Municipalities are finding it increasingly difficult to fund the growing cost of local services and other municipal operations. Financial support from higher levels of government is limited, while increases in property taxes often face stiff resistance from the electorate. While certain municipalities have been given special powers to assess and collect tax other than just property taxes, most municipalities must rely on property taxes as their principal means of funding many of the services they provide.
Under these circumstances, most local governments have been compelled to consider user fees and regulatory charges to meet the growing cost of, and demand for, municipal services. Implementing new fees and charges requires special care as they are vulnerable to court challenges alleging that they are in fact taxes and therefore beyond the power of most municipalities to assess or collect. The cost and distraction of litigation is something every local government tries to avoid.
Fortunately, when properly implemented, user fees and regulatory charges are within the statutory authority of a municipality to enact. Importantly, the courts have provided guidance as to what constitutes a permissible user fee and regulatory charge and what is required to defend a legal challenge alleging a fee or charge is a tax.
WHAT IS A TAX?
In Lawson v. Interior Tree Fruit and Vegetable Committee of Direction [1931] SCR 357, the Supreme Court of Canada established a foundation for this discussion by pronouncing that taxes met the criteria of being:
• Enforceable by law;
• Imposed under the authority of the legislature;
• Levied by a public body; and
• Intended for a public purpose
On their own, however, the above criteria are not helpful in d...
... middle of paper ...
...ous analysis of the municipality’s accounts. A surplus itself is not a problem so long as the municipalities made reasonable attempts to match the fee revenues with the administrative costs of the regulatory scheme.”
CONCLUSION
It remains clear that when municipalities implement new user fees or regulatory charges, there are steps that can be taken to minimize the risk of litigation. For new user fees, that means linking the fee to the service being provided and making a reasonable attempt to match fees charged with the cost of providing the service. In the case of a regulatory charge, the charge should be reasonably justifiable in light of the cost and purposes of the regulatory scheme. In either case, prudent municipalities will conduct a careful financial analysis of the proposed fee or charge and make efforts to share that analysis with all affected parties.
Taxes. We hate to love them and love to hate them. The mere mention of the word can stir heated debates and has done so for centuries. None was more prevalent than during colony times. During this time, on one side was the British Parliament while on the other side were the colonists, both arguing, either verbally or in written text, about which side did or did not have the right to tax the colonies. Soame Jenyns was one of these men who sided with the mother country in the tax debate.
...portunities for service provisions. The structural reforms cut the number of municipalities in half and implemented larger, single-tiered municipalities. The legislative reforms allowed for municipalities to have autonomy away from provincial control. After assessing the previously mentioned reforms, this paper determines that it is crucial to evaluate the behavior tendencies of the municipalities and the province when measuring the impact of these changes. For a long period of time, and arguably still to this day, municipalities have viewed themselves as creatures of the province. Further, the province of Ontario has taken a paternal and protective role over the municipalities (Graham and Phillips 179-209). In conclusion, even with financial, functional, structural and legislative reforms, these roles of the municipalities and province will not be changing quickly.
Municipal control or an alternative delivery method? This is the question that has intrigued all levels of local government and created intense debates between taxpayers across municipalities. The services that municipalities provide are often vital to the existence of a local area. The issues of accountability, cost savings, quality of service and democracy often arise when choosing the best options to deliver services to a municipal area. In recent years the concepts of privatization, alternative service delivery and public-private partnerships are often promoted as ways cut down on overburdened annual city budgets and promote a higher quality of service to citizens. Municipalities have historically always provided basic services such as fire protection, water purification/treatment and recreational facilities. However, would private companies or another municipality be able to better deliver the same services more efficiently or at a lower cost? The city or town often provides a political grass roots approach to most local problems. Municipalities are better positioned and have a wider scope to provide services to their constituents in order to ensure quality of service that does not erode accountability and transparency, or drive the municipality deeper into debt.
After tracing the evolution of the provincial-local financial relationship in Canada it has become apparent that the trend, throughout history, has been towards greater Provincial control and in turn less fiscal autonomy for the municipality. There has been an increase (due to demand as well as downloading from the provinces) in the functions and responsibilities of the municipality, as well as the cost of these functions, and a decrease in fiscal resources and revenue sources.
The City of Rock Hill has multiple budgetary funds. They have reported up to nine individual governmental funds, which include General Fund, SW TIF Fund, Street Bond Fund, and Capital Projects Fund (City of Rock Hill 2013, 6). The city also maintains other funds that are combined into one single fund called “other governmental funds,” which makes it easier to budget (City of Rock Hill 2013, 6). Within the other governmental fund category are the Police Training Fund, Asset Forfeiture Fund, Sewer Lateral Fund, McKnight Crossing TIF Fund, and the NW TIF Fund (City of Rock Hill 2013, 51). All of these funds make up the City of Rock Hill’s major and nonmajor funds. According to Bland, the City of Rock Hill is following the proper procedures, when it comes to governmental budgeting. The City of Rock Hill follows the generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP), which Bland states help standardized the governmental accounting profession (Bland, 107). As a lot of the of funds mention by Bland have different titles than Rock Hill’s funds, they operate in the same way. The cities Capital Project Fund increased by $252,940, and the SW TIF fund increased by $89,354(City of Rock Hill 2013, 10). Overall the cities combined fund balance decreased 28% or $1,237,418 from 2012, which the city said they could spend at their discretion (City of Rock Hill 2013, 10).
