Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutRMA Impact Report Card Summary - RMA membersMD OF ACADIA - ASSESSMENT MODEL REVIEW IMPACTS REPORT Municipal Impacts Based on the assessment model review scenarios provided by the Government of Alberta and financial data from the MFIS database, RMA’s models make the following municipal predictions. Due to the limits of data provided, we are unable to project past the first year of implementation. Because of the significant changes to the depreciation curves under most of the models, there will be increased impacts in the future as assets age. Scenario Tax Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Total Assessment Base Loss $-2,731,684 (-3%) $-3,468,119 (-4%) $-3,547,857 (-4%) $-5,088,160 (-6%) M&E Assessment Base Loss (%) -4% -4% -4% -4% LP Assessment Base Loss (%) -23% -29% -29% -42% M&E Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $-281 $-281 $-281 $-281 Linear Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $-58,434 $-74,263 $-75,977 $-109,084 Percent Loss of Total Revenue -2% -3% -3% -4% Municipal Response Options The response options below demonstrate how significant non-residential assessment and taxation is for rural municipalities. Even a modest reduction in oil and gas assessment may require municipalities to drastically increase tax rates or reduce expenses. In other words, changes to assessment have significant domino effects on rural municipalities. These illustrate hypothetical impacts that the changes may have on operations based on available data. These should not be seen as recommendations, as they are only provided for context. Potential Rural Municipality Response Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Residential Mill Rate Increase 21.8% 27.7% 28.3% 40.6% OR Non-Residential Mill Rate Increase (Excluding 5:1 limits) 17.5% 23.3% 24.0% 38.4% Tax capacity shortfall due to 5:1 ratio (includes tax capacity loss still required to achieve 5:1) $94,119 $108,479 $110,033 $140,067 OR Workforce Cuts to cover losses (% of total FTE’s) 10.2% 12.9% 13.2% 18.9% FTE’s at risk 0.61 0.77 0.79 1.13 OR Total Expense Reduction % (including capital infrastructure investment) 2.56% 3.25% 3.33% 4.77% OR Time shortfall can be covered by Unallocated Reserves (months) 496 391 382 266 ATHABASCA COUNTY - ASSESSMENT MODEL REVIEW IMPACTS REPORT Municipal Impacts Based on the assessment model review scenarios provided by the Government of Alberta and financial data from the MFIS database, RMA’s models make the following municipal predictions. Due to the limits of data provided, we are unable to project past the first year of implementation. Because of the significant changes to the depreciation curves under most of the models, there will be increased impacts in the future as assets age. Scenario Tax Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Total Assessment Base Loss $-86,264,667 (-4%) $-90,531,378 (-4%) $-116,386,186 (-6%) $-171,735,241 (-8%) M&E Assessment Base Loss (%) -1% -1% -1% -1% LP Assessment Base Loss (%) -14% -14% -18% -27% M&E Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $-34,160 $-34,160 $-34,160 $-34,160 Linear Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $-1,146,026 $-1,204,399 $-1,558,119 $-2,315,349 Percent Loss of Total Revenue -4% -4% -6% -8% Municipal Response Options The response options below demonstrate how significant non-residential assessment and taxation is for rural municipalities. Even a modest reduction in oil and gas assessment may require municipalities to drastically increase tax rates or reduce expenses. In other words, changes to assessment have significant domino effects on rural municipalities. These illustrate hypothetical impacts that the changes may have on operations based on available data. These should not be seen as recommendations, as they are only provided for context. Potential Rural Municipality Response Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Residential Mill Rate Increase 28.4% 29.8% 38.3% 56.6% OR Non-Residential Mill Rate Increase (Excluding 5:1 limits) 8.5% 9.0% 11.9% 18.5% Tax capacity shortfall due to 5:1 ratio (includes tax capacity loss still required to achieve 5:1) $0 $0 $0 $0 OR Workforce Cuts to cover losses (% of total FTE’s) 12.8% 13.4% 17.3% 25.5% FTE’s at risk 9.21 9.67 12.43 18.34 OR Total Expense Reduction % (including capital infrastructure investment) 4.11% 4.31% 5.54% 8.18% OR Time shortfall can be covered by Unallocated Reserves (months) 19 18 14 9 COUNTY OF BARRHEAD - ASSESSMENT MODEL REVIEW IMPACTS REPORT Municipal Impacts Based on the assessment model review scenarios provided by the Government of Alberta and financial data from the MFIS database, RMA’s models make the following municipal predictions. Due to the limits of data provided, we are unable to project past the first year of implementation. Because of the significant changes to the depreciation curves under most of the models, there will be increased impacts in the future as assets age. Scenario Tax Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Total Assessment Base Loss $-29,915,281 (-3%) $-34,250,152 (-4%) $-36,192,667 (-4%) $-51,843,561 (-5%) M&E Assessment Base Loss (%) 0% 0% 0% 0% LP Assessment Base Loss (%) -23% -26% -28% -40% M&E Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $0 $0 $0 $0 Linear Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $-518,656 $-593,812 $-627,490 $-898,838 Percent Loss of Total Revenue -4% -5% -5% -7% Municipal Response Options The response options below demonstrate how significant non-residential assessment and taxation is for rural municipalities. Even a modest reduction in oil and gas assessment may require municipalities to drastically increase tax rates or reduce expenses. In other words, changes to assessment have significant domino effects on rural municipalities. These illustrate hypothetical impacts that the changes may have on operations based on available data. These should not be seen as recommendations, as they are only provided for context. Potential Rural Municipality Response Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Residential Mill Rate Increase 11.2% 12.9% 13.6% 19.5% OR Non-Residential Mill Rate Increase (Excluding 5:1 limits) 16.6% 19.5% 20.8% 32.8% Tax capacity shortfall due to 5:1 ratio (includes tax capacity loss still required to achieve 5:1) $0 $0 $0 $0 OR Workforce Cuts to cover losses (% of total FTE’s) 14.1% 16.2% 17.1% 24.5% FTE’s at risk 4.10 4.69 4.96 7.10 OR Total Expense Reduction % (including capital infrastructure investment) 4.00% 4.58% 4.84% 6.93% OR Time shortfall can be covered by Unallocated Reserves (months) 9 8 8 5 BEAVER COUNTY - ASSESSMENT MODEL REVIEW IMPACTS REPORT Municipal Impacts Based on the assessment model review scenarios provided by the Government of Alberta and financial data from the MFIS database, RMA’s models make the following municipal predictions. Due to the limits of data provided, we are unable to project past the first year of implementation. Because of the significant changes to the depreciation curves under most of the models, there will be increased impacts in the future as assets age. Scenario Tax Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Total Assessment Base Loss $-139,085,205 (-11%) $-147,914,301 (-12%) $-151,707,164 (-12%) $-172,588,913 (-14%) M&E Assessment Base Loss (%) -19% -19% -19% -19% LP Assessment Base Loss (%) -40% -43% -44% -51% M&E Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $-259,611 $-259,611 $-259,611 $-259,611 Linear Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $-2,126,507 $-2,277,977 $-2,343,047 $-2,701,290 Percent Loss of Total Revenue -12% -13% -13% -15% Municipal Response Options The response options below demonstrate how significant non-residential assessment and taxation is for rural municipalities. Even a modest reduction in oil and gas assessment may require municipalities to drastically increase tax rates or reduce expenses. In other words, changes to assessment have significant domino effects on rural municipalities. These illustrate hypothetical impacts that the changes may have on operations based on available data. These should not be seen as recommendations, as they are only provided for context. Potential Rural Municipality Response Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Residential Mill Rate Increase 82.7% 87.9% 90.2% 102.6% OR Non-Residential Mill Rate Increase (Excluding 5:1 limits) 41.9% 45.8% 47.5% 57.8% Tax capacity shortfall due to 5:1 ratio (includes tax capacity loss still required to achieve 5:1) $1,676,192 $1,849,262 $1,923,610 $2,332,939 OR Workforce Cuts to cover losses (% of total FTE’s) 51.5% 54.7% 56.2% 63.9% FTE’s at risk 25.74 27.37 28.08 31.94 OR Total Expense Reduction % (including capital infrastructure investment) 12.76% 13.58% 13.92% 15.84% OR Time shortfall can be covered by Unallocated Reserves (months) 4 4 4 3 BIG LAKES COUNTY - ASSESSMENT MODEL REVIEW IMPACTS REPORT Municipal Impacts Based on the assessment model review scenarios provided by the Government of Alberta and financial data from the MFIS database, RMA’s models make the following municipal predictions. Due to the limits of data provided, we are unable to project past the first year of implementation. Because of the significant changes to the depreciation curves under most of the models, there will be increased impacts in the future as assets age. Scenario Tax Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Total Assessment Base Loss $-32,915,328 (-2%) $-64,644,296 (-3%) $-254,640,992 (-13%) $-341,029,952 (-18%) M&E Assessment Base Loss (%) -9% -9% -9% -9% LP Assessment Base Loss (%) 0% -4% -27% -38% M&E Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $-490,316 $-490,316 $-490,316 $-490,316 Linear Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $5,802 $-461,248 $-3,258,000 $-4,529,645 Percent Loss of Total Revenue -1% -3% -11% -15% Municipal Response Options The response options below demonstrate how significant non-residential assessment and taxation is for rural municipalities. Even a modest reduction in oil and gas assessment may require municipalities to drastically increase tax rates or reduce expenses. In other words, changes to assessment have significant domino effects on rural municipalities. These illustrate hypothetical impacts that the changes may have on operations based on available data. These should not be seen as recommendations, as they are only provided for context. Potential Rural Municipality Response Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Residential Mill Rate Increase 18.7% 36.8% 144.9% 194.1% OR Non-Residential Mill Rate Increase (Excluding 5:1 limits) 2.5% 5.1% 23.5% 34.1% Tax capacity shortfall due to 5:1 ratio (includes tax capacity loss still required to achieve 5:1) $0 $0 $0 $0 OR Workforce Cuts to cover losses (% of total FTE’s) 6.6% 13.0% 51.2% 68.6% FTE’s at risk 4.70 9.23 36.35 48.69 OR Total Expense Reduction % (including capital infrastructure investment) 1.47% 2.88% 11.36% 15.22% OR Time shortfall can be covered by Unallocated Reserves (months) 281 143 36 27 MD OF BIGHORN - ASSESSMENT MODEL REVIEW IMPACTS REPORT Municipal Impacts Based on the assessment model review scenarios provided by the Government of Alberta and financial data from the MFIS database, RMA’s models make the following municipal predictions. Due to the limits of data provided, we are unable to project past the first year of implementation. Because of the significant changes to the depreciation curves under most of the models, there will be increased impacts in the future as assets age. Scenario Tax Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Total Assessment Base Loss $-62,675,753 (-5%) $-65,091,586 (-5%) $-72,696,327 (-6%) $-76,227,510 (-6%) M&E Assessment Base Loss (%) -2% -2% -2% -2% LP Assessment Base Loss (%) -43% -45% -51% -53% M&E Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $-55,787 $-55,787 $-55,787 $-55,787 Linear Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $-398,169 $-415,667 $-470,747 $-496,324 Percent Loss of Total Revenue -4% -4% -4% -4% Municipal Response Options The response options below demonstrate how significant non-residential assessment and taxation is for rural municipalities. Even a modest reduction in oil and gas assessment may require municipalities to drastically increase tax rates or reduce expenses. In other words, changes to assessment have significant domino effects on rural municipalities. These illustrate hypothetical impacts that the changes may have on operations based on available data. These should not be seen as recommendations, as they are only provided for context. Potential Rural Municipality Response Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Residential Mill Rate Increase 40.6% 42.1% 47.0% 49.3% OR Non-Residential Mill Rate Increase (Excluding 5:1 limits) 9.4% 9.8% 11.1% 11.7% Tax capacity shortfall due to 5:1 ratio (includes tax capacity loss still required to achieve 5:1) $0 $0 $0 $0 OR Workforce Cuts to cover losses (% of total FTE’s) 17.3% 18.0% 20.1% 21.0% FTE’s at risk 4.15 4.31 4.81 5.05 OR Total Expense Reduction % (including capital infrastructure investment) 4.65% 4.83% 5.39% 5.65% OR Time shortfall can be covered by Unallocated Reserves (months) 106 102 91 87 BIRCH HILLS COUNTY - ASSESSMENT MODEL REVIEW IMPACTS REPORT Municipal Impacts Based on the assessment model review scenarios provided by the Government of Alberta and financial data from the MFIS database, RMA’s models make the following municipal predictions. Due to the limits of data provided, we are unable to project past the first year of implementation. Because of the significant changes to the depreciation curves under most of the models, there will be increased impacts in the future as assets age. Scenario Tax Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Total Assessment Base Loss $-52,082,224 (-17%) $-57,761,144 (-19%) $-60,442,803 (-20%) $-73,331,597 (-24%) M&E Assessment Base Loss (%) 0% 0% 0% 0% LP Assessment Base Loss (%) -42% -46% -48% -59% M&E Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $0 $0 $0 $0 Linear Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $-970,651 $-1,076,489 $-1,126,466 $-1,366,674 Percent Loss of Total Revenue -11% -12% -13% -16% Municipal Response Options The response options below demonstrate how significant non-residential assessment and taxation is for rural municipalities. Even a modest reduction in oil and gas assessment may require municipalities to drastically increase tax rates or reduce expenses. In other words, changes to assessment have significant domino effects on rural municipalities. These illustrate hypothetical impacts that the changes may have on operations based on available data. These should not be seen as recommendations, as they are only provided for context. Potential Rural Municipality Response Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Residential Mill Rate Increase 82.2% 91.1% 95.3% 115.7% OR Non-Residential Mill Rate Increase (Excluding 5:1 limits) 37.9% 43.8% 46.8% 63.1% Tax capacity shortfall due to 5:1 ratio (includes tax capacity loss still required to achieve 5:1) $0 $0 $0 $0 OR Workforce Cuts to cover losses (% of total FTE’s) 36.7% 40.7% 42.6% 51.7% FTE’s at risk 8.08 8.96 9.38 11.38 OR Total Expense Reduction % (including capital infrastructure investment) 10.46% 11.60% 12.14% 14.73% OR Time shortfall can be covered by Unallocated Reserves (months) 67 61 58 48 MD OF BONNYVILLE - ASSESSMENT MODEL REVIEW IMPACTS REPORT Municipal Impacts Based on the assessment model review scenarios provided by the Government of Alberta and financial data from the MFIS database, RMA’s models make the following municipal predictions. Due to the limits of data provided, we are unable to project past the first year of implementation. Because of the significant changes to the depreciation curves under most of the models, there will be increased impacts in the future as assets age. Scenario Tax Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Total Assessment Base Loss $-620,129,472 (-11%) $-681,535,979 (-12%) $-738,850,914 (-13%) $-961,666,881 (-16%) M&E Assessment Base Loss (%) -1% -1% -1% -1% LP Assessment Base Loss (%) -33% -36% -40% -52% M&E Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $-295,110 $-295,110 $-295,110 $-295,110 Linear Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $-8,696,767 $-9,587,162 $-10,418,228 $-13,649,060 Percent Loss of Total Revenue -10% -11% -12% -16% Municipal Response Options The response options below demonstrate how significant non-residential assessment and taxation is for rural municipalities. Even a modest reduction in oil and gas assessment may require municipalities to drastically increase tax rates or reduce expenses. In other words, changes to assessment have significant domino effects on rural municipalities. These illustrate hypothetical impacts that the changes may have on operations based on available data. These should not be seen as recommendations, as they are only provided for context. Potential Rural Municipality Response Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Residential Mill Rate Increase 169.4% 186.2% 201.8% 262.7% OR Non-Residential Mill Rate Increase (Excluding 5:1 limits) 18.5% 20.8% 22.9% 32.0% Tax capacity shortfall due to 5:1 ratio (includes tax capacity loss still required to achieve 5:1) $10,413,740 $11,284,308 $12,096,868 $15,255,757 OR Workforce Cuts to cover losses (% of total FTE’s) 43.6% 48.0% 52.0% 67.7% FTE’s at risk 63.29 69.55 75.40 98.14 OR Total Expense Reduction % (including capital infrastructure investment) 13.40% 14.73% 15.97% 20.78% OR Time shortfall can be covered by Unallocated Reserves (months) 39 36 33 25 BRAZEAU COUNTY - ASSESSMENT MODEL REVIEW IMPACTS REPORT Municipal Impacts Based on the assessment model review scenarios provided by the Government of Alberta and financial data from the MFIS database, RMA’s models make the following municipal predictions. Due to the limits of data provided, we are unable to project past the first year of implementation. Because of the significant changes to the depreciation curves under most of the models, there will be increased impacts in the future as assets age. Scenario Tax Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Total Assessment Base Loss $-248,145,145 (-7%) $-393,021,379 (-11%) $-587,094,012 (-16%) $-783,099,913 (-22%) M&E Assessment Base Loss (%) -18% -18% -18% -18% LP Assessment Base Loss (%) -7% -16% -27% -39% M&E Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $-1,190,401 $-1,190,401 $-1,190,401 $-1,190,401 Linear Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $-1,054,320 $-2,364,870 $-4,120,451 $-5,893,520 Percent Loss of Total Revenue -6% -10% -15% -20% Municipal Response Options The response options below demonstrate how significant non-residential assessment and taxation is for rural municipalities. Even a modest reduction in oil and gas assessment may require municipalities to drastically increase tax rates or reduce expenses. In other words, changes to assessment have significant domino effects on rural