My response: We - those of us who are not happy with current policies + practices - need to be using all available venues, including our FB "status" posts, to ask questions, talk about what's important to us.
Here's what's important to me: keeping my taxes low by investing in sustainability
Typically, elections - especially local government elections - are fought over tax issues. We all want to be paying less and getting more services. Mostly we want to be paying less. That includes me.
It used to be that things like "sustainability" and "conservation" were seen as "soft" and "expensive" items, ie. increasing taxpayer burden without much tangible benefit, other than a nice green place to take the kids for a hike. The evidence is shifting on this. More and more research, and particularly with regard to how communites are going to respond to climate change, shows that "conservation" and "sustainability" are keys to keeping the lid on, perhaps even reducing taxpayer burden.
There is a growing body of evidence showing conservation practices as beneficial to taxpayers, ie. smart use of land base = long term savings to taxpayers (infrastructure costs, climate change mitigation) as well as benefiting real estate values (greener, cleaner communities/neighbourhoods are more attractive to buyers) and general "quality of life."
Sustainability = investment in tax benefits
As taxpayers we get hijacked by the idea that "sustainability" and "conservation" are expense items. We need to think of them, and in turn pitch them to citizens and taxpayers, as "investment" items, investment in lowering taxes in the medium and long-term. In other words, if you're concerned about taxes, vote for candidates and parties that are serious about on-the-ground sustainability practices. If you're running for office, do what others aren't bold enough to do: talk about the real cost of "business as usual," and the real financial benefits of "sustainable business as usual."
Warning
I'm going to be posting about this, or variations of this, via my profile over the coming months. Forgive me for redundancy. But redundancy (with variations) is how people start to pay attention. I encourage you to steal/borrow/cut_and_paste/create your own variations with these ideas to suit your own needs.
Comments from FB
I'll be posting comments related to this article as they appear on FB, and as I have time. Generally, it's best to post here in the "comment" box below. I'm happy to see duplicates of FB comments appear here. To find a version of this post on Facebook... click here: Sustainability - it's about lowering taxpayer burden
Here are some from Mayor Paul Ives, Tom Dishlevoy, Alison Fox:
- Paul IvesI look forward to seeing how this debate unfolds... quite frankly, the timing is perfect as we head into a likely federal election, a probable provincial election, and of course the local government elections this Fall... from a fiscal sustainability perspective from local government is that we can't keep going back to the property taxpayer for increases in the range of 4 to 5% when inflation is running at about 2% along with wage settlements in the same range... while renewing and, on occasion, replacing aging infrastructure is the real challenge, we have to look at the life cycle costing aspects of any new infrastructure such that we build in reserves for renewal on an ongoing sustaining basis...about an hour ago ·
- Tom Dishlevoy Its about everybody living within their means - individuals, businesses and municipalities. We are going to get an earful at the upcoming CAVI sessions over the next year on infrastructure sustainability (fiscal that is). The solutions are going to take some inventive creativity. Our RGS and OCPs are telling us what we need to know but our plans and designs and approvals are ignoring them (even within the RGS and OCP documents themselves). I look forward to the debate as well and I hope it is an actual debate.17 minutes ago ·
hanspetermeyer
25 March 2011
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment
Thanks for posting!