At least one local elected official feels council’s proposal to borrow more than $1.9 million and raise taxes by nearly 10 per cent to pay for upgrades to two village streets could have serious ramifications for the municipality and may not receive the support of local taxpayers in a referendum.
Councillor Chris Beach, the only member of Burns Lake council to vote against the Aug. 11 proposal, says that while he respects council’s decision, it could hit many families and small businesses hard.
“I voted against this motion because I do not support raising municipal taxes by double digits in one year,” Beach said in an interview last week. “People feel our taxes are high, and many working families – and many struggling local businesses – cannot afford a one-time increase of possibly 10 per cent or more, particularly when there are several other pressing needs in our village that may also have to be financed in the years to come. Binding our residents to a 25 to 30 year loan for one project has serious, long-term consequences, particularly when village taxpayers are on the hook for something that the entire Lakes District will be utilizing on a daily basis.” Beach stressed that while he voted against the Aug. 11 motion, he supports repairing portions of the roads in question. He noted that village staff recommended a less costly option.
“Council's 2015 municipal objectives do state we will ‘continue with replacement of the portion of Eighth Avenue and Center Street from the highway to the hospital,’ but in a ‘fiscally responsible manner,’" he pointed out. “I am committed to at least resurfacing this section of road from Hwy. 16 to the hospital, and perhaps adding sidewalks and water control measures if there is widespread public support to raise taxes to pay for it.
“In my opinion, paving from the new hospital down to Hwy. 16 for approximately $213,000, or paving and adding one sidewalk and water control measures for the same section for approximately $1,400,000 and a possible tax increase of three per cent, are better options.”
During debate on the motion, Beach asked for more time to consider the implications of council’s proposal and discuss it with village taxpayers. He also feels coun. Susan Schienbein, absent on Aug. 11, should have had an opportunity to participate in discussions.
“I would have preferred to have more time to consider the options and speak to taxpayers,” he said. “I would also prefer for all of council to be present and vote on such an important decision.
He feels the project, as it currently stands, will be a hard sell.
“At this time, I don't think taxpayers would approve an approximate 10-per-cent tax increase and long-term borrowing for 25 to 30 years for one single project that could handcuff our ability to complete other projects that may become more necessary in the future,” he said.