Council approves 'fentanyl tax' .

petros

The Central Scrutinizer
Nov 21, 2008
117,629
14,363
113
Low Earth Orbit
Council approves 'fentanyl tax' to combat overdose crisis
Opposition councillors argue tax is accepting download from senior governments

MIKE HOWELL / VANCOUVER COURIER

DECEMBER 13, 2016 03:39 PM
overdose
Vancouver firefighters, seen here responding to an overdose Tuesday in the Downtown Eastside, will receive $1.8 million to help combat the overdose drug crisis. Photo Dan Toulgoet
Dig in to your wallets property owners – your taxes are going up by 3.9 per cent next year and a portion of that increase is to pay for the city’s response to the overdose drug crisis in Vancouver, where 124 people have died in the first 10 months of this year.

City council voted 8-3 Tuesday in favour of the tax hike after a fiery exchange between the ruling Vision Vancouver and the NPA that centred around saving lives and whether a tax hike was accepting a download of responsibility from senior levels of government mandated to deliver health care.

The debate, which closed in on three hours, was set off by Vision Coun. Geoff Meggs’ motion to raise taxes by another .5 per cent on top of the originally proposed 3.4 per cent increase. The half per cent increase, or “fentanyl tax,” will generate $3.5 million and be added to a $4 million contingency fund.

“This drug is the worst serial killer that we have seen on the streets of Vancouver – ever -- and to not act at this point, in my opinion, is morally wrong,” said Vision Coun. Andrea Reimer, referring to the synthetic narcotic that has been linked to 60 per cent of the 622 overdose deaths in B.C. in the first 10 months of this year.

For taxpayers, a 3.9 per cent tax hike will mean increases that range from $29 for a condo to $152 for a commercial property. A single-family home will see an increase of $83. All increases are based on median-priced homes.

NPA Coun. Melissa De Genova argued that politicians have known about the overdose crisis for several months but only decided 48 hours before a city budget meeting earlier this month to float the idea of raising taxes another half per cent.

“To have this burden thrown on taxpayers at the last minute, I think is concerning,” said De Genova, noting she has received hundreds of emails from residents upset at the lack of consultation.

She pointed out the federal government announced Monday a new drug strategy and that the province has already spent $43 million this year to combat the overdose crisis. She urged council to work with governments to get more funding rather than seek an additional tax.

“I think that there will be more money in that pot, but not if Vancouver makes a decision like this because they’ll be laughing all the way to the bank saying, ‘It’s OK, Vancouver’s going to raise their taxes and make people pay twice,’” De Genova said.

Vision Coun. Kerry Jang lashed back at De Genova, saying her suggestion about “paying twice” was a red herring and that he was happy to pay more tax to help save lives. In another exchange with De Genova, Jang said the city regularly speaks to the provincial government about getting more treatment for drug users but that hasn’t happened.

“That’s where the province should be putting the money, and that’s where they haven’t put the money – and it pisses me off,” he said, pounding his fist on his desk.

A big chunk of the so-called fentanyl tax money -- $1.8 million – will allow the Vancouver Fire Department to deploy four medic teams around the clock, instead of relying on overtime and taking firefighters and vehicles from other parts of the city to respond to overdose calls in the Downtown Eastside.

“I’m pleased,” said Fire Chief John McKearney after the council vote. “Now we have to look at the contingency fund to come up with a plan to make sure it works.”

Other measures the tax will pay for include $130,000 on "enhanced mental health support" for firefighters and frontline city and parks staff, opening a community policing centre in Strathcona ($200,000 per year), training city staff in overdose management ($20,000), creating a youth education program targeted at substance abuse and harm reduction ($200,000) and developing a strategy to create treatment-on-demand drug rehabilitation programs ($100,000).

Green Party Coun. Adriane Carr said it was the first time in five years that she would be voting to support the budget, which totals $1.3 billion and includes $80 million for housing and $14 million for childcare. Carr called the tax a "smart response" to combat the overdose crisis. She said the .5 per cent tax translates to an increase of $4 for a condo, $11 for a single-family house and $19 for a commercial property.

"These are not large burdens to respond to what is a life and death crisis in our city that is only escalating," Carr said.

mhowell@vancourier.com

- See more at: Council approves 'fentanyl tax' to combat overdose crisis
 

Nick Danger

Council Member
Jul 21, 2013
1,804
471
83
Penticton, BC
So the guy states early on that increase to cover the "fentanyl tax" will amount to 0.5%, but then proceeds to use the entire 3.9% figure for the rest of his rant. Let's keep this in perspective, the actual "fentanyl tax" on a median priced single-family home will be about ten bucks. Now, if you like, we can discuss the concept of our society paying for problems that our society creates ? The usual left/right split on this is the difference between "Let's do something to help them" and "It's their own damn fault, let them die". Where do you fall on that scale ?
 

pgs

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 29, 2008
28,554
8,150
113
B.C.
So the guy states early on that increase to cover the "fentanyl tax" will amount to 0.5%, but then proceeds to use the entire 3.9% figure for the rest of his rant. Let's keep this in perspective, the actual "fentanyl tax" on a median priced single-family home will be about ten bucks. Now, if you like, we can discuss the concept of our society paying for problems that our society creates ? The usual left/right split on this is the difference between "Let's do something to help them" and "It's their own damn fault, let them die". Where do you fall on that scale ?
Well when Penticton gets a fentanyl tax your property taxes can be raised also . Great idea eh .
 

TenPenny

Hall of Fame Member
Jun 9, 2004
17,467
139
63
Location, Location
So, the point of the article is that because emergency services costs are increasing, taxes are going up.


