Business Supports Proposed Road Tax

Wednesday, February 07, 2007 06:08 PM

The Prince George Chamber of Commerce has come out in support of a proposed four-percent road rehabilitation levy that, if approved by city council, would be tacked on to this year’s property taxes.

Chamber representatives appeared before city councillors during the public input portion of this afternoon’s first 2007 budget meeting. President, Michael Kerr, says "Our members are very supportive of what is being put forward and that you are responding to our members’ needs that we need a vibrant and good road system in order to move our goods and our people."

Kerr says, "The majority of members don’t see four-percent as a huge issue for them, at this point. They see the need for road work to be done and the rehabilitation and they realize somebody’s got to pay and they see that that is a fair way of doing it."

Mayor Colin Kinsley welcomed the chamber’s support, "It’s nice to see that the notion of trying to save money over a period of time by reducing our debt-servicing charges is a welcome one...it’s shows that your membership is looking at a very big picture, so we appreciate that."

The levy is being proposed as a "pay-as-you" go system whereby money raised from the levy would go into a reserve fund for road works, saving approximately $1.8-million dollars annually in interest payments over a 15-year term.

The Chamber President also used the opportunity to pass on some concerns, though, as budget deliberations begin in earnest.

"The concerns are that the business classes did not get any tax relief last year. Residential taxpayers got an additional grant and the business classes did not get that outright."

He says, "Our members (also) see that business licences, business licence fees, are in their terms a form of taxation on top of the regular municipal taxes."

And Kerr warned councillors, "That any rates or rate increases beyond inflation - so, two- to three- percent - they see as a tax shock, so that’s beyond what they would consider a normal and a viable increase."

City staff are proposing a 2.4-percent hike in the tax levy this year to maintain services at 2006 levels.

Previous Story - Next Story

Email |

Print |

Facebook |

Twitter |

Digg |

Del.icio.us

Posted on Wednesday, February 07, 2007 06:08 PM in News by Michelle Cyr-Whiting

Return to Home

Comments

Posted by: Gofaster on February 7 2007 7:09 PM

Of course they do....
their taxes go up and the product they sell goes up at least that amount or more...
As for 2006 levels....surely they can do better than that.....

Posted by: charles on February 7 2007 7:44 PM

It seems to me Prince George businesses are profiting handsomely from our present borrow and spend economy. I think prices for goods in Prince George (aside from the large retail chain stores) are way too high. For example, I have heard several stories in recent weeks where people have purchased their new vehicles in Quesnel because they were able to save thousands of dollars over the price here in Prince George for the same vehicle.

Shop smartly folks. If the business in Prince George does not match out of town prices, then purchase your goods out of town.

Posted by: Palopu on February 7 2007 8:03 PM

If the Business Class does not have a problem with the 4% levy then maybe we should increase it to 8% and reduce the levy to the residential section. We all know that business will pass their costs on, and at the end of the day the consumer will pay their portion of the taxes.

This is an unfair tax pure and simple. It is also a shell game, wherein the City can get the road rehabilitation done through a levy, and continue to tax us for roads through our normal taxes and spend this money somewhere else.

The Mayor can talk all he wants about reducing our debt servicing charges, however lest we forget, it was him, and council that borrowed the money for roads in the first place. So what kind of a banal statement is that.

Business will pay $591,281.00 of this levy. Light Industry $38,480.00 Major Industry $433,219.00 and of course Residential $1,245,470.00. So we could say that Industry and Business, who pound the hell out of the roads do not pay anymore than residential users. In addition those living in Apartments and Mobile home parks pay approx $15.00 per year. Large families with 3 or 4 drivers would pay the same levy as a single home owner who doesnt drive.

The only reason that the City is going to the across the board levy to get this money is because it is a one line item, easy to assess and collect, and requires little or no intelligence to implement. Heaven forbid that they should be required to come up with an equitable system, that would require some thinking and concentration on their part. Better to pretend to ask the public, and then do what you planned to do all along.

Posted by: Harbinger on February 7 2007 9:35 PM

Where was Sherry Sethen? In the crowd with the Chamber of Commerce? Or sitting quietly and saying nothing in her role as councillor? A fence sitter with both ears on the ground? The mayor says it is nice to see someone come forward and welcome higher taxation. I wonder how the rest of the business owners feel about this? Were they polled or questioned about this? Did the C. of C. send out letters to find out if the business owners were in favour of spending more hard earned dollars to fill the bottomless well of city hall? 4% is a big issue to some. Business owners can pass along this cost to unwary customers. Regular working ninnies can't do that. What a town!

Posted by: wrinkledawg on February 7 2007 9:53 PM

When and if I get a raise on my paycheck will I consider paying more taxes.
Until then the donkeys at city hall can KISS MY BROWN STARFISH. :(

Posted by: Chester on February 7 2007 10:06 PM

I don't support the proposed road tax, levi or whatever they want to call it.

The businesses hire the people to provide the products and services in this city. They are the ones who incur the financial risk. Then the employees want more money because their taxes are going up. The employer is forced to continually increase wages to retain employees. They can't always pass the costs onto the consumers.

The reason is that if the costs of doing business increase too much, the consumer resorts to heading out of town to shop or begins shopping online. So, the challenge continues. More taxes only take the money out of the pockets of the consumer or increase the burden to the business.

How many businesses have gone under because of the burden of taxes? Too many I think. Chester

Posted by: owl on February 8 2007 1:29 AM

"And Kerr warned councillors"

Interesting choice of words. I know how I would be treated if I were to go into open council chambers and be perceived to warn council.

Posted by: owl on February 8 2007 1:33 AM

Palopu. Everyone knows that if it were not for the residents of this city that business would not need to use roads.

Thus, they really should not be paying anything since we are the cause of business having to used roads.

;-)

Posted by: owl on February 8 2007 1:41 AM

"The reason is that if the costs of doing business increase too much, the consumer resorts to heading out of town to shop or begins shopping online."

Remember that we are not an island in many ways. What happens here, happens elsewhere too. Quesnel has no magic asphalt that repairs itself. It has no bypass roads. It has RCMP who demand raises and increase in force size.

While people may shop in Quesnel for cars or trucks at an operation that employs what? 10 people at the most? 3 of whom may be there due to PG business if they are that good. I doubt people will go to Quesnel to shop for groceries, go to restaurants, buy clothes, buy TVs, furniture, etc. The reverse may be more the fact.

Posted by: Foo738 on February 8 2007 8:53 PM

I received a notice that my pension is going up $2.18 this year.

I would prefer a performing arts centre on my increase

At least I would have something in the City to be proud of