|
Comments? Email |
|
NorthCoast's Regional Information
Site |
||||
NATURESea, land, river ECONOMYRegional PLACEBooks+ PEOPLESCommunity |
Go to the City Hall site and
then to the agenda packages (site framed -- here is the page)
and download it for scan of the package Fr Revitalization called for --- plus
read the excellent anti-fish farm tract included in package but ‘filed’ or
read it online at Rafe
Mairs site |
|
Kumar
‘explains’ why PR must reduce
services
Some of the
presentation was incomprehensible to me The message
seemed to be need reduce services by about 1.5M$ (or a huge tax increase of
3M$ in ‘unbiased’ option given council) See the full text of budget recommendations on Council Web site |
Before the Power Point presentation
|
|
Council
discussed LRMP ‘in camera’
|
|
Another
example of this council doing everything ‘in camera’ (in secret) When I asked
during “question period” why agenda says closed meeting because of ‘personal
information’ There
was a long pause and then someone thought up that Eamon was potentially going
to speak about ‘government to government’ communications |
Debts give us few options
|
|
Cruise
Dock – enjoy it about half the cuts in services are to pay for it
|
|
Yes “Skeena” taxes should be paid ‘morally’ by province who owned it for about 11M$ worth of the debt—same province that got almost 1B$ ‘equalization’ payment from Feds as a ‘have not’ (similar to PR?) “The cruise ship dock and upland projects cost the City $3.5
million financed through temporary borrowing which must be repaid within 5
years. Annual charge against property tax is $700,000 or $150 per $100,000 of
residential assessment and $110 per $100,000 of commercial assessment”.
(pasted from the PDF) Elsewhere in same PDF: Cruise ship & Uplands $3.5
million: Long term repayable in 20 years. This requires approximately
$454,000 charge against operations. Two options are available: reduce
services by the amount of the annual charge or increase tax. |
Slide was a ‘what if’ we increased services in amount we plan to cut
|
|
Huge Tax
increase any one?
|
|
UNFAIR example? One
would expect a costing out of “no services cuts” example here. But that may not
get the desired public reaction so lets double
the impact and see if anyone notices (my interpretation) And what is the
Fire Fighters ‘parity issue’?? I hear it was contractual – something to do w
parity with Vancouver fire fighters --- but you did not hear council or Kumar
explain this (more in camera’ secrets) (my
interpretation) Note the blue arrow where the cruise dock amortization is 700T$ while Skeena debt 600T$ --- >Kumarese?? |
|
Parking
meters as cash bonanza Almost
as good as logging our mountain behind town for $$ |
“Forward
w certainty and an eye to the future” |
|
Has
anyone heard of the Hydro project before now? (in camera) – Still 1st
nations might want some of the $$ as lake was once important sockeye system
before PR got water there. And check out the community forest (Terrace paper
said 6 parcels – best in same watershed as our drinking water? (in camera?) |
And make CityTel into a ‘private’ company
while borrowing 23M$ to upgrade services
|
|
Residential
Taxes |
|
Kumar
often gives the impact of some course action in how much it will cost a
‘typical’ home owner in ‘property taxes’. Left is from the power point
presentation but not in the PDF file --- for whatever reason it includes
Skeena taxes as if paid --- still gives good idea how this council has
redistributed the tax burden over time between business, Port and Residential
tax bills – of course it does not include the large increases paid for sewer/
water/ garbage (or does it?) |
|
|
Total
taxes |
|
Another
Kumar example that does not seem to ‘jibe’ with previous. Here
the decrease in taxes seems to be that Skeena not included after ’03. Note how CityTel has been
pumped to keep up the services in city operations |
|
|
|
|
|
Created by LG on 1/30/2005
Last updated on Monday, January 01, 2007