You can't have it both ways

Do rural townships want a farm tax rebate or more residential housing?

By Angela Dorie

The old saying goes that you can’t have your cake and eat it too...and several eastern Ontario townships, including South Glengarry, are discovering that it applies to taxes too.

Once upon a time, farm taxes were subsidized by the provincial government. The farmer paid his levies to the township then Queen’s Park cut him a cheque for 75% of the amount he had paid on his farmed land excluding the residence and an acre of land.

During the many and varied negotiations between the provincial and municipal governments years ago, both agreed that farmland would be taxed at 25% of the rate and that there would no longer be a farm tax rebate made to the farmers, all in return for other monetary considerations between the two levels.

Now before everyone screams: "Why should farmland be taxed any differently?" Just think: 100 acres of farmed land takes only a very, very small fraction of the municipal services that the same area in houses or businesses do. Besides that, tax it at the same level as business and there would not be a farmer left in Ontario!

At the time of the negotiations, there was a provision made for townships to be subsidized by the province if their farmland taxes constituted a set proportion of their tax base. In other words, if revenue from farm taxes was significant to the local government, the province would pay up.

So we fast forward and find that South Glengarry and other townships at our end of the province are crying foul and want the province to pay up for the taxes they are not receiving, calculated to be in the millions. Home owners are being told they are paying almost $100 in extra taxes per household just because farmland taxes are lower. A great PR job to increase warm and fuzzy feelings between farmer and non-farmer.

But wait, let’s look back and see what the township itself has done to put itself in this situation. For years they have allowed farmland to be re-zoned into residential, business and institutional areas. We even have councillors who openly ran in elections on the vow to encourage city dwellers to move to the country and increase the taxes and the services provided. But it costs more to maintain the infrastructure of these scattered residential subdivisions than what townships receive in property taxes.

Just drive the rural roads and look at the hundreds of newer houses built on what was once prime farm land, where site preparation costs are minimal: no trees, level ground. Once, a minimum of one acre was required per house, then two, now five acres is the norm. Even now, houses are still being built in hayfields, and all because permits were issued allowing it. Then look at various other businesses and even a school, all planted on what was once productive land. The high school on Boundary Road is a prime example of a huge chunk of South Glengarry farmland being taken off the tax rolls. Then an insurance company’s fancy new headquarters as well as a huge wood factory in North Glengarry. Even Cornwall’s industrial park was once farmland. The list goes on and on... and the farmland base gets smaller.

 Now all this brings in extra taxes but it also chews up extra services provided. Yes, costs have risen for the townships and counties, especially when every little thing presented to any council is sent for outside consultation or investigation, even the issue of whether or not the trains are blowing their whistles more often. Councils no longer make informed decisions based on their own area knowledge and/or experiences. Outside consultants now exist to tell them what to do...... and receive a nice cheque for doing so!

So, it would appear that, over the years, eastern Ontario townships have stabbed themselves in the back and are now trying to pass the blame on the province. Maybe a study should be ordered? Maybe we should be voting for consulting firms, not councillors, in the next election?