You guys better give yourselves a raise, this a lot to think about.

With the sorry state of the infrastructure (roads, water mains, sewer lines, etc.) in Prince George very much in the limelight recently does anyone know if the City is presently spending taxpayers’ money studying the concept of building a Performing Arts Center in Prince George?

With the sorry state of the infrastructure in Prince George was it responsible for the City to (borrow and) spend such a large sum of money approximately a year ago to build a new RCMP building?

Point 4, Brian, bend over and kiss your plans to be the mayor goodbye!

Albus, since you have all the great comments….. how exactly should we get these roads fixed with the existing money? I for one am happy to see this City finally talk some real strategy on how to get these roads fixed.

I for one think that a fund/tax that sets aside money that only can be used for fixing roads is the right idea. Too often City Council & Mayor will listen to a special interest group that needs more money and the roads get the boot!!!

It’s time that we put our money where our mouths are and put some funding into dealing with this. Selling City lots that are sitting empty is also a great idea. Why aren’t these properties being snapped up. Sell them at a slight discount to make those transactions happen. Talk about a pile of money coming in……….

Totally agree mwk and thank you Brian. Finally, maybe we will get some action moving to get the roads repaired. Those of you with negative comments…how do you expect them to get fixed??? The money just doesn’t fall out of the sky. Quit your bitching and put your money where your mouth is…run for city council if you think you could do a better job.

Here’s a 1 point plan that doesn’t require any reports, studies, lobbying, appraisals, surveys, plans, analysis or Core reviews.

Stop spending $3.5 million on other things and put that money towards roads!?

Maybe Mr Shakum has a difficult time focusing on the obveous these days.

Its a matter of setting priorities. This towns previous leadership obviously cut corners and took from what was needed in the road budget and put it in other places, allowing the roads to reach this point of deterioration.

The council must stand up and say we need 7 or 8 or 9 or 10 million dollars annually catch up and make it a priority.

Where to get the money? Just like your home budget, you have to cut somewhere else. Get rid of dead weight, cut some programs. Its obvious our roads have gotten to a critical state, now we have to forgo some of our luxury items and make sacrifices.

Some people will be unhappy no matter what project or service gets cut, but right now ALL people are unhappy with out infrastructure.

Looking at my tax statement I see a line item titled “Road Rehabilitation Reserve”, which makes me think that at some time in the past an extra levy was added to the tax bill so the city would have a reserve fund dedicated specifically to repairing roads. This would be in addition to the normal road repair funds from “General Municipal Purposes”

Brings a few questions to mind.

1. What happened to the money in the reserve fund?

2. Was the money in the general account that should have been pegged for roads used for other things and the reserve fund used for the normal annual repairs?

3. Did the money for repaving downtown streets after DES pipes were installed come out of the DES budget or the paving budget?

4. Another case of PBMS… Patricia Blvd Mismanagement Syndrome……#7 especially?? (if it happens once it is an isolated incident, twice an anomaly, three times a trend, 7000+ a syndrome ;-)

btw charles the city did grant the PAC society funds again this year, but I think that even they have seen the writing on the wall that construction is a longgggg ways away.

point 1.. prepare another report on city holdings, how many of these properties where purchased while Brian was on council ? If memory serves a majority of them so he is a big part of the problem.Also..what does another report due to fix anything but cost more time and money getting this report done ?

point2. really brian, like the provincial gov cares about anything north of Hope..but looks good to some I guess.

point 3. let them consider using Teresan.. consider means nothing.. again more useless words.

point 4 tax us more… really.. thats good thinking.. you and council have raised taxes and users fees every year.. enough is enough.

point 5 see above.

point 6 another report… great…..

point 7.. a 2 to 5 year plan.. you have been on council for 10 years..how many plans have you been part of since your start on council and how have they worked out?

No point 8 roll back your wage increase..
no point 9.. stop the waste of money on the core review and get city paid accountants to do thier job.
point 10 stop wasting money on useless fluff like the PAC, winter games, etc etc

I agree with Albus and co. Surely there has to be some more creative solutions out there rather than simply digging deeper into everyone’s pocket.

Can’t believe that people are so in love with Brian that they’re willing to go as far as paying more taxes to support him.

A note to Mayor and council, we elected you to lead with some fiscal responsibility. Cut the fat at City Hall before you come asking for more taxes. I haven’t even seen any serious attempt so far. Get to work!

mwk says….

