Property tax cut reveals lack of direction, leadership from council

A recent decision by Cape Breton Regional Municipality (CBRM) council to reduce property taxes by five per cent, resulting in overall savings of $3 million to residential payers and one million to business owners, has encouraged much debate both within and outside council.

This debate seems to have focused exclusively on the standard matters raised when any tax cut, rare as they are, comes about. Principally, can government afford it, will it mean the reduction of necessary programs and pet projects, how sound was its planning and formulation, and so forth.

I plainly confess to being a proponent of tax reductions where they are well planned and respectful of the proper application and administration of necessary government services.

Admittedly, this objective is sometimes difficult to determine and influenced by personal subjective biases and perceptions.

PERSUASIVE CASE

Even though predisposed to favouring tax cuts, as well as smaller governments with more limited powers, I respected the content of the arguments made by those opposing this particular reduction.

In this respect, District 6 Coun. James Edwards offered a persuasive case why this cut should not occur. Edwards pointed out that foregoing $4 million in revenue while borrowing $8.5 million and seeking a further $15 million from the provincial government is hardly in keeping with sound administrative practices.

Speaking of council’s approach to the matter he said, “the point is that we should have had the opportunity to properly plan, as opposed to scrambling to make the immediate five per cent fit.”

It’s a good observation, though is the mindset of this or any other government such that proper planning would necessarily lead to tax cuts?

I suggest not despite the genuine efforts of Coun. Edwards and other like him who favour such cuts, though of a more limited and phased in nature. Sometimes a seemingly arbitrary note, discordant as it may be, must be struck in order to change government’s traditional refrain.

Such is the case here, though this opportunity will be lost should council regard this as a conclusion and not beginning to a more generalized and consistent effort to further reduce taxes and operating costs. Such a position goes beyond one’s view of the role of government.

WEAKNESSES EXPOSED

Rather, in the case of CBRM government, it is based on its state of municipal financial weakness and uncertainty. A weakness exacerbated and not lessened by a high tax burden on its citizens and an uncertainty contributed to by a government appearing unfamiliar with its role.

Smaller government for the CBRM is not a mere theoretical consideration. It is, instead, an empirical imperative.

What this issue exposed, however, was something much deeper and more telling than the merits of this particular tax cut. What it revealed was the lack of any strategy, any plan, any sense of direction or leadership from this council. It operates purely in the world of transactional politics. It lurches from one idea, one notion, one crisis to the next.

Holding a cap in hand it repeats ad nauseum its now all too familiar mantra of “send us more money, Province of Nova Scotia.” Yet it fails to demonstrate any drive or initiative, any sense of purpose or vision.

In other words, any reason demonstrating how CBRM government utilizes and manages its citizen’s funds warrants giving it more money.

A DIFFERENT APPROACH

There is another and, I suggest, better approach. It will take courage and perhaps the acceptance by mayor and councillors that it will not foster their respective political careers, much less even good chances for re-election.

Here are several of its core elements:

• First, tax reform that involves accurate market assessments, lowering the residential and commercial rates and fast-tracking elimination of the CAP. Included in this could be consideration of a so-called first $10,000 of assessment tax free and a 10 to 15 per cent property tax deferment plan for seniors based on income level.

• Next significant operating cost reductions right across the board in all departments. The savings could be used for financing capital road repair and other growth generated infrastructure.

• Third, a yearly tax reduction plan spread evenly over the four-year council term co-ordinated with the earlier referenced operating cost reductions. At the end of the four years the objective being to have both taxes and operating costs reduced by 10 to 12 per cent.

• Finally, a restructuring and reduction of municipal planning and bylaw regulation, fostering a more development friendly environment.