Councillors here remain irked at the last of information coming from MPAC on a number of fronts – from farm properties assessed as residential to new buildings taking years to reach the assessment roles.
As of the Oct. 26, the finance committee stated that while 50 adjusted assessments were sent by MPAC regarding erroneous farm assessments, roughly 75 properties are affected by the errors.
Treasurer John Jeffrey said MPAC representatives were at council in September.
“They had promised that by the end of the month, that the documentation would be in our office to correct those farm properties,” Jeffrey said.
As of the end of October, not all the information had arrived to correct assessments.
“According to our count, we’re still looking for documentation on 10 different properties.”
Jeffrey said he has heard now the assessment date will not get to the municipality before Nov. 12, which means it may not be able to be included when the 2009 assessment roles are finalized.
That would, in turn, affect taxes for 2010.
“There’s a bit of an issue there,” he said.
As well, there are affects to the township’s ability to write off taxes for any number of reasons. One of those includes demolition or partial demolition of buildings.
He said 18 of the applications are still in the MPAC office and have not been processed yet, and and it does not appear they will be processed this year.
“These are applications dating back to last March,” Jeffrey said.
The issue with these types of applications is they might not only refer to the current year, but the previous year as well.
“Those are the types of backlogs MPAC has in its office,” he said. He expects other municipalities are dealing with the same issues. “They don’t seem to be responding very quickly.”
Councillor John Matusinec said he really did not expect work flow from MPAC to get better.
He asked if it had stuck to its word on keeping assessments up to date within a year for new buildings, “or is there still a three year backlog.”
“We’re getting some through,” said Jeffrey. “But we’ve got some that haven’t had any assessment on yet.”
He cited the “Matrix building in Arthur, which is only just now being assessed.”
His estimate is backlogs are two years – at least.
“Right now, if you look at the [assessment] role, it’s just a vacant piece of land.”
He said the revised assessment should appear on the next batch of supplementary numbers. But, he said, that is just one example.
He cited the new Petro Canada station at the intersection of Highway 6 and 89, which is just getting onto the role now.
“It’s been up and running, and been bankrupt once [under previous ownership].”
Matusinec wondered if it is time for council to send another letter to MPAC with its concerns.
“One other item on the farm issue,” Jeffrey said. “The County of Perth recently passed a similar resolution to Wellington North’s on the same issues.”
It is being circulated to Ontario’s municipalities to get the province to deal with the matter. Perth was identifying similar problems.
Councillor Ross Chaulk asked about the Ontario Municipal Partnership Fund (OMPF), which the province wants to reduce significantly. “Is that where they attempt to compensate us for the lack of farm tax rebate.”
Jeffrey said there is a component, “but in the formula for calculating that grant, the amount we are entitled to is based on our total farm taxation relative to our total taxation. That’s the point I’ve been trying to make. Not only is the farm taxation down, it’s artificially low because of that issue.”
And, Jeffrey said, the disconnect between OMAFRA and MPAC this year artificially reduced our farm assessment even lower. “So our qualification for that farm tax rebate is getting lower.”
He said since the OMPF came into effect, the province had promised the municipality would get the same amount of funding as in the previous year, and it kept that promise. But, there is a threat of losing that in 2010.
“That would be a significant loss, specifically because of the farm tax rebate,” Jefferson said. “If we have to go back and follow that formula, we’re going to face a significant reduction.”
Chaulk said, “We can’t be mad at the farmers on that one. We’re getting burned because the province is no longer providing that rebate. It’s the province that changed the rules.”
Broomhead said of MPAC “It’s quite interesting; there is always the promise of cleaning up its act and getting things together.”
He said it seems like every time there’s an improvement, there are other things that crop up.
“It feels like we’re spinning our wheels again. As municipal politicians all over, we’re outraged. We lobby, we write letters, we bring representatives here to let them know we’re disgruntled … where do you go from here?”
He said politicians, whether municipal, provincial, or federal would never be allowed to operate like that.
“You can say for a while, ‘We’re looking after it, and going to rectify the problem,’ but some day, there is a time when you have to account for your actions.”
He said it seems MPAC is not being taken to task. “We’ve tried every avenue.”
The municipality has had many meetings with MPAC .
“It just seems there’s always another curve thrown at us. At what point do we say enough is enough, and it means anything? At what point is someone held accountable?”
Jeffrey believes responsibility ultimately lies with the province, which created MPAC in 1998.
“At one point MPAC said it did not have the staff to respond … And that may very well be right, and it may still be the case.”
He suggested if it is an ongoing problem, at some point MPAC has to tell the province it does not have resources to do the job.
“The people who are paying the bill … us at the municipal level … are not getting the service for the amount of money being spent.
Broomhead agreed. But he added it must be frustrating for treasurers as a group when they meet directly with MPAC representatives.
Jeffrey did offer credit to the MPAC representatives who attend the treasurers’ meetings “knowing they are going to get the royal slap in the face from us all. We are polite to them, but the message is passed along.”
Jeffrey said with the most recent reassessment, any increases are being phased in, and there is absolute confusion as a result.
He said it is even more confusing for residential taxpayers who are used to just paying a tax bill.
Broomhead said he is hard pressed to come up with another issue as outrageous. “We’ve all had our rants. It’s not just a council thing.”
Matusinec asked which ministry MPAC is under.
Jeffrey believes it is still under the Ministry of Finance.
Matusinec asked if it would be worthwhile to set up a meeting with Perth-Wellington MPP John Wilkinson to pass on the message. Jeffrey said a meeting was already scheduled with Wilkinson on a number of issues including OMPF funding and its possible loss.
“We may very well add MPAC to the agenda whether he wants us to or not,” Jeffrey said.
Broomhead said the situation with MPAC has gone on for far too long.
Yake said it seemed the MPAC representatives in September “seemed to tell us what we wanted to here, and then went about their business as they normally did.”
Yake said, “Maybe it’s time to stop being polite and time that someone stood up to the provincial government and said ‘This isn’t working,’and that we would like to see MPAC removed or disbanded and another way of doing things put into place. As a council, we’ve never been afraid to take the lead.”
He suggest Wellington North send its own resolution to AMO for a new process, and the removal or disbandment of MPAC.
Yake said what happens is, “We’re too nice to them. We should have ripped them to shreds.”
He said during the presentation, council heard the information would be ready in a couple weeks – and then the municipality spends the next month chasing them down with phone call after phone call, getting the runaround.
“Let’s take a stand,” Yake said.
