“IPG’s “new focus will be more on the development of downtown.” Again, this smacks of an agenda that is narrowing IPG’s mandate before the Core Review process is allowed to unfold.”

Good Lord. Can we please try to differentiate who does what here.

Council decides on the focus of IPG. IPG is an operations arm of the City. Council sets the direction.

The core review is there to review City operations and whether the operations are functioning effectively and efficiently with respect to the directions set by Council as well as the standards required to meet any provincial and federal laws which municipalities have to abide by.

In addition, it should take a rough measure of those core services the City provides against those same services provided by other comparable sized cities.

I could not agree more with the notion that there was ONLY a select committee on business.

I guess that those businesses in the city who managed to get their voice heard by the Mayor specifically need to get some hugs and pats on the back for being here in the fist place. LOL.

I keep wonderting where the Chamber of Commerce is in all of this. Are these businesses saying that their Chamber is ineffective when it comes to representing them in the matter of dealing with the City?

Talk about the lack of other committees. Take a close look at the businesses represented on the business committee. Huge gaping holes as to representation of businesses in the City. They are already paying the lowest tax rates for businesses in BC or close to the lowest. And they want services which businesses get in communities where they pay the highest rates? Typical, isn’t it, from what we see from some posters on this site.

Now, should the committee’s report be incorporated into the core review? Of course!

Why? Well, if I were doing the report, it would be one of several examples of how the City takes “the pulse of the community”. How a City measures its effectiveness and efficiency is an important fucntion of a city and any modern service enterprise for that matter.

I know what I would say about it based on the information that I have seen. But, one would hope that a proper core review would have access to much more detailed information and be able to look much more deeply into why it was formed, how it was formed, and whether the recommendations are on track, especially as compared to the response from the City Manager who, in between the lines on several items seemed to say that the policy directions set by Council itself diverge from the recommendations, so it is Council that needs to review its policies in some cases if Council wants Administration to treat some issues differently.

As to whether “blinders” should be put on.

Yes in one sense. The review has to stop somewhere. One needs to specify the scope. Just the word “core” alone has a meaning in that respect. To me, and I suspect most others, it means that those services that HAVE to be provided by the laws of senior governments will/must be reviewed for the report to have any credibility.

Thus, for instance, the services of IPG would not fall under those core services requirements.

However, such services are commonly provided by larger municipalities and even regional districts these days.

So, I see that the list of what is a core service may be expanded by the City to include those services the City considers to be included in the core as opposed to optional services.

As an exsample, do we need to look at providing hockey rinks as part of the core services? Is providing hockey rinks a requirement by law? Or is providing hockey rinks a choice this City makes? And if so, does the City think that doing so is important enough that providing that service is a requirement and thus a core service?

In another sense, blinders need to be removed. This is a quality audit process. Once it has been established which services are to be audited, in part so that the process will not cost $1million, an auditor has to be left to do the work unfettered and undirected by the organization for which the audit is being done.

If the auditor cannot, in their professional opinion, state that they had access to anything they needed and were able to conduct an unbiased and undirected review, then the whole audit is useless.

The time to comment on the opinions and recommendations stated in the audit is after the audit is done. THAT is when the controversy and waffling, ande political rhetoric will start, depending on the audit outcome.

Peter stated: Why just have a “Select Committee on Business”…what about home owners who pay a huge portion of municipal taxes? What about workers at the pulp mills, sawmills, hospital, social service agencies, educational institutions, and other workplaces?”

We recently had fairly significant “Select Committee” that included all of these groups where everyone with an interest provided their input on the direction they would like the City of Prince George to move in over the next three years. They called it the municipal election…:)

Are you saying that those on the “Select Committee on Business” were not allowed to vote, so they had to use that forum?

Or are you saying that they need to have more than just one vote per person?

BTW, how do you figure a check mark here or there next to a person’s name allowed “everyone with an interest” to provide “their input on the direction they would like the City of Prince George to move in over the next three years”

Did your ballot have the option to comment?

I really thought you were heading towards the MyPG process. Everyone had access to that also and everyone was able to provide comments. Special interest groups – and the business community is one of those – were even able to set up special sessions to provide feedback.

Anybody else got an opinion on this article.

Gus GET A LIFE

I think we should have a core review process about why winters seem to be so long here. Just when you think it is on it’s way out, whammo, it comes back again. Pretty soon summer is going to be 2 months of rain and then back to winter. So much for global warming.

