July 2007 - page 2

Whither property tax reform?

What is it about this Liberal Government at Queen's Park that, when it comes to property tax reform, we all find so distressing and frustrating? Why is it that the Finance Minister seems so little interested in honouring his (our) Premier's pledge to make meaningful changes in this unfair and volatile current property tax regime? Why doesn't the Premier show some real leadership on this most important issue and find workable strategies that address the problem head on, and stop tinkering?

The Liberal plans during their assessment freeze hiatus have dealt with MPAC changes in assessment methodology and the placing of burden of proof on the assessor rather than the property owner, and phasing in assessment increases over four years, i.e. simply spreading the pain. WRAFT/CAPTR continues to highlight and make the property owner electorate aware of the inadequacies of the government's policies to counter unfairness and instability. And we will continue to do so right up until the fall election.

We have suggested to the Liberals that they add a cap to their already announced assessment policy as the best way to achieve some degree of fairness for all, and make it a part of their election platform for the fall election. Failing that, it may well be time to review and reflect upon the most appropriate voting intentions.

WRAFT/CAPTR continues to seek your financial assistance to help in their advocacy efforts at Queen's Park. Contributions can be made to WRAFT/CAPTR care of the Muskoka Ratepayers' Association. Writing your MPP is also an essential part of making them aware of the seriousness of the property tax reform issue.

Doug Bryden - Wraft Director

OMB Reforms

1. Residents are now notified earlier of development applications. They have additional opportunities - such as a mandatory open house for each project - to scrutinize plans.
2. Council decisions to protect "employment lands" cannot be appealed by developers seeking to convert them to residential or commercial use.
3. Developers have to stick with the development proposal first submitted to the city for approval, if a builder submits an altered version to the OMB, the panel can halt the proceeding and send the whole file back to council.
4. To discourage frivolous appeals to the OMB, residents' groups must now get their objections on the record before council votes on a development application if they plan to appeal that decision to the OMB.
5. An OMB ruling must now "have regard to" the original council vote - a brand-new provision that seeks to bring the OMB decisions in line with those made by local politicians.
6. Cities can now create a "local appeals board" that would replace the OMB's role when it comes to minor decisions - something the city of Toronto is choosing not to do.

...Previous page  Page 2  Next page...