The district is poised to give some businesses a break on water with a tax exemption.
Last month, Sicamous council gave three readings to a revitalization tax exemption bylaw, with fourth reading scheduled for tonight’s meeting (July 10). The bylaw will give 21 businesses an opportunity to claim up to $1,200 annually for five years (2014 to 2018), representing a $126,000 loss of municipal taxes. The exemption is to “assist high-volume commercial water users with the cost of installing water filtration systems” until the community’s new water filtration facility is up and running.
The bylaw represents the district’s response to calls from the business community for assistance following last year’s flooding, which crippled the municipal water supply. The district is about to undertake a feasibility study related to the $4.5 million municipal water treatment plant – two-thirds of which is being funded with federal and provincial grant money – and will be closer to knowing a construction date when it is complete.
Coun. Charlotte Hutchinson said she wasn’t comfortable with the exemption, not knowing how many businesses would be making use of it. She said that while it will take some time, the new water treatment plant is a solution.
Coun. Fred Busch said he was in favour of the spirit of the bylaw, but not the proposed duration. He also noted that business owners were not the only ones affected by the flooding.
“There are a lot of households where there are persons who have immune-compromised systems where they have to either put in a high-end filtration system or buy bottled water for their own use,” said Busch. “So yes, businesses are important to the community, I don’t deny that at all. But I think we have to realize that there are other people in this community other than the businesses who contribute to the well-being of the community.”
Coun. Terry Rysz, however, advocated strongly for the bylaw, going so far as to make a motion that the district cover 20 per cent of the businesses’ water filtration systems, regardless the cost. This motion failed, while the bylaw, as presented, received the support of council.