“I for one think that a fund/tax that sets aside money that only can be used for fixing roads is the right idea”

Your right, but they have already done this 2 or 3 times over the past few years and the money never went directly to our roads.
Maybe they should redirect that money from wherever the HE$% they are spending it back to where we were told it was going to be spent.

Brian you missed one unlimited source of possible funding. A column writer for the citizen blamed the potholes on man caused climate change. Since there is unlimited funds for perpetuating that so called man caused fraud, find a way to tap into those funds:)

Tax property owners based on the linear meters of pavement traveled to reach city hall from the end of their driveway. That oughta clear up the sprawl issue that’s contributing to the infrastructure deficit.

I may not agree with all of the points that are outlined above, however, at least this is one member of city council who is actually talking about it and trying to come up with some ideas and solutions.

What have you heard from any of the other members? All I have heard, in a nutshell, is “it’s not going to happen this year, so get over it.”

What about next year? The year after that? Zero discussion on how to work towards a solution.

Thanks Brian for, at the very least, bringing forward discussion and not letting City Council ignore this issue. You are the only one who seems to be hearing the rest of us and making this an issue to be brought forward.

The City has mismanaged our money and as a result we are faced with this situation. The money is not there and it has to be found somewhere. People can whine and complain all they want about the mismanagement but it won’t change the situation. Let’s get a plan in place to fix it already!

Well people, just wait for 2015. Every road will be perfect to show case our city. Then the final bill can be chared to the games and we will all be taxed for it.

While I don’t really love the points Mr. Skakun has laid out, at least he is bringing forth a discussion. A starting point, if you will.
I have said before, I would like to see austerity measures brought forth in P.G., for just a couple years, to get the infrastructure, including roads fixed. Once things are up to par, we could again start funding arts, sports, etc.
If I ran my household this way, I am sure my mortgage company would step in and take the house from me. Why then, are we allowed to treat our city like this? It is awful.
We have to maintain what is necessary, and only after that is done, can we have what is “nice”.

I resent the fact that a home owner is held HOSTAGE to pay a road tax and then come up with the idea that your going to hit us at the pump!
I think Prince George city council should be investigated by the R.C.M.P. to find out just exactly where and who’s bank account all our tax money has been spent in the last 10 years.
I’m sick of this, I want you to stay out of my G D pocket!
I want my Winter games money back too, I won’t and don’t support games when the town is falling apart around me! F A

Tonight we will be dealing with the issue of our road rehabilitation program. As mentioned before, I am going to be talking about a local gas tax. The idea of a local gas tax is not a new idea but one that needs to be discussed as one way we could look at how we fund our road repairs.It would be done through Bylaw and put in
a dedicated fund for road repairs.

Every property owner in Prince George pays a Road Rehabilitation levy on their yearly tax bills. It does not matter if you are a business or a home owner you still pay the tax. The whole issue of property taxation is a sore point for many because depending on where you live in town or if you invest in your home your taxes go up. With the Road tax you are paying now could mean you are paying more or less than other local residents and that in itself is not fair in my opinion. If there was a local fuel tax it would mean that all people that use the roads would pay. It does not stop there. With my idea of a consumption tax( gas tax) it would mean that the City would be able to reduce your Road Rehabilitation tax levy in proportion to the gas taxes collected.

What this would mean is it would be a fair tax and you would pay at the pump and your tax bill from the City would be reduced as a result.

Brian Skakun

Longnecks: “just wait for 2015”. In 2015 the roads will still be in the same crappy condition but will be covered by snow and ice when the games are held here so the city doesn’t have to worry about visitors viewing the PG eyesores.
Thunder, News2me: You are both correct, at least Skakun is trying to get a conversation going. His 7 points are discussion points, not answers, as he has said. And he wants others to come forward so we can get a solution to this mess. What have the other members of council done in this regard? Zilch. And what have any of them done to justify this 30% raise they gave themselves. Nothing is apparent. A certain level of service would have been expected before the raise. The additional 30% should mean a corresponding increase in the level of service you are providing. Where is it? Going to photo ops, Mayor Green and council, is not proof of performance.

One councilor running for re-election, at an all candidates meeting, a lawyer, said, and I quote,”We must bring more people to Prince George in order to lower taxes”. That’s what he said. I didn’t believe him. And I still don’t.

swordfern Good Idea. That would be a far more user pay based system.

The further you are from the city the more it costs to service.

Since we have to rebuild a bunch of water and sewer why don’t we meter it all. Average user would pay what you do now. Progressive users pay less.

Integrating more user pay is always best for those who want to have impact on their own bottom line.

