City council’s four per cent solution

The decision was a week delayed and the original plan was tossed aside, but Monday night Prince Rupert’s Mayor and council finally came to a consensus of sorts on just how much more of a tax load the residents of Prince Rupert can bear.

The number is….. Four per cent. The five per cent planned deemed as too steep, the 3.5 per cent idea just not enough cashola for the needs of a vibrant port city. So the mushy middle number of four was the one that popped out of the bingo machine.

The Mayor apparently feeling frustrated with the nights activities, suggested that he felt like someone who may be destined for a stint as a game show host Pond then said, "I feel like Howie Mandell on Deal or no Deal." (We here at Podunk however think he has more of an Alex Trebek thing happening though!).

.

It's a prospect that leaves us with many delicious possibilities; perhaps each council meeting could now begin with a snappy game show jingle, something to bring to mind those epic shows of “Let’s make a Deal? The Price is Right? “Beat the Clock” or maybe even “To Tell the Truth”, all worthy candidates for the cable ten presentations of Podunk. But considering the current drama of our finances, perhaps this is the best way to open up a council session every two weeks (or thereabouts when convenient)...

(All winnings of course to be turned back over to the city for deficit reduction purposes)

With the wrangling over percentages out of the way, the decks were cleared for the unanimous vote to add another four percent to the tax bill for this July’s collection time; the Daily News featured the developments as the front page story in Wednesday’s paper.

Included in their report is a chance for all the councilors to furrow their brows and weigh in with their interpretations of just how much the citizens can afford to pony up and what work may lay ahead for council to make the best use of those extra dollars.

HOMEOWNERS FACING FOUR PER CENT TAX HIKE FROM CITY

Marathon debate ends with council shooting-down five per cent proposal
By Patrick Witwicki
The Daily News
Wednesday, May 14, 2008

Pages one and three

Mayor Herb Pond said he felt like Howie Mandell from Deal or no Deal at Monday night's council meeting, where it took well over an hour for council to decide the size of this year's property tax increase.

But, at the end of the day, the decision reached through a close 4-3 vote called for a four per cent raise instead of the anticipated five per cent increase that initially received three readings, but which was defeated at an emergency budget meeting May 5.

Councillors Kathy Bedard and Joy Thorkelson in addition to Pond opposed the four per cent motion, but it passed and awaits final reading.

At the beginning of the meeting, council had the choice of accepting or opposing the five-year financial plan, which in turn would have triggered the five per cent increase in property tax, but council was split down the middle.

"When we first started talking about the budget, we started at four per cent," said Coun. Ken Cote.

He then referred to an article that appeared in Friday's Daily News, in which it stated that between 2000 and 2005, the median income in Rupert had dropped 12.7 per cent, putting the city among the worst-hit in B.C., yet, property taxes have continued to rise during that same time period.

"This economy has not recovered," Cote added. "I don't see five per cent as a hold-the-line budget."

But Pond reminded council that the article referred to census numbers taken in 2006, and he said that Rupert has since rebounded economically.

"I'm not saying we're anywhere near where we need to be," he said. "But those numbers are from 2006. We are a different community than what we were in 2006."

Thorkelson said that a five per cent increase, at the end of the day, wasn't going to be that much of a hit for Prince Rupert residents.

"The fact is, we've had to run this town in bad shape for a long time," she said. "This is not going to put money back into our pockets to do anything ... but it's only $19 to the average household."
Thorkleson was referring to Dan Rodin's report, which indicated the average house in Rupert is worth $167,000.

Thorkleson was pointing out the difference between a 3.5 and five per cent increase.

Currently, a five per cent increase on taxes would raise the taxes of an average household by approximately $70 to a total of $1,361. Four per cent would instead raise that rate to $1,349, a difference of $12.

But for a house of $300,000, that five per cent increase, as opposed to 3.5 per cent, was the equivalent to a difference of $24 per year, and property taxes would increase by well over $100 to a total of $2,446, as opposed to $2,422 if the increase were four per cent.

Coun. Tony Briglio then said that the increase hadn't taken into account the increased assessment value of homes in Prince Rupert, but Rodin and Pond corrected him, factoring in that the average increase in assessment for Rupert was 15.1 per cent.

"Each year, when the tax rate is set, we base in on what the property average is," said Rodin. "If your property didn't go up, your taxes don't go up."

Rodin added that the mill-rate, which has gone down in 2008, was also included as part of that assessment.

Bedard said she agreed with the tax increase because it would enable the city to get things done in the near future.

"I call this a development budget, so we can get money to spend money," she said.

"We can't apply for grants, because we don't have the funds to match.

"(But this) gives us the opportunity to look to the future."

But Cote didn't agree, saying he was convinced that continued increases in taxes would only scare away people.

"I've heard a $12 increase, $19 ... but people in Prince Rupert are paying hundreds and thousands of dollars in taxes," he said. "Where do you stop? When people are leaving town because they can't afford to pay those taxes?"

Coun. Nelson Kinney added: "Look at how many seniors we have in this city, and they can't afford this increase."

Coun. Sheila Gordon-Payne, who originally had agreed with the five per cent increase, said she no longer agreed with it, because: "I can't go to the community and say we need that five per cent.

"Our pencil hasn't been sharpened enough. We haven't nailed down our budget. (We say) money in, money out ... I say once burned, twice shy."

At that point, the vote was taken, and the five per cent increase was defeated by a vote of 4-2, with Bedard and Thorkelson voting in favour of the increase. Cote then proposed the motion of going with a 3.5 per cent increase instead, but that vote was split down the middle, as Thorkelson, Bedard, and Gordon-Payne opposed it.

Frustrated at what was transpiring, Pond then said, "I feel like Howie Mandell on Deal or no Deal."

So Briglio returned back to Cote's initial point regarding the four per cent.

.

"There's enough looseness in this budget to lose one per cent," he said.

So the motion for a four per cent increase was made - and it passed 4-3, as mentioned above.

.

Then, as amended, it received a unanimous vote of 6-0 to receive the first three readings.