Reposting of a April 26 article. This particular item was put off pending receipt of
information from Mr. Tom Christensen, MLA. On the agenda for the meeting is:THAT Council support an amendment to the Zoning Bylaw #5000 to limit the number of slot machines in the
City to 400. Agenda - 235Kb Agenda Package - 8.35MB (p.35- )
It appears that info from our MLA has been received so this part of the Casino package can proceed. Hopefully they will look at the fees that should be charged to raise the money to perpetuate a Social Responsibility Fund. The City's Lawyers use of a case about Provincial probate fees is clearly not pertinent to this discussion. At the very least, matching the Provincial fee(s) for a class B Casino plus a per worker charge would seem an interim solution until Council does some more research on this fee that should be charged.
If Fee's are charged only to cover costs for Casino Business Licence Fee, How does City Council Explain the Terasen Gas Franchise fee ?
See the link above to illustrate this double think on fees. Section 194 (4) of the Community Charter requires a municipality to make available to the public, on request, the basis for calculation of a fee. (Hopefully my request for a justification of the franchise fee charged to natural gas users imposed by the city and collected by Terasen Gas on their behalf will now be forthcoming?)----------------------------------
Original Apr. 26 Posting:
Agenda Package - 9.93MB (p.66-68
)
Purpose:
Council, at its January 28, 2008 Committee of the Whole meeting, directed staff to review business license fees for casinos. This report provides Council with information on services are currently provided in the community and the legal implications of imposing an increased business license fee on casinos.
Recommendation:
That Council support an amendment to Zoning Bylaw #5000 to limit the number of slot machines in the City to 400
-------------------------------------
Don Quixote Note:
- Provincial Fees Required: REGISTRATION CLASSES APPLICATION FEE AND ANNUAL REGISTRATION FEE
• Class A Casino (500 or more slots) $ 35,000 per site
• Class B Casino (less than 500 slots) $ 15,000 per site
The Application Fee is required to initiate a new or renewal application. The Annual Registration Fee is a yearly fee required to maintain registration. It is remitted to GPEB each year on or before the anniversary date (the date registration was approved by GPEB) for the term of the registration. The Application Fee and the Annual Registration Fee is the same. Gaming Workers $ 45 for 3 years / Senior Employees $ 250per year/ Senior Officials $ 250 per year - Vernon FEES : 08 Casino ............................................................................................ 110.00 +
+ $20.00/table/slot machine - 02 Arcade .............................................................................................. 50.00 +
+ Variable - See Table A-I
Arcade Vending Machine 8 – 10 $50.00 /20 – 22 $150.00/62 – 64 $500.00/71 + $600.00 - http://www.lawsociety.bc.ca/publications_forms/notices/98-11-09_probate.html
Appears that the case cited by the City of Vernon's lawyers is one involving probate fees in Ontario. The fees involved were ones that can only be prescribed by legislation rather than mere regulation. This case seems to have limited application and relevance to the fees imposed by a municipal government. Controlling Governments’ Taxing Powers (Re Eurig): Acted as co-counsel for Mrs. Eurig in this landmark case. The Supreme Court of Canada declared Ontario’s probate fee invalid on constitutional and administrative law grounds. The Supreme Court held that Ontario had charged a tax, rather than a fee, and that such a tax could only be imposed by the provincial legislature. The Court ordered that the appellant’s probate fee be refunded to her. The decision now constrains governments from imposing taxes by means other than a Bill originating in Parliament or one of the provincial legislatures. See Re Eurig Estate, [1998] 2 S.C.R. 565, 165 D.L.R. (4th) 1, 114 O.A.C. 55, 23 E.T.R. 1, 40 O.R. (3d) 160 (S.C.C.), rev’g (1997), 31 O.R. (3d) 777, 96 O.A.C. 354 (C.A.). - Section 194 (4) of the Community Charter requires a municipality to make available to the public, on request, the basis for calculation of a fee. (Hopefully my request for a justification of the franchise fee charged to natural gas users imposed by the city and collected by Terasen Gas on their behalf will now be forthcoming?)
- Section 194 (2) of the Community Charter;(b) base the fee on any factor specified in the bylaw and, in addition to the authority under section 12 (1) [variation authority], establish different rates or levels of fees in relation to different factors;
- Section 12 (1) of the Community Charter: A municipal bylaw under this Act may do one or more of the following:(a) make different provisions for different areas, times, conditions or circumstances as described by bylaw;(b) establish different classes of persons, places, activities, property or things; (c) make different provisions, including exceptions, for different classes established under paragraph (b). (2) A council may, in exercising its powers under section 8 (1) [natural person powers], establish any terms and conditions it considers appropriate.
- From the Report on page 67: Council, through Zoning Bylaw #5000, has the ability to place a limit on the number of slot machines in the City. Setting a limit at the current number of slots in the casino would put future Councils in a better negotiating position in the event of another expansion, and would effectively prevent creation of additional casinos. Setting the limit below the current number of slots would put the casino in a lawfully non-conforming condition, which could allow other opportunities for negotiation. (Don. Quixote Aside: We had a winning hand to negotiate a $50,000 per year Social Responsibility fund and we threw it away when we allowed the expansion and then tried to negotiate. This is the City's way of getting a new deal I guess !)
No comments:
Post a Comment