Linear tax systems only based on raw values do not serve the community as a whole well.
They also do not empower individuals to be in direct control of their costs.

Like his ideas or not, Brian is trying to look at a more fair system. I agree with his idea that a user pay system is better than property tax. I hate the idea of a new tax but I do understand why this makes sense.

If the bylaw is written that all $’s from this tax go to roads and only roads, that is fair

Here is something to watch out for, if for some miracle the city can come up with 6.7.8.million dollars for more paving I’ll put money on it that the price for a lane kilometre we pay now for paving will automatically go up. (Extra money let’s gouge em)

A tax is a tax is a tax. I think you’re going to lose a lot of votes on this one Brian, and rightly so. You want to shift the road levy burden onto the PG motoring public, well that is going to disproportionately hit businesses in this town I would image. Especially ones with fleets of vehicles (like the City). We already pay high fuel costs in Prince George and you want to add to that strain?

Cut costs, cut services, but don’t cut into peoples disposable incomes anymore.

Because of urban sprawl people drive everywhere in this town….PG is not a walkable City! As a northern winter City we already pay more for fuel, carbon tax, snow removal, etc. Hopefully saner heads will prevail and council will not endorse the preposterous idea of an additional local gas tax. It has been all too easy for council to go after the tax payers to cover every single item on their wish list. Digging deeper into the taxpayers pocket is not a smart idea at all…..not even a conversation starter…the message is loud and clear from the tax payers, (re: recent dike petition) most folks want city council to stop increasing taxes every year to pay for unwanted items and projects that they have decided are a priority, i.e. CWGs. Get on with providing leadership and put a plan in place to address the infrastructure short fall using the taxes currently collected, isn’t that what you were elected to do? Setting priorities and providing leadership not showboating is what we need from our elected officials.

The city should direct administration to investigate the costs of cancelling the Canada Winter Games and the cost of a referendum to call the question.

Then the public can actually have an opportunity to vote on the issue they were denied by the previous council.

Brian says…
“If there was a local fuel tax it would mean that all people that use the roads would pay”

Not so!

Everyone that lives in the borders of PG or any city are road users whether they have a vehicle that requires gasoline or diesel or not.

Life in any city depends on roads.

A fuel tax is a tax on fossil fuel burning vehicles not road users.

swordfern: “Tax property owners based on the linear meters of pavement traveled to reach city hall from the end of their driveway.”

monkeyboots: “swordfern Good Idea. That would be a far more user pay based system.

The further you are from the city the more it costs to service.”

That’s great if you work at city hall. However, I live near where I work and it’s nowhere near the downtown. Why should I pay to maintain roads I will never drive on, even though I live on what would be considered ‘the outskirts’? In other words, this line of thinking is flawed.

How about increasing the taxation levels on some of the heavy trucks pounding pavement that was never designed for it?

Brian,

You just dont get it do you.

“The whole issue of property taxation is a sore point for many”

The whole issue of TAX’s in general is a sore point for all. The fact that your not looking at adding ANOTHER tax as an appropriate solution is absurd. You dont get it, the people are tired of paying. Find the money, tighten your belts, do what is right, quite going to the trough when ever you have a problem.

Brian I can assure you this, if you push another new tax through I will be the head of the campaign making sure you never get elected again in this town. There is already allot of support against this and we dont need a councilor who campaigned on fiscal responsibility to at the head of adding yet another tax.

Do your job.

“The fact that your not looking at adding ANOTHER tax as an appropriate solution”

opps, typo, that should read: The fact that your looking at adding ANOTHER tax”

“How about increasing the taxation levels on some of the heavy trucks pounding pavement that was never designed for it?”

And enforcing the city bylaws that restrict heavy trucks from using residential streets as parking lots.

Brian says ” The whole issue of property taxation is a sore point for many because depending on where you live in town or if you invest in your home your taxes go up. With the Road tax you are paying now could mean you are paying more or less than other local residents and that in itself is not fair in my opinion. If there was a local fuel tax it would mean that all people that use the roads would pay.”

The entire community of Prince George benefits from having safe, reliable and well maintained roads. This issue should not be treated as an issue exclusive to the interests of drivers only, consequently a PG consumption gas tax is in effect double dipping and another way of evading the fiscal responsibility of council to manage its annual budget in a manner that meets the real needs of the community.

Infrastructure should be the #1 priority for any city council. if you have a poor infrastructure, you will have a poor city.

Imagine outside business’s looking at PG as a place to set up at, drive around town, see how bad of shape this city is in, they can see how poor of a job previous councils have done, why would they expect the current council to be any better?

