Skip to content
Join our Newsletter

No increases in propertytaxes... well, sort of

Grey is the new black. Gay is the new straight. 50 is the new 40. Biking is the new running. Big is the new little. Losing is the new winning. And, apparently, 2.8344 is the new 2.6913.
opinion_maxedout1

Grey is the new black. Gay is the new straight. 50 is the new 40. Biking is the new running. Big is the new little. Losing is the new winning.

And, apparently, 2.8344 is the new 2.6913.

Say what?

I defer to no greater source on the subject than Barbie when I quote, "Math is hard."

Math has always been hard except for those few misfits who seemed to be wired for numbers. Oh, it all seemed so innocent in the beginning. It started out so easily, so, well, logically. 1+1=2. 2+2=4. Yes, we all saw the patterns and we all understood... at least until we ran out of fingers. Sure, subtraction took a little getting used to and it raised uncomfortable philosophical questions about the nature of loss, especially after our total psychic immersion in the ever-expanding world of addition.

But then we seemed to lose some in the class when we tackled multiplication. Everything seemed to pile up so quickly. And no sooner than most of us began to get comfortable with the exponential nature of multiplication, wham, we were hit with division. Even that wasn't so bad as long as we could express the result in whole numbers and remainders. But noooooo... they had to lay decimals on us. And fractions. And from there it spiraled out of control: exponents, square roots, algebra, geometry, trigonometry, imaginary numbers. Many a child was left behind.

And even though we tried to salve our battered egos with the notion that we'd never use most of what we were being forced to learn in real life, math left many diminished, choking on their first real taste of defeat.

Quite a few people never recovered. They walk among us, mathophobes living in constant fear of numbers, never balancing their chequebooks, never questioning arguments fortified by numbers. Never actually looking at their property tax notices.

Funny thing about this year's RMOW property tax notice. There seems to be an arithmetic mistake. Or perhaps a mistaken belief that five per cent really is the new zero per cent.

In the accompanying "Tax Talk 2013" flyer, mayor Nancy says, "For the second year in a row... without increasing property taxes or utility fees." The whole sentence is rather long but it is important. How do I know this. Because it's the subject of the callout and anything in a callout is important. If you don't believe me, just read the callout on this page. Whatever it says, that's important. It's a rule.

I felt my chest swell with pride when I read that callout. Nancy's, not the one on this page. "They said it couldn't be done," I thought to myself. No increase in property taxes and here we are, second year in a row with... hey, wait a minute, how come my property tax bill is bigger this year?

Hmmm. School taxes? Up. But that's not a municipal thing. BCAA — we're carrying auto club? — up a buck. Hospital's down. Too bad; guess we'll never be able to land single engine choppers. Blah, blah.

General municipal property tax? Up? Must be the higher assessment value on my employee-restricted castle. Yeah, that's the ticket. Except the mil rate is... higher? Oh well, it's not like it's a lot higher. 2.8344 as opposed to 2.6913. That's nothing. That's... let's see, one, three, bring over 10 that's four, one. 0.1431, that's almost nothing, and it's a four-place decimal. My head's beginning to hurt. But wait a minute, that's a small change over a small number, which means... (at this point deferring to the HP12c, the most powerful financial calculator known to man) holy cow! That's an increase of more than five per cent!

I'm sure there's a perfectly good explanation for why five per cent is the new zero per cent, which is the numerical equivalent of no property tax increase, but I'll leave that up to whomever the Office of Miss Communication elects to answer, if anyone. The fact is, numerically, as in dollars and cents, the increase is smallish and means I'll have to miss out on a couple of reasonably-priced, delicious meals at one of our local restaurants and dine instead on whichever ear Zippy the Dog decides he can do without, no great hardship since he doesn't listen to anything I say anyway.

In the meantime, I'd just like to say, while I completely empathize with councillor Faulkner's expression of loathing reported in last week's Pique over the possibility of reopening the can of pay parking worms, I'd like to encourage our elected officials to grab that third rail with all the gusto they can muster.

Oh, I can hear you ask, "Why would anyone in their right mind want to wade back into that quagmire?" The short answer is, they wouldn't. But while I'm generally reluctant to embrace positions that would benefit my own self interest — being a truly altruistic kind of guy — this time I'm saying, "Go for it." I can't begin to tell you how boring things have been since you guys have been elected. It's like someone's slipped Quaaludes into the water supply.

The town's finances are generally being well managed, at least as long as the MFA continues to play along and we don't delve too deeply into the issue of reserves. Property taxes aren't really going up, unless they are but not by enough to get us too riled up — more water, please. The People of Cheakamus barely notice the smell of asphalt in the morning, unless they forget to drink their water. And no one except the B.C. Road Builders & Heavy Construction Association — known affectionately as the BCRB&HC — seems to mind we pay a handsome premium for the black gold we have trucked in from Squamish.

Do you have any idea how freakin' hard it is to come up with something to write about every week when the whole town seems happy with the way things are being run? Have a little consideration, folks. You think I have an unlimited backlog of cute dog and cat stories? Reopen pay parking. I'm beggin' ya.

It's an outrage that Lots 2 & 3 are virtually empty. If we make 'em free, the people parking in Lot 4 will happily fill them up and then Lot 4 will be empty but that's OK because it's out of sight and 2+3=5 and that's bigger than 4... by 25 per cent. Sorry, just thought I'd show off as long as I had my calculator out.

Be bold. Be fearless. Be incredibly self-destructive. By all means reopen the pay parking issue — if not for your benefit then for mine. I'll be forever in your debt... not that that'll stop me from wondering whether you've lost your minds.