Clear Full Forecast

4% Tax Levy Approved

By 250 News

Wednesday, February 28, 2007 05:57 PM

In a 5-4 split, Prince George City Council has approved a 4% "road rehabilitation reserve".

That means  the "average" residential tax bill will see an extra $50 dollars.

Those in favour of the  4% levy were: Mayor Kinsley, Councillors Bassermann, Zurowski, Gratton and Krause

Those against:  Councillors Skakun, Munoz, Sethen and Scott.

Here's how the debate shaped up:

Councillor Don Zurowski is the Chair of the Finance and Audit  Committee which produced the report calling for the road rehab reserve.  He says the quality of life surveys indicated 55% of the residents surveyed said road rehabilitation is  important to them and this is a pay today issue, orpay more later  "If we adopt this now it will cost the taxpayer $2.35 million dollars, but if we continue to finance the repairs over 15 years it will end up costing the taxpayers $3.76 million dollars."

Zurowski says he knows it is painful, but thinks it is the right thing to do.

Councillor Sherry Sethen believes the full  4% is "Too much of a tax shock for the people at this time" She wanted to know if the City has considered what impact pulling the $2.35 million from taxpayers would have on the  City's economy.  

Councillor Brian Skakun says he thinks there are other options other than taxation.  He says 14.2 cents a litre goes to the Federal goverment,  those funds should be used to increase transit and other options, he noted gaming revenue as a possibility.  "We have to look as a municipality  as to where we can reduce costs to come up with the funding to pay for the road rehabilitation costs."  Skakun says there was also an issue with the perception "Most people thought this  was a one time deal, but it isn't, it is 4% every year and when people I spoke to realized that, their opinion changed"

Councillor Glenn Scott says the concept is correct, "However this is not the right time to bring it forward. "He says people tell him they know the roads need to be worked on, and ask continually "Why the City keeps going back to hammer the taxpayers."  Scott says there must be some other way "Why can't we cut costs in other areas and move those savings into road rehabilitation?"

Councillor Murry Krause says while  people say it isn't fair to the homeowner, it is the homeowner will end up paying anyway, either through this levy, or through  interest on the dollars already borrowed to  repair roads.  But he is NOT going to support  a full 4% this year,  just too much of a burden on some taxpayers says Krause.

Councillor Don Bassermann  "This community is anticipating economic restructuring, we don't know if we are going to have as strong an economic future as we have today, I would argue the timing couldn't be better for dealing with this issue.  I'm looking at it as helping pay for the cost now, instead of passing on the  burden to my kids and grandkids."  He says he wants to see the City conitnue to  lobby to get a share of the  gas tax dollars, "But in the interim, lets not burden future citizens of this community with that debt."

Councillor Shirley Gratton  said  this reserve with the snow reserve and said that was a wise thing to do. She  said was torn  between the option of 4% and option c) which calls for 2% now and 2% next year. In the end she voted for the full 4%.

Councillor Deborah Munoz  says this is one of the toughest things she has had to deal with since being elected.  She says  roads are a jurisdictional  responsibility of local government  and the proposal lacks a broader social  and economic consideration.  A 4% increase could negatively impact development and growth says Munoz.

Mayor Colin Kinsley "I don't think the timing could be better than right now, because of a booming economy that trancends Prince George, and an opportunity in the future, if we keep up the pressure, to continue the lobbying to get some of the gas tax dollars."   The Mayor  supports the full 4% levy, "I think the prudent thing to do is to go ahead and do it now, and that would save $117 thousand dollars in interest payments, and that  could go along way to  pay for the enhanced pot hole patching request ."  The Mayor finished his comments urging his Council colleagues to support the concept of pay as you go "What is right is not always popular, but on the other hand, what is popular is not always right."


Previous Story - Next Story



Return to Home
NetBistro

Comments

"Murry Krause says... he is NOT going to support a full 4% this year, just too much of a burden on some taxpayers says Krause."

After saying that emphatically, he voted in favour of the full 4% increase.

