In addition to a uniform mill rate of 4.78, residents of the RM of Corman Park will pay a base tax of $235 for each property they own, which will allow the municipality to balance its 2025 budget.
During a special council meeting on May 8, councillors passed third reading on Bylaw 18/25, which establishes the base tax rate of $235 for all 7,322 properties in the RM.
It should be noted that if a property has multiple classes — say, a 10-acre parcel has seven acres zoned as agricultural and three zoned as residential — the owner will only have to pay the base tax once.
Council had previously passed first and second reading on the bylaw during their April 29 council meeting. Because they did not have unanimous agreement to go to third reading — Division 1 and 3 councillors John Germs and Lyndon Haduik were opposed — the special council meeting on May 8 was required.
During the April 29 meeting, council also passed all three readings on Bylaw 17/25, which set the uniform mill rate at 4.78.
The bylaw also established the following Education Property Tax Mill Rates (EPT): agricultural at 1.07, residential at 4.27, commercial/industrial at 6.37 and resource at 7.49.
TAX OPTIONS
Councillors had previously discussed options for adjusting the 2025 mill rate during the administration committee meeting on April 8.
Administation noted that the 2024 uniform mill rate had been set at 5.66, which was an increase of 4.9 per cent from 2023.
Because 2025 is a revaluation year, this means that all properties were re-assessed based on market values as of Jan. 1, 2023, and adjustments to the uniform mill rate and mill rate factors were needed to ensure a ‘revenue neutral’ starting point. As such, the mill rate was dropped to 4.78.
Because of this revaluation, incidentally, a residential property whose assessment went up 14 per cent or less would be paying either the same or fewer taxes.
Administration pointed out that this year’s 2025 budget included a shortfall of $3.4 million. Council wanted to cover this by bringing in an additional $1.725 million through taxation and a debenture of $1.7 million. Administration presented council with five options for raising this additional tax revenue, the first being a base tax of $235 that would bring in an additional $1.72 million in revenue.
The other options included a base tax of $200 for each property class, applying a different base tax per property class ($225 for agricultural, $300 for commercial and $160 for residential), increasing the mill rate to 5.35 and a combination of base taxes, mill rate increases and taking out more money through the debenture.
Germs outright voiced his opposition to a base tax, adding that he thought a lot of people would come forward to ask what the RM was giving them for that money, as opposed to a local improvement tax.
“If we can explain, ‘This is what we’re going to do for you,’ that’s one thing. But I think we’re going to have a heck of a problem trying to explain another tax to the local folk,” he said, indicating his preference for raising the mill rate.
Reeve Joe Hargrave indicated his preference for the base tax of $235, comparing it to a meal for four people at a restaurant.
He pointed out that there are a number of properties within the RM where the owners are basically paying no tax, despite the fact that the roads near those properties are still being graded and plowed.
“If that’s not worth $235, then do it yourself, and we’ll save money by not buying graders, not buying plows and not hiring people,” he said.
On the other hand, Hargrave said he believed it would be a lot tougher discussion to say to one ratepayer that their taxes are going up $1,000 and another person down the road would only pay an extra $80 or $90.
Division 2 councillor John Saleski initially indicated his preference for a base tax of $200 per property class, but agreed with Hargrave that it would be more fair to everybody in the RM if all properties were applied the base tax.
“Somebody with 30 acres paying $85 is not fair in any world that I live in,” he said.
Haduik expressed concern that someone who owned a small property that just had a slough on it would now have to pay the $235 base tax.
“There’s got to be a different way to segregate those 80-acre parcels from a one-acre parcel,” he said.
Division 6 councillor Steven Balzer said he believed that the base tax of $235 was, for this current year and for the future, “the best solution to managing our tax revenues coming in.
“It starts the process of more fair, appropriate taxation on these smaller parcels,” he said, noting that they could look at going with another option in another year.
Ultimately, council voted in favour of the recommendation to go with the base tax rate.
During the May 8 special council meeting, Division 4 councillor David Greenwood also encouraged council to vote against the base tax rate, indicating that he felt it was too high.
Division 8 councillor Wendy Trask said she had received a couple of calls from ratepayers concerned about the base tax, adding that she had tried to explain to them that it was intended to be more fair.
“We have a dollar amount that we need to run the RM, and to meet that threshold, we either do this or those taxes are going to go up even more, and the parcels that are paying such minimal amounts will continue to do so,” she said.