Halfway Through 2011 Budget Deliberations

Thursday, February 17, 2011 03:55 AM

Prince George, B.C. - Two budget meetings down and two to go, as Prince George City Councillors continue to work their way through the 2011 budget deliberations.

Councillors are working with an overall proposed operating budget of $129.9-million dollars, compared to $128.7-million last year. That's comprised of $117.6-million dollars for general operating expenditures, $6.7-million dollars for water operating expenditures, and $5.6-million for sewer operating expenditures.

In addition to receiving the local RCMP's budget of $20.6-million dollars at last night's meeting, Councillors also approved in-principle the Fire Protection budget at $13.6-million dollars - up $500-thousand over last year - and okay'ed the rest of the budget from Corporate Services.

Some of the more contentious issues may be yet to come, however, with snow control, road maintenance, and public transit on the agenda for next Wednesday's meeting. And the final budget meeting on February 28th will look at the proposed five-year capital plan and consider the proposed two-percent special levy to cover the city's capital costs of preparing for the 2015 Canada Winter Games. The city's capital commitment to the games is $12-million dollars - a two-percent levy would raise $1.3-million towards that total this year.

Mayor Dan Rogers says councillors may decide at that time to go with a levy lower than the suggested two-percent, but, he thinks city residents realize there will be significant benefits to hosting the games. "And I think it's prudent that we say we're not going to put it on the back of future taxpayers and make it debt, we're going to 'pay as you go', in fact, 'pay in advance' in a little bit and incrementally over a number of years and I think it's reasonable for us to approach it that way."

If the proposed budget and special levy are approved, as is, at the February 28th meeting, the increase to the tax levy will be 4.4-percent.

Previous Story - Next Story

Email |

Print |

Facebook |

Twitter |

Digg |

Del.icio.us

Posted on Thursday, February 17, 2011 03:55 AM in News by 250 News

Return to Home

Comments

Posted by: forthegoodofmankind on February 17 2011 6:44 AM

I don't mind paying for police and fire protection services. I think they both do a very good job here in PG. What I think the City should cut is the perks to other staff eg. trips for training. I know of one person who travels to the same place every year, worth thousands of dollars, to learn the same stuff over and over. A sad waste of money. I would imagine that the "perk" budget aka training is absolutely insane compared to the private sector. Also, I don't buy the "we have to have the best people so we have to pay them 30% more than the private sector plus incredible benefits" story.

Posted by: gus on February 17 2011 7:00 AM

"he thinks city residents realize there will be significant benefits to hosting the games"

But are they tangible? They are certainly of the "feel good" kind, but I doubt that we will see the additional taxes put in at the front coming back as tax credits in the 4 years following the games or taxes being able to be kept at the same level for 4 years in a row because the world is moving to PG due to the games and increasing the tax base.

So, tell us the financial benefits that the average homeowner will receive due to the games.

Posted by: Resident on February 17 2011 7:58 AM

Financial benefit to the home owner. A bunch of hogwash. A small group of people promoting the games that the general public could care less about. I wonder how many people other than the people involved in the games will actually travel east this year to view the games.
The benefit will go to the accommodations and restaurant industry who will raise prices while the home owner picks up the tab.
These types of major expenditures should be approved by referendum. Get the public's opinion before committing the tax payer to even more spiraling costs.
The way Rodgers and his sheep spend money soon it will be impossible to attend any functions as disposable income will be needed just to pay the ever increasing tax bill.
Can't wait to see the city spin doctors take on the taxes in the citizen paper and tell us what a great deal we are getting.

Posted by: gus on February 17 2011 8:24 AM

"Can't wait to see the city spin doctors take on the taxes in the citizen paper"

You will likely have to wait a long time since they are unlikely to do that.

Posted by: wise 1 on February 17 2011 9:56 AM

The Winter Games will be an excellent opportunity for our city. We will get some Federal money to fix up our outdated rinks. People complained about the Northern Sport Centre when it was proposed and it is an excellent facility that is very busy everytime I am there!

Posted by: gus on February 17 2011 11:00 AM

It is an excellent facility .....

We keep figures of how many times the Library is accessed. So what are the actual user figures for the sports centre?

Remember, the City pays around $300,000/year to support the operations of the sports centre.

Posted by: lonesome sparrow on February 17 2011 11:28 AM

And what will the PAC cost per year if that white elephant is ever built.

