PG To Lead Push For A Share of Gas Tax

Tuesday, April 17, 2007 01:08 PM

While at least three Councillors feel it’s a long shot, the City will put forward two resolutions requesting a municipal share of fuel taxes at next fall’s Union of B.C. Municipalities’ Convention.

Resolutions Committee Chair Sherry Sethen says the resolutions ask the provincial government to share a percentage of the revenue it receives from gasoline taxes, 14.2-cents per litre. In her report to Council, Sethen says the local share "would go a certain distance in alleviating the shortfall between funding and need (for road rehabilitation."

For Councillor Debora Munoz, the long-term goal is to remove the four-percent road rehab levy that will be a line item on property tax notices for the first time this year. "We had discussions at our Resolutions Committee that if we are fortunate and the province grants us that authority, then there was discussion around the possibility of removing the four-percent road rehabilition tax as a property tax line item."

Councillor Don Zurowski says, for him, the road rehab tax included in this year’s budget is a seperate issue, not to be tied to securing a share of the fuel tax.

"We’ve gone through a land-based taxation exercise to do some major and well-deserved road rehabilitation work within the community. I’m not certain it’s either-or," says Zurowski, "I’m not real certain I’m interested in being a party to the promotion of a gas price increase in the City of Prince George, that can well be dangerous as well. We’re taking a very conservative approach to how we’re managing road rehabilitation and I’m not sure I want to be the champion of a gas price increase in the City of Prince George."

Councillor Brian Skakun sees the resolutions as being long shots, but says it doesn’t hurt to put it there for support from other cities and towns around the province at the upcoming UBCM.

Acting Mayor Don Bassermann says, "It’s important we ask the question, but I agree with you on the ’long shot’."

Basserman says "Should this resolution carry and then see the light of day on the floor of the conference and then, in fact, precipitate provincial action, it will create a set of decision for us - many of them which we have not even come close to discussing here - some of those would include the impact on tourism and other fuel uses in the community other than just people driving about."

Previous Story - Next Story

Email |

Print |

Facebook |

Twitter |

Digg |

Del.icio.us

Posted on Tuesday, April 17, 2007 01:08 PM in News by 250 News

Return to Home

Comments

Posted by: Chadermando on April 17 2007 2:40 PM

I highly commend Sherry Sethen for her leadership as weird as it feels to say that. She is on the right track and deserves support on this issue.

Its about properly allocating existing road taxes to their proper expenditure on road improvements. Sherry Sethen seems to get it.

Its common sense and I challange the senior federal and provincial governments to explain themselves if they oppose spending the gas tax for road improvments on municiple roads where the vast majority of the tax is collected.

I have lost faith in the business skills and decision making ability of Don Zurowski. Don Zurowski wrongly asserts that spending the existing allocated gas tax on road improvments means the tax will have to be increased. Don Zurowski is also wrong to assert that a persons home should be taxed to subsidize road improvments that are already paid for with an existing gas tax. Claiming that it is an 'either or' situation shows his lack of ability to look objectively at alternative proposals. The easy solution of taxing a home owner who has no control and no relation to the expenditure is not an acceptable 'either or' option.

All in my humble opinion.

Posted by: diplomat on April 17 2007 3:52 PM

"Don Zurowski is also wrong to assert that a persons home should be taxed to subsidize road improvements that are already paid for with an existing gas tax."

Actually it is only road maintenance and rehabilitation that the new levy will pay for. We have been warned not to expect anything more than that. A road condition survey showed that the overall condition of the roads in P.G. is only *fair.* The new levy will be just enough to keep the rating from falling but real new improvements are simply not in the budget.

If we want actual improvements we will be asked to step up to the pay counter yet again.

Homeowners who do not use the roads because they do not have a vehicle are being asked to pay more homeowners' taxes.

Both federal and provincial governments have misappropriated billions of dollars of gas taxes for other than road uses for decades, even though it was promised more than once that the money would be returned to the cities where it was collected.

Mr. Zuroswki doesn't seem to understand this or he just doesn't want to rock the boat, in my humble opinion.

Hill and Harris, hello, are you listening?

Posted by: Palopu on April 17 2007 7:10 PM

Taxes are taking a bigger chunk out of the average Canadian family income than food, clothing and housing combined, a new survey suggests;

The Fraser Institute says the Canadian Consumer Tax Index is up significantly in the past 45 years.

The average Canadian family earned $63,000 in 2006, with nearly 45 per cent of that going to taxes

Just over 35 per cent was spent of food, clothing and housing.

In 1961, the institute says just 33.5 per cent of income went to taxes.

The tax index includes direct taxation, such as income taxes, sales taxes, Employment Insurance and Canadian Pension Plan contributons, as well as hidden taxes, such as import duties, gas taxes and excise taxes on tobacco and alcohol.

We have reached a point where any increases in taxes should not even be discussed. Any Politician who advocates any increase in taxes for any reason should be voted out of office. You would have to be brain dead or awful close to brain dead if you are not aware of the fact that we waste hundreds of millions of dollars on all kinds of crap that we do not need, and at the same time avoid spending money on essential infrastructure.

Prince George is a prime example of a City gone mad in regards to taxing and spending. It should be audited by some outside source and used as an example for the rest of the Country as to what not to do with tax dollars.

New Police Station $24 Million
Sports Plex $33 Million
Co-Generation Plant $18 Million
Replay Board $1 Million
Performing Arts Centre $20 Million???
Cameron St. Bridge $10 Million.

$106 Million (roughly) on new projects never mind all the other projects that wont be paid for, for the next 10/20 years.

And guess what. $2.35 Million for road repair annually, with the threat that we may have to put in a gas tax to continue to repair our roads.

Its time to close the public purse and have our Politicians make some serious decisions in regards to reducing taxes and costs. If they cannot do this, then they should resign, because in actual fact if they continue to stay at City Hall they are not doing us any good, they only cost us money. Thats not why they were elected.

Posted by: diplomat on April 18 2007 12:21 PM

"PG To Lead Push For A Share of Gas Tax"

As a top priority I'd rather see PG take the lead in getting the city's financial house in order!

How can anybody take our plea for getting a greater share of already collected taxes seriously when at the same time we are plunging ahead with roughly $106 million of new borrowing and debt financing???

It doesn't add up, does it?

Posted by: Chadermando on April 19 2007 1:44 PM

Diplomat I thought those were both the same thing. We collect our share of the gas tax from the provincial and federal government and then we can use the city taxes to reduce our debt and home taxes in the future.

I don't think it can be done in the reverse as you are suggesting.