municipalities. These illustrate hypothetical impacts that the changes may have on operations based on available data. These should not be seen as recommendations, as they are only provided for context. Potential Rural Municipality Response Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Residential Mill Rate Increase 105.8% 167.5% 250.3% 333.8% OR Non-Residential Mill Rate Increase (Excluding 5:1 limits) 10.3% 17.4% 28.4% 41.8% Tax capacity shortfall due to 5:1 ratio (includes tax capacity loss still required to achieve 5:1) $0 $0 $1,165,061 $3,383,560 OR Workforce Cuts to cover losses (% of total FTE’s) 25.7% 40.8% 60.9% 81.2% FTE’s at risk 19.30 30.57 45.67 60.92 OR Total Expense Reduction % (including capital infrastructure investment) 7.04% 11.14% 16.65% 22.20% OR Time shortfall can be covered by Unallocated Reserves (months) 45 28 19 14 CAMROSE COUNTY - ASSESSMENT MODEL REVIEW IMPACTS REPORT Municipal Impacts Based on the assessment model review scenarios provided by the Government of Alberta and financial data from the MFIS database, RMA’s models make the following municipal predictions. Due to the limits of data provided, we are unable to project past the first year of implementation. Because of the significant changes to the depreciation curves under most of the models, there will be increased impacts in the future as assets age. Scenario Tax Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Total Assessment Base Loss $-129,053,147 (-6%) $-139,904,106 (-7%) $-146,754,275 (-7%) $-174,913,821 (-8%) M&E Assessment Base Loss (%) -6% -6% -6% -6% LP Assessment Base Loss (%) -33% -36% -38% -46% M&E Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $-151,411 $-151,411 $-151,411 $-151,411 Linear Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $-1,611,196 $-1,759,399 $-1,852,958 $-2,237,562 Percent Loss of Total Revenue -7% -7% -8% -9% Municipal Response Options The response options below demonstrate how significant non-residential assessment and taxation is for rural municipalities. Even a modest reduction in oil and gas assessment may require municipalities to drastically increase tax rates or reduce expenses. In other words, changes to assessment have significant domino effects on rural municipalities. These illustrate hypothetical impacts that the changes may have on operations based on available data. These should not be seen as recommendations, as they are only provided for context. Potential Rural Municipality Response Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Residential Mill Rate Increase 41.4% 44.8% 47.0% 56.1% OR Non-Residential Mill Rate Increase (Excluding 5:1 limits) 22.0% 24.3% 25.8% 32.3% Tax capacity shortfall due to 5:1 ratio (includes tax capacity loss still required to achieve 5:1) $399,615 $579,738 $693,450 $1,160,893 OR Workforce Cuts to cover losses (% of total FTE’s) 24.0% 26.0% 27.3% 32.5% FTE’s at risk 16.07 17.42 18.27 21.78 OR Total Expense Reduction % (including capital infrastructure investment) 8.28% 8.98% 9.42% 11.23% OR Time shortfall can be covered by Unallocated Reserves (months) 0 0 0 0 CARDSTON COUNTY - ASSESSMENT MODEL REVIEW IMPACTS REPORT Municipal Impacts Based on the assessment model review scenarios provided by the Government of Alberta and financial data from the MFIS database, RMA’s models make the following municipal predictions. Due to the limits of data provided, we are unable to project past the first year of implementation. Because of the significant changes to the depreciation curves under most of the models, there will be increased impacts in the future as assets age. Scenario Tax Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Total Assessment Base Loss $-14,535,857 (-2%) $-17,018,972 (-3%) $-18,892,314 (-3%) $-24,481,499 (-4%) M&E Assessment Base Loss (%) -10% -10% -10% -10% LP Assessment Base Loss (%) -15% -18% -21% -27% M&E Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $-25,869 $-25,869 $-25,869 $-25,869 Linear Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $-214,699 $-255,795 $-286,799 $-379,300 Percent Loss of Total Revenue -2% -3% -3% -4% Municipal Response Options The response options below demonstrate how significant non-residential assessment and taxation is for rural municipalities. Even a modest reduction in oil and gas assessment may require municipalities to drastically increase tax rates or reduce expenses. In other words, changes to assessment have significant domino effects on rural municipalities. These illustrate hypothetical impacts that the changes may have on operations based on available data. These should not be seen as recommendations, as they are only provided for context. Potential Rural Municipality Response Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Residential Mill Rate Increase 10.1% 11.8% 13.1% 17.0% OR Non-Residential Mill Rate Increase (Excluding 5:1 limits) 12.6% 15.0% 17.0% 23.2% Tax capacity shortfall due to 5:1 ratio (includes tax capacity loss still required to achieve 5:1) $0 $0 $0 $0 OR Workforce Cuts to cover losses (% of total FTE’s) 8.0% 9.3% 10.3% 13.4% FTE’s at risk 1.91 2.23 2.48 3.21 OR Total Expense Reduction % (including capital infrastructure investment) 2.76% 3.24% 3.59% 4.66% OR Time shortfall can be covered by Unallocated Reserves (months) 85 73 66 51 CLEAR HILLS COUNTY - ASSESSMENT MODEL REVIEW IMPACTS REPORT Municipal Impacts Based on the assessment model review scenarios provided by the Government of Alberta and financial data from the MFIS database, RMA’s models make the following municipal predictions. Due to the limits of data provided, we are unable to project past the first year of implementation. Because of the significant changes to the depreciation curves under most of the models, there will be increased impacts in the future as assets age. Scenario Tax Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Total Assessment Base Loss $-198,461,213 (-18%) $-219,083,505 (-20%) $-239,891,988 (-21%) $-304,733,246 (-27%) M&E Assessment Base Loss (%) -13% -13% -13% -13% LP Assessment Base Loss (%) -27% -30% -33% -44% M&E Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $-478,588 $-478,588 $-478,588 $-478,588 Linear Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $-2,428,055 $-2,730,087 $-3,034,846 $-3,984,504 Percent Loss of Total Revenue -16% -17% -19% -24% Municipal Response Options The response options below demonstrate how significant non-residential assessment and taxation is for rural municipalities. Even a modest reduction in oil and gas assessment may require municipalities to drastically increase tax rates or reduce expenses. In other words, changes to assessment have significant domino effects on rural municipalities. These illustrate hypothetical impacts that the changes may have on operations based on available data. These should not be seen as recommendations, as they are only provided for context. Potential Rural Municipality Response Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Residential Mill Rate Increase 950.3% 1049.1% 1148.7% 1459.2% OR Non-Residential Mill Rate Increase (Excluding 5:1 limits) 26.8% 30.5% 34.3% 48.1% Tax capacity shortfall due to 5:1 ratio (includes tax capacity loss still required to achieve 5:1) $12,697,232 $12,738,172 $12,779,483 $12,908,210 OR Workforce Cuts to cover losses (% of total FTE’s) 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% FTE’s at risk 14.00 14.00 14.00 14.00 OR Total Expense Reduction % (including capital infrastructure investment) 16.32% 18.01% 19.72% 25.05% OR Time shortfall can be covered by Unallocated Reserves (months) 15 14 13 10 CLEARWATER COUNTY - ASSESSMENT MODEL REVIEW IMPACTS REPORT Municipal Impacts Based on the assessment model review scenarios provided by the Government of Alberta and financial data from the MFIS database, RMA’s models make the following municipal predictions. Due to the limits of data provided, we are unable to project past the first year of implementation. Because of the significant changes to the depreciation curves under most of the models, there will be increased impacts in the future as assets age. Scenario Tax Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Total Assessment Base Loss $-317,161,002 (-4%) $-456,539,615 (-6%) $-1,305,705,806 (-18%) $-1,646,750,571 (-23%) M&E Assessment Base Loss (%) -14% -14% -14% -14% LP Assessment Base Loss (%) -2% -7% -36% -47% M&E Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $-1,947,990 $-1,947,990 $-1,947,990 $-1,947,990 Linear Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $-587,458 $-1,701,679 $-8,490,083 $-11,216,463 Percent Loss of Total Revenue -4% -6% -17% -22% Municipal Response Options The response options below demonstrate how significant non-residential assessment and taxation is for rural municipalities. Even a modest reduction in oil and gas assessment may require municipalities to drastically increase tax rates or reduce expenses. In other words, changes to assessment have significant domino effects on rural municipalities. These illustrate hypothetical impacts that the changes may have on operations based on available data. These should not be seen as recommendations, as they are only provided for context. Potential Rural Municipality Response Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Residential Mill Rate Increase 49.6% 71.4% 204.3% 257.7% OR Non-Residential Mill Rate Increase (Excluding 5:1 limits) 6.4% 9.5% 33.0% 45.5% Tax capacity shortfall due to 5:1 ratio (includes tax capacity loss still required to achieve 5:1) $0 $0 $0 $0 OR Workforce Cuts to cover losses (% of total FTE’s) 21.4% 30.8% 88.0% 100.0% FTE’s at risk 23.31 33.56 95.97 109.00 OR Total Expense Reduction % (including capital infrastructure investment) 4.81% 6.92% 19.80% 24.98% OR Time shortfall can be covered by Unallocated Reserves (months) 5 3 1 1 CYPRESS COUNTY - ASSESSMENT MODEL REVIEW IMPACTS REPORT Municipal Impacts Based on the assessment model review scenarios provided by the Government of Alberta and financial data from the MFIS database, RMA’s models make the following municipal predictions. Due to the limits of data provided, we are unable to project past the first year of implementation. Because of the significant changes to the depreciation curves under most of the models, there will be increased impacts in the future as assets age. Scenario Tax Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Total Assessment Base Loss $-1,059,619,509 (-20%) $-1,258,803,514 (-24%) $-1,292,663,659 (-25%) $-1,453,842,992 (-28%) M&E Assessment Base Loss (%) -20% -20% -20% -20% LP Assessment Base Loss (%) -39% -47% -49% -56% M&E Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $-903,246 $-903,246 $-903,246 $-903,246 Linear Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $-4,759,361 $-5,823,800 $-6,004,749 $-6,866,091 Percent Loss of Total Revenue -16% -19% -19% -22% Municipal Response Options The response options below demonstrate how significant non-residential assessment and taxation is for rural municipalities. Even a modest reduction in oil and gas assessment may require municipalities to drastically increase tax rates or reduce expenses. In other words, changes to assessment have significant domino effects on rural municipalities. These illustrate hypothetical impacts that the changes may have on operations based on available data. These should not be seen as recommendations, as they are only provided for context. Potential Rural Municipality Response Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Residential Mill Rate Increase 132.2% 157.0% 161.2% 181.3% OR Non-Residential Mill Rate Increase (Excluding 5:1 limits) 39.6% 50.8% 52.8% 63.6% Tax capacity shortfall due to 5:1 ratio (includes tax capacity loss still required to achieve 5:1) $0 $0 $0 $0 OR Workforce Cuts to cover losses (% of total FTE’s) 71.3% 84.7% 87.0% 97.9% FTE’s at risk 46.36 55.07 56.55 63.61 OR Total Expense Reduction % (including capital infrastructure investment) 19.38% 23.03% 23.65% 26.60% OR Time shortfall can be covered by Unallocated Reserves (months) 23 20 19 17 MD OF FAIRVIEW - ASSESSMENT MODEL REVIEW IMPACTS REPORT Municipal Impacts Based on the assessment model review scenarios provided by the Government of Alberta and financial data from the MFIS database, RMA’s models make the following municipal predictions. Due to the limits of data provided, we are unable to project past the first year of implementation. Because of the significant changes to the depreciation curves under most of the models, there will be increased impacts in the future as assets age. Scenario Tax Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Total Assessment Base Loss $-48,235,928 (-14%) $-52,657,314 (-15%) $-53,165,137 (-15%) $-59,588,066 (-17%) M&E Assessment Base Loss (%) -17% -17% -17% -17% LP Assessment Base Loss (%) -41% -45% -46% -53% M&E Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $-192,622 $-192,622 $-192,622 $-192,622 Linear Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $-796,215 $-886,853 $-897,263 $-1,028,933 Percent Loss of Total Revenue -13% -14% -14% -16% Municipal Response Options The response options below demonstrate how significant non-residential assessment and taxation is for rural municipalities. Even a modest reduction in oil and gas assessment may require municipalities to drastically increase tax rates or reduce expenses. In other words, changes to assessment have significant domino effects on rural municipalities. These illustrate hypothetical impacts that the changes may have on operations based on available data. These should not be seen as recommendations, as they are only provided for context. Potential Rural Municipality Response Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Residential Mill Rate Increase 64.7% 70.6% 71.3% 79.9% OR Non-Residential Mill Rate Increase (Excluding 5:1 limits) 38.7% 43.8% 44.4% 52.6% Tax capacity shortfall due to 5:1 ratio (includes tax capacity loss still required to achieve 5:1) $0 $0 $0 $0 OR Workforce Cuts to cover losses (% of total FTE’s) 43.6% 47.6% 48.0% 53.8% FTE’s at risk 8.72 9.52 9.61 10.77 OR Total Expense Reduction % (including capital infrastructure investment) 15.04% 16.41% 16.57% 18.57% OR Time shortfall can be covered by Unallocated Reserves (months) 19 18 18 16 FLAGSTAFF COUNTY - ASSESSMENT MODEL REVIEW IMPACTS REPORT Municipal Impacts Based on the assessment model review scenarios provided by the Government of Alberta and financial data from the MFIS database, RMA’s models make the following municipal predictions. Due to the limits of data provided, we are unable to project past the first year of implementation. Because of the significant changes to the depreciation curves under most of the models, there will be increased impacts in the future as assets age. Scenario Tax Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Total Assessment Base Loss $-217,738,822 (-15%) $-244,725,589 (-17%) $-254,538,152 (-17%) $-297,381,335 (-20%) M&E Assessment Base Loss (%) -10% -10% -10% -10% LP Assessment Base Loss (%) -33% -38% -39% -47% M&E Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $-523,857 $-523,857 $-523,857 $-523,857 Linear Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $-3,157,214 $-3,613,450 $-3,779,340 $-4,503,643 Percent Loss of Total Revenue -13% -15% -15% -18% Municipal Response Options The response options below demonstrate how significant non-residential assessment and taxation is for rural municipalities. Even a modest reduction in oil and gas assessment may require municipalities to drastically increase tax rates or reduce expenses. In other words, changes to assessment have significant domino effects on rural municipalities. These illustrate hypothetical impacts that the changes may have on operations based on available data. These should not be seen as recommendations, as they are only provided for context. Potential Rural Municipality Response Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Residential Mill Rate Increase 139.9% 157.3% 163.6% 191.1% OR Non-Residential Mill Rate Increase (Excluding 5:1 limits) 28.4% 33.1% 34.9% 43.3% Tax capacity shortfall due to 5:1 ratio (includes tax capacity loss still required to achieve 5:1) $0 $0 $0 $0 OR Workforce Cuts to cover losses (% of total FTE’s) 51.1% 57.4% 59.7% 69.7% FTE’s at risk 32.17 36.15 37.60 43.93 OR Total Expense Reduction % (including capital infrastructure investment) 16.34% 18.36% 19.10% 22.31% OR Time shortfall can be covered by Unallocated Reserves (months) 58 52 50 43 MD OF FOOTHILLS - ASSESSMENT MODEL REVIEW IMPACTS REPORT Municipal Impacts Based on the assessment model review scenarios provided by the Government of Alberta and financial data from the MFIS database, RMA’s models make the following municipal predictions. Due to the limits of data provided, we are unable to project past the first year of implementation. Because of the significant changes to the depreciation curves under most of the models, there will be increased impacts in the future as assets age. Scenario Tax Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Total Assessment Base Loss $-153,955,617 (-2%) $-160,622,867 (-2%) $-174,471,037 (-2%) $-188,147,623 (-2%) M&E Assessment Base Loss (%) -6% -6% -6% -6% LP Assessment Base Loss (%) -38% -40% -43% -47% M&E Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $-67,190 $-67,190 $-67,190 $-67,190 Linear Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $-1,094,152 $-1,144,446 $-1,248,907 $-1,352,075 Percent Loss of Total Revenue -2% -2% -3% -3% Municipal Response Options The response options below demonstrate how significant non-residential assessment and taxation is for rural municipalities. Even a modest reduction in oil and gas assessment may require municipalities to drastically increase tax rates or reduce expenses. In other words, changes to assessment have significant domino effects on rural municipalities. These illustrate hypothetical impacts that the changes may have on operations based on available data. These should not be seen as recommendations, as they are only provided for context. Potential Rural Municipality Response Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Residential Mill Rate Increase 5.2% 5.4% 5.9% 6.3% OR Non-Residential Mill Rate Increase (Excluding 5:1 limits) 15.9% 16.7% 18.4% 20.2% Tax capacity shortfall due to 5:1 ratio (includes tax capacity loss still required to achieve 5:1) $0 $0 $0 $0 OR Workforce Cuts to cover losses (% of total FTE’s) 8.6% 8.9% 9.7% 10.5% FTE’s at risk 12.59 13.13 14.26 15.38 OR Total Expense Reduction % (including capital infrastructure investment) 2.65% 2.77% 3.01% 3.24% OR Time shortfall can be covered by Unallocated Reserves (months) 38 36 33 31 COUNTY OF FORTY MILE - ASSESSMENT MODEL REVIEW IMPACTS REPORT Municipal Impacts Based on the assessment model review scenarios provided by the Government of Alberta and financial data from the MFIS database, RMA’s models make the following municipal predictions. Due to the limits of data provided, we are unable to project past the first year of implementation. Because of the significant changes to the depreciation curves under most of the models, there will be increased