Thirty Years Ago in the Glebe Report

Market value assessment

In anticipation of the October 14, 1992 Regional Council vote on Market Value Assessment (MVA), the September 18,1992 Glebe Report was dominated by nine submissions. In favour of MVA: 0, against MVO: 9.

The front-page article by Inez Berg carried the headline “MVA – Get the facts, figures and fight it!” Readers were encouraged to attend upcoming public meetings to voice their opinions, and directions were given on effectively lobbying regional councillors.

Her editorial advocated postponing the vote on MVA until after the Ontario Fair Tax Commission submitted its final report in 1993.

Lengthy letters-to-the-editor denounced MVA. Ilsa Kyssa argued that MVA would have a devastating effect on pensioners and low-income earners whose house values may have gone up, but the ability to pay increased taxes could only be realized if owners sold their homes.

Doug McKeen of the Glebe Business Group wrote that MVA was an unfair, unjust tax, and small, independently owned family business in the Glebe would experience tax increases which would far exceed their potential profits.

Henry Drystek insisted that MVAs were inflated. The home he purchased in 1988 was assessed for $50,000 more than he actually paid for it because the assessment office averaged sales prices in an area and disregarded particular sales they considered unusually low.

Judy and Dick Peacocke pointed out that assessing a $200,000 house in Kanata the same as a $200,000 house in the Glebe seemed fair but was not. The Kanata house was almost assuredly on a larger lot, would consume more and newer services (roads, lighting, garbage collection, sewer and water lines, etc.) which Glebe residents had been paying taxes to cover for years.

GCA President Beatrice Raffoul proposed that MVA should be combatted relentlessly. Councillor Jim Watson stated that if MVA was approved, 88 per cent of the people in Capital Ward would see their taxes go up.

Ian Lee and David Webber stated that “the proposed MVA is unjust, inequitable and unfair, for it penalizes homeowners, young people with large mortgages and people who improve their homes and take pride in their community.”

Two separate articles on the negative aspects of MVA had earlier dominated the June 1992 Glebe Report.

Watson outlined how MVA could have a negative impact on the Glebe. He explained that current (1992) property taxes were based on 1980 assessments. The proposed changes would see taxes calculated based on the current market value of each property. Mr. Watson stated that “market value assessment was an unfair tax system, particularly for people on fixed incomes.”

Jim McCarthy’s front-page article went into more detail on “the evils of MVA in older neighbourhoods.” He wrote that 88.6 per cent of residential properties in Capital Ward would experience tax increases. He felt MVA was particularly unfair to long-term residents, lower income property owners, the elderly and tenants. It penalizes owners for improving their properties, contrary to the best interests of the community. It taxes potential but unrealized capital gains and bears no relationship to the municipal services consumed. He felt MVA was expensive, flawed and required much subjective judgement on the part of assessors.