First, the good news – that $100 recreational and culture levy that was sprung upon Surrey taxpayers just a few shorts weeks after the last civic election is coming to an end.
The bad? That $100 tax – err, levy – is still going to come out of residents’ pockets, and is simply being rebranded as a ‘capital levy’, an undefined, sweeping term that, one assumes, can be used by the city to pay for just about any project.
The original levy – approved unanimously by the newly elected, all-Surrey First council in 2014 – came during a flurry of tax hikes the city approved in order to pay for a number of election promises, notably the goal of hiring 100 more police officers.
The tax – sorry, the levy – was estimated to boost city coffers by $16 million annually.
In theory, earmarking money for recreation and culture – be it arts, leisure, sports or other similar projects – is a wonderful idea. It, presumably, has helped pay for a number of important projects throughout the city, including the long-awaited aquatic facilities soon to open in Grandview Heights.
But what now? And why the change?
The city says the capital levy can be used for “any capital project.” Is this name-change a way to siphon much-needed funding away from the oft-ignored cultural and arts community?
Your guess is as good as anyone’s, because the city hasn’t exactly rolled out the name-change of this tax – levy, sorry – with much fanfare or discussion.
Such action, of course, points to a much larger issue which has loomed large over the city since voters elected candidates from a single political slate in across the board. They can govern in something of a vacuum – with a mandate from residents who took the time to vote, it should still be noted – left to make decisions without individual council members offering dissent, or even discussion, at least before the public eye.
Is there not a single member of council willing to speak out – about the capital levy, or the ongoing truck-park proposal in South Surrey, or the widely contested expropriation of the Riverside Golf Centre, or anything else?
Perhaps, so far, they’ve simply all been in agreement – it’s certainly not inconceivable.
But should a situation arise in the future in which a member of council disagrees with his or her colleagues, one hopes they’ll have the gumption to raise a hand in opposition, regardless of political stripe.
Surrey taxpayers deserve at least that much.