1 / 20

Presentation Overview

A Strategy to Capture Hidden Investment Case Study: City of Timmins, Ontario September 2015 EDAC Conference. Presentation Overview. City of Timmins Profile Project Overview – Key Components Project Results Concluding Remarks – Lessons Learned. City of Timmins Profile.

denim
Télécharger la présentation

Presentation Overview

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. A Strategy to Capture Hidden InvestmentCase Study: City of Timmins, OntarioSeptember 2015 EDAC Conference Mark Jensen, Director of Community & Development Services

  2. Presentation Overview • City of Timmins Profile • Project Overview – Key Components • Project Results • Concluding Remarks – Lessons Learned

  3. City of Timmins Profile • Northeastern Ontario regional center • Local population of 45,000 and regional population of 118,000 • Huge Geography – 3,185 km² (1,220 mi²) • Predominantly English and Francophone speaking community with an expanding diversity of cultures • A growing Aboriginal youth population

  4. Economic Base • Natural Resource Based Sector

  5. Economic Base • Economic Diversification in Progress

  6. Project Overview • Impetus for Assessment Review Project • Structures not reflected in the Municipal Assessment Roll • Largely explained by illegal building activity • No building permit issued = no property assessment completed = no property taxes being collected

  7. Project Overview • Municipal Response • 2-year contract position (Pilot): “Property Assessment Advisor” • Identify and document illegal structures for assessment and taxation purposes • Project Success based on newly found property taxes > salary of position

  8. Project Overview • Key Project Components • Data Review & Verification • Municipal Property Assessment Data • Building Permit Data • Municipal Geographic Information System (GIS) – Aerial Imagery Layer • Site Visits • Resident “Hot Lines”

  9. Project Overview • Comprehensive Database Development • Identify structures and details for purposes of assessment • Completing Assessments of Buildings • Directing database to MPAC for assessment purposes • Media • Promoting merits of project to public • Voluntary reporting of offenses

  10. Project Results

  11. Project Results

  12. Project Results

  13. Concluding Remarks • Two (2) year Pilot Project huge success • New annual property taxes generated > 4.5 times salary of position • 12,386 residential and 1,482 non-residential properties still to review

  14. Concluding Remarks • Contract Position now full-time • Continued Property Reviews • Reviews quarterly MPAC supplementary property assessments • Attends property assessment appeals • Provides Real Estate and Assessment data/advice

  15. Concluding Remarks • Corrects an inequity situation • Everyone should pay fair share of property taxes • Strategy can be readily adopted in other jurisdictions • Low risk – high reward • Data readily available at limited to no cost

  16. Concluding Remarks • An approach to grow revenue for municipal operations • Supports municipal operations, including ED budgets • Captures already existing hidden investment

  17. Concluding Remarks • Resources required to deal with compliance issues • Building Code • Property Standards • Zoning • More significant hidden assessment in “remote areas” • Importance of public awareness & penalties

  18. Concluding Remarks • Be prepared for unintended consequences: Scenario A – typical case: • Pool constructed on City and Mattagami Region Conservation Authority property • Storage of personal equipment Scenario B – not so typical case: • Dumping of fill on City property (in floodplain) • Construction of accessory buildings • Storage of personal equipment • Business operating in garage

  19. Concluding Remarks Scenario C – extreme case: Multiple residential units & accessory structures

  20. Contact Information Mark Jensen, BA, MPL, MCIP, RPP Director of Community & Development Services City of Timmins mark.jensen@timmins.ca www.timmins.ca Mark Jensen, Director of Community & Development Services

More Related