24 replies to this topic

[Gregory Hartnell]

+++

An ad placed and signed (illegibly) by the City of Victoria Corporate Administrator in the December 29 number of the Times Colonist newspaper in the Legals & Tenders section of the Classifieds on page B10 tells the sad tale...

+++

[Logo of The City of Victoria]

NOTICE OF PROPOSED PERMISSIVE EXEMPTION

For the purpose of supporting the conservation, rehabilitation, and hotel use of heritage property, the Municipal Council of the City of Victoria proposes a bylaw that would exempt from municipal property taxes for 10 years the heritage building located at 1450 Douglas Street (Douglas Hotel) in the City of Victoria.

The exemption would apply if:

(a) the upgrading of the property is complete and [in] accordance with the B. C. Building Code,

(b) a covenant for the exemption is registered on title for the property, and

© the property is used for hotel and related retail purposes.

The estimated amount of municipal taxes that would be imposed for the first 3 years on the property, if it were not exempt, would be approximately $398,298.00

Any property who wishes to review a copy of the proposed Tax Exemption Bylaw may do so by contacting:

Corporate Administrator
City of Victoria
#1 Centennial Square
Victoria, BC V8W 1P6
Telephone (250) 361-0571

This notice is given in accordance with Section 227 of the Community Charter.

Dated this 15th day of December, 2006

[Illegible signature]
Corporate Administrator

City of Victoria

+++

The stupidity of the proposed bylaw is self-evident. While I am sure that all property owners would love to enjoy such largesse from the City, this proposed bylaw is the direct and logical consequence of the bad precedent set some years ago when the Moses Znaimer group of tv stations finessed a similar deal at the ex-Macdonald's Furniture store just down Pandora Avenue with the help of ex-Councillor Laura Acton.

If the intent of the bylaw is to stimulate economic and social activity in the depressed downtown area around City Hall, it would be much fairer to have a property tax reduction across the board for both residential and commercial property owners in the City of Victoria, and not to favour certain businesses over others. Such a tax reduction would stimulate all sectors of the local economy.

Spot zoning tax exemptions of this type put an extra unfair burden on all the rest of us Victoria property taxpayers who are not insiders and don't have the ear of the Mayor and Councillors.

When one considers that the hotel in question, directly across from City Hall, is one of the most notorious locales for the purchase and sale of deadly addictive drugs of all kinds, the proposed bylaw is even more odious.

+++

[Holden West]

This renovation is an essential step in ridding the Douglas/Rialto of the undesirable element you speak of.

This program is popular and widely supported. The onus is on you to provide concrete reasons as to why this program is unwarranted. Simply calling it "favouritism" doesn't cut it.

Owning a century old building can be a formidable financial burden. It is also an important privilege and responsibility as these buildings give Victoria much of its appeal. The buildings, if well cared for, will last long after their owners are dead. If cost is an obstacle to rehabilitation, its in our own self-interest to help out.

If we're going to crack down on businesses that get sweet tax breaks, we might consider starting with churches.

[G-Man]

I agree with Holden and your example of the Mcdonalds Furniture Building is interesting in that it is one of the nicest building in that area now.

I think that the very few buildings that could even be entered into this program and that actually have just goes to show that this is not some sort of free pot of money that everyone will enjoy.

[zoomer]

When one considers that the hotel in question, directly across from City Hall, is one of the most notorious locales for the purchase and sale of deadly addictive drugs of all kinds, the proposed bylaw is even more odious.

+++

I think they sell alcohol and tobacco, but you refer to "addictive drugs of all kinds". Is the Douglas Hotel selling opium, pot, cocaine or crystal meth? If so, I agree with you, they should not be getting a tax break.

[gumgum]

The onus is on you to provide concrete reasons as to why this program is unwarranted. Simply calling it "favouritism" doesn't cut it.

+++


It is because he says it is.