impacts in the future as assets age. Scenario Tax Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Total Assessment Base Loss $-96,597,616 (-12%) $-116,504,934 (-15%) $-119,042,839 (-15%) $-135,712,496 (-17%) M&E Assessment Base Loss (%) -55% -55% -55% -55% LP Assessment Base Loss (%) -31% -38% -39% -46% M&E Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $-186,657 $-186,657 $-186,657 $-186,657 Linear Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $-844,540 $-1,057,054 $-1,084,147 $-1,262,098 Percent Loss of Total Revenue -6% -7% -7% -8% Municipal Response Options The response options below demonstrate how significant non-residential assessment and taxation is for rural municipalities. Even a modest reduction in oil and gas assessment may require municipalities to drastically increase tax rates or reduce expenses. In other words, changes to assessment have significant domino effects on rural municipalities. These illustrate hypothetical impacts that the changes may have on operations based on available data. These should not be seen as recommendations, as they are only provided for context. Potential Rural Municipality Response Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Residential Mill Rate Increase 36.7% 44.2% 45.2% 51.5% OR Non-Residential Mill Rate Increase (Excluding 5:1 limits) 40.9% 53.9% 55.7% 68.9% Tax capacity shortfall due to 5:1 ratio (includes tax capacity loss still required to achieve 5:1) $0 $0 $0 $0 OR Workforce Cuts to cover losses (% of total FTE’s) 19.4% 23.4% 23.9% 27.2% FTE’s at risk 7.56 9.12 9.31 10.62 OR Total Expense Reduction % (including capital infrastructure investment) 8.11% 9.78% 9.99% 11.39% OR Time shortfall can be covered by Unallocated Reserves (months) 30 25 24 21 COUNTY OF GRANDE PRAIRIE - ASSESSMENT MODEL REVIEW IMPACTS REPORT Municipal Impacts Based on the assessment model review scenarios provided by the Government of Alberta and financial data from the MFIS database, RMA’s models make the following municipal predictions. Due to the limits of data provided, we are unable to project past the first year of implementation. Because of the significant changes to the depreciation curves under most of the models, there will be increased impacts in the future as assets age. Scenario Tax Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Total Assessment Base Loss $-189,720,688 (-2%) $-254,693,317 (-3%) $-492,756,941 (-6%) $-637,210,655 (-7%) M&E Assessment Base Loss (%) -7% -7% -7% -7% LP Assessment Base Loss (%) -8% -12% -29% -39% M&E Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $-1,092,358 $-1,092,358 $-1,092,358 $-1,092,358 Linear Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $-1,515,543 $-2,408,657 $-5,681,079 $-7,666,740 Percent Loss of Total Revenue -2% -3% -6% -7% Municipal Response Options The response options below demonstrate how significant non-residential assessment and taxation is for rural municipalities. Even a modest reduction in oil and gas assessment may require municipalities to drastically increase tax rates or reduce expenses. In other words, changes to assessment have significant domino effects on rural municipalities. These illustrate hypothetical impacts that the changes may have on operations based on available data. These should not be seen as recommendations, as they are only provided for context. Potential Rural Municipality Response Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Residential Mill Rate Increase 15.6% 20.9% 40.4% 52.2% OR Non-Residential Mill Rate Increase (Excluding 5:1 limits) 4.1% 5.5% 11.3% 15.1% Tax capacity shortfall due to 5:1 ratio (includes tax capacity loss still required to achieve 5:1) $0 $0 $0 $0 OR Workforce Cuts to cover losses (% of total FTE’s) 7.9% 10.7% 20.6% 26.6% FTE’s at risk 19.91 26.73 51.72 66.88 OR Total Expense Reduction % (including capital infrastructure investment) 2.68% 3.60% 6.96% 9.00% OR Time shortfall can be covered by Unallocated Reserves (months) 3 2 1 1 MD OF GREENVIEW - ASSESSMENT MODEL REVIEW IMPACTS REPORT Municipal Impacts Based on the assessment model review scenarios provided by the Government of Alberta and financial data from the MFIS database, RMA’s models make the following municipal predictions. Due to the limits of data provided, we are unable to project past the first year of implementation. Because of the significant changes to the depreciation curves under most of the models, there will be increased impacts in the future as assets age. Scenario Tax Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Total Assessment Base Loss $1,844,854,368 (15%) $1,510,074,086 (12%) $-741,416,411 (-6%) $-1,755,481,940 (-14%) M&E Assessment Base Loss (%) -7% -7% -7% -7% LP Assessment Base Loss (%) 38% 32% -7% -25% M&E Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $-2,494,816 $-2,494,816 $-2,494,816 $-2,494,816 Linear Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $16,936,336 $14,315,676 $-3,308,992 $-11,247,097 Percent Loss of Total Revenue 13% 11% -5% -12% Municipal Response Options The response options below demonstrate how significant non-residential assessment and taxation is for rural municipalities. Even a modest reduction in oil and gas assessment may require municipalities to drastically increase tax rates or reduce expenses. In other words, changes to assessment have significant domino effects on rural municipalities. These illustrate hypothetical impacts that the changes may have on operations based on available data. These should not be seen as recommendations, as they are only provided for context. Potential Rural Municipality Response Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Residential Mill Rate Increase n/a n/a 273.3% 647.0% OR Non-Residential Mill Rate Increase (Excluding 5:1 limits) n/a n/a 6.9% 18.2% Tax capacity shortfall due to 5:1 ratio (includes tax capacity loss still required to achieve 5:1) $0 $0 $0 $0 OR Workforce Cuts to cover losses (% of total FTE’s) n/a n/a 42.0% 99.5% FTE’s at risk n/a n/a 56.33 133.37 OR Total Expense Reduction % (including capital infrastructure investment) n/a n/a 6.54% 15.49% OR Time shortfall can be covered by Unallocated Reserves (months) n/a n/a 2 1 KNEEHILL COUNTY - ASSESSMENT MODEL REVIEW IMPACTS REPORT Municipal Impacts Based on the assessment model review scenarios provided by the Government of Alberta and financial data from the MFIS database, RMA’s models make the following municipal predictions. Due to the limits of data provided, we are unable to project past the first year of implementation. Because of the significant changes to the depreciation curves under most of the models, there will be increased impacts in the future as assets age. Scenario Tax Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Total Assessment Base Loss $-250,352,299 (-12%) $-297,658,519 (-14%) $-351,676,578 (-17%) $-504,226,218 (-24%) M&E Assessment Base Loss (%) -23% -23% -23% -23% LP Assessment Base Loss (%) -18% -22% -27% -42% M&E Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $-932,815 $-932,815 $-932,815 $-932,815 Linear Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $-2,576,624 $-3,239,763 $-3,996,988 $-6,135,429 Percent Loss of Total Revenue -11% -13% -16% -22% Municipal Response Options The response options below demonstrate how significant non-residential assessment and taxation is for rural municipalities. Even a modest reduction in oil and gas assessment may require municipalities to drastically increase tax rates or reduce expenses. In other words, changes to assessment have significant domino effects on rural municipalities. These illustrate hypothetical impacts that the changes may have on operations based on available data. These should not be seen as recommendations, as they are only provided for context. Potential Rural Municipality Response Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Residential Mill Rate Increase 190.6% 226.6% 267.7% 383.8% OR Non-Residential Mill Rate Increase (Excluding 5:1 limits) 20.3% 25.1% 31.1% 51.5% Tax capacity shortfall due to 5:1 ratio (includes tax capacity loss still required to achieve 5:1) $2,680,088 $3,377,094 $4,172,993 $6,420,649 OR Workforce Cuts to cover losses (% of total FTE’s) 43.6% 51.8% 61.2% 87.7% FTE’s at risk 33.54 39.88 47.12 67.56 OR Total Expense Reduction % (including capital infrastructure investment) 13.13% 15.61% 18.44% 26.44% OR Time shortfall can be covered by Unallocated Reserves (months) 29 25 21 15 LAC STE. ANNE COUNTY - ASSESSMENT MODEL REVIEW IMPACTS REPORT Municipal Impacts Based on the assessment model review scenarios provided by the Government of Alberta and financial data from the MFIS database, RMA’s models make the following municipal predictions. Due to the limits of data provided, we are unable to project past the first year of implementation. Because of the significant changes to the depreciation curves under most of the models, there will be increased impacts in the future as assets age. Scenario Tax Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Total Assessment Base Loss $-69,066,199 (-3%) $-74,652,414 (-4%) $-80,680,971 (-4%) $-102,181,337 (-5%) M&E Assessment Base Loss (%) -14% -14% -14% -14% LP Assessment Base Loss (%) -22% -25% -27% -35% M&E Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $-180,030 $-180,030 $-180,030 $-180,030 Linear Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $-1,139,963 $-1,246,727 $-1,361,944 $-1,772,859 Percent Loss of Total Revenue -5% -6% -6% -8% Municipal Response Options The response options below demonstrate how significant non-residential assessment and taxation is for rural municipalities. Even a modest reduction in oil and gas assessment may require municipalities to drastically increase tax rates or reduce expenses. In other words, changes to assessment have significant domino effects on rural municipalities. These illustrate hypothetical impacts that the changes may have on operations based on available data. These should not be seen as recommendations, as they are only provided for context. Potential Rural Municipality Response Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Residential Mill Rate Increase 17.1% 18.5% 20.0% 25.3% OR Non-Residential Mill Rate Increase (Excluding 5:1 limits) 21.8% 24.0% 26.5% 36.1% Tax capacity shortfall due to 5:1 ratio (includes tax capacity loss still required to achieve 5:1) $18,125 $149,325 $290,914 $795,882 OR Workforce Cuts to cover losses (% of total FTE’s) 16.8% 18.2% 19.7% 24.9% FTE’s at risk 12.46 13.47 14.56 18.44 OR Total Expense Reduction % (including capital infrastructure investment) 5.64% 6.10% 6.59% 8.35% OR Time shortfall can be covered by Unallocated Reserves (months) 0 0 0 0 LACOMBE COUNTY - ASSESSMENT MODEL REVIEW IMPACTS REPORT Municipal Impacts Based on the assessment model review scenarios provided by the Government of Alberta and financial data from the MFIS database, RMA’s models make the following municipal predictions. Due to the limits of data provided, we are unable to project past the first year of implementation. Because of the significant changes to the depreciation curves under most of the models, there will be increased impacts in the future as assets age. Scenario Tax Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Total Assessment Base Loss $-163,929,417 (-2%) $-205,583,671 (-3%) $-276,701,147 (-4%) $-365,817,191 (-5%) M&E Assessment Base Loss (%) -2% -2% -2% -2% LP Assessment Base Loss (%) -11% -16% -24% -34% M&E Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $-358,754 $-358,754 $-358,754 $-358,754 Linear Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $-536,793 $-764,350 $-1,152,865 $-1,639,706 Percent Loss of Total Revenue -2% -3% -4% -5% Municipal Response Options The response options below demonstrate how significant non-residential assessment and taxation is for rural municipalities. Even a modest reduction in oil and gas assessment may require municipalities to drastically increase tax rates or reduce expenses. In other words, changes to assessment have significant domino effects on rural municipalities. These illustrate hypothetical impacts that the changes may have on operations based on available data. These should not be seen as recommendations, as they are only provided for context. Potential Rural Municipality Response Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Residential Mill Rate Increase 17.5% 22.0% 29.6% 39.1% OR Non-Residential Mill Rate Increase (Excluding 5:1 limits) 3.6% 4.5% 6.2% 8.4% Tax capacity shortfall due to 5:1 ratio (includes tax capacity loss still required to achieve 5:1) $0 $0 $0 $0 OR Workforce Cuts to cover losses (% of total FTE’s) 8.0% 10.1% 13.6% 17.9% FTE’s at risk 7.48 9.38 12.63 16.69 OR Total Expense Reduction % (including capital infrastructure investment) 1.85% 2.32% 3.13% 4.14% OR Time shortfall can be covered by Unallocated Reserves (months) 91 73 54 41 LAMONT COUNTY - ASSESSMENT MODEL REVIEW IMPACTS REPORT Municipal Impacts Based on the assessment model review scenarios provided by the Government of Alberta and financial data from the MFIS database, RMA’s models make the following municipal predictions. Due to the limits of data provided, we are unable to project past the first year of implementation. Because of the significant changes to the depreciation curves under most of the models, there will be increased impacts in the future as assets age. Scenario Tax Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Total Assessment Base Loss $-54,622,188 (-5%) $-64,542,700 (-5%) $-72,634,237 (-6%) $-102,778,672 (-9%) M&E Assessment Base Loss (%) -12% -12% -12% -12% LP Assessment Base Loss (%) -13% -16% -18% -27% M&E Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $-204,549 $-204,549 $-204,549 $-204,549 Linear Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $-821,567 $-1,007,931 $-1,159,936 $-1,726,221 Percent Loss of Total Revenue -5% -6% -7% -9% Municipal Response Options The response options below demonstrate how significant non-residential assessment and taxation is for rural municipalities. Even a modest reduction in oil and gas assessment may require municipalities to drastically increase tax rates or reduce expenses. In other words, changes to assessment have significant domino effects on rural municipalities. These illustrate hypothetical impacts that the changes may have on operations based on available data. These should not be seen as recommendations, as they are only provided for context. Potential Rural Municipality Response Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Residential Mill Rate Increase 43.3% 51.1% 57.5% 81.4% OR Non-Residential Mill Rate Increase (Excluding 5:1 limits) 9.4% 11.3% 12.9% 19.3% Tax capacity shortfall due to 5:1 ratio (includes tax capacity loss still required to achieve 5:1) $0 $0 $74,346 $729,423 OR Workforce Cuts to cover losses (% of total FTE’s) 15.0% 17.7% 19.9% 28.2% FTE’s at risk 7.05 8.33 9.37 13.26 OR Total Expense Reduction % (including capital infrastructure investment) 5.19% 6.13% 6.90% 9.76% OR Time shortfall can be covered by Unallocated Reserves (months) 0 0 0 0 LEDUC COUNTY - ASSESSMENT MODEL REVIEW IMPACTS REPORT Municipal Impacts Based on the assessment model review scenarios provided by the Government of Alberta and financial data from the MFIS database, RMA’s models make the following municipal predictions. Due to the limits of data provided, we are unable to project past the first year of implementation. Because of the significant changes to the depreciation curves under most of the models, there will be increased impacts in the future as assets age. Scenario Tax Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Total Assessment Base Loss $-104,957,698 (-1%) $-140,512,390 (-2%) $-147,884,722 (-2%) $-188,281,487 (-2%) M&E Assessment Base Loss (%) -14% -14% -14% -14% LP Assessment Base Loss (%) -6% -9% -10% -13% M&E Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $-137,482 $-137,482 $-137,482 $-137,482 Linear Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $-591,974 $-839,079 $-890,317 $-1,171,074 Percent Loss of Total Revenue -1% -1% -1% -1% Municipal Response Options The response options below demonstrate how significant non-residential assessment and taxation is for rural municipalities. Even a modest reduction in oil and gas assessment may require municipalities to drastically increase tax rates or reduce expenses. In other words, changes to assessment have significant domino effects on rural municipalities. These illustrate hypothetical impacts that the changes may have on operations based on available data. These should not be seen as recommendations, as they are only provided for context. Potential Rural Municipality Response Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Residential Mill Rate Increase 7.7% 10.2% 10.8% 13.7% OR Non-Residential Mill Rate Increase (Excluding 5:1 limits) 1.9% 2.6% 2.7% 3.5% Tax capacity shortfall due to 5:1 ratio (includes tax capacity loss still required to achieve 5:1) $0 $0 $0 $0 OR Workforce Cuts to cover losses (% of total FTE’s) 3.4% 4.5% 4.7% 6.0% FTE’s at risk 5.37 7.18 7.56 9.62 OR Total Expense Reduction % (including capital infrastructure investment) 1.01% 1.36% 1.43% 1.82% OR Time shortfall can be covered by Unallocated Reserves (months) 0 0 0 0 MD OF LESSER SLAVE RIVER - ASSESSMENT MODEL REVIEW IMPACTS REPORT Municipal Impacts Based on the assessment model review scenarios provided by the Government of Alberta and financial data from the MFIS database, RMA’s models make the following municipal predictions. Due to the limits of data provided, we are unable to project past the first year of implementation. Because of the significant changes to the depreciation curves under most of the models, there will be increased impacts in the future as assets age. Scenario Tax Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Total Assessment Base Loss $-186,474,156 (-12%) $-202,402,661 (-13%) $-211,156,166 (-13%) $-249,101,901 (-16%) M&E Assessment Base Loss (%) -5% -5% -5% -5% LP Assessment Base Loss (%) -36% -39% -41% -49% M&E Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $-211,579 $-211,579 $-211,579 $-211,579 Linear Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $-1,983,818 $-2,171,348 $-2,274,405 $-2,721,147 Percent Loss of Total Revenue -6% -7% -7% -9% Municipal Response Options The response options below demonstrate how significant non-residential assessment and taxation is for rural municipalities. Even a modest reduction in oil and gas assessment may require municipalities to drastically increase tax rates or reduce expenses. In other words, changes to assessment have significant domino effects on rural municipalities. These illustrate hypothetical impacts that the changes may have on operations based on available data. These should not be seen as recommendations, as they are only provided for context. Potential Rural Municipality Response Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Residential Mill Rate Increase 154.0% 167.1% 174.3% 205.7% OR Non-Residential Mill Rate Increase (Excluding 5:1 limits) 22.0% 24.3% 25.7% 31.7% Tax capacity shortfall due to 5:1 ratio (includes tax capacity