At Last Count We Are Municipal, Provincial And Federal Taxpayers
Friday, May 18, 2012 @ 3:48 AM
Let me get this straight, 86 BC mayors have banded together to form their own group to be able to lobby the province and the federal government to see if the two senior levels of government will give the municipalities more money.
As I understand it, doesn’t Mayor Shari Green only have one vote on council? Decisions are made by the majority of council, all eight in case she has forgotten.
Add to that is the fact that when you get some more money from either the province or the feds that money comes from , you guessed it, your pocket, there is only one taxpayer.
Now the Mayor, to her credit, is trying to get more money, problem is, it’s your money.
In order to get more money to begin the long process of fixing the city’s roads, she might want to start with this tought…don’t spend money on frivolous projects.
Mayor Green sat on council and voted for the $3.5 million we will have spent getting the old Prince George Hotel knocked down to provide a space for a new wood innovation building.
She also sat on council when the city spent $1 million on the air above the parking lot for a subsidized housing project for seniors, a purely Provincial responsibility.
She also was aware that we had plenty of land in the down town for a Wood innovation center and the Province was prepared to go where the city told them to.
Then there is the raise, not overly significant in its total amount, but it represents another $75,000 dollars. Add that to the new assistant ,at 75-K , add on the $280,000 for interest and principle per year for the dike on River Rd , and by just scratching the surface I add that up to $5 million that would have fixed a lot of roads in this city.
Instead of suggesting that the City needs more money , start by cutting some of the programs. Cutting staff made her Worship look good too some, until she hired a new executive assistant, hardly what can be called being fiscally prudent.
So when the Mayor is meeting with the rest of the mayors, she might want to pose this question, "how much is it costing the taxpayers for me to be at these meetings, and what can we hope to get from them? Unless there are some lessons being handed out on how to spend less of the taxpayer’s money, the exercise seems rather foolish.
I’m Meisner and that’s one man’s opinion.
Comments
Yes, it is one taxpayer. But it is 3 levels of government. That is where the problem is. The three levels of government are often playing “I am better than they are” instead of working together.
I mean, look at the grand standing of Rustad and Chong yesterday. Chong comes out with a bunch of useless big figures to show what they have contributed to the province and Rustad tells us that roads are the responsibility of the municipalities.
They don’t tell us that flood control is a provincial responsibility and that we still have no resolution to the problem here after 100 years of spring floods and winter ice jams; that air quality from source emitters is a provincial responsibility and that as we learn more and more of the effects of the pollutants on our health the province does not manage the contributors to that pollution; that they collect all the tax on gasoline at the pumps around the province which are a direct user fee to those who use the roads in the province, but that over half the roads in the province are municipal roads and that municipalities do not get anywhere near their share of that money.
The way I see it, it is time we got better, more user friendly reports on the expenditures of ALL governments. Time to quit playing downloading games, games of letâs let the corporations pay less tax and letâs let them create more jobs and ding the taxpayer for the benevolent jobs that are being handed out. Quit the left-right infighting, quit the âwe are the senior governmentâ games, quit all the economic theories, half of which do not work in the real world, and work together to become more efficient and effective.
For those who are incapable of doing that, move on to another vocation. Create some meaningful metrics by which each elected member can be evaluated at time of election that improves on having to select an individual based on who can pretend the most and be the best carney barker. We do not choose and keep the rest of our workforce in that fashion. And, yes, you are part of the workforce in this country.
The politicians I appreciate the least are those who spend more time defending their position on issues than listening to the people they are working for and displaying originality and flexibility.
Right about the pollution and lack of action by the provincial gov’t Gus. After traveling through Smithers this week and Houston and seeing the blue haze or as commonly known VOC’s coming off the dryers at these respective MDF and pellet plants it becomes obvious the gov’t has closed their eyes as far as industrial pollution is concerned. Yes it costs money to fix the issue but the technology in the form of a wet ESP or wet scrubber has existed for years. Until the public gets involved the gov’t sits on their hands and ignores the issue just as they did with the old beehive burners.
I understand the sentiment, but I don’t buy the argument we are only one tax payer.
International finance pays no taxes and they benefit a whole lot from society (they could and should be paying their fair share)… multinational resource companies pay the cost of doing business to get their access to resources (supply and demand trumps tax policy)… and free trade undermines free enterprise (through lowest common denominator market cheats that off shore the ill gotten gains), which then undermines diversity of taxation and makes the one tax payer concept more of a reality (as globalization gets off tax free).
We are all tax payers, but when it comes to collecting taxes the federal government has the option to tariff trade, collect corporate and personal income taxes, flat tax goods and services, and inflate the monetary base, or otherwise pervert to their needs the interest rates. The provincial government too has access to resource revenue, which can be inflated through exports, as well as things like gas taxes and a variety of other sources.
Municipal how ever sees its main go to for revenue as the captive home owners… the more and more they pervert their mandate the more and more they make unjust the concept that obtuse spending should be paid for by taxing the home owner.
