, 7.84%

As promised by city officials in Saturday's print Gazette,  municipal tax increases will not reach double digits for the next three years.

City administration lifted the lid from the 2009-11 budget during a preview for the finance and audit committee on Tuesday. All council members sit on the committee, so it was their first opportunity to see the proposed increases.

Here's the proposed tax hike breakdown:

2009: 8.39 per cent

2010: 8.42 per cent

2011: 7.84 per cent

The 2009 increase works out to an extra $17 per month in taxes for the owner of $420,000 single-detached home. That's $204 a year for those without a calculator.

Utilities up 9.5%

Taxes are not the only means for a municipality to raise revenues. Utilities are also on the rise — 9.5 per cent annually for all three years of the budget. 

The utility hike means the average* monthly bill will rise $7.06 in 2009 to $81.37. That would increase to $89.10 in 2010 and $97.32 the year after.

* The city bases the average utility bill on 20 cubic metres of water consumption and two bags of garbage.

I'll have more information about the 2009-11 budget later in the day.