loss still required to achieve 5:1) $890,075 $1,108,985 $1,229,286 $1,750,785 OR Workforce Cuts to cover losses (% of total FTE’s) 42.2% 45.8% 47.8% 56.4% FTE’s at risk 22.36 24.27 25.32 29.87 OR Total Expense Reduction % (including capital infrastructure investment) 9.79% 10.62% 11.08% 13.08% OR Time shortfall can be covered by Unallocated Reserves (months) 5 4 4 3 LETHBRIDGE COUNTY - ASSESSMENT MODEL REVIEW IMPACTS REPORT Municipal Impacts Based on the assessment model review scenarios provided by the Government of Alberta and financial data from the MFIS database, RMA’s models make the following municipal predictions. Due to the limits of data provided, we are unable to project past the first year of implementation. Because of the significant changes to the depreciation curves under most of the models, there will be increased impacts in the future as assets age. Scenario Tax Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Total Assessment Base Loss $-66,628,639 (-3%) $-75,316,451 (-4%) $-78,780,001 (-4%) $-89,943,452 (-5%) M&E Assessment Base Loss (%) -8% -8% -8% -8% LP Assessment Base Loss (%) -26% -30% -32% -37% M&E Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $-84,858 $-84,858 $-84,858 $-84,858 Linear Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $-522,442 $-601,629 $-633,198 $-734,949 Percent Loss of Total Revenue -3% -3% -3% -4% Municipal Response Options The response options below demonstrate how significant non-residential assessment and taxation is for rural municipalities. Even a modest reduction in oil and gas assessment may require municipalities to drastically increase tax rates or reduce expenses. In other words, changes to assessment have significant domino effects on rural municipalities. These illustrate hypothetical impacts that the changes may have on operations based on available data. These should not be seen as recommendations, as they are only provided for context. Potential Rural Municipality Response Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Residential Mill Rate Increase 10.6% 12.0% 12.5% 14.3% OR Non-Residential Mill Rate Increase (Excluding 5:1 limits) 9.8% 11.2% 11.8% 13.7% Tax capacity shortfall due to 5:1 ratio (includes tax capacity loss still required to achieve 5:1) $0 $0 $0 $0 OR Workforce Cuts to cover losses (% of total FTE’s) 6.4% 7.2% 7.6% 8.6% FTE’s at risk 4.09 4.62 4.83 5.52 OR Total Expense Reduction % (including capital infrastructure investment) 2.38% 2.69% 2.81% 3.21% OR Time shortfall can be covered by Unallocated Reserves (months) 53 47 45 39 COUNTY OF MINBURN - ASSESSMENT MODEL REVIEW IMPACTS REPORT Municipal Impacts Based on the assessment model review scenarios provided by the Government of Alberta and financial data from the MFIS database, RMA’s models make the following municipal predictions. Due to the limits of data provided, we are unable to project past the first year of implementation. Because of the significant changes to the depreciation curves under most of the models, there will be increased impacts in the future as assets age. Scenario Tax Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Total Assessment Base Loss $-100,927,128 (-12%) $-113,912,982 (-13%) $-120,333,714 (-14%) $-149,619,626 (-17%) M&E Assessment Base Loss (%) -4% -4% -4% -4% LP Assessment Base Loss (%) -33% -37% -39% -49% M&E Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $-91,752 $-91,752 $-91,752 $-91,752 Linear Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $-1,958,007 $-2,221,741 $-2,352,141 $-2,946,918 Percent Loss of Total Revenue -12% -14% -15% -18% Municipal Response Options The response options below demonstrate how significant non-residential assessment and taxation is for rural municipalities. Even a modest reduction in oil and gas assessment may require municipalities to drastically increase tax rates or reduce expenses. In other words, changes to assessment have significant domino effects on rural municipalities. These illustrate hypothetical impacts that the changes may have on operations based on available data. These should not be seen as recommendations, as they are only provided for context. Potential Rural Municipality Response Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Residential Mill Rate Increase 111.2% 125.5% 132.6% 164.9% OR Non-Residential Mill Rate Increase (Excluding 5:1 limits) 27.8% 32.6% 35.0% 47.6% Tax capacity shortfall due to 5:1 ratio (includes tax capacity loss still required to achieve 5:1) $1,155,474 $1,465,438 $1,618,697 $2,317,733 OR Workforce Cuts to cover losses (% of total FTE’s) 41.0% 46.3% 48.9% 60.8% FTE’s at risk 16.00 18.06 19.08 23.72 OR Total Expense Reduction % (including capital infrastructure investment) 13.25% 14.95% 15.80% 19.64% OR Time shortfall can be covered by Unallocated Reserves (months) 64 56 53 43 MOUNTAIN VIEW COUNTY - ASSESSMENT MODEL REVIEW IMPACTS REPORT Municipal Impacts Based on the assessment model review scenarios provided by the Government of Alberta and financial data from the MFIS database, RMA’s models make the following municipal predictions. Due to the limits of data provided, we are unable to project past the first year of implementation. Because of the significant changes to the depreciation curves under most of the models, there will be increased impacts in the future as assets age. Scenario Tax Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Total Assessment Base Loss $-313,341,765 (-7%) $-351,344,295 (-8%) $-583,909,335 (-13%) $-704,368,752 (-15%) M&E Assessment Base Loss (%) -14% -14% -14% -14% LP Assessment Base Loss (%) -18% -21% -39% -48% M&E Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $-776,077 $-776,077 $-776,077 $-776,077 Linear Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $-2,451,343 $-2,842,769 $-5,238,189 $-6,478,921 Percent Loss of Total Revenue -7% -8% -13% -16% Municipal Response Options The response options below demonstrate how significant non-residential assessment and taxation is for rural municipalities. Even a modest reduction in oil and gas assessment may require municipalities to drastically increase tax rates or reduce expenses. In other words, changes to assessment have significant domino effects on rural municipalities. These illustrate hypothetical impacts that the changes may have on operations based on available data. These should not be seen as recommendations, as they are only provided for context. Potential Rural Municipality Response Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Residential Mill Rate Increase 41.9% 47.0% 78.1% 94.3% OR Non-Residential Mill Rate Increase (Excluding 5:1 limits) 17.1% 19.6% 37.5% 49.0% Tax capacity shortfall due to 5:1 ratio (includes tax capacity loss still required to achieve 5:1) $0 $0 $0 $743,056 OR Workforce Cuts to cover losses (% of total FTE’s) 30.3% 34.0% 56.5% 68.1% FTE’s at risk 28.79 32.28 53.65 64.72 OR Total Expense Reduction % (including capital infrastructure investment) 9.28% 10.40% 17.29% 20.86% OR Time shortfall can be covered by Unallocated Reserves (months) 0 0 0 0 COUNTY OF NEWELL - ASSESSMENT MODEL REVIEW IMPACTS REPORT Municipal Impacts Based on the assessment model review scenarios provided by the Government of Alberta and financial data from the MFIS database, RMA’s models make the following municipal predictions. Due to the limits of data provided, we are unable to project past the first year of implementation. Because of the significant changes to the depreciation curves under most of the models, there will be increased impacts in the future as assets age. Scenario Tax Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Total Assessment Base Loss $-812,374,539 (-19%) $-1,024,151,055 (-24%) $-1,046,699,317 (-24%) $-1,318,195,689 (-31%) M&E Assessment Base Loss (%) -27% -27% -27% -27% LP Assessment Base Loss (%) -28% -37% -38% -49% M&E Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $-1,227,134 $-1,227,134 $-1,227,134 $-1,227,134 Linear Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $-5,342,864 $-7,055,586 $-7,237,943 $-9,433,642 Percent Loss of Total Revenue -18% -22% -23% -29% Municipal Response Options The response options below demonstrate how significant non-residential assessment and taxation is for rural municipalities. Even a modest reduction in oil and gas assessment may require municipalities to drastically increase tax rates or reduce expenses. In other words, changes to assessment have significant domino effects on rural municipalities. These illustrate hypothetical impacts that the changes may have on operations based on available data. These should not be seen as recommendations, as they are only provided for context. Potential Rural Municipality Response Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Residential Mill Rate Increase 162.8% 205.2% 209.7% 264.1% OR Non-Residential Mill Rate Increase (Excluding 5:1 limits) 32.1% 44.2% 45.6% 65.2% Tax capacity shortfall due to 5:1 ratio (includes tax capacity loss still required to achieve 5:1) $0 $0 $0 $0 OR Workforce Cuts to cover losses (% of total FTE’s) 90.6% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% FTE’s at risk 57.05 63.00 63.00 63.00 OR Total Expense Reduction % (including capital infrastructure investment) 22.59% 28.47% 29.10% 36.65% OR Time shortfall can be covered by Unallocated Reserves (months) 5 4 4 3 COUNTY OF NORTHERN LIGHTS - ASSESSMENT MODEL REVIEW IMPACTS REPORT Municipal Impacts Based on the assessment model review scenarios provided by the Government of Alberta and financial data from the MFIS database, RMA’s models make the following municipal predictions. Due to the limits of data provided, we are unable to project past the first year of implementation. Because of the significant changes to the depreciation curves under most of the models, there will be increased impacts in the future as assets age. Scenario Tax Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Total Assessment Base Loss $-204,154,904 (-15%) $-214,232,109 (-16%) $-221,507,791 (-16%) $-250,104,747 (-19%) M&E Assessment Base Loss (%) -3% -3% -3% -3% LP Assessment Base Loss (%) -39% -41% -42% -48% M&E Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $-106,177 $-106,177 $-106,177 $-106,177 Linear Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $-2,753,890 $-2,895,065 $-2,996,992 $-3,397,615 Percent Loss of Total Revenue -9% -10% -10% -12% Municipal Response Options The response options below demonstrate how significant non-residential assessment and taxation is for rural municipalities. Even a modest reduction in oil and gas assessment may require municipalities to drastically increase tax rates or reduce expenses. In other words, changes to assessment have significant domino effects on rural municipalities. These illustrate hypothetical impacts that the changes may have on operations based on available data. These should not be seen as recommendations, as they are only provided for context. Potential Rural Municipality Response Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Residential Mill Rate Increase 105.9% 111.1% 114.9% 129.8% OR Non-Residential Mill Rate Increase (Excluding 5:1 limits) 28.4% 30.2% 31.6% 37.2% Tax capacity shortfall due to 5:1 ratio (includes tax capacity loss still required to achieve 5:1) $0 $0 $0 $0 OR Workforce Cuts to cover losses (% of total FTE’s) 77.9% 81.7% 84.5% 95.4% FTE’s at risk 25.70 26.97 27.89 31.49 OR Total Expense Reduction % (including capital infrastructure investment) 16.08% 16.87% 17.45% 19.70% OR Time shortfall can be covered by Unallocated Reserves (months) 19 18 17 15 NORTHERN SUNRISE COUNTY - ASSESSMENT MODEL REVIEW IMPACTS REPORT Municipal Impacts Based on the assessment model review scenarios provided by the Government of Alberta and financial data from the MFIS database, RMA’s models make the following municipal predictions. Due to the limits of data provided, we are unable to project past the first year of implementation. Because of the significant changes to the depreciation curves under most of the models, there will be increased impacts in the future as assets age. Scenario Tax Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Total Assessment Base Loss $-205,007,084 (-9%) $-260,327,859 (-12%) $-281,069,616 (-13%) $-470,061,530 (-21%) M&E Assessment Base Loss (%) 0% 0% 0% 0% LP Assessment Base Loss (%) -18% -23% -25% -42% M&E Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $0 $0 $0 $0 Linear Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $-2,665,092 $-3,384,262 $-3,653,905 $-6,110,800 Percent Loss of Total Revenue -7% -9% -10% -17% Municipal Response Options The response options below demonstrate how significant non-residential assessment and taxation is for rural municipalities. Even a modest reduction in oil and gas assessment may require municipalities to drastically increase tax rates or reduce expenses. In other words, changes to assessment have significant domino effects on rural municipalities. These illustrate hypothetical impacts that the changes may have on operations based on available data. These should not be seen as recommendations, as they are only provided for context. Potential Rural Municipality Response Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Residential Mill Rate Increase 223.4% 283.6% 306.2% 512.1% OR Non-Residential Mill Rate Increase (Excluding 5:1 limits) 11.6% 15.2% 16.6% 31.3% Tax capacity shortfall due to 5:1 ratio (includes tax capacity loss still required to achieve 5:1) $0 $0 $0 $0 OR Workforce Cuts to cover losses (% of total FTE’s) 37.7% 47.8% 51.7% 86.4% FTE’s at risk 16.58 21.05 22.73 38.01 OR Total Expense Reduction % (including capital infrastructure investment) 8.53% 10.84% 11.70% 19.57% OR Time shortfall can be covered by Unallocated Reserves (months) 37 29 27 16 MD OF OPPORTUNITY - ASSESSMENT MODEL REVIEW IMPACTS REPORT Municipal Impacts Based on the assessment model review scenarios provided by the Government of Alberta and financial data from the MFIS database, RMA’s models make the following municipal predictions. Due to the limits of data provided, we are unable to project past the first year of implementation. Because of the significant changes to the depreciation curves under most of the models, there will be increased impacts in the future as assets age. Scenario Tax Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Total Assessment Base Loss $-791,557,048 (-28%) $-837,174,615 (-29%) $-889,426,616 (-31%) $-1,121,258,051 (-39%) M&E Assessment Base Loss (%) -8% -8% -8% -8% LP Assessment Base Loss (%) -40% -43% -46% -58% M&E Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $-668,684 $-668,684 $-668,684 $-668,684 Linear Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $-14,337,259 $-15,202,054 $-16,192,621 $-20,587,566 Percent Loss of Total Revenue -21% -22% -23% -29% Municipal Response Options The response options below demonstrate how significant non-residential assessment and taxation is for rural municipalities. Even a modest reduction in oil and gas assessment may require municipalities to drastically increase tax rates or reduce expenses. In other words, changes to assessment have significant domino effects on rural municipalities. These illustrate hypothetical impacts that the changes may have on operations based on available data. These should not be seen as recommendations, as they are only provided for context. Potential Rural Municipality Response Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Residential Mill Rate Increase 1557.2% 1646.9% 1749.7% 2205.8% OR Non-Residential Mill Rate Increase (Excluding 5:1 limits) 44.2% 48.0% 52.5% 76.8% Tax capacity shortfall due to 5:1 ratio (includes tax capacity loss still required to achieve 5:1) $20,338,105 $21,071,504 $21,911,565 $25,638,745 OR Workforce Cuts to cover losses (% of total FTE’s) 51.2% 54.1% 57.5% 72.5% FTE’s at risk 132.53 140.17 148.92 187.74 OR Total Expense Reduction % (including capital infrastructure investment) 21.51% 22.75% 24.17% 30.46% OR Time shortfall can be covered by Unallocated Reserves (months) 18 17 16 13 COUNTY OF PAINTEARTH - ASSESSMENT MODEL REVIEW IMPACTS REPORT Municipal Impacts Based on the assessment model review scenarios provided by the Government of Alberta and financial data from the MFIS database, RMA’s models make the following municipal predictions. Due to the limits of data provided, we are unable to project past the first year of implementation. Because of the significant changes to the depreciation curves under most of the models, there will be increased impacts in the future as assets age. Scenario Tax Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Total Assessment Base Loss $-90,642,585 (-8%) $-112,320,168 (-10%) $-114,921,672 (-10%) $-150,621,203 (-13%) M&E Assessment Base Loss (%) -19% -19% -19% -19% LP Assessment Base Loss (%) -9% -13% -13% -18% M&E Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $-391,518 $-391,518 $-391,518 $-391,518 Linear Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $-878,912 $-1,182,741 $-1,219,203 $-1,719,561 Percent Loss of Total Revenue -8% -10% -10% -13% Municipal Response Options The response options below demonstrate how significant non-residential assessment and taxation is for rural municipalities. Even a modest reduction in oil and gas assessment may require municipalities to drastically increase tax rates or reduce expenses. In other words, changes to assessment have significant domino effects on rural municipalities. These illustrate hypothetical impacts that the changes may have on operations based on available data. These should not be seen as recommendations, as they are only provided for context. Potential Rural Municipality Response Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Residential Mill Rate Increase 119.3% 147.8% 151.2% 198.2% OR Non-Residential Mill Rate Increase (Excluding 5:1 limits) 11.1% 14.1% 14.5% 19.9% Tax capacity shortfall due to 5:1 ratio (includes tax capacity loss still required to achieve 5:1) $0 $0 $0 $0 OR Workforce Cuts to cover losses (% of total FTE’s) 26.1% 32.3% 33.1% 43.3% FTE’s at risk 10.43 12.92 13.22 17.33 OR Total Expense Reduction % (including capital infrastructure investment) 9.25% 11.47% 11.73% 15.38% OR Time shortfall can be covered by Unallocated Reserves (months) 7 5 5 4 PARKLAND COUNTY - ASSESSMENT MODEL REVIEW IMPACTS REPORT Municipal Impacts Based on the assessment model review scenarios provided by the Government of Alberta and financial data from the MFIS database, RMA’s models make the following municipal predictions. Due to the limits of data provided, we are unable to project past the first year of implementation. Because of the significant changes to the depreciation curves under most of the models, there will be increased impacts in the future as assets age. Scenario Tax Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Total Assessment Base Loss $-43,281,121 (-0%) $-57,184,041 (-1%) $-59,978,960 (-1%) $-75,861,774 (-1%) M&E Assessment Base Loss (%) -5% -5% -5% -5% LP Assessment Base Loss (%) -2% -2% -3% -3% M&E Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $-102,681 $-102,681 $-102,681 $-102,681 Linear Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $-244,663 $-356,238 $-378,668 $-506,132 Percent Loss of Total Revenue -0% -0% -1% -1% Municipal Response Options The response options below demonstrate how significant non-residential assessment and taxation is for rural municipalities. Even a modest reduction in oil and gas assessment may require municipalities to drastically increase tax rates or reduce expenses. In other words, changes to assessment have significant domino effects on rural municipalities. These illustrate hypothetical impacts that the changes may have on operations based on available data. These should not be seen as recommendations, as they are only provided for context. Potential Rural Municipality Response Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Residential Mill Rate Increase 1.1% 1.5% 1.6% 2.0% OR Non-Residential Mill Rate Increase (Excluding 5:1 limits) 1.0% 1.3% 1.4% 1.8% Tax capacity shortfall due to 5:1 ratio (includes tax capacity loss still required to achieve 5:1) $0 $0 $0 $0 OR Workforce Cuts to cover losses (% of total FTE’s) 1.0% 1.4% 1.4% 1.8% FTE’s at risk 2.57 3.39 3.56 4.50 OR Total Expense Reduction % (including capital infrastructure investment) 0.42% 0.55% 0.58% 0.73% OR Time shortfall can be covered by Unallocated Reserves (months) 32 24 23 18 MD OF PEACE - ASSESSMENT MODEL REVIEW IMPACTS REPORT Municipal Impacts Based on the assessment model review scenarios provided by the Government of Alberta and financial data from the MFIS database, RMA’s models make the following municipal predictions. Due to the limits of data provided, we are unable to project past the first year of implementation. Because of the significant changes to the depreciation curves under most of the models, there will be increased impacts in the future as assets age. Scenario Tax Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Total Assessment Base Loss $-15,672,773 (-5%) $-19,585,632 (-7%) $-19,812,082 (-7%) $-26,198,353 (-9%) M&E Assessment Base Loss (%) -17% -17% -17% -17% LP Assessment Base Loss (%) -24% -31% -31% -42% M&E Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $-19,892 $-19,892 $-19,892 $-19,892 Linear Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $-202,396 $-257,893 $-261,104 $-351,682 Percent Loss of Total Revenue -5% -6% -6% -8% Municipal Response Options The response options below demonstrate how significant non-residential assessment and taxation is for rural municipalities. Even a modest reduction in oil and gas assessment may require municipalities to drastically increase tax rates or reduce expenses. In other words, changes to assessment have significant domino effects on rural municipalities. These illustrate hypothetical impacts that the changes may have on operations based on available data. These should not be seen as recommendations, as they are only provided for context. Potential Rural Municipality Response Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Residential Mill Rate Increase 26.7% 33.3% 33.7% 44.6% OR Non-Residential Mill Rate Increase (Excluding 5:1 limits) 16.0% 20.8% 21.1% 29.9% Tax capacity shortfall due to 5:1 ratio (includes tax capacity loss still required to achieve 5:1) $0 $0 $0 $0 OR Workforce Cuts to cover losses (% of total FTE’s) 18.1% 22.6% 22.9% 30.3% FTE’s at risk 1.99 2.49 2.52 3.33 OR Total Expense Reduction % (including capital infrastructure investment) 5.58% 6.98% 7.06% 9.33% OR Time shortfall can be covered by Unallocated Reserves (months) 90 72 71 54 MD OF PINCHER CREEK - ASSESSMENT MODEL REVIEW IMPACTS REPORT Municipal Impacts Based on the assessment model review scenarios provided by the Government of Alberta and financial data from the MFIS database, RMA’s models make the following municipal predictions. Due to the limits of data provided, we are unable to project past the first year of implementation. Because of the significant changes to the depreciation curves under most of the models, there will be increased impacts in the future as assets age. Scenario Tax Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Total Assessment Base Loss $-108,443,209 (-7%) $-109,758,588 (-7%) $-113,587,184 (-7%) $-117,153,625 (-8%) M&E Assessment Base Loss (%) -6% -6% -6% -6% LP Assessment Base Loss (%) -15% -15% -15% -16% M&E Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $-93,433 $-93,433 $-93,433 $-93,433 Linear Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $-919,426 $-931,712 $-967,471 $-1,000,782 Percent Loss of Total Revenue -6% -6% -6% -6% Municipal Response Options The response options below demonstrate how significant non-residential assessment and taxation is for rural municipalities. Even a modest reduction in oil and gas assessment may require municipalities to drastically increase tax rates or reduce expenses. In other words, changes to assessment have significant domino effects on rural municipalities. These illustrate hypothetical impacts that the changes may have on operations based on available data. These should not be seen as recommendations, as they are only provided for context. Potential Rural Municipality Response Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Residential Mill Rate Increase 32.4% 32.8% 33.9% 35.0% OR Non-Residential Mill Rate Increase (Excluding 5:1 limits) 13.5% 13.7% 14.3% 14.8% Tax capacity shortfall due to 5:1 ratio (includes tax capacity loss still required to achieve 5:1) $0 $0 $0 $0 OR Workforce Cuts to cover losses (% of total FTE’s) 24.2% 24.5% 25.4% 26.2% FTE’s at risk 8.48 8.58 8.88 9.16 OR Total Expense Reduction % (including capital infrastructure investment) 7.21% 7.30% 7.55% 7.79% OR Time shortfall can be covered by Unallocated Reserves (months) 15 15 14 14 PONOKA COUNTY - ASSESSMENT MODEL REVIEW IMPACTS REPORT Municipal Impacts Based on the assessment model review scenarios provided by the Government of Alberta and financial data from the MFIS database, RMA’s models make the following municipal predictions. Due to the limits of data provided, we are unable to project past the first year of implementation. Because of the significant changes to the depreciation curves under most of the models, there will be increased impacts in the future as assets age. Scenario Tax Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Total Assessment Base Loss $-88,196,023 (-3%) $-137,670,786 (-4%) $-282,182,688 (-9%) $-385,739,799 (-12%) M&E Assessment Base Loss (%) -19% -19% -19% -19% LP Assessment Base Loss (%) 0% -6% -23% -35% M&E Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $-980,988 $-980,988 $-980,988 $-980,988 Linear Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $26,707 $-508,609 $-2,072,228 $-3,192,716 Percent Loss of Total Revenue -4% -6% -11% -16% Municipal Response Options The response options below demonstrate how significant non-residential assessment and taxation is for rural municipalities. Even a modest reduction in oil and gas assessment may require municipalities to drastically increase tax rates or reduce expenses. In other words, changes to assessment have significant domino effects on rural municipalities. These illustrate hypothetical impacts that the changes may have on operations based on available data. These should not be seen as recommendations, as they are only provided for context. Potential Rural Municipality Response Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Residential Mill Rate Increase 34.3% 53.5% 109.8% 150.0% OR Non-Residential Mill Rate Increase (Excluding 5:1 limits) 6.4% 10.4% 24.0% 36.0% Tax capacity shortfall due to 5:1 ratio (includes tax capacity loss still required to achieve 5:1) $6,560,426 $6,893,287 $7,865,548 $8,562,269 OR Workforce Cuts to cover losses (% of total FTE’s) 17.5% 27.3% 55.9% 76.5% FTE’s at risk 6.12 9.55 19.58 26.77 OR Total Expense Reduction % (including capital infrastructure investment) 4.70% 7.33% 15.03% 20.55% OR Time shortfall can be covered by Unallocated Reserves (months) 6 4 2 1 MD OF PROVOST - ASSESSMENT MODEL REVIEW IMPACTS REPORT Municipal Impacts Based on the assessment model review scenarios provided by the Government of Alberta and financial data from the MFIS database, RMA’s models make the following municipal predictions. Due to the limits of data provided, we are unable to project past the first year of implementation. Because of the significant changes to the depreciation curves under most of the models, there will be increased impacts in the future as assets age. Scenario Tax Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Total Assessment Base Loss $-331,540,999 (-13%) $-390,056,092 (-16%) $-407,304,030 (-16%) $-498,697,352 (-20%) M&E Assessment Base Loss (%) -5% -5% -5% -5% LP Assessment Base Loss (%) -28% -34% -36% -45% M&E Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $-503,112 $-503,112 $-503,112 $-503,112 Linear Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $-2,641,588 $-3,196,609 $-3,360,208 $-4,227,083 Percent Loss of Total Revenue -11% -13% -14% -17% Municipal Response Options The response options below demonstrate how significant non-residential assessment and taxation is for rural municipalities. Even a modest reduction in oil and gas assessment may require municipalities to drastically increase tax rates or reduce expenses. In other words, changes to assessment have significant domino effects on rural municipalities. These illustrate hypothetical impacts that the changes may have on operations based on available data. These should not be seen as recommendations, as they are only provided for context. Potential Rural Municipality Response Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Residential Mill Rate Increase 275.9% 324.6% 339.0% 415.0% OR Non-Residential Mill Rate Increase (Excluding 5:1 limits) 17.8% 21.6% 22.7% 29.3% Tax capacity shortfall due to 5:1 ratio (includes tax capacity loss still required to achieve 5:1) $0 $0 $0 $0 OR Workforce Cuts to cover losses (% of total FTE’s) 68.4% 80.5% 84.1% 100.0% FTE’s at risk 34.90 41.06 42.88 51.00 OR Total Expense Reduction % (including capital infrastructure investment) 16.42% 19.32% 20.18% 24.70% OR Time shortfall can be covered by Unallocated Reserves (months) 21 18 17 14 MD OF RANCHLAND - ASSESSMENT MODEL REVIEW IMPACTS REPORT Municipal Impacts Based on the assessment model review scenarios provided by the Government of Alberta and financial data from the MFIS database, RMA’s models make the following municipal predictions. Due to the limits of data provided, we are unable to project past the first year of implementation. Because of the significant changes to the depreciation curves under most of the models, there will be increased impacts in the future as assets age. Scenario Tax Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Total Assessment Base Loss $-81,641,009 (-45%) $-81,882,013 (-45%) $-83,699,258 (-46%) $-88,473,712 (-49%) M&E Assessment Base Loss (%) -0% -0% -0% -0% LP Assessment Base Loss (%) -62% -62% -63% -67% M&E Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $-513 $-513 $-513 $-513 Linear Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $-591,385 $-593,132 $-606,307 $-640,922 Percent Loss of Total Revenue -31% -32% -32% -34% Municipal Response Options The response options below demonstrate how significant non-residential assessment and taxation is for rural municipalities. Even a modest reduction in oil and gas assessment may require municipalities to drastically increase tax rates or reduce expenses. In other words, changes to assessment have significant domino effects on rural municipalities. These illustrate hypothetical impacts that the changes may have on operations based on available data. These should not be seen as recommendations, as they are only provided for context. Potential Rural Municipality Response Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Residential Mill Rate Increase 516.7% 518.2% 529.7% 559.9% OR Non-Residential Mill Rate Increase (Excluding 5:1 limits) 107.6% 108.3% 113.4% 128.2% Tax capacity shortfall due to 5:1 ratio (includes tax capacity loss still required to achieve 5:1) $19,605 $23,235 $50,609 $122,528 OR Workforce Cuts to cover losses (% of total FTE’s) 65.2% 65.3% 66.8% 70.6% FTE’s at risk 5.21 5.23 5.34 5.65 OR Total Expense Reduction % (including capital infrastructure investment) 28.29% 28.37% 29.00% 30.66% OR Time shortfall can be covered by Unallocated Reserves (months) 105 105 102 97 RED DEER COUNTY - ASSESSMENT MODEL REVIEW IMPACTS REPORT Municipal Impacts Based on the assessment model review scenarios provided by the Government of Alberta and financial data from the MFIS database, RMA’s models make the following municipal predictions. Due to the limits of data provided, we are unable to project past the first year of implementation. Because of the significant changes to the depreciation curves under most of the models, there will be increased impacts in the future as assets age. Scenario Tax Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Total Assessment Base Loss $-115,012,827 (-2%) $-164,018,190 (-3%) $-236,160,502 (-4%) $-363,419,043 (-6%) M&E Assessment Base Loss (%) -26% -26% -26% -26% LP Assessment Base Loss (%) -5% -10% -18% -32% M&E Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $-780,966 $-780,966 $-780,966 $-780,966 Linear Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $-478,022 $-1,014,459 $-1,804,165 $-3,197,200 Percent Loss of Total Revenue -2% -3% -4% -6% Municipal Response Options The response options below demonstrate how significant non-residential assessment and taxation is for rural municipalities. Even a modest reduction in oil and gas assessment may require municipalities to drastically increase tax rates or reduce expenses. In other words, changes to assessment have significant domino effects on rural municipalities. These illustrate hypothetical impacts that the changes may have on operations based on available data. These should not be seen as recommendations, as they are only provided for context. Potential Rural Municipality Response Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Residential Mill Rate Increase 9.4% 13.4% 19.3% 29.6% OR Non-Residential Mill Rate Increase (Excluding 5:1 limits) 4.5% 6.6% 9.7% 15.8% Tax capacity shortfall due to 5:1 ratio (includes tax capacity loss still required to achieve 5:1) $0 $0 $0 $0 OR Workforce Cuts to cover losses (% of total FTE’s) 11.0% 15.6% 22.5% 34.7% FTE’s at risk 10.31 14.70 21.17 32.58 OR Total Expense Reduction % (including capital infrastructure investment) 1.84% 2.63% 3.78% 5.82% OR Time shortfall can be covered by Unallocated Reserves (months) 0 0 0 0 ROCKY VIEW COUNTY - ASSESSMENT MODEL REVIEW IMPACTS REPORT Municipal Impacts Based on the assessment model review scenarios provided by the Government of Alberta and financial data from the MFIS database, RMA’s models make the following municipal predictions. Due to the limits of data provided, we are unable to project past the first year of implementation. Because of the significant changes to the depreciation curves under most of the models, there will be increased impacts in the future as assets age. Scenario Tax Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Total Assessment Base Loss $-198,413,675 (-1%) $-219,414,360 (-1%) $-310,757,847 (-2%) $-389,400,732 (-2%) M&E Assessment Base Loss (%) -3% -3% -3% -3% LP Assessment Base Loss (%) -14% -16% -23% -29% M&E Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $-105,355 $-105,355 $-105,355 $-105,355 Linear Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $-1,091,992 $-1,218,723 $-1,769,944 $-2,244,522 Percent Loss of Total Revenue -1% -1% -2% -2% Municipal Response Options The response options below demonstrate how significant non-residential assessment and taxation is for rural municipalities. Even a modest reduction in oil and gas assessment may require municipalities to drastically increase tax rates or reduce expenses. In other words, changes to assessment have significant domino effects on rural municipalities. These illustrate hypothetical impacts that the changes may have on operations based on available data. These should not be seen as recommendations, as they are only provided for context. Potential Rural Municipality Response Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Residential Mill Rate Increase 3.5% 3.9% 5.5% 6.9% OR Non-Residential Mill Rate Increase (Excluding 5:1 limits) 3.9% 4.3% 6.3% 8.0% Tax capacity shortfall due to 5:1 ratio (includes tax capacity loss still required to achieve 5:1) $0 $0 $0 $0 OR Workforce Cuts to cover losses (% of total FTE’s) 3.9% 4.3% 6.1% 7.7% FTE’s at risk 11.79 13.04 18.47 23.15 OR Total Expense Reduction % (including capital infrastructure investment) 1.51% 1.67% 2.36% 2.96% OR Time shortfall can be covered by Unallocated Reserves (months) 7 7 5 4 SADDLE HILLS COUNTY - ASSESSMENT MODEL REVIEW IMPACTS REPORT Municipal Impacts Based on the assessment model review scenarios provided by the Government of Alberta and financial data from the MFIS database, RMA’s models make the following municipal predictions. Due to the limits of data provided, we are unable to project past the first year of implementation. Because of the significant changes to the depreciation curves under most of the models, there will be increased impacts in the future as assets age. Scenario Tax Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Total Assessment Base Loss $383,777,629 (14%) $291,265,493 (11%) $-176,980,359 (-6%) $-395,386,363 (-15%) M&E Assessment Base Loss (%) 0% 0% 0% 0% LP Assessment Base Loss (%) 27% 20% -12% -27% M&E Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $0 $0 $0 $0 Linear Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $4,835,598 $3,669,945 $-2,229,953 $-4,981,868 Percent Loss of Total Revenue 12% 9% -5% -12% Municipal Response Options The response options below demonstrate how significant non-residential assessment and taxation is for rural municipalities. Even a modest reduction in oil and gas assessment may require municipalities to drastically increase tax rates or reduce expenses. In other words, changes to assessment have significant domino effects on rural municipalities. These illustrate hypothetical impacts that the changes may have on operations based on available data. These should not be seen as recommendations, as they are only provided for context. Potential Rural Municipality Response Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Residential Mill Rate Increase n/a n/a 328.1% 733.1% OR Non-Residential Mill Rate Increase (Excluding 5:1 limits) n/a n/a 7.5% 18.3% Tax capacity shortfall due to 5:1 ratio (includes tax capacity loss still required to achieve 5:1) $0 $0 $0 $0 OR Workforce Cuts to cover losses (% of total FTE’s) n/a n/a 28.1% 62.8% FTE’s at risk n/a n/a 19.40 43.34 OR Total Expense Reduction % (including capital infrastructure investment) n/a n/a 7.84% 17.51% OR Time shortfall can be covered by Unallocated Reserves (months) 0 0 0 0 SMOKY LAKE COUNTY - ASSESSMENT MODEL REVIEW IMPACTS REPORT Municipal Impacts Based on the assessment model review scenarios provided by the Government of Alberta and financial data from the MFIS database, RMA’s models make the following municipal