Posted by: gus on February 17 2011 12:47 PM

Ah yes, the old answer a question with a question trick. You must be a politician .... LOL

Posted by: Resident on February 17 2011 1:20 PM

It is no wonder Dan and the rest of the councillors have a spend, spend, spend, attitude. The coffers are overflowing. Just look at all the new businesses IPG has lined up chomping at the bit to relocate to PG. Then there is is that long line of business just trying to get on the list to get a crack at the most sought after real estate in Canada we in PG call downtown.
It is no wonder PG can afford a PAC,and a new RCMP station. Heck, maybe Dan should revisit these projects. With all the extra funds floating around both these projects should be enhanced to their full potential.
Other cities must just be drooling at the mouth in envy of PG have such a visionary as Dan, who has taken us from "have not status" to stardom in only a few short years.

Posted by: lonesome sparrow on February 17 2011 1:42 PM

And we only have a couple of days to wait to find out how much more they are going to give away to try to entice some(read "PLEASE FOR GOD SAKE, SOMETHING------ANYTHING!!!) development in the downtown core.

Posted by: lonesome sparrow on February 17 2011 1:45 PM

gus

If memory serves the payments to the sports center will decline whereas the PAC will be a lodestone around our neck for the life of the building.

Posted by: gus on February 17 2011 3:57 PM

"a lodestone around our neck for the life of the building"

Ah, sort of like roads, ice rinks, pools, police stations, civic centres and all that other infrastructure we can do without ...........

I think I have the solution. We can start the Canada Performing Arts Games so that when the building is 40 years old it can be replaced the same as part of the Kin Centre through a Federal/Provincial/Municipal partnership ... ;-)

Posted by: confused on February 17 2011 4:11 PM

Resident you are correct lets spend it all. I think MR ROGERS just wants to build as many buildings as he can with his name on the commemorative plaque so he can take pictures of them to staple to his resume after the next election when he is looking for a job.

Posted by: lonesome sparrow on February 17 2011 4:46 PM

The PAC is one piece of infrastructure the city can do without. The roads,ice rinks and the pools wear out from use, I do not think that will be the case with the PAC. An article in the paper talked to a lot of the potential local users and a lot of them said that they would not use it because of cost.
The head of the PAC society said in today's paper that Vanier Hall,which has 800 seat, is not good enough because because of lighting, sound, ambiance and washrooms. Really? For a fraction of the cost of a PAC all of those items could be addressed, could even put in Swarovski crystal urinals for ambiance. No mention was made in the article of the facility available at the casino.

Even if the city gets the other levels of government to kick in, it cannot afford to go further in debt for an underutilized facility.

With the municipal elections coming up in November the PAC approval should be put on the ballot rather than going the alternate approval route.

Posted by: PrinceGeorge on February 17 2011 5:49 PM

"And what will the PAC cost per year if that white elephant is ever built."

It's going to be an elephant alright, but it isn't going to be a white one. I looked at the colour scheme of the planned PAC in today's paper and it looks as if the circus is coming to town! Who put this hodgepodge of colours, shapes and tumbled blocks together?

I sure hope that the new PAC (if they go ahead) won't resemble in any way what this awkward preview attempt looks like!

The Playhouse Theatre at the intersection of 16/97 looks great - but it will probably fall prey to the wrecking ball soon!

Well, Dan...will the taxpayers stand still for the endless feather plucking?

Posted by: gus on February 17 2011 10:28 PM

"Who put this hodgepodge of colours, shapes and tumbled blocks together?"

The Citizen failed to give credit to that image. I recall that was part of the package developed for Commonwealth to show what a downtown of the future could look like which was unveiled late spring, early summer by the now deceased Paul Zanette.

I noticed that IPG has an image that is credited to the performing arts group's effort and is in the latest marketing prospectus for the City through IPG.

That version can be seen on page 9 of the document available to download here:
http://www.pgcitycentre.ca
and clicking on the link to the 2011 Prospectus on the lower left of the web page.

BTW, when I first came to town in 1973, some people were talking about it being time to look at replacing Vanier Hall or refurbishing it to meet the standard of a professional theatre space rather than a school auditorium. Kamloops did that with a simlar theatre they had. In fact, they have improved the facility twice over the period of its existance.

It is now in the hands of the city plus the SD so that bookings have to be shared. It is called the Sagebrush. A virtual tour is available here: http://www.seevirtual360.com/themes/2/theme02.aspx?listingID=11841

I would estimate that the same could be done here for not significantly less, if at all, than a new building in a more appropriate location and leaving the space for 100% school use.