Isn't that a contradiction?
"Pay as you go" concept used to be the norm years ago before the credit cards came full force into everyones lives so the city reverting to the "good old days" should be a financial lesson for everyone that saving interest charges is beneficiall in the long term, even if there is some hardship in the shout term.
Pay as you go is a bunch of Horse ****.
The fact of the matter is we have been paying taxes for years to repair the roads and build new ones and the City in its wisdom has spent this money in other areas.

Some of these other areas are the adding of staff at City Hall.

Implementing a new garbage system, which keeps things cleaner, but now appears to be more expensive than the old system.

The constant relocation of various City Recreation and other sites that costs us millions.

The purchase of the Yellow Head road and bridge yard at 18th and Ospika. 5 Million??

The list goes on and on, however I am not going to get into it at this time.

How concerned about interest payments will the Mayor and Council be when they approve borrowing for the Cameron St., Bridge, the (NEW) but unnecessary Police Station, the Co-Generation Plant, and last but not least the Performing Arts Centre. I can tell you right now they could care less about the cost of interest on these projects, and they could care less about the interest in borrowing money for road re-habilatation.

This move is nothing more than a tax grab, for road repairs, and to free up space to enable them to borrow more money.

We have sufficient income from Gambling revenues, and the Terasen Gas lease in lease out arrangement to fund $ 2 Million of the $2.5 Million we need, and any fool with half a brain knows we could come up with the rest.

I beleive that the Mayor and some of those on Council know exactly what they are up to, and I suspect that the balance of Council doesnt have a clue, as to whats going on or how to stop it. Its time for them to stop wringing their hands and crying about how painful it is to raise taxes, and to take a hard line on costs, and get them reduced.

If this out of control taxing and spending continues, it will just be a matter of time before we will become the laughing stock of Canadian Citys. We will be further in debt than any City of similar size, and we will be over staffed, over taxed.

Remember the old saying **A fool and his money are soon parted** In this case the taxpayers of Prince George are the fools.
Why did they even bother telling us what they were going to to do!...Why inform us!...just raise the taxes and be done with it!


V for VENDETTA
Pay, pay, pay, pay never ending taxes! We are taxed to death! I'm sure glad the economy is booming. Booming for who? Sure as heck ain't the working person.
I wonder if Mr. Krause realizes that had he voted the way he had decided first (against the 4% option) he would have gotten an opportunity to vote for the option he really favoured, namely 2% + 2% in the following year?

It was my impression that voting on the options would continue until one option met with majority approval.

However, I may be mistaken in assuming that this was the agenda of the meeting.

Palopu, I agree with most of your posting.

The City needs a new direction, badly.
It was interesting to watch the pro group spin their yarn. When they talked about the average tax increase on a home valued at 133 M they would refer to the amount as ABOUT $50.00. When Zurowski refered to the population of PG it was 80,000 residents which is also not correct. I guess thats why he cant look at the camera when he talks.

The knowledgable Councilor Basserman also tried to confuse the issue by telling us that using percentages is incorrect that one must look at the dollar figures to be accurate.

I guess Krause was the dumest of the lot. I have voted for him but never again. He didnt even support the habitat fo humanity issue and this guy is supposed to have some compassion for the poor. I guess he probably needs the money paid to councilors

I have to applaude the four concilors that had the courage to speak up and vote against the levy.

Cheers
Everyone says that we need new leadership, however, last election, there were about 25 candiates (myself included) and who got in? The same old same old. Not one returing coucillor lost and one of the new ones had been a councillor before. People complain but do nothing to change their lot.
THIS is a booming economy ?

Did I miss something ?
Well, I did not vote for a single incumbent - and I am really sorry that some of the very good new and eager candidates did not win.

A whole new council would have brought some fresh and more realistic attitudes with them.

Hopefully they will be motivated to give it another try!



I have to agree with you thereasonableman. Krause however was not an incumbent. I thought he had been away to have a brain implant I guess i should have done more research.

There were some good candidtes . And Rodgers was our man for Mayor. maybe next time. I guess we will just have to grin and bear it till 08.

Cheers
Krause was incumbent, Denzell (sic?) and Rodgers didn't run the two new ones were Munoz and Gratton