Vancouver City Council studies $30M tax proposal

Deliberation over A Stronger Vancouver continued Monday evening with a city council workshop targeted at all the services and upgrades the city might be able to buy with an additional $30 million a year in tax revenue.

The result of two years of analysis and outreach, the sweeping package would pour resources into economic development, public safety and city parks.

“It’s a big project. It’s going to be the largest undertaking the city has done in recent history, if ever,” Councilor Laurie Lebowsky said at the April 22 meeting.

Parks and Recreation Director Julie Hannon, Community Economic Development Director Chad Eiken and Fire Chief Joe Molina laid out the benefits of the project to their respective departments in a presentation to council. It was a follow-up to last week, when representatives from the Vancouver Strong Executive Sponsors Council presented their formal recommendations — including how to pay for them.

Among other things, the Stronger Vancouver plan would provide funds to:

• Replace the Operations Center.

• Rebuild two fire stations and renovate three.

• Enhance the parks system, which would include building nine new parks on city property, improving 14 existing parks and redesigning two others.

• Increase investments in areas needing a boost, like the Fourth Plain corridor and the Heights district.

• Establish a citywide culture, arts and heritage program.

• Improve response times of emergency services.

• Support and extend operations serving the homeless at the Vancouver Navigation Center.

• Make the Affordable Housing Fund property tax levy permanent.

• Update fire safety requirements to include sprinklers in all new buildings.

• Improve pedestrian and cyclist safety.

One of the goals of the package was to help restore the staff levels after the Great Recession slashed city payrolls. If approved, A Stronger Vancouver should stabilize the city’s operating budget through 2030.

“Since about 2012, the city has been relentlessly focused on: how do we optimize the best results to the community that we can with the resources we do have? And after we do that, what gaps do we have?” said City Manager Eric Holmes. “What mix of programs and projects could achieve that vision?”

It all comes at a hefty price tag: $30.1 million per year in added taxes and fees, or about a 5 percent increase in the city’s overall operating budget.

However, Councilor Linda Glover pointed out that the package was actually a slimmed-down version of the group’s original wish list.

“There’s been a lot of public outreach and there’s been a lot of public feedback, and you’ve been listening,” Glover told the panel of city staff. “Things have been pared down.”

To fund the upgrades, the plan recommends a three-way tax split: $9.7 million from an uptick in property taxes, $9.7 million from increased business taxes and $10.7 million from other miscellaneous taxes and fees.

Raising property taxes would require a ballot measure for a multiyear permanent levy lid lift. Under the plan, the move would collect 44 cents per $1,000 of assessed property value, or about $154 for a home assessed at $350,000.

The city would also reinstate its Business and Occupancy tax for the first time since 2002, expected to generate $5.5 million per year by collecting 55 cents per $1,000 of gross operating revenue from businesses operating within Vancouver limits. The plan would also bump the city’s business head tax up by $70 per employee.

The final, miscellaneous category would include $2.7 million through an increase to the utility tax rate, $3 million from a city tax on internet sales and $2.6 million from increased park impact fees, among a handful of other charges.

At Monday’s workshop, Councilor Ty Stober expressed concern that the tax-heavy message of the Stronger Vancouver plan might turn some constituents off.

“What really came through in the report and last week’s workshop is a tax message,” Stober said.

Instead, he said, the city should frame the conversation around investments.

“If we make wise choices, there’s a positive return on that investment,” Stober said. “If we spend a dollar, our businesses get more than a dollar back, our residents get more than a dollar back.”

Fellow Councilor Bill Turlay, a staunch fiscal conservative, expressed skepticism with the plan’s priorities — wants, he said, shouldn’t be elevated to the same level as needs.

“Is it essential? Because if it’s going to affect my taxes as well as other seniors on a fixed income, I’m going to say no,” Turlay said.