The MD of Willow Creek has directed administration to draft a by-law for a community aggregate payment levy, that would see 40 cents charged on every tonne of sand and gravel aggregate leaving a pit within the municipality.
The decision came at council’s March 11 meeting after it heard a report from director of infrastructure Craig Pittman .
Council had asked administration to collect and prepare information regarding the potential of implementing a community aggregate payment levy.
The municipality sent notification and a survey to be completed to all aggregate operators within the municipality and hosted a meeting with the operators to gain feedback and perspective on Feb. 11.
The survey results were discussed and operators were encouraged to communicate their opinions.
At this meeting, council requested annual quantities be reported to administration for better understanding of volumes.
While only three producers provided historic volumes, it is estimated the total amount of aggregate leaving pits within the municipality may be upwards of one million tonnes annually.
In addition to the comments received on the survey and reviewed at the Feb. 11 meeting, producers stated items at the meeting which are summarized as such:
- Where does it (tax) stop? Will there be a tax on agricultural operations such as irrigated farmland and cattle?
- Some folks would like a committee or a representative from industry be involved in selecting projects to spend levy funds on.
- Why can’t a series of haul use agreements be used? These agreements cover damage, not upgrades and normal wear and tear on roads and bridges.
- Why not increase taxes to the whole municipality rather than selecting and taxing only one industry?
- There were some concerns about the potential to lose a competitive advantage they have, and some projects may get cancelled.
- Will pits leased by the MD of Willow Creek be exempt, and the answer is yes.
- Most of the aggregate is leaving the MD of Willow Creek on provincial highways. Why is this applicable? The resource is non-renewable and is currently located within the municipality.
Pittman said should council choose to implement this by-law, it is anticipated about three quarters of a full-time employee would be required to administer and enforce it. This would largely affect the accounts receivable and by-law enforcement work groups.
Implementation of this by-law would be followed by the creation and distribution of a video outlining the industry, the levy, and community benefits.
Similar information would be added to the municipal newsletter, Web site, and social media.
Coun. Earl Hemmaway said he was opposed to the levy, pointing out in one meeting the municipality wants to promote business and in another is proposing a tax on business.
Hemmaway noted these trucks are not breaking up the road any more than super bees or cattle liners.
With people being taxed more for education, health and fuel, Hemmaway asked what’s next? Will cattle liners be taxed?
“To me, this is a never-ending thing,” Hemmaway said.
Coun. Brian Nelson said the levy is not taxing operators, they just collect the levy. It is taxing those companies in Calgary and Lethbridge buying the sand and gravel.
“They’re (pit operators) just passing the cost on,” Nelson said.
Nelson stressed the levy is taxing gravel leaving the MD of Willow Creek.
Nelson also pointed out most neighbouring municipalities already have a levy, and the actual increased cost per load would be $8 to $10.
Evan Berger said when the gravel is gone, it is gone forever, observing other areas, primarily the cities, are sucking it all out.
Berger noted Foothills County did not lose business when it instituted a levy.
Berger also disagreed with the comparison to beef and grain because those are renewable, and raised in the municipality.
Hemmaway said he would be in favour of a levy if the revenue goes to a specific purpose such as roads, but not into general revenue.
Reeve Maryanne Sandberg agreed, the money needs to go to a specific purpose.
The rest of council also agreed, and unanimously decided to direct administration to bring back a draft community aggregate payment levy by-law for council’s consideration.
