My Platform

Towns, Cities and Villages are probably the greatest and most numerous non-profit organizations on the planet, out numbering even the number of national governments, who rule them. Ponoka, like all governments, is organized voluntarily by it citizens for the expressed purpose of sharing certain costs which are too high for the individual to bear alone and for enabling the individual to share in economic and social benefits which cannot be gained by the individual outside of of the group dynamic. The organization of human society at this larger level enables the amassed individuals to become more than the sum of their parts.

There are three basic sources of operating revenue for our town:

Property tax assessments

Licensing and permitting

Government transfers- both federal and provincial.

As we all know, the first two sources of income are both paid by the business people and residents of the jurisdiction. Government sources of money are actually contributions that are made by residents of other jurisdictions to the residents of the receiving jurisdiction. In 2009 of the three largest sources of town revenue, one third came from Government transfers. This means that 1 dollar of every three that we need in order for our community to operate must come from people who are residents of other areas of this province or another province, who pay taxes based upon their income.

Although taxing property alone seems to not be the best means of taxation, it does have its advantages besides it being the only means of taxation that is open to local government. Some of the advantages of the property tax are outlined on page 9 of, Alternatives on Property Taxation by Joan M. Youngman :

They are highly perceptible to rate payers and promote accountability

Well understood

Cheap to collect

Difficult to evade

It is my belief that the idea of having infrastructure categories such as “Local Area Improvement” runs contrary to and undermines this basic purpose for which citizens organize themselves into these larger groupings of villages, towns and cities. The only way in which the idea that a neighborhood should be made to finance its own infrastructure needs is if the town can point to and say that the wear and tear that is sustained by installed infrastructure has arisen directly as a result of use by the local residents, and is in no way a consequence of normal degradation. Otherwise it is morally wrong for the town to charge those residents exclusively with costs of their replacement.

Such a change in town policy pertaining to the way in which some ongoing infrastructure needs have been funded will mean that taxes have to go up. However the current policy, although it has meant an overall exceptionally low rate of taxation compared to similar towns and has been a misrepresentation on the part of Council. The truth being that taxes have increased for those who have had to pay for their own “local area improvement”. The current policy has pitted neighbour against neighbour and has placed an inordinate financial burden on those who must live on fixed incomes.

If I were to be voted onto town council the areas which I think should receive the town's funding priorities are:

roads/sidewalks

policing

water/sewer

library

parks

These are the areas where I believe that the greatest community good can be achieved for the benefit of the greatest number of citizens.

Raising local property taxes alone is not going to close the town's income deficit. During my three year term of office I would also like for the town to enter into talks with the County of Ponoka for the purpose of amalgamating the two jurisdictions. I believe that amalgamation with the county is more in the town's interest than is the annexation of county land. It would seem that overall it would be fair for the county to acknowledge that its residents benefit from town services, such as the pool, library, shopping, arena; that are not provided by the county. The town of Ponoka is also a business and shopping hub for county residents. And for many it is the place where they retire from farming.

An advantage to the town, besides shared operational costs, would be a reduced number of councillors. Many county residents retire in Ponoka because living in an urban community affords more benefits,such as social and economic benefits, for the elderly than they can enjoy by staying in the sparsely populated countryside.

It is not my position that elected officials have the moral right to tell their electors what they will discuss with the town's residents or for how long they will discuss a matter. This is simply not their place. refuse to have further discussions with them when they have a grievance that is unresolved. Nor do I think that it is legitimate for the elected officials to hide behind provincial regulatory bodies and statutes, as a means of evading accountability. Nor should they drive this town's residents into penury as they look for justice in a property tax system that, in the interest of the politicians, has become opaque in its structure.

I would also work for a change to Ponoka's subsidized housing program which would require of those who reside in the units that they be working to get themselves out. No longer should the provision of subsidized housing be treated as an entitlement and a permanent place of for long term residence. Rather we need to structure the low income housing program around the concept of it being a way station. A place that affords the individual an opportunity to get a leg “up”. Rather than it being used as a permanent cheap storage facility for the lives of those who can work but who refuse to do so.

In the new system approved applicants would have to sign one year renewable leases which could only be renwed for a maximum of three consecutive years.  Priority would be given to applicants who are currently working and are living below the official poverty threshold.  If an applicant is not working he/she would have to submit a current resume or proof of fulltime attendance at a post secondary institution or enrollment in a trades program.  Once approved, continued maintenance of a person's residential priviliges would be contingent upon their maintaining either fulltime attendance at the post secondary institution/trades program or continuing proof that they are seeking fulltime work.