Rhino's Ramblings - A Taxing Affair

By Robert Thomas - Opinion/Commentary

It may have been a slip of the tongue by Mayor Clive Tolley but it sent off shockwaves at City Hall and for Council watchers alike.

At an innocuous information meeting put on by the pro-business lobby group, the Moose Jaw Chamber and District Chamber of Commerce, Mayor Tolley did a major faux pas by allegedly releasing the details of in-camera discussions.

Behind closed door discussions to get rid of what some on Council view as a major thorn in the side of City Hall - the Board of Revision and replace it with a company to do the same work.

For those who do not know it the Board of Revision is a quasi-judicial tribunal where taxpayers go to appeal their property tax assessments.

Assessments that are not done by the City but rather by a private firm the Saskatchewan Assessment Management Agency of SAMA for short.

Over the past few years Moose Jaw, like other communities, has faced a deluge of tax assessment appeals. Many from commercial and industrial properties. Assessments on more than a few occasions property owners have been winning.

For SAMA the losses have been hard to take.

The witch’s brew whose ingredients are for many more secret than the Coca-Cola formula recipe go into a bubbling pot they stir on reassessment years.

Reassessments which have seen a rising wave of commercial property assessment appeals. And not appeals the property owners are losing but in many instances rather they are winning.

The growing losses in commercial assessments wiped off the books - whether permanently or until a potential win by the City upon appeal - have been run by firms more than a few people at City Hall and even on Council consider to be thugs and bandits.

In his report last Monday to Executive Committee City of Moose Jaw director of finances Brian Acker took direct aim at professional assessment appeals agents.

The new sheriffs who have rode into town shooting down high taxes, OK sorry that is someone else, but rather these agents have won cases against SAMA’s commercial property assessments that in the professional opinion of the Board of Revision are incorrect.

According to the report almost 75% of the 434 commercial property appeals in the last five years have been made by Professional Assessment Appeal Agents on behalf of their clients.

The report also points out another key statistic and that is the City and commercial property owners on 87 of those 4334 commercial appeals reached an agreement regarding the assessment.

Or in another word just shy of 20 percent of the commercial property assessment appeals of assessments from SAMA had flaws in them. Mistakes if you like. Mistakes the City could see before the appeal even got to the Board of Revision were corrected.

Exactly the nature of those appeals the report did not comment on.

But what the report does show - there were errors in more than a few commercial property assessments.

Now who was responsible for those errors - SAMA or the property owner (by not submitting the required questionnaire or filling it out improperly is common) - is yet to be seen.

But now it is becoming more than apparent that - if what the Mayor leaked of in-camera conversations - is members of Council are taking the view the Board of Revision is the problem.

So, well let’s just get rid of them because SAMA’s assessments are not the problem seems to me what is most is likely what is being said behind closed doors. If what the Mayor said is correct.

It is a view or an attitude in my opinion there are some on Council and Administration that these professional assessment agents are helping the accused commercial property owner beat a criminal rap.

In my opinion I wonder about the other side and if there are not some who have the opinion SAMA is able to walk across water without even causing a ripple.

And then to make up for what in my opinion are really in more than a few cases proving to be errors in the assessment, Council is now apparently prepared to throw the Board of Revision under the proverbial bus coming full tilt down the 9th Avenue NE hill.

Could there be people at the corner of Main Street and Fairford Street who have taken the assessment “losses” or mistakes far too personally if you look at the half full pothole in another way.

But there is a second issue which needs not to be swept under the rug but rather needs to be addressed.

And that is Mayor Clive Tolley releasing the decision made on a major policy shift at a public meeting hosted mostly for the membership of the Moose Jaw and District Chamber of Commerce.

At this meeting Mayor Clive Tolley in my opinion did something allegedly really bad - announced the decision Council made behind closed doors about the Board of Revision.

Their days are likely numbered it seems but I wonder how they feel hearing about it in the media? Could it not be kept silent - as in-camera discussions are suppose to - until come the next regular Council meeting in just over a week?

I know for some it may not seem like a very big deal - the slip by the Mayor - but here is the problem there are actually rules, or rather a Bylaw, against this sort of thing and penalties Council can apply.

Council can hold in-camera meetings but they are not allowed to make decisions while in-camera. They need to come out of camera and make the vote in public. It is right there in the Cities Act.

Additionally Council is not suppose to release publicly what was said in-camera until at least the matter appears at Council - something that the alleged changes to the Board of Revision has yet to happen.

It is something Councils of other days have rigorously enforced. Something if caught doing a Council member can be punished for it by his peers.

It is not widely known but during Mayor Deb Higgins tenure an investigation was conducted against former Councillor Brian Swanson for allegedly releasing what was said in an in-camera discussion with someone he was not authorized to do so with.

An investigation I was told by a source in City Hall we as taxpayers spent $10,000 on with an end result the accusation turned out to be baseless.

So take a look at what Mayor Tolley has done. He allegedly released in-camera information at a non-City meeting before it was discussed at Council. A major breach now reported by all three local media sources.

It is something Council must look at whether they like it or not because the Mayor is also an appointed member of the Moose Jaw and District Chamber of Commerce and attends their meetings.

It leaves me thinking is there the possibility the Mayor is releasing other things to the Chamber he shouldn’t be?

Council has two choices.

They can ignore the “slip of the tongue” or they can use the provisions of the Bylaw to investigate what has happened and if they should do anything about it.

But here is the key thing about it, if they do nothing they are going to have to admit the discussions and apparently what looks like to be behind closed doors decisions made really are no big deal.

Or maybe even brush it off with the simple explanation the Mayor was mistaken as how does that make him look?

If they are really no big deal and do not deserve any type of discussion or look based upon the applicable rules then the question can be asked should this matter even have been discussed in-camera to begin with?

If you take a look at the number of agenda items there are evenings where more is discussed in-camera than publicly at Council or Executive Committee.

It is a bit of a quandary for Council because such admission can lead to other things such as a potential LAFOIP (Freedom of Information request).

They can no longer fight off by saying it was proper in-camera discussions and more importantly what the Mayor stated in my opinion were decisions.

It is a bit of mess they will likely say is just in my head until they get my FOI and have to dance through hoops.