|
REPORT
TO COUNCIL |
REVENUE SOURCES |
| Percentage of Total Revenue average - 1995-99 | ||||||||
| Total Municipal Taxation | Grants in lieu of taxes | Services provided for other govts. | Sales of services | Revenue from own sources | Transfers from other govts. | Transfers from other funds | Total | |
| Quesnel | 69.06% | 2.89% | 7.75% | 7.05% | 7.70% | 3.77% | 1.77 | 100.00% |
| Nelson | 44.96% | 2.82% | 3.18% | 8.98% | 17.98% | 9.01% | 13.07% | 100.00% |
| Castlegar | 69.61% | 1.27% | 0.00% | 7.05% | 15.51% | 6.44% | 0.13% | 100.00% |
| Kimberley | 79.85% | 0.61% | 0.00% | 4.93% | 7.94% | 5.50% | 0.17% | 100.00% |
| Salmon Arm | 72.00% | 1.37% | 0.00% | 11.10% | 9.74% | 5.52% | 0.27% | 100.00% |
| Merritt | 56.23% | 2.70% | 3.42% | 6.50% | 20.24% | 9.38 | 1.52% | 100.00% |
| Golden | 72.07% | 2.28% | 0.00% | 7.66% | 4.50% | 13.48% | 0.00% | 100.00% |
| All Municipalities | 66.41% | 3.05% | 0.44% | 11.13% | 11.32% | 6.55% | 1.10% | 100.00% |
| Revelstoke | 42.27% | 16.36% | 0.00% | 19.12% | 6.17% | 12.88% | 3.19% | 100.00% |
| Note: Nelson and Revelstoke generate larger portions from Transfers from Other Funds than do most other municipalities. For Nelson most of the 13.07% comes from the city's electric utility, for Revelstoke the money comes from other sources including interest earnings on the Electrical Utility Reserve Fund. | ||||||||
|
|
| Revelstoke Revenue Contribution Sources - 1995-99 | |||||||
| Total Municipal Taxation | Grants in lieu of taxes | Services provided for other govts | Sales of services | Revenue from own sources | Transfers from other govts. | Transfers from other funds | |
| 1995 | 41.39% | 16.15% | 0.00% | 20.35% | 5.75% | 14.18% | 2.19% |
| 1996 | 41.17% | 16.29% | 0.00% | 19.65% | 5.79% | 13.67% | 3.43% |
| 1997 | 42.21% | 16.40% | 0.00% | 19.12% | 6.14% | 13.62% | 2.50% |
| 1998 | 43.68% | 16.89% | 0.00% | 18.71% | 6.64% | 11.15% | 2.92% |
| 1999 | 42.86% | 16.07% | 0.00% | 17.85% | 6.52% | 11.89% | 4.82% |
|
Revelstoke's residential
property tax trend is outlined below for the five years ended 2001. |
| Property Tax Trend - 1997-2000 | |||
| Year | Average Assessment | Tax rate (City and CSRD) | Average taxes |
| 1997 | $94,247 | 5.5313 | $521.31 |
| 1998 | $92,156 | 5.9492 | $548.25 |
| 1999 | $89,683 | 6.3468 | $569.20 |
| 2000 | $88,980 | 6.6970 | $595.90 |
| 2001 | $88,691 | 7.2000 | $638.58 |
|
The burden of property taxation per capita can be demonstrated by the following charts:
It can be seen that the incidence of property taxation per capital in Revelstoke compares favourably with the other municipalities in the comparison group. Revelstoke ranks higher only than Castlegar, Quesnel and Merritt in terms of residential taxes. This is largely due to the fact that Castlegar's recreational facilities are provided by the regional district and Quesnel's major industry sector provides a substantial portion of its taxation revenue. |
|
The following pie charts show the proportion of property tax revenue contributed by each property tax class. It can be seen that the overall contribution by the business class to property taxes in 2000 was 34.5% compared with 33.8% in 1999 while the contribution by residential property owners decreased from 50.5% to 48.8%. The reason for these changes is the fact that new construction in the commercial sector increased by over $4 million or 6.73% while residential new construction increased by only $1.8 million or 0.69%. As new construction in the commercial sector continues to outstrip that in the residential sector there will continue to be a shift in the overall contribution to property taxes by the various classes. This does not mean that the level of taxation for a particular class is increasing or decreasing at a different rate to another.
|
|
As a comparison the same data is shown for Salmon Arm and Golden in the following diagrams:
|
[Introduction]
[General Fund Debt per
Capita] [General Fund Expenditures]
[Revenue Sources] [Capital Expenditures]
[Reserves & Surpluses] |
