Tax increase for next year 3.85% in the budget overview - Oakville came in at 2.45%

Newsflash 100By Staff

November 17, 2105


Look for a tax increase of about 3.85% – Mayor Goldring suggested they might try and get it down to 3.25% during an Overview of both the capital and Operating budgets for the 2015-2016 fiscal year.

The Gazette will provide details on a budget that will result in a total tax levy of $146,883,341


Don’t expect to see very much in the way of public engagement in the budget that council is working its way through – the word is that they will inform you – and that the time set aside for delegations will not include an evening session.

Don’t look for all that much public engagement. Director of Finance Joan Ford said the city would “inform” the public but did not [plan on “engaging” the public on the contents of the budget.

There will be one occasion for the public to delegate on the city budget – January 19th at the Community and Corporate Service meeting – there will not be an evening session.

Burlington’s budget, in its first form, has been presented to Council before the Regional Council has decided on how much money it is going to need.

The Director of Finance expects the surplus for the fiscal year that is ending to come in at about $3.5 million. A large part of that surplus was the result of a supplementary tax payment – $1.8 million.

The finance people in Burlington continue to refer to the surplus as a positive variance.

Oakville has predicted a tax increase of 2.45%

Return to the Front page
Print Friendly, PDF & Email

4 comments to Tax increase for next year 3.85% in the budget overview – Oakville came in at 2.45%

  • Helene Skinner

    Yes, Steve you are correct. We are treated as serfs by our council and Mayor. For those of you (Mike) who find the Beachway story boring…sorry…but I bet the government doesn’t find it boring to collect our taxes including the upcoming 3.85% TAX HIKE . Yes, we on the Beachway pay the same property tax ratio that everyone else does. Council believes that important, large, humanistic issues can just be swept under the carpet with their inked pens and smug attitudes because they had the final word. Oh yes…I believe they call that a Vote. Not a day goes by that I don’t remember how council tossed aside tax payers’ petitions, how they didn’t listen to their constituents (serfs) and how they threw us under the bus!!! I laugh when I remember Regional staff recently telling me with conviction that I would thank them if I decided to sell my home to them. I can’t believe the audacity. Let me assure Burlington and its council that they will not see a 30+ year old stale park mandate completed during their tenure. I know that Councilor Craven holds this park plan dear to his heart…but I’m sure that MP Karina Gould must shake her head because treating Canadians in a discriminatory manner is not the Liberal way. Burlington…public engagement…not a chance!

  • warningu2

    Each year it goes up and our roads in Burlington look more like the third world. Guess we are still paying for the pier.

  • Peter Rusin

    I vaguely recall Goldring stating he would control the tax increase to no more than the inflation rate during the election effort.

    Watch the tax increase keep increasing if this old regime continues with the attitude of not managing the growth pressures of reality this city is facing.

    You can see this city being left well behind Oakville and Milton. Hamilton is even further advanced in vision and competent leadership.

    Taxes usually go up with political non-performance.

    With an annual budget that is peanuts compared with other municipalities, we could have had a zero tax increase if this mayor did not blow the walker’s line deal.

    You can all thank Goldring for another increase that should have been below Oakville’s, a municipality well managed.

  • Steve

    “Director of Finance Joan Ford said the city would “inform” the public but did not [plan on “engaging” the public on the contents of the budget”

    Wow, how elitist of them. I guess serfs don’t need to know the particulars.