I think its absolutely correct that municipal governments should be focusing on basic infrastructure and having a better idea of advocating with senior levels of government for those governments to cover their own fiduciary duties.
The problem is we seem to have local politicians that tend to spend freely on wants and issues that should be funded by other levels of government, and then use the resulting lack of funding for the essentials as a kind of go to hostage promotion for increasing their revenue to fix a problem that is more of a lack of clear priorities, than a lack of senior levels of government sharing revenue.
In the end for provincial and federal responsibility they need to start paying up, and I don’t believe we should look at that spending as being from the individual tax payer on anywhere near the level we should apply the scrutiny to municipal tax dollars. We need municipal politicians that can advocate for the municipality to senior levels of government so that the tax base from other tax payer sources contribute to our local needs.
IMHO
It never seaces to amaze me how littled I understand or paid attention to taxation. I only knew that when I no longer had enough money to pay taxes then I was paying too much taxes. I humbly thank you Gus, Eagle, Misner for the information. I will endeavor to become more informed in the future.
Further to the above post I think it is the responsability of tax payers to ensure that our tax dollars are respected. (ie) Saved whenever possable. If we all just go along with whatever happens we are not unlike the uncareing parent or guardian of our children. Here is $20.00 have a good day and there is more where that came from. Rather than Here is $20.00 it is your allowance for the week so spend it wisely and remember to put $2.00 into your savings for emergencies. Some think of us as whiners and complainers but I think it is incumbent on us to tell our elected officials that those dollars that they are spending are our tax dollars!!
In the small town that I live in, the Village Council has 10 hired staff (inside and outside) to look after a town of 586 people. Corruption, cronyism and wasteful spending is rampant. The elected officials have set themselves up as tin pot dictators with little or no accountability to the people they are supposed to represent. If we as a community have let this happen on such an intimate level, what hope do we have to effect change on a Provincial or Federal level? We have grown to accept being lied to, bullied and manipulated as a matter of course, and if someone dares to speak out… they pay for it with lost business and lost opportunities. Who, at this “Mayors conference” is speaking for the people they are supposed to represent? Or is this just another cash grab so that our local politicians can continue to line their friends pockets?
(A lot of taxpayers aren’t too smart when it comes to managing their own money)
TORONTO, ONTARIO–(Marketwire -05/16/12)- BMO Financial Group released a study today indicating that many Canadian homeowners are feeling the pinch of balancing mortgage responsibilities with saving for retirement.
The survey, conducted by Leger Marketing, found the following:
— Over half of Canadians expect to carry a mortgage into their retirement years (51 per cent)
— Fifty-two per cent of homeowners feel their debt load or mortgage is hindering their ability to plan or save for retirement
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/mortgage-debt-hindering-retirement-planning-130000795.html
Hey Gus, aren’t you Pat Bell’s Policy Chair? If you’re so smart, why don’t you use your influence to actually walk the talk?
Funny how Ben never complained about city spending while Mayor Rogers was sending him a monthly cheque for ‘advertising’. Feeling tight Ben?
Say, here’s an idea Ben – GIVE US OUR MONEY BACK! We can use it to fill some pot holes.
mrpopular. Please check out the following article (on this website) written by Ben on October 6, 2010. The title is Spending – Is There A Limit ?
http://www.opinion250.com/blog/view/17837/3û%20%3EÃm%3CÃN9÷/spending+-++is+there+a+limit+%3f?id=&st=180
mitch.h. I assume you understand that political parties are made up of many members and each has limited influence, some more than others.
I also assume you know that the party policies may not necessarily meet with the interest of those who sit in the legislature. In fact, they should not, in my opinion, since they are supposed to represent all the people in the province and specifically all those in their ridings, not just party members.
As far as the three levels of government working close enough together that the systems integrate efficiently and effectively so that the whole is greater than the sum of the parts, I feel that is so totally against human nature and the very way the system is set up at the moment.
Since we are a federation of provinces, the provinces carry some considerable influence with the federal government.
The provinces ares, however, not a federation of municipalities. Municipalities are enshrined in provincial legislation as children of the province. I feel the province likes to keep it that way until they may be forced to do otherwise.
Cities, especially large cities are getting fed up and there is talk of some trying to gain the powers of provinces within the federation of Canada. Watch the proceedings of the FCM to see whether they can move in that direction. Even the meeting in Penticton may be an early indicator that some changes will happen in the next decade or so.
Finally, all three levels of government are faced with the realities of administrators who wield considerable influence. They are very protective of their information as well as their authority.
Even though everyone might want to work towards a goal of improving the integration of government operations, human nature will work against that. Humans are very territorial.
Mitch: “Hey Gus, aren’t you Pat Bell’s Policy Chair?”
gus kind of danced around the question. Does that mean that he is?
Oh hey it’s mrpopular, haven’t seen you much since you threatened a poster by waving your big sponsorship of the SPCA like a machete (nasty)in response to his/her criticism surrounding the whole jackn’ up the rent for the Farmer’s Market….welcome back! Things must be tight in the “midas of PG” biz, as well.
Comments for this article are closed.