predictions. Due to the limits of data provided, we are unable to project past the first year of implementation. Because of the significant changes to the depreciation curves under most of the models, there will be increased impacts in the future as assets age. Scenario Tax Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Total Assessment Base Loss $-110,018,495 (-16%) $-114,406,873 (-17%) $-118,593,717 (-17%) $-135,128,601 (-20%) M&E Assessment Base Loss (%) -15% -15% -15% -15% LP Assessment Base Loss (%) -41% -43% -45% -51% M&E Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $-162,868 $-162,868 $-162,868 $-162,868 Linear Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $-2,031,550 $-2,119,080 $-2,202,590 $-2,532,394 Percent Loss of Total Revenue -25% -26% -27% -31% Municipal Response Options The response options below demonstrate how significant non-residential assessment and taxation is for rural municipalities. Even a modest reduction in oil and gas assessment may require municipalities to drastically increase tax rates or reduce expenses. In other words, changes to assessment have significant domino effects on rural municipalities. These illustrate hypothetical impacts that the changes may have on operations based on available data. These should not be seen as recommendations, as they are only provided for context. Potential Rural Municipality Response Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Residential Mill Rate Increase 109.5% 113.8% 118.0% 134.4% OR Non-Residential Mill Rate Increase (Excluding 5:1 limits) 48.2% 51.1% 54.0% 66.5% Tax capacity shortfall due to 5:1 ratio (includes tax capacity loss still required to achieve 5:1) $828,760 $957,180 $1,079,703 $1,563,574 OR Workforce Cuts to cover losses (% of total FTE’s) 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% FTE’s at risk 62.00 62.00 62.00 62.00 OR Total Expense Reduction % (including capital infrastructure investment) 208.67% 216.99% 224.93% 256.30% OR Time shortfall can be covered by Unallocated Reserves (months) 1 1 1 1 MD OF SMOKY RIVER - ASSESSMENT MODEL REVIEW IMPACTS REPORT Municipal Impacts Based on the assessment model review scenarios provided by the Government of Alberta and financial data from the MFIS database, RMA’s models make the following municipal predictions. Due to the limits of data provided, we are unable to project past the first year of implementation. Because of the significant changes to the depreciation curves under most of the models, there will be increased impacts in the future as assets age. Scenario Tax Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Total Assessment Base Loss $21,163,834 (4%) $3,963,313 (1%) $1,994,257 (0%) $-43,979,531 (-8%) M&E Assessment Base Loss (%) -11% -11% -11% -11% LP Assessment Base Loss (%) 21% 9% 8% -23% M&E Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $-160,238 $-160,238 $-160,238 $-160,238 Linear Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $518,076 $227,249 $193,957 $-583,368 Percent Loss of Total Revenue 3% 1% 0% -6% Municipal Response Options The response options below demonstrate how significant non-residential assessment and taxation is for rural municipalities. Even a modest reduction in oil and gas assessment may require municipalities to drastically increase tax rates or reduce expenses. In other words, changes to assessment have significant domino effects on rural municipalities. These illustrate hypothetical impacts that the changes may have on operations based on available data. These should not be seen as recommendations, as they are only provided for context. Potential Rural Municipality Response Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Residential Mill Rate Increase n/a n/a n/a 58.6% OR Non-Residential Mill Rate Increase (Excluding 5:1 limits) n/a n/a n/a 16.8% Tax capacity shortfall due to 5:1 ratio (includes tax capacity loss still required to achieve 5:1) $0 $0 $0 $0 OR Workforce Cuts to cover losses (% of total FTE’s) n/a n/a n/a 21.9% FTE’s at risk n/a n/a n/a 7.33 OR Total Expense Reduction % (including capital infrastructure investment) n/a n/a n/a 6.32% OR Time shortfall can be covered by Unallocated Reserves (months) n/a n/a n/a 11 MD OF SPIRIT RIVER - ASSESSMENT MODEL REVIEW IMPACTS REPORT Municipal Impacts Based on the assessment model review scenarios provided by the Government of Alberta and financial data from the MFIS database, RMA’s models make the following municipal predictions. Due to the limits of data provided, we are unable to project past the first year of implementation. Because of the significant changes to the depreciation curves under most of the models, there will be increased impacts in the future as assets age. Scenario Tax Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Total Assessment Base Loss $-14,872,139 (-6%) $-16,911,315 (-7%) $-17,459,098 (-8%) $-19,907,347 (-9%) M&E Assessment Base Loss (%) 0% 0% 0% 0% LP Assessment Base Loss (%) -32% -36% -38% -43% M&E Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $0 $0 $0 $0 Linear Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $-230,920 $-262,582 $-271,087 $-309,101 Percent Loss of Total Revenue -6% -7% -7% -8% Municipal Response Options The response options below demonstrate how significant non-residential assessment and taxation is for rural municipalities. Even a modest reduction in oil and gas assessment may require municipalities to drastically increase tax rates or reduce expenses. In other words, changes to assessment have significant domino effects on rural municipalities. These illustrate hypothetical impacts that the changes may have on operations based on available data. These should not be seen as recommendations, as they are only provided for context. Potential Rural Municipality Response Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Residential Mill Rate Increase 33.1% 37.7% 38.9% 44.4% OR Non-Residential Mill Rate Increase (Excluding 5:1 limits) 10.6% 12.2% 12.7% 14.7% Tax capacity shortfall due to 5:1 ratio (includes tax capacity loss still required to achieve 5:1) $0 $0 $0 $0 OR Workforce Cuts to cover losses (% of total FTE’s) 24.7% 28.1% 29.0% 33.0% FTE’s at risk 2.71 3.09 3.19 3.63 OR Total Expense Reduction % (including capital infrastructure investment) 5.63% 6.40% 6.61% 7.54% OR Time shortfall can be covered by Unallocated Reserves (months) 0 0 0 0 COUNTY OF ST. PAUL - ASSESSMENT MODEL REVIEW IMPACTS REPORT Municipal Impacts Based on the assessment model review scenarios provided by the Government of Alberta and financial data from the MFIS database, RMA’s models make the following municipal predictions. Due to the limits of data provided, we are unable to project past the first year of implementation. Because of the significant changes to the depreciation curves under most of the models, there will be increased impacts in the future as assets age. Scenario Tax Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Total Assessment Base Loss $-104,911,663 (-6%) $-124,229,595 (-7%) $-137,802,763 (-7%) $-192,034,278 (-10%) M&E Assessment Base Loss (%) -2% -2% -2% -2% LP Assessment Base Loss (%) -23% -28% -31% -44% M&E Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $-125,748 $-125,748 $-125,748 $-125,748 Linear Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $-1,852,613 $-2,216,899 $-2,472,854 $-3,495,519 Percent Loss of Total Revenue -5% -6% -7% -9% Municipal Response Options The response options below demonstrate how significant non-residential assessment and taxation is for rural municipalities. Even a modest reduction in oil and gas assessment may require municipalities to drastically increase tax rates or reduce expenses. In other words, changes to assessment have significant domino effects on rural municipalities. These illustrate hypothetical impacts that the changes may have on operations based on available data. These should not be seen as recommendations, as they are only provided for context. Potential Rural Municipality Response Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Residential Mill Rate Increase 49.0% 58.0% 64.4% 89.7% OR Non-Residential Mill Rate Increase (Excluding 5:1 limits) 12.5% 15.1% 17.1% 25.5% Tax capacity shortfall due to 5:1 ratio (includes tax capacity loss still required to achieve 5:1) $0 $64,835 $361,322 $1,545,934 OR Workforce Cuts to cover losses (% of total FTE’s) 22.6% 26.8% 29.7% 41.4% FTE’s at risk 16.27 19.27 21.37 29.78 OR Total Expense Reduction % (including capital infrastructure investment) 7.36% 8.71% 9.66% 13.47% OR Time shortfall can be covered by Unallocated Reserves (months) 41 34 31 22 STARLAND COUNTY - ASSESSMENT MODEL REVIEW IMPACTS REPORT Municipal Impacts Based on the assessment model review scenarios provided by the Government of Alberta and financial data from the MFIS database, RMA’s models make the following municipal predictions. Due to the limits of data provided, we are unable to project past the first year of implementation. Because of the significant changes to the depreciation curves under most of the models, there will be increased impacts in the future as assets age. Scenario Tax Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Total Assessment Base Loss $-145,947,036 (-19%) $-169,024,949 (-22%) $-172,332,208 (-23%) $-210,153,719 (-28%) M&E Assessment Base Loss (%) -30% -30% -30% -30% LP Assessment Base Loss (%) -29% -35% -36% -46% M&E Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $-642,734 $-642,734 $-642,734 $-642,734 Linear Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $-2,013,327 $-2,433,317 $-2,493,505 $-3,181,812 Percent Loss of Total Revenue -19% -22% -23% -27% Municipal Response Options The response options below demonstrate how significant non-residential assessment and taxation is for rural municipalities. Even a modest reduction in oil and gas assessment may require municipalities to drastically increase tax rates or reduce expenses. In other words, changes to assessment have significant domino effects on rural municipalities. These illustrate hypothetical impacts that the changes may have on operations based on available data. These should not be seen as recommendations, as they are only provided for context. Potential Rural Municipality Response Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Residential Mill Rate Increase 275.3% 318.8% 325.1% 396.4% OR Non-Residential Mill Rate Increase (Excluding 5:1 limits) 36.8% 45.3% 46.6% 63.3% Tax capacity shortfall due to 5:1 ratio (includes tax capacity loss still required to achieve 5:1) $1,040,190 $1,571,877 $1,648,073 $2,519,435 OR Workforce Cuts to cover losses (% of total FTE’s) 52.2% 60.5% 61.7% 75.2% FTE’s at risk 18.01 20.86 21.27 25.94 OR Total Expense Reduction % (including capital infrastructure investment) 13.17% 15.25% 15.55% 18.96% OR Time shortfall can be covered by Unallocated Reserves (months) 0 0 0 0 COUNTY OF STETTLER - ASSESSMENT MODEL REVIEW IMPACTS REPORT Municipal Impacts Based on the assessment model review scenarios provided by the Government of Alberta and financial data from the MFIS database, RMA’s models make the following municipal predictions. Due to the limits of data provided, we are unable to project past the first year of implementation. Because of the significant changes to the depreciation curves under most of the models, there will be increased impacts in the future as assets age. Scenario Tax Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Total Assessment Base Loss $-200,505,441 (-13%) $-223,870,501 (-15%) $-229,547,203 (-15%) $-276,003,762 (-18%) M&E Assessment Base Loss (%) -40% -40% -40% -40% LP Assessment Base Loss (%) -29% -34% -35% -45% M&E Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $-763,348 $-763,348 $-763,348 $-763,348 Linear Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $-1,909,830 $-2,221,338 $-2,297,021 $-2,916,389 Percent Loss of Total Revenue -12% -14% -14% -17% Municipal Response Options The response options below demonstrate how significant non-residential assessment and taxation is for rural municipalities. Even a modest reduction in oil and gas assessment may require municipalities to drastically increase tax rates or reduce expenses. In other words, changes to assessment have significant domino effects on rural municipalities. These illustrate hypothetical impacts that the changes may have on operations based on available data. These should not be seen as recommendations, as they are only provided for context. Potential Rural Municipality Response Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Residential Mill Rate Increase 79.3% 88.5% 90.8% 109.1% OR Non-Residential Mill Rate Increase (Excluding 5:1 limits) 38.4% 44.9% 46.6% 61.9% Tax capacity shortfall due to 5:1 ratio (includes tax capacity loss still required to achieve 5:1) $0 $0 $0 $790,987 OR Workforce Cuts to cover losses (% of total FTE’s) 37.0% 41.4% 42.4% 51.0% FTE’s at risk 21.49 23.99 24.60 29.58 OR Total Expense Reduction % (including capital infrastructure investment) 12.60% 14.07% 14.43% 17.35% OR Time shortfall can be covered by Unallocated Reserves (months) 30 27 26 22 STURGEON COUNTY - ASSESSMENT MODEL REVIEW IMPACTS REPORT Municipal Impacts Based on the assessment model review scenarios provided by the Government of Alberta and financial data from the MFIS database, RMA’s models make the following municipal predictions. Due to the limits of data provided, we are unable to project past the first year of implementation. Because of the significant changes to the depreciation curves under most of the models, there will be increased impacts in the future as assets age. Scenario Tax Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Total Assessment Base Loss $-62,877,568 (-1%) $-85,956,161 (-1%) $-95,301,131 (-1%) $-153,562,940 (-2%) M&E Assessment Base Loss (%) -1% -1% -1% -1% LP Assessment Base Loss (%) -6% -9% -10% -18% M&E Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $-133,000 $-133,000 $-133,000 $-133,000 Linear Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $-513,432 $-750,698 $-846,772 $-1,445,750 Percent Loss of Total Revenue -1% -1% -1% -2% Municipal Response Options The response options below demonstrate how significant non-residential assessment and taxation is for rural municipalities. Even a modest reduction in oil and gas assessment may require municipalities to drastically increase tax rates or reduce expenses. In other words, changes to assessment have significant domino effects on rural municipalities. These illustrate hypothetical impacts that the changes may have on operations based on available data. These should not be seen as recommendations, as they are only provided for context. Potential Rural Municipality Response Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Residential Mill Rate Increase 4.4% 6.1% 6.7% 10.8% OR Non-Residential Mill Rate Increase (Excluding 5:1 limits) 1.9% 2.6% 2.8% 4.7% Tax capacity shortfall due to 5:1 ratio (includes tax capacity loss still required to achieve 5:1) $0 $0 $0 $0 OR Workforce Cuts to cover losses (% of total FTE’s) 2.8% 3.9% 4.3% 6.9% FTE’s at risk 5.00 6.83 7.57 12.20 OR Total Expense Reduction % (including capital infrastructure investment) 1.13% 1.54% 1.71% 2.75% OR Time shortfall can be covered by Unallocated Reserves (months) 0 0 0 0 MD OF TABER - ASSESSMENT MODEL REVIEW IMPACTS REPORT Municipal Impacts Based on the assessment model review scenarios provided by the Government of Alberta and financial data from the MFIS database, RMA’s models make the following municipal predictions. Due to the limits of data provided, we are unable to project past the first year of implementation. Because of the significant changes to the depreciation curves under most of the models, there will be increased impacts in the future as assets age. Scenario Tax Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Total Assessment Base Loss $-340,596,975 (-16%) $-402,722,871 (-19%) $-407,253,114 (-19%) $-443,318,703 (-21%) M&E Assessment Base Loss (%) -31% -31% -31% -31% LP Assessment Base Loss (%) -32% -41% -41% -46% M&E Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $-925,819 $-925,819 $-925,819 $-925,819 Linear Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $-2,212,271 $-2,784,668 $-2,826,407 $-3,158,698 Percent Loss of Total Revenue -13% -15% -15% -17% Municipal Response Options The response options below demonstrate how significant non-residential assessment and taxation is for rural municipalities. Even a modest reduction in oil and gas assessment may require municipalities to drastically increase tax rates or reduce expenses. In other words, changes to assessment have significant domino effects on rural municipalities. These illustrate hypothetical impacts that the changes may have on operations based on available data. These should not be seen as recommendations, as they are only provided for context. Potential Rural Municipality Response Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Residential Mill Rate Increase 100.0% 118.2% 119.6% 130.1% OR Non-Residential Mill Rate Increase (Excluding 5:1 limits) 36.2% 45.8% 46.5% 52.8% Tax capacity shortfall due to 5:1 ratio (includes tax capacity loss still required to achieve 5:1) $0 $0 $0 $0 OR Workforce Cuts to cover losses (% of total FTE’s) 36.5% 43.1% 43.6% 47.5% FTE’s at risk 30.28 35.81 36.21 39.42 OR Total Expense Reduction % (including capital infrastructure investment) 13.49% 15.95% 16.13% 17.56% OR Time shortfall can be covered by Unallocated Reserves (months) 32 27 26 24 THORHILD COUNTY - ASSESSMENT MODEL REVIEW IMPACTS REPORT Municipal Impacts Based on the assessment model review scenarios provided by the Government of Alberta and financial data from the MFIS database, RMA’s models make the following municipal predictions. Due to the limits of data provided, we are unable to project past the first year of implementation. Because of the significant changes to the depreciation curves under most of the models, there will be increased impacts in the future as assets age. Scenario Tax Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Total Assessment Base Loss $-4,700,825 (-1%) $-12,976,868 (-2%) $-26,945,987 (-3%) $-66,345,145 (-8%) M&E Assessment Base Loss (%) -7% -7% -7% -7% LP Assessment Base Loss (%) -1% -3% -8% -20% M&E Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $-46,012 $-46,012 $-46,012 $-46,012 Linear Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $-60,623 $-248,360 $-565,241 $-1,458,988 Percent Loss of Total Revenue -0% -1% -3% -7% Municipal Response Options The response options below demonstrate how significant non-residential assessment and taxation is for rural municipalities. Even a modest reduction in oil and gas assessment may require municipalities to drastically increase tax rates or reduce expenses. In other words, changes to assessment have significant domino effects on rural municipalities. These illustrate hypothetical impacts that the changes may have on operations based on available data. These should not be seen as recommendations, as they are only provided for context. Potential Rural Municipality Response Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Residential