The province needs to update their rules on who gets to vote for the MRDT tax. Right now it's only the large resorts (fixed roof) who get to vote and not individual vacation rental owners yet everyone must collect the tax. Most of the resort owners do not live in Tofino yet they control the voting. The residents of Tofino, who own vacation rentals, should be allowed to vote on the MRDT tax rate. Locals will have Tofino's best interest in mind and not an out of town resort owner. It's time for BC to update the policy. If you could vote, would you decrease Tourism Tofino funding and lower the rate to 1 or 2 percent so we can slow the over promotion of our home called Tofino?
9:22 makes an excellant point. I am not a VR operator but think it unfair they get no say. It was also decided for them that the MRDT monies collected from VR's would go to "Affordable Housing". Is that what they wanted?
During the presentation of their new scheme, a system of voluntary donations,(how reliable is that?), the Hotel people indicated that they would want a say in how any monies they collected could be allocated, (spent). This is a terrible idea. Inevitably their interests, business interests, would come into conflict with the broader interests that a council should represent. It would become another round of RMI funding, for tourist promotion only. We have enough of that already. Beware the wolf in sheep's clothing.
Two years of planing and agreement about the use of the MRDT could go up in smoke. The large hotel people with this eleventh hour reversal have shown themselves to be an unreliable partner to the town. Elections have consequences. Your guy lost the election. Get over it.
@ 10:40 Just to clarify - It was air bnb and the province that decided the money would be for affordable housing. If a VR doesn't take a booking on the air bnb platform, then the MRDT goes through the regular channels.
It's time that we all had an equal voice in how our town is promoted. I think it is safe to say that we could cut the MRDT in half (down to 1.5%) and still have too many people here. Tourism Tofino is fat and needs to be put on a diet but they don't want to give up their piece of the pie.
As I recall 11:26 that was so the proliferation of vacation rentals and the destruction of the rental housing pool was made more palatable. Still not to the benefit of those who wanted to actually live here or to the town as a whole.
I think that a 1% "sustainability fee" (or tourism service fee) is a great idea. Thanks to the resort operators for bringing the idea into discussion, again. Tofino could sure use the money. There's lots that needs to be done, just on basic infrastructure alone. Sewage treatment, up grade the water supply, streets to be paved, water and sewer mains to upgrade.
Five years from now, when the establishment of this new tax has cleared all the hurdles in the provincial government, and become legal, Tofino will reap great benefits from this idea. We should pursue the idea, start the process.
6:45 Like what you're saying, but don't give the impression a "new tax" is being proposed. It is no more than a charitable contribution. No one will be obligated by law to contribute. So until laws are created or changed the MRDT is obviously the way to go.
That's great! The resort owners have said that they're willing to contribute voluntarily. That surely shows that the idea itself is a good one, so they can't complain when the DOT takes the idea and runs with it. A local tourism sustainability tax. Is it realistic?
Interesting thought I had the other day... almost without exception- each house built in Tofino over the last decade or so has included a secondary suite so they can conform to the bylaws. I wonder how many of those homes would have just been stand alone empty houses for out of town owners otherwise?
One could argue that each air bnb has 1 unit of staff housing attached to it, and has actually added 200-250 long term rental unit to the market...
The province needs to update their rules on who gets to vote for the MRDT tax. Right now it's only the large resorts (fixed roof) who get to vote and not individual vacation rental owners yet everyone must collect the tax. Most of the resort owners do not live in Tofino yet they control the voting. The residents of Tofino, who own vacation rentals, should be allowed to vote on the MRDT tax rate. Locals will have Tofino's best interest in mind and not an out of town resort owner. It's time for BC to update the policy. If you could vote, would you decrease Tourism Tofino funding and lower the rate to 1 or 2 percent so we can slow the over promotion of our home called Tofino?
ReplyDelete9:22 makes an excellant point. I am not a VR operator but think it unfair they get no say. It was also decided for them that the MRDT monies collected from VR's would go to "Affordable Housing". Is that what they wanted?
ReplyDeleteDuring the presentation of their new scheme, a system of voluntary donations,(how reliable is that?), the Hotel people indicated that they would want a say in how any monies they collected could be allocated, (spent). This is a terrible idea. Inevitably their interests, business interests, would come into conflict with the broader interests that a council should represent. It would become another round of RMI funding, for tourist promotion only. We have enough of that already. Beware the wolf in sheep's clothing.
Two years of planing and agreement about the use of the MRDT could go up in smoke. The large hotel people with this eleventh hour reversal have shown themselves to be an unreliable partner to the town. Elections have consequences. Your guy lost the election. Get over it.
@ 10:40 Just to clarify - It was air bnb and the province that decided the money would be for affordable housing. If a VR doesn't take a booking on the air bnb platform, then the MRDT goes through the regular channels.
ReplyDeleteIt's time that we all had an equal voice in how our town is promoted. I think it is safe to say that we could cut the MRDT in half (down to 1.5%) and still have too many people here. Tourism Tofino is fat and needs to be put on a diet but they don't want to give up their piece of the pie.
ReplyDelete@11:09 I believe this was lobbied by our Mayor and local politicians at the time.
ReplyDeleteAs I recall 11:26 that was so the proliferation of vacation rentals and the destruction of the rental housing pool was made more palatable.
ReplyDeleteStill not to the benefit of those who wanted to actually live here or to the town as a whole.
I think that a 1% "sustainability fee" (or tourism service fee) is a great idea. Thanks to the resort operators for bringing the idea into discussion, again. Tofino could sure use the money. There's lots that needs to be done, just on basic infrastructure alone. Sewage treatment, up grade the water supply, streets to be paved, water and sewer mains to upgrade.
ReplyDeleteFive years from now, when the establishment of this new tax has cleared all the hurdles in the provincial government, and become legal, Tofino will reap great benefits from this idea. We should pursue the idea, start the process.
Until then, we'll use "our" MRDT money.
6:45 Like what you're saying, but don't give the impression a "new tax" is being proposed. It is no more than a charitable contribution. No one will be obligated by law to contribute. So until laws are created or changed the MRDT is obviously the way to go.
ReplyDeleteThat's great! The resort owners have said that they're willing to contribute voluntarily. That surely shows that the idea itself is a good one, so they can't complain when the DOT takes the idea and runs with it.
ReplyDeleteA local tourism sustainability tax. Is it realistic?
Here's another alternative: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Value-added_tax
ReplyDeleteHow about Air b&B's contribute as well. They wrecked the town as much as any resort.
ReplyDeleteInteresting thought I had the other day... almost without exception- each house built in Tofino over the last decade or so has included a secondary suite so they can conform to the bylaws.
ReplyDeleteI wonder how many of those homes would have just been stand alone empty houses for out of town owners otherwise?
One could argue that each air bnb has 1 unit of staff housing attached to it, and has actually added 200-250 long term rental unit to the market...
You bet the resorts can't claim that ratio of 1:1
Food for thought.