We can spend hours and hours listing all the projects and purchases they have been able to find the cash for, many mortgaging the future with long term loans. Now they have a huge debt load to service and when they need to work on the roads, by gosh we better create new tax’s.

We as citizens have failed to put enough pressure on these people to do the right thing.

A user tax, think about it, every person in PG uses the roads. Riding the bus, riding with a friend, having a pizza delevered, riding a bicycle even going for a walk.

The roads have to be fixed because of the poor way they are repaved. New pavement cannot be layed over old pavement. It is a new layer old layer problem. Roads repaired last year are already failing. Do a proper job.

Oh if there is a tax increase there will be a city hall pay increase.

My taxes say road rehabilitation reserve too at the rate of .34031. How much money does this tax bring in each year? Let’s see the books how this money is spent! My portion ends up being 76.37.

I got my property tax notice today and I will be paying $2200 after home owner’s grant. Then add in the utility bill of roughly $700 per year and overall I’m paying less than $3K per year on home that’s slightly above average. That gets me:

1. Clean water
2. Sewer
3. RCMP
4. Fire/Ambulance
5. Garbage collection
6. Schools
7. Roads/snow clearing/street cleaning
8. CN Centre/swimming pools/soccer fields
ETC, ETC.

Sure some of those services get their funding from the Fed/Prov. but that’s still some good value for $250/month or roughly $8.00 per day for a family of 4.

Wake up people, they are doing a fairly good job with the funds they are getting. I say raise another $75 per rate payer on average and you would have enough money to fix the roads. Please, all those saying they pay too much tax haven’t stopped to think of all the things they get.

Don’t a lot of people spend about $8.00 a day on Tims or a nice lunch or something similar. And for this small amount money you are getting all these services. GOOD VALUE….PERIOD

Don’t a lot of people spend about $8.00 a day on Tims or a nice lunch or something similar. And for this small amount money you are getting all these services. GOOD VALUE….PERIOD
You need to wake up!
You need to just speak for your self mwk!
Not everyone is on the taxpayer payroll!
I only go into town, when I absolutely need to., buy underwear. I make a better cup of coffee, and a meal at home than I can get in P.G. PERIOD!

I’ve got a road that hasn’t seen a patch crew nor a paving crew in 20 years! Hell i’m lucky if I see a grater in the winter 3 times. I’m Taxed out!

If “climate change” is the reason our roads are crappy, shouldn’t that entitle us to put our sticky fingers into the carbon tax pot? Sounds fair to me. After all, the carbon tax is supposed to stop or slow down global warming and/or climate change isn’t it?

Still I see nothing about water floridation. From what I hear the water was pristene before the flouridation. Now all that I taste is flouridation and it makes me sick to my stomach. Flouridation costs money even though it doesn’t cost millions i’m sure that it costs thousands and that could go towards road repairs. The trouble with flouridation is when ever it is mentioned to a councilor they don’t look at tghe person that brought up the subject, but instead they look down at their shinny shoes and avoid answering.

Why are we continuing to focus on the symptom (potholes) rather than the problem? (Lousy paving strategy)

Let’s look at Edmonton. (similar latitude)And see how much different their streets are holding up under similar weather conditions. Guess what? I understand that the paving is at least twice as thick as what we do in PG.

A $4 Starbucks/day x 365 days = $1,460.

2 people in the household …. = $2,920/year

Would I prefer Starbucks … or City Services? Starbucks or City Services?

Okay, I opt for Starbucks ….. now, how do I get out of paying for City Services? … LOL

BTW, how much do condo fees cost for maintaining common areas? Likely around $250/month and more depending on the Condo ….. plus taxes.

I suspect the average home pays about $85 for the Road Rehabilitation.

Let us say that home has two adult occupants who each work and drive a car and that on average they buy a total of 4,000 litres between them for local travel, discounting any travel to other communities, cottages, camping, etc. A 2 cents per litre tax would offset the $85 per household. If that results in $3.5 million for the road reserve, then 4 cents/litre would have to be added for the average householder.

More expansive properties would pay more, but they also are the more likely to have newer cars with newer gas saving technologies while owners of less expensive properties would be paying less into the reserve but end up paying more because they will use similar amounts of gasoline and would be more likely to have gas guzzlers.

As with the HST, a gasoline tax in this replacement process is a regressive tax, just like any sales tax. A property tax, on the other hand, is a progressive tax.

Your opperating on the assumption that the city would remove the road rehabilitation tax.