I think it’s a mistake to limit IPG’s focus to the downtown. Short of outlawing computers (and bringing back all the secretaries to the downtown), the best way to revitalize the downtown is to have the rest of the economy burning on full cylinders.

Without growth in the rest of the economy, we don’t need more lawyers, office workers, shops, restaurants, etc.

If IPG isn’t allowed to focus on the economy as a whole, then which group will?

“Why make these cuts before the process has even begun?”

Council instructed staff that tax increase would be limited to 3%, decisions HAD to be made to either cut staff or services. Waiting 12 months or more to complete and implement core review was not an option.

As for the positions cut, does the city really need a Community Events Co-ordinator,business development co-ordinator for CN center or community policing co-ordinator for the Hart that saw only a handful of people a month. Don’t get me started on THREE positions in environment, air fairies etc.

I would not ask why these positions were eliminated, but what took so long to do it!
The city is not immune to the economic hardships in the world and must act accordingly.

mattyc If you do not want to read someone’s post…learn to use the wheel on your mouse and scroll past or go play in the looney left sandbox you were promoting here on Friday.

This green Mayor appears a bit confused in the direction that Mayor Grenn wants us to go.

A Select Commitee of businse, IPG, Core Review, DBI and how many more organization will we have. Appears the Municipal Election was about exposure and some extra cash.
Cheers

Mr. Ewart, good work on this piece. Well-research, well-argued, and an overall excellent piece of journalism. Keep it up!

Lonesome Sparrow, that you think the job cuts had anything to do with saving money displays your ignorance of municipal government and fiscal prudence. Add up the severances paid out and the cost to contract out work now that the in-house expertise is lost and show me where the money has been saved. And then look at the cost to the community in the diminishment of service. It’s a clear lose-lose for this community and really unfortunate.

Gus, I was merely being facetious. That was the point of the :) at the end.

The city should concentrate on the services required by the taxpayer. Roads, sewers, water distribution, recreation facilities, bylaw enforcement, etc.
Instead we have a city in the downtown realestate busines assembling land for some unknown purpose. Everytime the city buys another downtown property we lose the tax dollars that would have been paid by the private owner. If downtown properties are such a good deal why are not others lined up to purchase. Have a look at other Cdn cities who have spent money trying to save the core. Thunder Bay has their Victoriaville. Looks real nice but is a financial bust with empty store fronts. Why, people do not wnat to shop downtown but want the specialty stores or big box retailers.
As for IPG, a nice idea, but really never going to attach major industry and good paying jobs. It might attract the odd call center who leave town after a few years when the freebies have run out.
if you want the average citizen to be proud of the city fix the roads, mow the dandelions, clean the curbs, and cut the weeds along the streets. Try the KISS principle.
As for the city workers don’t blame them. They do the best they can with the limited funds provided. You don’t see city trucks sitting outside Timmies like you do with other public servants.

Severance packages are short term pain as long as the positions do creep back in.

Some of the unions have a no lay off clause, so the city often has to “find” work to keep them busy. Cutting some of those positions and bring in contractors during peak times would be a net gain to the taxpayer.

The city’s quality engagement specialist and multi-media co-ordinator were laid off according to the Citizen. What did those people do and how is service diminished to the community now they are gone. Power point presentations not quite as pretty…fine with me. Quality engagement specialist?????your guess is as good as mine but have not noticed any change in the quality of life since that person has gone to greener pastures.

They are not going to fill a half a dozen part time gardeners…I can put up with a few weeds in the flower beds if it means a few more feet of new pavement on Tabor. Are they going to have a contractor sneak into the Timmy’s line up to see if you are idling….I hope not…net saving to taxpayer.

The city’s payroll has grown even though the population has shrunk, time for them to trim a little fat, lots there without getting anywhere near the bone.

So if what you say is true Gus then when we pay our high house taxes we should thank the business lobbyists who are protecting their own profit margin, donating to big campaigns that get “their” representatives in office, and ultimately getting tax breaks thanks to favourable decisions at city hall?

If so the result is us average working stiffs get stuck paying business’s share of the bill? Maybe it is time for an “average taxpayers association” to lobby on behalf of us poor home owners that are struggling just to make ends met. Sounds like it would be a good select committee to form.

We aren’t doing well at electing a council and mayor. Perhaps the answer is to vote on block. Think about it and the possabilities. I think we could have a meeting with the mayor and council and lobby them to take into consideration some of the things that we require as homeowners and constituents of the city.

We aren’t having any luck electing council and mayor of late. Perhaps we as tax payers should form an interest group and make an appointment to make our presentation to the mayor and council. Goodness knows the buisnesses around town do it all of the time. We could make suggestions as to instead of giving property tax breaks to the wealthy have them help paved our streets for instance.