Mill Rate Increase 5.4% 14.9% 30.9% 76.0% OR Non-Residential Mill Rate Increase (Excluding 5:1 limits) 1.2% 3.4% 7.3% 20.0% Tax capacity shortfall due to 5:1 ratio (includes tax capacity loss still required to achieve 5:1) $0 $0 $233,315 $1,189,367 OR Workforce Cuts to cover losses (% of total FTE’s) 1.6% 4.4% 9.1% 22.5% FTE’s at risk 1.05 2.90 6.02 14.83 OR Total Expense Reduction % (including capital infrastructure investment) 0.61% 1.68% 3.48% 8.57% OR Time shortfall can be covered by Unallocated Reserves (months) 137 50 24 10 COUNTY OF TWO HILLS - ASSESSMENT MODEL REVIEW IMPACTS REPORT Municipal Impacts Based on the assessment model review scenarios provided by the Government of Alberta and financial data from the MFIS database, RMA’s models make the following municipal predictions. Due to the limits of data provided, we are unable to project past the first year of implementation. Because of the significant changes to the depreciation curves under most of the models, there will be increased impacts in the future as assets age. Scenario Tax Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Total Assessment Base Loss $-69,610,585 (-11%) $-74,285,601 (-11%) $-76,986,957 (-12%) $-97,796,511 (-15%) M&E Assessment Base Loss (%) -11% -11% -11% -11% LP Assessment Base Loss (%) -38% -41% -43% -55% M&E Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $-118,501 $-118,501 $-118,501 $-118,501 Linear Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $-1,403,945 $-1,506,192 $-1,565,273 $-2,020,397 Percent Loss of Total Revenue -8% -9% -9% -12% Municipal Response Options The response options below demonstrate how significant non-residential assessment and taxation is for rural municipalities. Even a modest reduction in oil and gas assessment may require municipalities to drastically increase tax rates or reduce expenses. In other words, changes to assessment have significant domino effects on rural municipalities. These illustrate hypothetical impacts that the changes may have on operations based on available data. These should not be seen as recommendations, as they are only provided for context. Potential Rural Municipality Response Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Residential Mill Rate Increase 78.3% 83.6% 86.6% 110.1% OR Non-Residential Mill Rate Increase (Excluding 5:1 limits) 40.6% 44.6% 47.0% 68.3% Tax capacity shortfall due to 5:1 ratio (includes tax capacity loss still required to achieve 5:1) $1,240,945 $1,355,254 $1,421,305 $1,930,119 OR Workforce Cuts to cover losses (% of total FTE’s) 30.5% 32.5% 33.7% 42.8% FTE’s at risk 15.24 16.26 16.85 21.41 OR Total Expense Reduction % (including capital infrastructure investment) 8.43% 8.99% 9.32% 11.84% OR Time shortfall can be covered by Unallocated Reserves (months) 54 51 49 39 COUNTY OF VERMILION RIVER - ASSESSMENT MODEL REVIEW IMPACTS REPORT Municipal Impacts Based on the assessment model review scenarios provided by the Government of Alberta and financial data from the MFIS database, RMA’s models make the following municipal predictions. Due to the limits of data provided, we are unable to project past the first year of implementation. Because of the significant changes to the depreciation curves under most of the models, there will be increased impacts in the future as assets age. Scenario Tax Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Total Assessment Base Loss $70,609,471 (3%) $-8,263,314 (-0%) $-31,575,821 (-1%) $-293,506,740 (-11%) M&E Assessment Base Loss (%) -4% -4% -4% -4% LP Assessment Base Loss (%) 10% 0% -2% -35% M&E Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $-170,643 $-170,643 $-170,643 $-170,643 Linear Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $1,149,629 $56,074 $-267,149 $-3,898,769 Percent Loss of Total Revenue 2% -0% -1% -9% Municipal Response Options The response options below demonstrate how significant non-residential assessment and taxation is for rural municipalities. Even a modest reduction in oil and gas assessment may require municipalities to drastically increase tax rates or reduce expenses. In other words, changes to assessment have significant domino effects on rural municipalities. These illustrate hypothetical impacts that the changes may have on operations based on available data. These should not be seen as recommendations, as they are only provided for context. Potential Rural Municipality Response Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Residential Mill Rate Increase n/a 3.1% 11.8% 109.6% OR Non-Residential Mill Rate Increase (Excluding 5:1 limits) n/a 0.6% 2.3% 25.9% Tax capacity shortfall due to 5:1 ratio (includes tax capacity loss still required to achieve 5:1) $0 $0 $0 $2,654,357 OR Workforce Cuts to cover losses (% of total FTE’s) n/a 1.3% 4.9% 45.2% FTE’s at risk n/a 1.09 4.18 38.86 OR Total Expense Reduction % (including capital infrastructure investment) n/a 0.28% 1.06% 9.83% OR Time shortfall can be covered by Unallocated Reserves (months) n/a 0 0 0 VULCAN COUNTY - ASSESSMENT MODEL REVIEW IMPACTS REPORT Municipal Impacts Based on the assessment model review scenarios provided by the Government of Alberta and financial data from the MFIS database, RMA’s models make the following municipal predictions. Due to the limits of data provided, we are unable to project past the first year of implementation. Because of the significant changes to the depreciation curves under most of the models, there will be increased impacts in the future as assets age. Scenario Tax Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Total Assessment Base Loss $-125,742,693 (-8%) $-157,168,850 (-10%) $-159,262,143 (-10%) $-192,338,854 (-12%) M&E Assessment Base Loss (%) -25% -25% -25% -25% LP Assessment Base Loss (%) -14% -19% -19% -23% M&E Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $-205,822 $-205,822 $-205,822 $-205,822 Linear Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $-943,466 $-1,230,701 $-1,249,833 $-1,552,155 Percent Loss of Total Revenue -6% -7% -7% -9% Municipal Response Options The response options below demonstrate how significant non-residential assessment and taxation is for rural municipalities. Even a modest reduction in oil and gas assessment may require municipalities to drastically increase tax rates or reduce expenses. In other words, changes to assessment have significant domino effects on rural municipalities. These illustrate hypothetical impacts that the changes may have on operations based on available data. These should not be seen as recommendations, as they are only provided for context. Potential Rural Municipality Response Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Residential Mill Rate Increase 30.1% 37.6% 38.1% 46.0% OR Non-Residential Mill Rate Increase (Excluding 5:1 limits) 16.4% 21.3% 21.7% 27.4% Tax capacity shortfall due to 5:1 ratio (includes tax capacity loss still required to achieve 5:1) $0 $0 $0 $0 OR Workforce Cuts to cover losses (% of total FTE’s) 19.7% 24.6% 25.0% 30.1% FTE’s at risk 10.44 13.06 13.23 15.98 OR Total Expense Reduction % (including capital infrastructure investment) 5.60% 7.00% 7.09% 8.56% OR Time shortfall can be covered by Unallocated Reserves (months) 15 12 11 9 MD OF WAINWRIGHT - ASSESSMENT MODEL REVIEW IMPACTS REPORT Municipal Impacts Based on the assessment model review scenarios provided by the Government of Alberta and financial data from the MFIS database, RMA’s models make the following municipal predictions. Due to the limits of data provided, we are unable to project past the first year of implementation. Because of the significant changes to the depreciation curves under most of the models, there will be increased impacts in the future as assets age. Scenario Tax Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Total Assessment Base Loss $-391,155,393 (-19%) $-450,097,878 (-22%) $-466,482,516 (-22%) $-529,809,749 (-25%) M&E Assessment Base Loss (%) -32% -32% -32% -32% LP Assessment Base Loss (%) -35% -41% -43% -50% M&E Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $-1,299,091 $-1,299,091 $-1,299,091 $-1,299,091 Linear Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $-5,680,686 $-6,732,455 $-7,024,823 $-8,154,834 Percent Loss of Total Revenue -22% -25% -26% -30% Municipal Response Options The response options below demonstrate how significant non-residential assessment and taxation is for rural municipalities. Even a modest reduction in oil and gas assessment may require municipalities to drastically increase tax rates or reduce expenses. In other words, changes to assessment have significant domino effects on rural municipalities. These illustrate hypothetical impacts that the changes may have on operations based on available data. These should not be seen as recommendations, as they are only provided for context. Potential Rural Municipality Response Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Residential Mill Rate Increase 290.1% 333.9% 346.0% 393.0% OR Non-Residential Mill Rate Increase (Excluding 5:1 limits) 37.4% 45.6% 48.0% 58.4% Tax capacity shortfall due to 5:1 ratio (includes tax capacity loss still required to achieve 5:1) $6,579,348 $7,719,231 $8,036,092 $9,260,771 OR Workforce Cuts to cover losses (% of total FTE’s) 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% FTE’s at risk 43.00 43.00 43.00 43.00 OR Total Expense Reduction % (including capital infrastructure investment) 21.89% 25.19% 26.11% 29.65% OR Time shortfall can be covered by Unallocated Reserves (months) 13 11 11 9 COUNTY OF WARNER - ASSESSMENT MODEL REVIEW IMPACTS REPORT Municipal Impacts Based on the assessment model review scenarios provided by the Government of Alberta and financial data from the MFIS database, RMA’s models make the following municipal predictions. Due to the limits of data provided, we are unable to project past the first year of implementation. Because of the significant changes to the depreciation curves under most of the models, there will be increased impacts in the future as assets age. Scenario Tax Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Total Assessment Base Loss $-26,753,225 (-4%) $-44,654,725 (-6%) $-47,555,183 (-7%) $-72,278,797 (-10%) M&E Assessment Base Loss (%) -27% -27% -27% -27% LP Assessment Base Loss (%) -9% -18% -19% -32% M&E Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $-111,326 $-111,326 $-111,326 $-111,326 Linear Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $-217,665 $-437,805 $-473,473 $-777,506 Percent Loss of Total Revenue -3% -5% -5% -8% Municipal Response Options The response options below demonstrate how significant non-residential assessment and taxation is for rural municipalities. Even a modest reduction in oil and gas assessment may require municipalities to drastically increase tax rates or reduce expenses. In other words, changes to assessment have significant domino effects on rural municipalities. These illustrate hypothetical impacts that the changes may have on operations based on available data. These should not be seen as recommendations, as they are only provided for context. Potential Rural Municipality Response Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Residential Mill Rate Increase 12.9% 21.6% 23.0% 34.9% OR Non-Residential Mill Rate Increase (Excluding 5:1 limits) 11.3% 20.3% 21.9% 37.6% Tax capacity shortfall due to 5:1 ratio (includes tax capacity loss still required to achieve 5:1) $0 $0 $0 $0 OR Workforce Cuts to cover losses (% of total FTE’s) 8.1% 13.6% 14.4% 21.9% FTE’s at risk 3.17 5.29 5.63 8.56 OR Total Expense Reduction % (including capital infrastructure investment) 3.15% 5.26% 5.60% 8.51% OR Time shortfall can be covered by Unallocated Reserves (months) 39 23 22 14 WESTLOCK COUNTY - ASSESSMENT MODEL REVIEW IMPACTS REPORT Municipal Impacts Based on the assessment model review scenarios provided by the Government of Alberta and financial data from the MFIS database, RMA’s models make the following municipal predictions. Due to the limits of data provided, we are unable to project past the first year of implementation. Because of the significant changes to the depreciation curves under most of the models, there will be increased impacts in the future as assets age. Scenario Tax Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Total Assessment Base Loss $-41,662,572 (-4%) $-44,405,069 (-4%) $-46,068,647 (-4%) $-54,249,047 (-5%) M&E Assessment Base Loss (%) -6% -6% -6% -6% LP Assessment Base Loss (%) -34% -36% -37% -44% M&E Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $-12,838 $-12,838 $-12,838 $-12,838 Linear Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $-1,028,076 $-1,096,596 $-1,138,159 $-1,342,542 Percent Loss of Total Revenue -6% -6% -6% -7% Municipal Response Options The response options below demonstrate how significant non-residential assessment and taxation is for rural municipalities. Even a modest reduction in oil and gas assessment may require municipalities to drastically increase tax rates or reduce expenses. In other words, changes to assessment have significant domino effects on rural municipalities. These illustrate hypothetical impacts that the changes may have on operations based on available data. These should not be seen as recommendations, as they are only provided for context. Potential Rural Municipality Response Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Residential Mill Rate Increase 24.1% 25.7% 26.6% 31.3% OR Non-Residential Mill Rate Increase (Excluding 5:1 limits) 31.2% 33.9% 35.6% 44.8% Tax capacity shortfall due to 5:1 ratio (includes tax capacity loss still required to achieve 5:1) $1,084,294 $1,153,878 $1,196,087 $1,403,646 OR Workforce Cuts to cover losses (% of total FTE’s) 21.4% 22.8% 23.6% 27.8% FTE’s at risk 9.98 10.64 11.04 13.00 OR Total Expense Reduction % (including capital infrastructure investment) 6.39% 6.81% 7.07% 8.32% OR Time shortfall can be covered by Unallocated Reserves (months) 10 9 9 8 COUNTY OF WETASKIWIN - ASSESSMENT MODEL REVIEW IMPACTS REPORT Municipal Impacts Based on the assessment model review scenarios provided by the Government of Alberta and financial data from the MFIS database, RMA’s models make the following municipal predictions. Due to the limits of data provided, we are unable to project past the first year of implementation. Because of the significant changes to the depreciation curves under most of the models, there will be increased impacts in the future as assets age. Scenario Tax Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Total Assessment Base Loss $-131,245,751 (-5%) $-180,650,001 (-6%) $-196,071,516 (-7%) $-261,636,866 (-9%) M&E Assessment Base Loss (%) -31% -31% -31% -31% LP Assessment Base Loss (%) -14% -23% -25% -37% M&E Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $-805,495 $-805,495 $-805,495 $-805,495 Linear Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $-1,091,006 $-1,804,897 $-2,027,738 $-2,975,158 Percent Loss of Total Revenue -5% -7% -8% -11% Municipal Response Options The response options below demonstrate how significant non-residential assessment and taxation is for rural municipalities. Even a modest reduction in oil and gas assessment may require municipalities to drastically increase tax rates or reduce expenses. In other words, changes to assessment have significant domino effects on rural municipalities. These illustrate hypothetical impacts that the changes may have on operations based on available data. These should not be seen as recommendations, as they are only provided for context. Potential Rural Municipality Response Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Residential Mill Rate Increase 35.5% 48.8% 53.0% 70.7% OR Non-Residential Mill Rate Increase (Excluding 5:1 limits) 18.3% 27.0% 30.0% 44.5% Tax capacity shortfall due to 5:1 ratio (includes tax capacity loss still required to achieve 5:1) $3,119,659 $3,760,777 $3,960,901 $4,811,740 OR Workforce Cuts to cover losses (% of total FTE’s) 19.2% 26.4% 28.7% 38.2% FTE’s at risk 14.58 20.07 21.78 29.07 OR Total Expense Reduction % (including capital infrastructure investment) 7.03% 9.67% 10.50% 14.01% OR Time shortfall can be covered by Unallocated Reserves (months) 0 0 0 0 WHEATLAND COUNTY - ASSESSMENT MODEL REVIEW IMPACTS REPORT Municipal Impacts Based on the assessment model review scenarios provided by the Government of Alberta and financial data from the MFIS database, RMA’s models make the following municipal predictions. Due to the limits of data provided, we are unable to project past the first year of implementation. Because of the significant changes to the depreciation curves under most of the models, there will be increased impacts in the future as assets age. Scenario Tax Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Total Assessment Base Loss $-460,272,656 (-11%) $-557,554,577 (-13%) $-576,413,879 (-14%) $-792,134,141 (-19%) M&E Assessment Base Loss (%) -18% -18% -18% -18% LP Assessment Base Loss (%) -22% -28% -30% -44% M&E Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $-1,162,458 $-1,162,458 $-1,162,458 $-1,162,458 Linear Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $-2,805,598 $-3,644,276 $-3,806,863 $-5,666,609 Percent Loss of Total Revenue -11% -14% -14% -19% Municipal Response Options The response options below demonstrate how significant non-residential assessment and taxation is for rural municipalities. Even a modest reduction in oil and gas assessment may require municipalities to drastically increase tax rates or reduce expenses. In other words, changes to assessment have significant domino effects on rural municipalities. These illustrate hypothetical impacts that the changes may have on operations based on available data. These should not be seen as recommendations, as they are only provided for context. Potential Rural Municipality Response Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Residential Mill Rate Increase 72.3% 87.6% 90.5% 124.4% OR Non-Residential Mill Rate Increase (Excluding 5:1 limits) 19.6% 24.7% 25.8% 39.2% Tax capacity shortfall due to 5:1 ratio (includes tax capacity loss still required to achieve 5:1) $0 $0 $0 $0 OR Workforce Cuts to cover losses (% of total FTE’s) 36.2% 43.9% 45.3% 62.3% FTE’s at risk 47.43 57.45 59.39 81.62 OR Total Expense Reduction % (including capital infrastructure investment) 10.63% 12.87% 13.31% 18.29% OR Time shortfall can be covered by Unallocated Reserves (months) 48 40 38 28 MD OF WILLOW CREEK - ASSESSMENT MODEL REVIEW IMPACTS REPORT Municipal Impacts Based on the assessment model review scenarios provided by the Government of Alberta and financial data from the MFIS database, RMA’s models make the following municipal predictions. Due to the limits of data provided, we are unable to project past the first year of implementation. Because of the significant changes to the depreciation curves under most of the models, there will be increased impacts in the future as assets age. Scenario Tax Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Total Assessment Base Loss $-89,155,295 (-6%) $-102,003,781 (-7%) $-110,166,630 (-7%) $-131,425,439 (-9%) M&E Assessment Base Loss (%) -32% -32% -32% -32% LP Assessment Base