As spokesperson for the St. Albert Taxpayers Association (SATA), I feel compelled to respond to statements contained in Reuben Kaufman’s letter, ‘Tax watchdog needs to stand for something,’ Aug. 25 Gazette. Kaufman is a director of the Arts and Heritage Foundation.
First and foremost SATA’s Vision is “A St. Albert where all can afford to live, taxes are affordable and municipal spending is in the best interest of the majority of taxpayers rather than special interest groups.”
I would hope any municipal council would have this as their mantra as well. Why focus on this? First, because successive councils have not only made St. Albert property taxes the highest in Alberta, but they have increased our debt level by 302 per cent between 2002 and 2009 (based on city financial statements). Second, because most of this increase is the direct result of spending on projects advocated by special interests.
Over the past few years council’s spending decisions have been focused on developers and recreation and cultural organizations. For example, a recent study shows that based on 2008 figures, on a per capita basis St. Albert spends more than twice as much on recreation and culture as Edmonton, and two-and-a-half times as much as Calgary. What is troubling is that every year during budget time, we are all reminded about St. Albert’s growing infrastructure deficit. Under the circumstances we believe that St. Albert taxpayers have good reason to be concerned about excessive spending on non-essential projects that benefit only small segments of the community. St. Albert already is the slowest growing municipality in the Edmonton region and given St. Albert’s reliance on residential assessments and a continuing trend of reduced grant funding from senior levels of government, St. Albert taxpayers will probably continue to face high property taxes.
But all special interest groups are not the same. As was suggested, a group of general taxpayers could be called a special interest group. Cornerstone Hall represents special interest groups. The St. Albert Community League (SACL) is also a special interest group. But there is one major difference — none of these are demanding huge sums of money out of the taxpayers’ pocket. (Disclosure: I am on the board of the SACL and the city just provided a $10,000 grant to the SACL for kitchen upgrades).
Then there's the point that SATA “don’t seem to be an advocate ‘for’ anything.” We do want increased transparency in how city council spends taxpayer money, we want better cost controls and we want ‘value for money’ accountability. As our website www.stalberttaxpayers.org states, “Let’s
• Take steps to slow runaway growth in spending on city operations
• Identify and prioritize “must-have” spending initiatives, and focus future spending on core needs
• Eliminate spending on “nice-to-have” projects until taxpayers can absorb the additional tax burden
• Ensure new discretionary capital projects are economically feasible without taxpayer subsidies
• Improve project management methods and cost controls to eliminate project cost over-runs
• Consult with residents on their vision of St. Albert before launching new initiatives
• Acknowledge and capitalize on St. Albert’s proximity to Edmonton and area attractions, and don't develop projects and programs that compete with them
• Require developers to pay up-front infrastructure costs.
The City of St. Albert is multimillion-dollar corporation. And while as shareholders we do not advocate that the bottom line be “the only consideration” running the city, we have every right to expect the city’s bottom line to be the primary consideration.
Lynda Flannery, president, St. Albert Taxpayers Association
