Keep in mind that one property developing (and as a result, paying more in taxes than the previous iteration) doesn't mean the City collects more money. It just means the neighbours pay less. The amount the City collects remains the same, the burden of payment just shifts more to the more valued property. So, when the City says they want to increase taxes by X%, it means the overall amount they collect goes up by X%, but the distribution could vary wildly depending on how much a certain property value has changed compared to others year over year.
Also, most of the capital costs of new communities are paid by developers. For the portions of infrastructure that are not their responsibility to build, they contribute to it with offsite levies. I don't know if the City does the growth business cases process anymore (this current Council got rid of it, didn't like the "beauty pageant" aspect of it) so I am not sure if we will be able to see any updated analysis on the costs / payback period of these new communities.
I guess I just get frustrated / fed-up when I hear Councilor's pat themselvs on the back of how good of a job they did because they held tax increases at "inflation plus growth", a refrain we have heard for a long time. If that is the case, we can expect ever higher taxes as we continue to grow.
