Another step forward for a second berth at Ridley Island's Trigon Terminal was announced today with Trigon Pacific Terminals announcement of a 71 million dollar contract award to PPM Civil Constructors ULC, the award for the marine construction of their Berth 2 Beyond Carbon infrastructure.
The project is part of Trigon's diversification program which will see low carbon energy exports such as ammonia and hydrogen for fuel use shipped through the North Coast facility.
“The world is transitioning and so are we. Canada is exceptionally well-positioned to supply the Asia-Pacific with emerging fuels such as ammonia, and we are putting the necessary pieces in place to transform our terminal, and Prince Rupert, into a low-carbon energy export hub.” -- Trigon CEO Rob Booker.
Neil Williams, President of PPMCC noted of the economic benefits that the project will bring to the region.
“PPMCC is honoured to carry out this project in the communities of the Tsimshian Territory. Delivering projects of this magnitude, while maintaining a focus on safety, the community, and the environment – these are absolute priorities of ours,. This project will also provide economic benefits to this region, including excellent employment opportunities for the foreseeable future.”
 |
| Officials from Trigon and PPMC at today's announcement (image from Trigon) |
For anyone wondering: yes, this investment will be subject to the Port tax cap. Meaning we as federal taxpayers are subsidizing the cost of its construction, we as provincial taxpayers are subsidizing its taxes, and we as local property owners will soon be subsidizing its property taxes as their assessed value inevitably declines.
ReplyDelete#lawltownbigport
What would you rather subsidize?More war, or how about more expensive vacations? Dig a little deeper and find that additional separate community investment by the PRPA helps fund programs and services that taxes to the overlords at city hall would not cover.
DeleteWe would rather not subsidize any of it, thanks!
DeleteSimply flip your argument the other direction to see that the PRPA is not funding roads, water, sewer, or other critical infrastructure at the same rate as the rest of us with their community investments. Most probably because there is no way to stick their logo sign on them!
Wouldn't need road sewer or water infrastructure funding if there are no high paying jobs that are generated through port development. These jobs provide a rather handsome tax base for our top heavy city administration to be supported by. The fact is that without industry courting this region through port development our community would be nothing more than a ghost town.
DeleteJobs don’t provide a property tax base, property does.
DeleteBy that logic , why are we even asking industry or small businesses to even pay taxes in the first place? Let’s exempt them all and raise house taxes by 1200% instead of just 12!
Since there are so many good paying jobs, it wouldn’t be a problem right?
Only in Rupert will you hear someone complain about the high taxes along with the possibility of new revenue.
ReplyDeleteIs the "berth" even taxable? Maybe I'm wrong but it was my understanding that the city's interest ends at the shoreline.
Only in Rupert is the vast majority of major industry granted a grossly unfair property tax break
DeleteThat comment just goes to show how misinformed some residents are,
Deletehttps://www.bclaws.gov.bc.ca/civix/document/id/complete/statreg/04007_01
Rupert is one of nine cities in the province where the port tax cap applies.
How many of the 1784 scrap the tax signatures were from the eight other cities?
That comment just goes to show how misinformed that specific commentator is.
DeleteDo any other of the impacted cities in BC have a port complex that is over a third of their GDP? No.
Do any other impacted cities have substantially higher populations, more houses, more businesses and other industries to share the burden? Yes, yes, yes and yes.
Port Metro Vancouver, $305 Billion in trade.
DeleteCity of Vancouver budget, 1.97 Billion
There should be tons of scrap the tax signatures out of Vancouver right?
Why can't Prince Rupert attract more business to share the burden, what is holding back the 31st largest city in the province?
Watson is only 13% leased
Our light business tax base has eroded by 10%.
Seems people are missing the point,our tax dollars wether their come from federal or provincial are being used to subsidize a facility for a Foreign Company. Then this same company gets a tax break from the same people paying for the project I don’t think many local people will be hired by the out of town contractor, and those coming into town to work on the project will need somewhere to rent, Taking away from an already serious shortage of rental stock in Prince Rupert
ReplyDeleteCorrect, despite the various layers, there is only one taxpayer!
Delete'subsidize a facility for a Foreign Company."
DeleteThe caps have provided cost certainty for the marine industry which has allowed the Federal government to expand trade in Asia & Indo Pacific.
Why is there a serious shortage of rental stock?
Maybe it is because our bylaws are not enforced so buildings have burnt down and our permitting is too slow so nothing can be rebuilt.
Call it whatever you want but the rationale for providing some tax certainty is to ensure a level playing field and financial stability for port operators in a very competitive market. US ports on the west coast aren't subject to the same, high level of taxation so some incentive was/is necessary. We should be thankful.
DeleteWhy are we worried about a relatively small government subsidy, if we want to call it that? If that's what it takes to attract and maintain investment then so be it.
We're "subsidizing" Translink to the tune of $1.5 billion to replace their 4 lane Pattullo Bridge with another 4 lane bridge. This bridge is owned by Translink and is not part of provincial infrastructure yet the government thought they'd be nice and pay for the entire rebuild, when they had previously only committed to half.
Now that user fees have been removed from the Port Mann and Golden Ears bridges as well, guess who pays the full cost? If you guessed BC taxpayers you'd be correct. Instead of being user funded, they're now taxpayer funded, including those of us in PR who rarely, if ever, use them.
So I couldn't care less if a bit of provincial money is sent here to help support these industries and our community. I'd rather that than be back in 2004 when this community was desperate to find a path forward after the collapse of Skeena Cellulose.
Thanks to our past and current provincial governments for helping to create and maintain and environment that attracts industry, to the PRPA for helping to support the community by selling us on the world stage, and for the port operators for investing in our community. I hope you know that you have the support of many.
Now lets continue to find new sources of revenue for the City of PR. That starts with welcoming Vopak which may contribute as much as another $5 million a year to the city.
And no, I don't work for the port.
Somehow the Wheelhouse Pub is supposed to help our city. It has never been explained to me how this will generate more taxes.
Delete