- - - - - - - Langley Free Press Welcomes Your Comments - - - - - - - - - Name Email URL is optional
This Motion reminds me of how the Japanese would bind women's feet to try and keep their feet small.
This Motion is not only unrealistic but it is unhealthy.
Kim,you know how to get headlines but, if you ever become mayor you could easily cripple us!
So Whatever, you don't like the Cdn. Taxpayers Federation and its goal of advocating for us taxpayers. You must be a Township Councillor! Which one?
Monday should be a blast. This Editor will be video taping it. I'm pretty sure Richter's motion won't even be discussed as it won't be seconded. But, on the other hand, it is a TV night so maybe the boys are already rehearsing and choreographing their performances so they don't look too "clubby" on TV.
Tune in Shaw Cable 4 Live Monday at 7 PM. This beats WWF!
BTW: CTF does say that if the municipality does need more than CPI increase in any given year that they have to justify it by going to the public to ask for their buy in via referenda. Old time reformers should love this! Hence not binding feet. Read the CTF attached document in the CTF posting. Closed minds and closed discussions are far more unhealthy.
LFP,
If I'm not mistaken every new full-time firehall added to the system adds 2% to our property taxes. I suppose under this plan only those of us lucky enough to already have full-time firefighters will get them.
As for referendums for tax increases look at the disaster that is the funding system in California and Oregon (called initiatives down there). They have so many initiatives that have locked up monies in so many complex ways that their governments are left with little control over their budgets and are struggling to figure out a way to pay for utility repairs and police officers. After looking at that model I'd say this should be a non-starter here.
Frankly we already go to the public every three years to ask the public what they think. Last time they elected the current council as for next time well who knows....
Blair, Queenie & Methinks, In this spendthrift Council's 3 year term alone they will be compounding their annual habitual minimum ~5% tax increases for a compounded 15+%. I don't remember any of them running for election saying they would raise taxes at all or by this much. In fact Cllr. Bateman, the poster boy champion so far of this Albert's council term's historic first two years of consecutive ~5% tax increases ran on the platform of low taxes as one of his 3 priority platforms! I guess maybe HE CHANGED his mind?!
Should taxpayers not have a more direct voice and another check balance on the dramatic tax increase whims of this obviously business challenged and financially incompetent council within their term? This Editor thinks so and supports Richter and the CTF recomendations. The alternatives are being taxed to death right out of our homes if not even out of Langley Township. In addition at what point will any investors or home buyers looking at Langley Township's tax, spend and borrow track record along with a 77% planned tax increase over the next 10 years have second thoughts about ever investing in the Township at all! If this continues it could even affect our actual property values at selling time!
The Township themselves admit that they have 4 to 5% annual revenue growth due to increased taxpayer base growth. So adding the 5% tax increase means they are really increasing our annual spending by ~ 10%! Township development growth is clearly not self sustaining. The increased new taxpayer base alone should be able to support 2 new full time firehalls each year never mind one every two years or so as is now planned!
And on major projects we paid over $3 million on a supposed initially sold cap of $800,000 maximum for the Township portion of the costed Grandstand. Now for the real total of over $6 million (double the overall initial estimate) to date all we see at best is occasionaly about 5 or 10 soccer moms watching their kids practise from on high atop the concrete blob. And for over $6 million to date and still counting, how often will the Grandstand really ever be used annually? Once? Maybe twice if very lucky? To boot the interior finishing has not been done and no seating has been installed on the blob's concrete steps (or worse still budgeted/paid for yet)! A referenda may have prevented this white elephant or at least forced a real financial cap to have prevented it doubling its initial total cost!
In the supposed bad ole days of the LLT they essentially and proudly eliminated the Township debt. That's right it was pretty much $0! ASK the question, what is the debt today that we as taxpayers are paying interest on. Last year the Albert's council slate alone added $4 million of new debt for the Golf Course purchase and this year they have added another $11 million of new debt for land purchases alone (at a peak land value purchase time!). The cost of this land purchase debt alone, principal and interest, would be about $800,000 a year to us taxpayers. Let me assure you debt free is something this council no longer has bragging rights on.
So in summary the present Albert's council slate, taxes like mad, spends like mad and borrows like mad. Proven recipe for disaster don't you think! And this is all in a terrific economic and growth period. Imagine the disaster if this Alberts Council slate were instead in recessionary times!
Don't you think this is out of control? I know you try to be the devil's advocate Blair, but even you must have to admit this is ridiculous. This community, especially those on fixed incomes and many other property owners especially older and longer term and rural residents are affected the most. Many of whom are not as well off as you or I. They obviously need better protection and checks and balances between elections too. Maybe even more so. Look no further than this incompetent Albert's council slate for definitive proof.
I think that council should openly discuss the reasons why, or why not this suggestion should be explored. It might be an illustration of how informed Alberts' faithful six-pack are about all factors of economic planning at the municipal level. I for one won't hold my breath though. Kurt's jokers simply tack on the tax increases to solve the synmptoms of our township inflationary trend, but don't think to look for the causes or cures.
Ed/Bob/Kim,
Well there's no shortfall of grandstanding in you rhetoric.
More dialogue certainly doesn't make you any more correct.
Citizen Whatever, I would like to see your well thought out, elequently described reasoning for your position. That's what I come on here to read. One liners don't offer me much in the way of information or bring me any closer to agreeing with your points. Please enlighten us.
Libelous personal attacks will not be tolerated and result in a minumum 6 month or a permanent ban from this site! If you want to be reconsidered for re-instatement, email the Editor with your appeal rationale.
There is a certain beauty in simplicity isn't there?
Sometimes more is less.
In the interests of journalistic accuracy, please note that it was the CHINESE who practiced foot binding.
How's that for information in a one-liner?
Ah so, foot binding wasn't a geisha-thing?
OK, The Geisha thing was "The wax job".
I gotta get one of those for my car!
Maybe if I try binding my car it will become a Smart car and I can save money on gas?
OK, The next time you're in a Geisha house, I would'nt ask for the wax job. It does blast the wax out of your ears, but you might limp around for a day or two after.
Commenting by HaloScan