I couldn’t be more in agreement Surefire. There should be a “Citizens Advocacy Committee” which is scheduled to meet on a regular basis with council the bring forward issues of concern that the TAXPAYERS feel need addressing. It appears that right now the people who have the Mayor’s ear are those who show up at the photo ops and write the Rah-Rah letters and posts. The ones who turn out to the restaurant openings and get the free meals and pay lip service to “get the message out” as the cost of going to that free meal, who use the corporate credit card for the luncheons (“let’s see, what can we say this “meeting” was for, nudge, nudge, wink, wink)but who wouldn’t spend a dime of their own money.
The people who are footing the bill to make the city run, the taxpayers, should have direct access to council on a regular, organized basis to bring concerns forward.

I live in College Heights, not Prince George. I at times take a road trip to my dentist and The Northern in PG, thats about it.

Of course the folks at the Hall would never agree to meet with such a committee because come next election time, their re-election attempts might be turned upside down by people who are actually representing the interests of John and Mary taxpayer.

psst wrote:
“So if what you say is true Gus then when we pay our high house taxes we should thank the business lobbyists who are protecting their own profit margin, donating to big campaigns that get “their” representatives in office, and ultimately getting tax breaks thanks to favourable decisions at city hall?”
That is right.
http://www.cfib-fcei.ca/english/article/1925-bc-municipalities-continue-to-overtax-small-business-it-s-time-to-cap-the-property-tax-gap.html

Look at the table at the bottom of the article. I have posted about thi on many occasions, expecially when the Chamber makes what seems to be an almost annual presentation to Council ab out lowering business property taxes.

We are second from the lowest business property taxes in BC. and, yes, someone else is paying for the taxes …. the residents of the community.

The gap is the rate businesses pay in relation to residential. Note that the table is for the 30 most populated cities in BC. There is no information of gaps in the remaining communities on the site.

In PG the rate is 2.15 times more than residential. Penticton is the only community which is lower than the rest of the communities. The average is 3.3 times higher.

So, I figure business here has a good thing going and, like a spoiled child, they want more candy.

Surefire … we need a ratepayers’ association.

The envirnoment got PACHA …. business has the Chamber, downtown has the DBIA …. there are all sorts of special interest groups …. none for the residential taxpayer

Peter, what’s the problem? This is how it’s always been… well perhaps not always. Look at history. Remember the Diggers of old? It seems the plutocracy is alive and well; largely unchallenged save the likes of Peter.

We should be grateful to our Lords for permitting us the crumbs and second-hand riches.

http://quityourwhiningandfillyourownpotholes.com

This has a direct link to the 81 K Mayor Green was provided to ensure her the win for Mayor of PG. In essence, it is time Mayor Green pays the Piper. More to the truth, though it is time for PG residence to pay Mayor Greens Piper(s). The entire process stinks and so far is a farce. The core review is the horse and cart for Mayor Green and her pipers, the Select Committee, vision of PG. A vision that was pre ordered and at a cost of 81K from the well heeled business(s) of PG but at a greater cost to the taxpaying residence of PG.

Maybe we should start a recall Green campaign.

I like what **resident** says.

It will be interesting to see what the **Core Reveiw** actually looks at.

Prince George is a perfectly F….. Up City. This whole process of a core reveiw etc; while good on the surface will probably not solve too many problems.

Part of the problem is that the people who are going to **fix** the problem are the problem. Namely the Mayor, Council, business groups, and various and sundry vested interest groups.

This town has been pissing away $100 Million dollars a year for the past 20 years. We have paid for more stupid projects, than any other City in the Country.

As best we can be described as a bunch of backwoods boys with money in our jeans. A lot of business’s in this town would have gone broke, or moved on years ago if it was not for the taxpayers of Prince George and the Province keeping them alive.

Every Major project in the past 15/20 years has been paid for by tax dollars. Ie;

1. Kin one and two
2. CN Centre
3. Civic Centre
4. Art Centre
5. Charles Jago Sports Centre
6. University of Northern BC
7. New Cancer Clinic
8. Community Energy System
9. Cameron St. Bridge
10. Airport Runway Expansion and Terminal
11. Community Energy System
12. River Road Upgrade
13. Boundry Road Cut Off
14. Twinning Simon Fraser Bridge.
15. New Police Station

On the Books.

