Despite tweaks, Woolwich has its heart set on 8.7% tax hike

GOING INTO THE FOURTH AND

final special budget meeting, Woolwich councillors were looking at an 8.7 per cent tax hike for 2024. Having cut some expenditures, including planned hirings, they got the tax hike down to … 8.7 per cent.

Instead of cutting the tax bump, they opted to apply any savings to the infrastructure reserve fund, hoping to bank money for future road and bridge projects, for which there’s a shortfall of tens of millions of dollars.

Council also scaled back capital projects planned for this year to reduce the amount of borrowing to just over $6 million from $11.5 million.

The adjustment mean residents will be paying about $93 more on the township portion of their property tax bills, based on an average assessment of $418,000.

Cuts approved at the February 1 budget session included putting off the rehabilitation of the Peel Street bridge in Winterbourne for a savings of about $3 million on the capital side, and foregoing two of the five new staff additions proposed for this year: a revenue clerk and a manager of bylaw enforcement. The former maybe be back on the list, and the tax levy, however, as councillors meeting Tuesday reversed course, reducing the amount of savings.

The reduced amount of borrowing this year will still lead to an additional $478,000 in debt payments in 2025, requiring a tax hike of 3.3 per cent to cover.

Transferring the savings from the various tweaks will provide an additional $138,000 for the infrastructure reserve fund, bringing the total this year to just shy of $2 million, interim director of finance Steven Fairweather told councillors.

The extra funding amounts to almost one per cent more for the infrastructure fund, on top of the 1.5 already included in this year’s increase.

Suggestions that the one per cent greening levy included in the 8.7 per cent be redirected this year found no traction.

“My proposal would be to convert that one per cent that’s going to climate change to either reduce taxes or to put that towards infrastructure for other reserves where it is needed most,” said Coun. Evan Burgess.

“I think after an 8.7 last year and the proposed 8.7 this year, I’d like to give the taxpayers a break and just take one year out and drop that one per cent,” added

Coun. Bonnie Bryant.

Neither option generated enough support to move forward, however.

On the greening front, the biggest debate came over controversial plans to hire a sustainability coordinator to oversee whatever climate-action projects the township might come up with. Council ultimately opted to go with the additional staff position, though Coun. Eric Schwindt did so reluctantly, stressing that the position would have to be reviewed in a couple of years to determine if it’s effective, axing it if it proves not to be worth the expense.

“If we’re going to do it, we have to do it with the provision we’re going to review it in two years to see if the position is working out or not,” he said, noting the township may have to move on at that point. “Admittedly, there may be costs associated with that, but so be it. To me, this position’s got to be focused on implementing actions and finding funds to implement those actions.”

Council is expected to vote formally on the 2024 budget at its February 12 meeting.