A BID is defined as, “[a]n organization of property owners in a commercial district who tax themselves to raise money for neighborhood improvements” (Cullingworth, 387). Assessments are then made mandatory and collected by the city. Thus, funding does not come by way of the federal government, but city’s can utilize grants to help fund their efforts. In this way, the federal governments support the community economic development, but takes no direct efforts in funding the programs. The city’s then offer incentives, in the form of tax exemptions, to attract developers. In turn, new construction would create jobs and lower unemployment. Theoretically, the encouragement of a tax incentives is to stimulate the economic growth of an area with higher unemployment rates. The problem is many developers tend to gravitate towards the city’s that can offer greater incentive. Officials have wondered if these programs benefit the cities with the greatest
The city’s budget crisis was not a surprise, the City Manager had forecasted the shortfall and brought it to the attention of the city council. Based on the organizational structure, the City Manager clearly had more knowledge and information about the city’s budget, which was his source of power. However, the city council actually controls the resources (money in this case) and how and where to distribute the resource. Both, the City Manager and city council possess authority and power that neither want to relinquish; as a result, the employees suffered. Smithville city leaders needed to come together at the onset of the budget crisis and work together in a direct democratic fashion. When leaders come together and synthesize facts and resources, organizational members can increase the power they exert within an organization (Morgan, 2006). The budget crisis could potentially have been avoided had city leaders made an appeal to the public, explained the situation and offered a reasonable solution to the problem. Moreover, the transparency would have relieved some tension between the City Manager, city council, and the three labor unions. Because the city was not transparent and forthcoming with union leaders, the city negotiators enter the negotiation process giving members false hope of receiving salary and benefit increases when there were none to give. In summary, given the current situation, the City Manager needed to exert his expert power on the budget issue, join alliance with the union leaders, and push the city council to change city charter to implement the sales tax, which would have potentially off-set the budget
given to aid with enforcing social regulations. Includes verification and program design, administrative concerns and lessons for policy analysts.
I. Adult establishments, new and old are barred from certain districts that are zoned for manufacturing and
...t severely reduced the amount of property taxes collected and thus diminished funding for California's education system. Although, voters intended to reduce state government interference in local governance, the proposition had the opposite effect. The shortfall in tax revenue made it necessary for the State to provide aid to local governments to keep public safety, welfare programs, and education programs running. Property tax revenue at the county level decreased from thirty-three percent to only twelve percent after the implementation of Proposition 13.(Chapman 1998) The allotment of aid means that the state has greater control over how money is allocated and spent, while cities were able to transfer lost revenue onto residents through service fees, counties had to turn to state and federal funding to provide for public safety and public assistance programs.
Sprague, D.N. (1980). Government Lawlessness in the Administration of Manitoba Land Claims, 1870-1887. 10 Man. L.J. 433 (1979-1980)
When deciding what to do about federal mandates that are not funded, one must consider both sides. With federal mandates such as the Clean Air Act, Superfund cleanup and the Endangered Species Act, the U.S. government sets national standards that states and local governments don’t necessarily want. If the laws are necessary, taxpayers at the local level should approve them. Otherwise, the federal government should be expected to pay for the mandates they regulate. Unfunded mandates are one more way for Washington bureaucrats to transfer responsibility for their actions onto the backs of local taxpayers.
Taxation has always been a major controversy. Just like any major corporation, the government is constantly looking to raise revenue. The easiest and fairest way to do this is by taxing the people. However, how the people will be taxed is always an issue.
Regulation is an important tool used by our government entities that strongly impacts public health. It can be used to enforce new policies and initiatives in order to control risks or dangers to the public and can encourage improved behaviors within the population. There are legal foundations supporting and permitting the use of regulations in our government, and there are recognized times regulation can be justified.
...to. The notion is rather consistent to the already established idea that all local governments’ functions are and should be provided by either a municipal government or a county government. Without the procedures for city-initiated annexation and annexation powers, most of the urban services desired by and required for citizens would have to be provided by Guilford County. Lastly, as the local level of government in North Carolina, almost all governmental responsibilities have been vested in municipalities and county governments’ which are two types of general-purpose government units. Expenditures of local government units in North Carolina are made through cities and counties, whereas in many other states special districts are much more important. The result from this is that North Carolina’s urban areas do not have the likelihood of overlapping units elsewhere.