+++
:wink:

Isn't that bar a favourite hangout of the Mayor's?
Maybe that's why he considers it favouritism.

[G-Man]

Pot is not addictive dude :smt028

[Caramia]

Pretty sure you could get all of the above at the Dougy.


In my opinion tax incentives are one of the most powerful tools City Council has to promote development that would benefit the city while being economically unfeasable without it. Intelligently used, it is a mechanism that can tip a property owner in the direction that the City wants them to go. But I cannot think of one case where there has been a tax incentive where the owner did not have to make a choice that meant less bang for their buck. Take two other examples of the tax holiday being used... Chris LeFevre's development of the Wilson block on Herald, and Bob Cross's development of his building on Douglas. Both owners took a hit, and the tax incentive didn't do much but soften the blow. But two derelict buildings were turned into very attractively restored residential units that added to the City's rental stock. Without the tax holiday LeFevre has said he would have had to do luxury condos.* The live/work rentals he created instead hit the market at a reasonable price. I really love what he did with that building.

The externalities from developments like these were positive for the neighbourhood and the City. I appreciate our heritage, and I also understands some of the economic disincentives (the worst of which, seismic upgrading, is City imposed) that cause many heritage buildings to stand empty on upper floors. To me the empty or derelict heritage buildings represent a real cost to the city, while the sensitive revitalisation of those buildings is a real gain. Owners of Heritage buildings who are willing to jump through the hoops pay their dues by investing in their properties in uneconomic ways. There has to be some kind of civic pride in a person to take on something like that, the tax incentives don't tip the scale that much. And imo that is something we should encourage.

*MA thesis interview

[Scaper]

I am not even going to get into the Church Tax break...this could start a small war!!! hahahaha....

Though I agree with tax breaks and gov't incentives for the owners of heritage buildings where these owners are in hunt for help to upgrade their buildings. An example is the Janion building....That sad building is going to be lost one day if it doesn't get an upgrade. But that upgrade will cost millions of dollars and how can an owner make a business case to spend multi millions of dollars to upgrade such a small building that may hold six condo at the most and lower retail? They can't so the buildings sit waiting their ultimate decay. A tax break is not enough IMO.

[Gregory Hartnell]

+++

I note with interest the sympathy most Vibrant Victoria commentators exhibit for the plight of heroic developers and their supposed financial difficulties. Not one of you has addressed the public interest, which is that all of our property taxes go up every year, while the ambience of the downtown is demonstrably worse under the present benighted period of laissez-faire Liberals like Messers Cross and Lowe. Empty shop fronts, beggars on nearly every corner, homelessness, overt public hard drug abuse, etc...

These yearly property tax increases are agravated when favouritism is shown to developers such as Mr. Lefevre and the present owners of the Hotel Douglas. The upper stories of the latter building have never been left derelict for many years, as have many of the other buildings in the Old Towne that seem to concern the heritage crowd. The renovations at the hotel have been ongoing for many years. I recall setting ceramic tile in the men's room with my brother some years ago. We were subject to intolerable abuse from the alcoholic clientele who apparently didn't appreciate our efforts to improve that room during the bar's business hours. This is the type of clientele which the hotel attracts, and whose custom the bylaw would encourage...

By showing favouritism to the owners of such heritage structures, the owners of other commercial and residential buildings built in later periods are effectively penalized. The City of Victoria budget expands every year, and the lacuna in tax revenue is filled by the rest of us outsiders in the form of higher property taxes for no appreciable amelioration in the quality of life for Victoria citizens.

+++

[G-Man]

The only reason my property tax is any different is because my property value went up.

I am no neo-liberal by any means but I do have a basic understading of how our economy works. If we want buildings in our old-town to be fixed up and preserved we need to provide incentive otherwise these developers will invest their money elsewhere.

If you can think of a great way to have old buildings preserved and enhanced without using public money than lets hear your plan and we can discuss it.

How can you knock us for thinking well of plan when you have not presented another option?

