Clear Full Forecast

Would You Support A Downtown Development Tax Exemption Of 20-30 Or 40 Years?

By Ben Meisner

Wednesday, May 26, 2010 03:45 AM

The issue that the citizens of Prince George must address in the coming two months is whether they support  the idea of offering 20-30 or 40 year tax exemptions to projects being built in the C-1 area (downtown) .

Will the citizens of the city support anything more than the present policy of allowing 5 years of tax exemption with a further 5 year extension?  Just wait and see.

On one hand, those people who now run the DBIA say 20-30 or 40 year tax breaks are needed in order to encourage development, while in the second breath they suggest the City of Prince George has been miss managed and we pay too much tax.

Well, if  you give one part of town a  30 year tax break,  who do you think will pick up the tab?  If one  segment of the City is paying zero, everyone else will be paying more. 

You can’t have it both ways.

It should come as no surprise to those trying to fish the idea through Council and eventually the provincial government, that there is only one taxpayer, you and me. Whether you operate a home, heavy industry or even a newspaper, if you give someone a break on their tax someone has to step up to the plate to pick up the slack.

Calling upon your children and your grand children to pay for your mistake in allowing such an exemption is irresponsible.

But remember in all this, it will be up to the City Council of Prince George  whether such an idea will be pursued.  The good news is,  with the exception of  thre councillors,  the rest of the elected body  does not support this idea.

There is however another hurdle to clear, and that is the provincial government.

Can you see the Premier being called upon to respond to a new law that allows for a 20-30 or even 40 year tax exemption knowing full well that the idea was first floated in Prince George by a set of investors, who would stand to make money at the expense of the local taxpayer? That hurdle will never pass the acid test of Gordon Campbell, he may be low in the ratings, but he is not stupid. A move such as this would expose the underbelly of not only the Liberal party in BC but the MLA’s of this area who would take the biggest hit.

So while the idea is being pumped up with lots of hot air from the new  DBIA, when the taxpayers are finished, it will fizzle with as much drama  as  a balloon with a slow leak.  City Hall will then stick the knife in a bit further and, unless we have read the Premier all together wrong over these many years, he will put the finishing touches to it.

I’m Meisner and that’s one man’s opinion.


Previous Story - Next Story



Return to Home
NetBistro

Comments

If the Mayor and Town Council implement a "tax break" for downtown Prince George, I think the citizens should implement a total boycott of downtown Prince George.
As Ben said, they cannot do it because the provincial law does not allow it. And I agree with him, the province will not open that avenue for the rest of the province to follow.

There are other ways that a municipality could much more fairly assist developers on a project by project basis. The provincial laws in BC are essentially archaic and do need an overhaul for the entire province I believe.

Read this handbook from Ontario to get some idea of waht the probelms are and what the tools are that are available to developers and municipalities.

Time we got our heads out of the sand. The world is changing and so are our cities. Face up to it.

http://www.mah.gov.on.ca/Asset1173.aspx

from the handbook:
"Section 28 of the Planning Act sets out the authority for municipalities to designate community improvement project areas and adopt community improvement plans.This is done through a legal process involving public notice, a public meeting and the right of appeal. Once approved by the minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing, a community improvement plan can provide municipalities with broad powers to acquire, hold, clear, lease and sell land in designated areas for the purpose of community improvement.

Within the framework of a local official plan, once a municipality has approved community improvement policies and a designated community improvement project area, IT MAY USE THE POWERS AFFORDED THROUGH SUBSECTION 28(7) TO ISSUE GRANTS OR LOANS TO REGISTERED OR ASSESSED OWNERS OF LANDS AND BUILDINGS WITHIN THE DESIGNATED AREA.

While community improvement plans are not new, several municipalities have begun using this power to establish financing incentives for remediation of contaminated sites (see section on tax increment
equivalent grants or loans).

In addition to the provisions of the Planning Act, Section 39 of the Ontario Heritage Act allows municipalities to MAKE GRANTS OR LOANS TO OWNERS OF HERITAGE DESIGNATED PROPERTIES. These grants or loans are to pay for all or part of the cost of alteration (i.e., restoration, renovation and repair) of the designated property, on terms and conditions established by municipal council.
If the city could do it, I'd have no problem with it. Since they can't though, I have no problem with them looking at ways to make it attractive to set up shop and invest in the downtown.

Why is this such a big deal anyway? I know people will play the "fairness" card, but let's be realistic. Tax systems all over the world (even ours in Canada) are designed to include incentives. They even give specific perks to certain people. Rich people pay higher rates, poor people get credits that others don't, certain types of corporations get lower rates than other types of corporations, old people get breaks, etc.

In short, nothing is fair when it comes to the tax system. Tax systems are COMPLETELY designed to achieve very specific goals and objectives based on the needs, desires and social values of the society they serve. Why should city finances and taxes be any different?

Heck, if it were up to me, clean industry would pay minimal taxes and heavy industry would pay a premium. Perks would be given to developers wanting to do infill activities, while additional costs would be borne by people wanting to contribute to sprawl. Why shouldn't we use the system to help us achieve the goals of the city? Oh it gets back to that whole "fair" thing. Too bad life isn't fair, LOL.
downtown will never recover,are boozers have to hang out somewhere!
just like the vla known as the hood,big money in renovations by dozen different companies.the VLA IS GOING BACK TO THE SAME STATE NOW! what can u do?
Very interesting to note that Gord's mouthpiece at IPG has pulled back from the DBIA