Loss (%) -11% -13% -15% -18% M&E Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $-152,352 $-152,352 $-152,352 $-152,352 Linear Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $-542,435 $-642,563 $-706,176 $-871,846 Percent Loss of Total Revenue -5% -6% -6% -7% Municipal Response Options The response options below demonstrate how significant non-residential assessment and taxation is for rural municipalities. Even a modest reduction in oil and gas assessment may require municipalities to drastically increase tax rates or reduce expenses. In other words, changes to assessment have significant domino effects on rural municipalities. These illustrate hypothetical impacts that the changes may have on operations based on available data. These should not be seen as recommendations, as they are only provided for context. Potential Rural Municipality Response Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Residential Mill Rate Increase 21.3% 24.3% 26.3% 31.4% OR Non-Residential Mill Rate Increase (Excluding 5:1 limits) 13.7% 16.0% 17.5% 21.6% Tax capacity shortfall due to 5:1 ratio (includes tax capacity loss still required to achieve 5:1) $0 $0 $0 $0 OR Workforce Cuts to cover losses (% of total FTE’s) 14.3% 16.3% 17.6% 21.0% FTE’s at risk 6.85 7.84 8.46 10.10 OR Total Expense Reduction % (including capital infrastructure investment) 4.26% 4.88% 5.27% 6.28% OR Time shortfall can be covered by Unallocated Reserves (months) 12 11 10 8 WOODLANDS COUNTY - ASSESSMENT MODEL REVIEW IMPACTS REPORT Municipal Impacts Based on the assessment model review scenarios provided by the Government of Alberta and financial data from the MFIS database, RMA’s models make the following municipal predictions. Due to the limits of data provided, we are unable to project past the first year of implementation. Because of the significant changes to the depreciation curves under most of the models, there will be increased impacts in the future as assets age. Scenario Tax Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Total Assessment Base Loss $-167,695,809 (-7%) $-191,163,133 (-8%) $-254,270,445 (-11%) $-326,453,449 (-14%) M&E Assessment Base Loss (%) -5% -5% -5% -5% LP Assessment Base Loss (%) -17% -20% -28% -37% M&E Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $-317,548 $-317,548 $-317,548 $-317,548 Linear Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $-1,421,860 $-1,665,272 $-2,319,846 $-3,068,557 Percent Loss of Total Revenue -7% -8% -11% -14% Municipal Response Options The response options below demonstrate how significant non-residential assessment and taxation is for rural municipalities. Even a modest reduction in oil and gas assessment may require municipalities to drastically increase tax rates or reduce expenses. In other words, changes to assessment have significant domino effects on rural municipalities. These illustrate hypothetical impacts that the changes may have on operations based on available data. These should not be seen as recommendations, as they are only provided for context. Potential Rural Municipality Response Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Residential Mill Rate Increase 181.1% 206.5% 274.6% 352.6% OR Non-Residential Mill Rate Increase (Excluding 5:1 limits) 11.3% 13.1% 18.2% 24.7% Tax capacity shortfall due to 5:1 ratio (includes tax capacity loss still required to achieve 5:1) $12,818,601 $12,892,130 $13,089,862 $13,316,030 OR Workforce Cuts to cover losses (% of total FTE’s) 26.2% 29.8% 39.7% 50.9% FTE’s at risk 15.83 18.05 24.00 30.82 OR Total Expense Reduction % (including capital infrastructure investment) 6.43% 7.33% 9.74% 12.51% OR Time shortfall can be covered by Unallocated Reserves (months) 0 0 0 0 YELLOWHEAD COUNTY - ASSESSMENT MODEL REVIEW IMPACTS REPORT Municipal Impacts Based on the assessment model review scenarios provided by the Government of Alberta and financial data from the MFIS database, RMA’s models make the following municipal predictions. Due to the limits of data provided, we are unable to project past the first year of implementation. Because of the significant changes to the depreciation curves under most of the models, there will be increased impacts in the future as assets age. Scenario Tax Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Total Assessment Base Loss $131,270,426 (1%) $-101,067,145 (-1%) $-1,495,636,950 (-16%) $-2,175,007,683 (-23%) M&E Assessment Base Loss (%) -13% -13% -13% -13% LP Assessment Base Loss (%) 10% 5% -25% -40% M&E Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $-2,254,428 $-2,254,428 $-2,254,428 $-2,254,428 Linear Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $3,104,365 $1,600,049 $-7,429,373 $-11,828,094 Percent Loss of Total Revenue 1% -1% -14% -21% Municipal Response Options The response options below demonstrate how significant non-residential assessment and taxation is for rural municipalities. Even a modest reduction in oil and gas assessment may require municipalities to drastically increase tax rates or reduce expenses. In other words, changes to assessment have significant domino effects on rural municipalities. These illustrate hypothetical impacts that the changes may have on operations based on available data. These should not be seen as recommendations, as they are only provided for context. Potential Rural Municipality Response Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Residential Mill Rate Increase n/a 16.3% 240.7% 350.0% OR Non-Residential Mill Rate Increase (Excluding 5:1 limits) n/a 1.3% 22.5% 36.5% Tax capacity shortfall due to 5:1 ratio (includes tax capacity loss still required to achieve 5:1) $0 $0 $0 $0 OR Workforce Cuts to cover losses (% of total FTE’s) n/a 6.1% 89.8% 100.0% FTE’s at risk n/a 5.76 85.28 95.00 OR Total Expense Reduction % (including capital infrastructure investment) n/a 1.17% 17.32% 25.19% OR Time shortfall can be covered by Unallocated Reserves (months) n/a 311 21 14 SPECIAL AREAS BOARD - ASSESSMENT MODEL REVIEW IMPACTS REPORT Municipal Impacts Based on the assessment model review scenarios provided by the Government of Alberta and financial data from the MFIS database, RMA’s models make the following municipal predictions. Due to the limits of data provided, we are unable to project past the first year of implementation. Because of the significant changes to the depreciation curves under most of the models, there will be increased impacts in the future as assets age. Scenario Tax Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Total Assessment Base Loss $-868,645,549 (-21%) $-1,074,661,241 (-26%) $-1,100,823,321 (-27%) $-1,327,733,334 (-33%) M&E Assessment Base Loss (%) -27% -27% -27% -27% LP Assessment Base Loss (%) -27% -34% -35% -43% M&E Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $-1,077,078 $-1,077,078 $-1,077,078 $-1,077,078 Linear Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $-5,976,324 $-7,649,171 $-7,861,607 $-9,704,117 Percent Loss of Total Revenue -13% -16% -16% -19% Municipal Response Options The response options below demonstrate how significant non-residential assessment and taxation is for rural municipalities. Even a modest reduction in oil and gas assessment may require municipalities to drastically increase tax rates or reduce expenses. In other words, changes to assessment have significant domino effects on rural municipalities. These illustrate hypothetical impacts that the changes may have on operations based on available data. These should not be seen as recommendations, as they are only provided for context. Potential Rural Municipality Response Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Residential Mill Rate Increase 529.1% 654.5% 670.5% 808.7% OR Non-Residential Mill Rate Increase (Excluding 5:1 limits) 33.1% 44.5% 46.1% 61.4% Tax capacity shortfall due to 5:1 ratio (includes tax capacity loss still required to achieve 5:1) $0 $564,705 $865,512 $3,474,483 OR Workforce Cuts to cover losses (% of total FTE’s) 39.0% 48.3% 49.4% 59.6% FTE’s at risk 74.91 92.68 94.93 114.50 OR Total Expense Reduction % (including capital infrastructure investment) 15.38% 19.03% 19.50% 23.52% OR Time shortfall can be covered by Unallocated Reserves (months) 42 34 33 27 MUN. OF CROWSNEST PASS - ASSESSMENT MODEL REVIEW IMPACTS REPORT Municipal Impacts Based on the assessment model review scenarios provided by the Government of Alberta and financial data from the MFIS database, RMA’s models make the following municipal predictions. Due to the limits of data provided, we are unable to project past the first year of implementation. Because of the significant changes to the depreciation curves under most of the models, there will be increased impacts in the future as assets age. Scenario Tax Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Total Assessment Base Loss $-29,858,684 (-3%) $-29,858,684 (-3%) $-29,861,020 (-3%) $-30,578,107 (-3%) M&E Assessment Base Loss (%) 0% 0% 0% 0% LP Assessment Base Loss (%) -54% -54% -54% -55% M&E Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $0 $0 $0 $0 Linear Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $-530,095 $-530,095 $-530,136 $-542,867 Percent Loss of Total Revenue -3% -3% -3% -3% Municipal Response Options The response options below demonstrate how significant non-residential assessment and taxation is for rural municipalities. Even a modest reduction in oil and gas assessment may require municipalities to drastically increase tax rates or reduce expenses. In other words, changes to assessment have significant domino effects on rural municipalities. These illustrate hypothetical impacts that the changes may have on operations based on available data. These should not be seen as recommendations, as they are only provided for context. Potential Rural Municipality Response Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Residential Mill Rate Increase 8.8% 8.8% 8.8% 9.0% OR Non-Residential Mill Rate Increase (Excluding 5:1 limits) 25.4% 25.4% 25.4% 26.2% Tax capacity shortfall due to 5:1 ratio (includes tax capacity loss still required to achieve 5:1) $0 $0 $0 $0 OR Workforce Cuts to cover losses (% of total FTE’s) 7.8% 7.8% 7.8% 8.0% FTE’s at risk 4.54 4.54 4.55 4.65 OR Total Expense Reduction % (including capital infrastructure investment) 3.07% 3.07% 3.07% 3.14% OR Time shortfall can be covered by Unallocated Reserves (months) 60 60 60 58 LAC LA BICHE COUNTY - ASSESSMENT MODEL REVIEW IMPACTS REPORT Municipal Impacts Based on the assessment model review scenarios provided by the Government of Alberta and financial data from the MFIS database, RMA’s models make the following municipal predictions. Due to the limits of data provided, we are unable to project past the first year of implementation. Because of the significant changes to the depreciation curves under most of the models, there will be increased impacts in the future as assets age. Scenario Tax Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Total Assessment Base Loss $21,285,855 (0%) $-52,555,986 (-1%) $-120,557,574 (-3%) $-320,718,043 (-7%) M&E Assessment Base Loss (%) -0% -0% -0% -0% LP Assessment Base Loss (%) 2% -4% -9% -24% M&E Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $-121,752 $-121,752 $-121,752 $-121,752 Linear Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $512,661 $-843,423 $-2,092,251 $-5,768,138 Percent Loss of Total Revenue 0% -1% -3% -7% Municipal Response Options The response options below demonstrate how significant non-residential assessment and taxation is for rural municipalities. Even a modest reduction in oil and gas assessment may require municipalities to drastically increase tax rates or reduce expenses. In other words, changes to assessment have significant domino effects on rural municipalities. These illustrate hypothetical impacts that the changes may have on operations based on available data. These should not be seen as recommendations, as they are only provided for context. Potential Rural Municipality Response Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Residential Mill Rate Increase n/a 24.5% 56.2% 149.6% OR Non-Residential Mill Rate Increase (Excluding 5:1 limits) n/a 1.6% 3.7% 10.5% Tax capacity shortfall due to 5:1 ratio (includes tax capacity loss still required to achieve 5:1) $10,727,619 $11,858,537 $12,900,008 $15,965,546 OR Workforce Cuts to cover losses (% of total FTE’s) n/a 4.5% 10.4% 27.6% FTE’s at risk n/a 8.00 18.36 48.84 OR Total Expense Reduction % (including capital infrastructure investment) n/a 1.69% 3.87% 10.28% OR Time shortfall can be covered by Unallocated Reserves (months) n/a 63 27 10 MACKENZIE COUNTY - ASSESSMENT MODEL REVIEW IMPACTS REPORT Municipal Impacts Based on the assessment model review scenarios provided by the Government of Alberta and financial data from the MFIS database, RMA’s models make the following municipal predictions. Due to the limits of data provided, we are unable to project past the first year of implementation. Because of the significant changes to the depreciation curves under most of the models, there will be increased impacts in the future as assets age. Scenario Tax Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Total Assessment Base Loss $-273,247,156 (-11%) $-301,342,309 (-12%) $-318,178,208 (-13%) $-367,343,173 (-15%) M&E Assessment Base Loss (%) -7% -7% -7% -7% LP Assessment Base Loss (%) -31% -34% -36% -42% M&E Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $-320,969 $-320,969 $-320,969 $-320,969 Linear Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $-3,161,566 $-3,519,639 $-3,734,213 $-4,360,820 Percent Loss of Total Revenue -9% -10% -11% -12% Municipal Response Options The response options below demonstrate how significant non-residential assessment and taxation is for rural municipalities. Even a modest reduction in oil and gas assessment may require municipalities to drastically increase tax rates or reduce expenses. In other words, changes to assessment have significant domino effects on rural municipalities. These illustrate hypothetical impacts that the changes may have on operations based on available data. These should not be seen as recommendations, as they are only provided for context. Potential Rural Municipality Response Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Residential Mill Rate Increase 51.3% 56.6% 59.8% 69.0% OR Non-Residential Mill Rate Increase (Excluding 5:1 limits) 22.9% 25.8% 27.7% 33.4% Tax capacity shortfall due to 5:1 ratio (includes tax capacity loss still required to achieve 5:1) $0 $0 $0 $0 OR Workforce Cuts to cover losses (% of total FTE’s) 36.7% 40.5% 42.7% 49.3% FTE’s at risk 29.36 32.38 34.18 39.47 OR Total Expense Reduction % (including capital infrastructure investment) 9.12% 10.06% 10.62% 12.26% OR Time shortfall can be covered by Unallocated Reserves (months) 16 15 14 12 STRATHCONA COUNTY - ASSESSMENT MODEL REVIEW IMPACTS REPORT Municipal Impacts Based on the assessment model review scenarios provided by the Government of Alberta and financial data from the MFIS database, RMA’s models make the following municipal predictions. Due to the limits of data provided, we are unable to project past the first year of implementation. Because of the significant changes to the depreciation curves under most of the models, there will be increased impacts in the future as assets age. Scenario Tax Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Total Assessment Base Loss $-126,999,723 (-0%) $-137,268,181 (-0%) $-156,087,903 (-0%) $-205,555,746 (-1%) M&E Assessment Base Loss (%) -0% -0% -0% -0% LP Assessment Base Loss (%) -14% -15% -17% -23% M&E Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $-94,617 $-94,617 $-94,617 $-94,617 Linear Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $-1,019,438 $-1,109,514 $-1,274,602 $-1,708,539 Percent Loss of Total Revenue -0% -0% -0% -0% Municipal Response Options The response options below demonstrate how significant non-residential assessment and taxation is for rural municipalities. Even a modest reduction in oil and gas assessment may require municipalities to drastically increase tax rates or reduce expenses. In other words, changes to assessment have significant domino effects on rural municipalities. These illustrate hypothetical impacts that the changes may have on operations based on available data. These should not be seen as recommendations, as they are only provided for context. Potential Rural Municipality Response Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Residential Mill Rate Increase 1.5% 1.6% 1.8% 2.4% OR Non-Residential Mill Rate Increase (Excluding 5:1 limits) 0.8% 0.8% 1.0% 1.3% Tax capacity shortfall due to 5:1 ratio (includes tax capacity loss still required to achieve 5:1) $0 $0 $0 $0 OR Workforce Cuts to cover losses (% of total FTE’s) 0.7% 0.7% 0.8% 1.1% FTE’s at risk 10.90 11.78 13.39 17.64 OR Total Expense Reduction % (including capital infrastructure investment) 0.32% 0.34% 0.39% 0.52% OR Time shortfall can be covered by Unallocated Reserves (months) 0 0 0 0 RM OF WOOD BUFFALO- ASSESSMENT MODEL REVIEW IMPACTS REPORT Municipal Impacts Based on the assessment model review scenarios provided by the Government of Alberta and financial data from the MFIS database, RMA’s models make the following municipal predictions. Due to the limits of data provided, we are unable to project past the first year of implementation. Because of the significant changes to the depreciation curves under most of the models, there will be increased impacts in the future as assets age. Scenario Tax Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Total Assessment Base Loss $549,971,630 (1%) $276,811,435 (0%) $38,816,782 (0%) $-581,980,062 (-1%) M&E Assessment Base Loss (%) 0% 0% 0% 0% LP Assessment Base Loss (%) 16% 8% 1% -17% M&E Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $0 $0 $0 $0 Linear Tax $ Loss (2019 Mill Rate) $7,174,545 $3,611,088 $506,377 $-7,592,105 Percent Loss of Total Revenue 1% 0% 0% -1% Municipal Response Options The response options below demonstrate how significant non-residential assessment and taxation is for rural municipalities. Even a modest reduction in oil and gas assessment may require municipalities to drastically increase tax rates or reduce expenses. In other words, changes to assessment have significant domino effects on rural municipalities. These illustrate hypothetical impacts that the changes may have on operations based on available data. These should not be seen as recommendations, as they are only provided for context. Potential Rural Municipality Response Impacts Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Residential Mill Rate Increase n/a n/a n/a 34.4% OR Non-Residential Mill Rate Increase (Excluding 5:1 limits) n/a n/a n/a 1.2% Tax capacity shortfall due to 5:1 ratio (includes tax capacity loss still required to achieve 5:1) $243,275,699 $245,514,996 $247,466,015 $252,555,148 OR Workforce Cuts to cover losses (% of total FTE’s) n/a n/a n/a 3.0% FTE’s at risk n/a n/a n/a 40.07 OR Total Expense Reduction % (including capital infrastructure investment) n/a n/a n/a 1.30% OR Time shortfall can be covered by Unallocated Reserves (months) n/a n/a n/a 0