By Staff
October 29th, 2024
BURLINGTON, ON
Their first really sold kick at the 2025 budget is concise and direct. BRAG – Burlington Residents’ Action Committee picks it’s way through the 2025 Budget showing a significant number of errors in mathematics.
BRAG member Eric Stern and the rest of the team are going over the budget with a fine tooth comb – lots of cooties.
BRAG Budget Summary
Highlights:
Page 17 shows that the “Net City Tax Levy” is increasing by 8.3%.
Page 27 shows that Burlington’s portion of our tax bill is increasing by 7.5%.
Why is spending increasing 8.3% and property taxes 7.5%? We believe the difference is being made up for by property tax revenue from the new homes and condos that will start paying taxes in 2025. So far, we have not been able to find an explanation for this difference in the budget document.
The number of new full-time employees the city will be hiring in 2025 is 29, a 2.5% increase in full-time head count.
The average salary increase, for existing full-time employees, 2024 to 2025, appears to be 5%. The Bank of Canada is expecting inflation to be in the 2% range in 2025.[I] We’ll have to wait for the Sunshine list to be published in 2025 to see what the raises were like following 2024’s 10.21% budget increase.
Pages 9 and 10
These pages show selected results from the online survey conducted by the city.
This quote is from the survey: “As we plan this year’s budget, we’re facing inflation, much like our residents and local businesses. Our 2025 forecast predicts a total tax increase of 5.5%, with 1% for Halton Region services, 4.5% for Burlington services, and no change for education.”
Would the results have been different if the city had clearly stated a budget increase of 8.3%?
Page 21
Some of the calculations on this page have errors.
Looking at the first box on the right, the numbers shown add up to 142,457 not 140,514,298. Residents should not have to make assumptions about the numbers in the budget but, if we assume the city meant 140,514, meaning they simply forgot to convert the number to thousands, there is still a difference of $1,943,000 when dealing with the actual numbers ($142,457,000 – $140,514,298).
Looking at the middle box on the right. The numbers add up to 37,695, not the 37,191,580 shown. If we again assume the number should be in thousands at 37,191, the difference is still $504,000 (in real terms).
The bottom box is in the other benefits and allowances section. The numbers add up to 1,325. At least the difference, after making assumptions, is only about $7,000.
When you add up the numbers, from the city, in the total budget column the total comes to $179,023,828 not the $181,476,000 shown in the chart. The incorrectly stated numbers in the city’s chart do not add up to the total shown in the city’s chart.
Page 24
Reserve and Reserve Funds
This chart shows the total, uncommitted, and committed reserve funds by year. Read BRAG’s comment in the blue box. Based on the information in this graph it is impossible to tell how much money is in the reserve funds.
Page 25
Reserve and Reserve Funds Continued. The committed value shown on the chart above, from page 24, for 2025 does not match the committed balance we calculate using the information provided on page 25. We took the amount in the balance column and subtracted the amount in the uncommitted balance column to calculate the committed balance. You can see the committed balances in the blue boxes.
The total committed balances on this page are $104,951,043 not the $167,000,000 shown in the chart on page 24.
What are we left with? We are left with questions.
1 – Are these errors acceptable and what other errors are in the document?
2 – Does this call into question the integrity of the entire document?
3 – This is the first detailed budget document the public has been allowed to see, based on the quality of this document public input is essential.Why were the mayor’s engagement sessions held before a draft version of the budget was released?
4 – Do residents have to cross-check every column and every total in the budget document?4 –
Under strong mayor powers this is the mayor’s budget – is she responsible and accountable?
Will bonus payments be withheld from those who signed off on this document?
You might want to consider becoming a supporting member of BRAG – they have served taxpayers well.
[i] Bank of Canada Inflation forecast – https://www.bankofcanada.ca/publications/mpr/mpr-2024-10-23/
This must be investigated, people can’t let this happen, we all work hard for our money! We pay to much taxes , seniors can’t afford to have taxes go up an up ! Please stop!
Interesting research for sure.
There are many people, departments and committees responsible for the accuracy and release of this document.
If in fact these were the numbers used to calculate the tax on residents, then there are obviously many questions to be asked.
How will BRAG make more residents aware of the errors ?
Will there be follow up to keep track of any responses or corrections made by city officials ?
Who will advocate for a review process ?
Most importantly, addressing errors in a public document is important for maintaining trust in local government, so there should be serious accountability consequences for those involved in this process.
Who will ensure there is “effect” internally ?
So, good work BRAG !!
Is this the budget of a transparent, trustworthy Municipality? Certainly does not appear to be the case. Don’t expect any explanation from our strong Mayor. She has already put it on the city council record on simple matters like “why was the National Anthem not played at a Council meeting.” “We do not answer questions,”
Still nothing on why Spencer Smith washrooms were closed Thanksgiving!