The following text may have been generated by Optical Character Recognition, with varying degrees of accuracy. Reader beware!

€ x I .g?sg%i“t 5 dn mss 01 e M xt +wo. â€" b es ; Ey e C > mugk 9 4e § 8 $ k s "u€ | ssm it S E. _‘ mixed responses || â€" ogt« _ ww :»~ K ; Met"s _ = | +. 5 t a_â€" _ â€" ie C 3 â€" C 4 s [ z: B â€" *3 E gtit. o s\ to MPAC news: _ ees: es ar 2l P P bâ€"=â€"==~la +3 /+ 38 f | > ~Sllue n ’!03\ we s pe:_= # ‘:â€"é\_ a oo . _ o( <les 3 s o n ce e e " Ees y (2§| y Bos Owen o o "f ‘h CA u w PB S. fâ€" x ; j Msecss~ > _'-5 ; chronicle@belinet.ca > < e 3~ 1 ' | eP A : en e e Co /. 12 [ F Taxpayers in Cramahe Township reéceived I ho E< } | 2 y 7 xaimilh ad L ‘¥@) revised property valuations from the Municipal | *.: e _ 9 | ceen CR P L lzS| Property Assessment Corporation (MPAC) in the ols â€":_ s t & * Li SSA )|| final week of September. The average 18â€"month ks * o ~< procl nc increases are almost 15 per cent. That has left many Em t 5 [ â€" * . h s -‘W landowners wondering about their tax bill in 2006. . | | 4 pPPS en en iteteenaannienretete Ammaminl The question of the impact on taxes was put to es 3 if ces â€" e Cramahe Township council at its October 4 meeting | | h\ is . 1 maes . & Am 4 held in the Castleton Town Hall. Members of council » | ‘ h M ) & ns § m 4 3 »\ were asked if they support reducing the township ‘ ‘ | *‘ j Mss . eR e 5 A * mill rate so people will not face huge tax increases j Tess i UUCEsy â€"_â€" Jms spalip on next year. | Heess s \",e o o SMifnnccmmimiinmmsind (Cé6LLorne CPASD C CSee MPAC, Page 3 [ s / 1j ABA p 23 5 & a> . i Ee L nmneneinnieamaet s s 0| n mPRle ‘moo Shnenitentes"_~~ ns nsmb ies (."1 cyC 4 R 1 \ 30e . es c _ _ e seses Katcpayers mneeting [b ie Sertrommmitcerae intiteatnier = s 1 k \“; ppmmast _ . oo en oo O sc 10 IOOK at aSs essments n es e oC > * .. es 3 " uces . (% L . s : ~** . se * Ls New property assessments will be the hot topic at _.; e e e h e e TSA > #0>. $ ‘fd the October 20 meeting of the Cramahe Ratepayers‘ * aivase " w m ... Audiidta n ts onl‘ infi msts . o txmce~ .c se Femmeal Caaiel| Association. ? a o enc t _':g latiss nstcatiidl The new property assessments just issued by the c as e inalke® \, a es _3’ Municipal Property Assessment Corporation (MPAC) e ~~ has: Aa + o msld | are concerning many ratepayers, Alan Slater of the \ T in ~a.. . sls e Cramahe group notes. ; j F_ / cS on {.‘.‘r . 1 "There are many reasons to object to this system, 2% : 3 ‘â€"';fi"“ 2yz‘ | including: Sss 2 on e eaae g + The high average increase, and the variations in a «B e % Warae@|| assessments between townships and even between | TW «Je . 1 . ooo h e e e neighbours. { * o ~â€" _ e l e C Asmes ie + The huge increases given to some properties, such | am Text 4t * * “‘"“gu“: A3H| as waterfront, although they use local services no | j * en tss gxD is2 _A ) more than others. ‘ se Je ao a ie ie l * o t B 3 + The increased assessments are seen by councils as Puoto sy Bos Owen | a perfect excuse to raise taxes by keeping the same MEMORIES SET IN STONE ntstct g f + The waste of $156â€"million a year on MPAC, which | The memory stone project is complete â€" maybe. Lenna Broatch, Doug Rutherford, Dougâ€"| adds absolutely nothing to the Ontario economy." _ 1 Denny and Bev Denny admire the 304 stones already laid at the front of Old St. Andrew‘s Anyone with concerns about the property assessâ€" Presbyterian Church. That was supposed to be the limit, but Mr. Rutherford has had 15 | ment system is urged to attend the Cramahe Ratepayâ€" ] more enguiries and is considering adding another block. The stones which have been laig | ers‘ meeting, 7:30 p.m. Thursday, October 20 at f will be blessed in a special ceremony on October 15 at 2 p.m. Everyone is welcome. Friendship House, 77 King St. East, Colborne. . _ | \ Cramahe sets new building record starts is one more than for the whole of last m refans.s year. ‘The 2004 total exceeded 2003 by 50 per With three months left in the year, It is likely that this month the township | Cramahe Township has set a new record _ will exceed the 2002 record number of perâ€" for construction starts. mits issued for a year. As of September 30 The September report issued by chief â€" there had been 118 permits. Only 11 are building officer Natalie Morozâ€"Cornell _ needed to set yet one more record. l gives the yearâ€"toâ€"date total as $9,494,546 Permits were granted for eight new | putting it 31 per cent higher than at the homes in September and one seasonal | | same time last year and $725,000 higher â€" dwelling. Value of those alone was $1.28â€" | than last year‘s recordâ€"setting yearâ€"end million. Six of the eight permits granted for total. single family dwellings were in rural |\ _ As of September 30, 46 singleâ€"family Cramahe, one was in the Colborne Creek dwellings had been issued permits comâ€" _ development owned by the Township and pared to 35 at this time last year. The 46 â€" the other was on Durham Street South. § â€"___qâ€"__â€"_______-â€"â€"____â€"â€"_â€"-_â€"â€"-_"_'â€"’â€"â€"= | &