I am completely open to any option that will save me tax money and I not a big fan of giving things to developers for free but I cannot myself think of something that would for example have fixed up the Monaco Lofts Building and the Vogue building while at the same time have brought new residents into town.

[Baro]

If the only way to clean up this horrible hotel and turn it into a lovely asset is by giving them a minor tax break, it's tax dollars well spent. That's the reason we have taxes, so we can spend them on fixing up the city. this hotel needs fixing up, thus city does its job. Your examples of trouble you've experianced in the hotel are the exact reasons why this tax break is a good idea. Clean up the hotel, get rid of the worst scary people. It's an investment in the social and commercial fabric of the city.

[Mike K.]

Mr Hartnell, you're conveniently avoiding presenting us with an alternative option.

Unless you have a plan that will

a) restore heritage buildings
b) do so in an economically viable way for both the developer and the consumer

harping on those who support tax incentives for redevelopment of important heritage structures is far from a resolution to the issue at hand.

[Holden West]

LeFevre's Yates St. heritage buildings sat vacant for decades because restoring it was a money losing proposition.

Your response, Mr. Hartnell?

[Gregory Hartnell]

+++

If you read my postings carefully, you will see that I consistently advocate for lowering commercial and residential property taxes, as an economic stimulator. If follows logically that there would be spending reductions at City Hall to balance the books. This is what I advocated as my first priority when I ran for elected office in November 2005.

I am no great fan of the late economist Milton Friedman, however I believe that this is a basic law of economics in our capitalist system.

I would suggest that any developer who can't get a loan from a bank, credit union or other financial institution should revise the flawed business plan, and then try other lenders, and not rely on a decade's worth of subsidization from the public purse.

Taxpayers do not have a responsiblity to support the speculative activity of these developers, however they may couch their intentions with flowery language about saving heritage structures.

+++

[Holden West]

History shows lowering taxes to increase revenue is a failure. Unless you can show me where it has worked in the past.

Your plan to make tax breaks equitable is admirable, Mr. Hartnell but surely you must admit the foundation it's based upon has a poor track record.

[VicHockeyFan]

History shows lowering taxes to increase revenue is a failure. Unless you can show me where it has worked in the past.

Ireland.

[G-Man]

Actually Ireland is running into a lot of problems with its Healthcare and other government services because of excess downloading onto citizens.

[Scaper]

Lower taxes does create jobs and thus creating a larger tax base pool and in the end increasing tax revenue. The opposite increasing taxes, hurts small business and then creates a smaller tax pool and thus the opposite happens. The american economy is doing very well right now, they have a four percent unemployment rate all due to bush's tax cuts.

Though that being said, We need to give incentives to keep these older buildings.

The other option is to completey destroy these old buildings and crank up some tall high density condo's and or offices with no tax breaks and thus the city will have a larger tax revenue from the new building. It's a choice. Personally I would love to see the old buildings saved and the new high density towers built outside of old town and on parking lots or non heritage buildings like the crystal court motel site. That being said I also believe you can have density transfer. Where a developer can spend the millions of dollars restoring say the Janion building receive a banked bonus density amount, that can be transfer to another site in the city or sold to another developer for another project. Thus saving the tax payer from having to foot the bill!!! and in the end another high density building is built in exchange for saving heritage and a new high tax based development is created. An example of this was B.C.B.C. restoration of St. Annes for the current Y lot. If it wasn't for the Y lot we wouldn't have St. Annes today!!! And now the next possilble example will be the Hudson.

[Mike K.]

I'll take that

[G-Man]

I am all for the Swedish model, just to piss all of you neo-liberals off and you won't change my mind.

I love univerasal helath care.

I think welfare is great.

I think that University should be free.

And I think my taxes can go up so long as services do as well.


:smt016 :smt019 :smt016 :smt019 :smt016 :smt019 :smt098 :smt098 :smt098 :smt096 :smt096