A. New $3 Million office building for City purchasing staff.

B. New dike along River Road.

C. Wood Innovation Building

D. Performing Arts Centre

Where is the investment of business in this City. All the business’s in the shopping centres, basically replace the smaller business’s that they caused to go broke a number of years ago. So the loss of the old business makes up for the new business, and at the end of the day, its the consumers in PG, and surrounding area that keep these business’s afloat.

The rest of the contractors, engineering firms, consultants, etc, make their money off of taxpayer funded projects, as listed above.

What does the taxpayer get in return. Primarily BS. Busted roads, higher taxes, higher services, higher gas, higher insurance, and the proverbial run around, if you want to get something done.

Will the core review look at the $300,000.00 per year that we are going to pay to the Charles Jago Sports Centre for the next 30 years.

Will it look at the $12 Million dollars in debt carrying costs that we have every year.

Will it look at the huge cost of policing, and fireman, with a view to finding some reductions.

Is it still necessary to have 50 staff working for the Police. Is it necessary to have these staff working, while the people in the fire department are on the payroll, but are sleeping?? Can fireman assist the police in some areas to reduce costs.

Is it necessary to have staff looking for grants from other levels of Government and then forcing us to match funds, and go further into the hole.

Will they look at the Cougers franchise which costs us a fortune to have in this town, this is a private business that is basically subsidized by taxpayers. If they cannot pay their way, then they should move on. Can we afford these kinds of frills.

We need to get something for our tax dollars. As mentioned by **resident** the basics would be a good start.

Its time for the City to quit the BS about the growth in this City. After 15/20 years of stagnation, and actual reduction in population, and the workforce, you would think that they would get the message, and concentrate on making the City a better place to live for all of us, rather that suck up to thier business associates, who are for all intents and purposes conning them.

If they had a rating for Citys across Canada, who wasted the most money per capita over a 20 year period, for once we would be in first place.

C.

I’m not sure I follow Gus’ logic as to why businesses should pay more property taxes than residents.

In the end, most businesses are small businesses. They pay for a house as well as their business and they employ people that pay for houses as well.

Individuals use the pool, library, hockey arenas, not businesses.

I can understand that businesses don’t get to vote, so let’s sock it to them, but besides that argument, I’m having trouble seeing why businesses should be treated any differently than residents for tax purposes. What do businesses do that costs the City so much more than what residents do?

When the rent for a small business is $12 per square foot and the City’s portion is 1/3 of that, it’s a bit difficult to swallow for most small businesses that are trying to eke out a meager living.

Maybe the core review will look at waste such as the sand truck that drove all the way down to the end of Domano this morning and all the way back up to Hwy 16 without doing a thing. There had already been a truck that looked after Domano earlier in the morning.

This guy drove all the way down there for what reason?

Also curious as to why the pothole crews are showing up, doing every second pothole then leaving, then coming back two days later and doing every 4th one then leaving, then coming back 3 days later and are still missing some of the worst ones. Who exactly are their supervisors. You are a pile of morons.

Core review that!

Perhaps the core review can also explain why two people that are married and own a home together are both not allowed to vote on the AAP against the dike. WTF is with that? I apparently mistook BC and Canada as a democracy!

“I’m not sure I follow Gus’ logic as to why businesses should pay more property taxes than residents.”

I know why you can’t follow it, Icicle. I did not give an argument that business owners should pay more than residential property owners.

I just made the statement that businesses in PG are one of the lowest taxed in the province. As a reult of them carrying less of a burden than they do in other cities, others, such as industry and residential have to pay more on a proportionate basis.

There is a lot to be said about tax reform. Why do property owners have to pay school taxes? Hospital taxes? Property tax also is considered to be a regressive tax, the same as sales tax. The lower the income of the family, the higher the proportion of tax they pay to the municiplity as well as for sales tax. So, moving school tax, hospital tax, etc. over to income tax would mean that it would be beneficial for lower income people as well as businesses, of course.

http://www.statcan.ca/pub/75-001-x/00703/6578-eng.html

Dragonmaster… Two people who own a home can each vote on the AAP against the Dike Proposal, as long as they are both residents of Prince George. HOWEVER if they are not residents of the City, then only one gets to vote. Rather strange to say the least.

Thanks Palopu, I misread it.

So, I guess applying property taxes to the churches is off the table.

When I was a kid in the big city shop owners came to their businesses before they opened their doors to sweep the sidewalk and gutter in front of their business. It was part of the social contract, and indicated that the business had a sense of citizenship and community. Consider an amendment to the “tidy premises” bylaw.

The Hawk
==========