Okay, other than being blindingly obvious, is there anything else to say?
 

Nick Danger

Council Member
Jul 21, 2013
1,804
471
83
Penticton, BC
So, the point of the article is that because emergency services costs are increasing, taxes are going up.

On the surface, yes. Maybe it's just me but I get the impression from the way the article is written that the author is attempting to give some credibility to those who would say that since addiction is a "self inflicted" injury that those who suffer from it are undeserving of taxpayer support.
 

Cannuck

Time Out
Feb 2, 2006
30,245
99
48
Alberta
So, the point of the article is that because emergency services costs are increasing, taxes are going up.


Okay, other than being blindingly obvious, is there anything else to say?

For me, the real issue is the downloading. Healthcare is a provincial jurisdiction. We're experiencing the same type of issues here in Alberta where the province has been pushing medical co-response. Fire fighting is a municipal responsibility and this is nothing more than AHS trying to offload that onto municipalities.
 

Mowich

Hall of Fame Member
Dec 25, 2005
16,649
998
113
76
Eagle Creek
So the guy states early on that increase to cover the "fentanyl tax" will amount to 0.5%, but then proceeds to use the entire 3.9% figure for the rest of his rant. Let's keep this in perspective, the actual "fentanyl tax" on a median priced single-family home will be about ten bucks. Now, if you like, we can discuss the concept of our society paying for problems that our society creates ? The usual left/right split on this is the difference between "Let's do something to help them" and "It's their own damn fault, let them die". Where do you fall on that scale ?

Interesting question, Nick. I just read an article in the NP where one addict admitted to being revived four times in one day - four times. How in hell do you help someone so set on destroying themselves? The emotional toll this crisis is taking on first responders, emergency rooms and all those who come in contact with a fentanyl ODs is rising as I write this. The burden on a health system all ready taxed beyond their means is immense. People are dying as I write this and that is unbelievably sad. Even funeral homes are starting to stock the anti-dote because members attending the funeral of a loved one may take the drug to get through it and might need to be revived. I find myself torn between compassion for those who are taking the drug and those who have to save their lives.
 

Nick Danger

Council Member
Jul 21, 2013
1,804
471
83
Penticton, BC
I see that, but it leaves us with a pretty nasty decision to make. Keep eating the cost of keeping these lost souls alive or cutting them loose knowing they don't have to "equipment" to look after themselves. We could start looking at an addict's disregard for public resources as a manner of crime worthy of some form of incarceration, mandatory treatment if you will but that brins up a whole new set of questions. Here in BC we have a government crusading for federal programs to deal with the OD crisis, after having spent a couple of decades under-funding and closing addiction treatment centers. As always, it's looking like the situation is being reduced to dollars and cents.
 

IdRatherBeSkiing

Satelitte Radio Addict
May 28, 2007
15,266
2,893
113
Toronto, ON
So they are taxing property to help save lives with people oding on fentinal? Exactly how will giving city coffers more money help with that? Must be some left coast logic in there.
 

Nick Danger

Council Member
Jul 21, 2013
1,804
471
83
Penticton, BC
Cut and paste from the article in the OP:

"A big chunk of the so-called fentanyl tax money -- $1.8 million – will allow the Vancouver Fire Department to deploy four medic teams around the clock, instead of relying on overtime and taking firefighters and vehicles from other parts of the city to respond to overdose calls in the Downtown Eastside."
 

IdRatherBeSkiing

Satelitte Radio Addict
May 28, 2007
15,266
2,893
113
Toronto, ON
Cut and paste from the article in the OP:

"A big chunk of the so-called fentanyl tax money -- $1.8 million – will allow the Vancouver Fire Department to deploy four medic teams around the clock, instead of relying on overtime and taking firefighters and vehicles from other parts of the city to respond to overdose calls in the Downtown Eastside."

So their goal is to treat the addicts which have oded.
 

Mowich

Hall of Fame Member
Dec 25, 2005
16,649
998
113
76
Eagle Creek
I see that, but it leaves us with a pretty nasty decision to make. Keep eating the cost of keeping these lost souls alive or cutting them loose knowing they don't have to "equipment" to look after themselves. We could start looking at an addict's disregard for public resources as a manner of crime worthy of some form of incarceration, mandatory treatment if you will but that brins up a whole new set of questions. Here in BC we have a government crusading for federal programs to deal with the OD crisis, after having spent a couple of decades under-funding and closing addiction treatment centers. As always, it's looking like the situation is being reduced to dollars and cents.

Exacerbating the situation is the fact that the drug is apparently easy to make, kills in minuscule doses and is being mixed with other drugs so that even those who might avoid it end up taking it inadvertently. There are no easy answers, Nick.
 

IdRatherBeSkiing

Satelitte Radio Addict
May 28, 2007
15,266
2,893
113
Toronto, ON
Exacerbating the situation is the fact that the drug is apparently easy to make, kills in minuscule doses and is being mixed with other drugs so that even those who might avoid it end up taking it inadvertently. There are no easy answers, Nick.


The easiest solution is to decriminalize it completely, and let people take whatever drug they want. But I would also remove the burden from any government, hospital, doctor or good Samaritan from having to offer any assistance if said drug use causes any issues.

Although this is the easiest, I am not in favour of it.
 

Mowich

Hall of Fame Member
Dec 25, 2005
16,649
998
113
76
Eagle Creek
But I would also remove the burden from any government, hospital, doctor or good Samaritan from having to offer any assistance if said drug use causes any issues.

I simply don't see that happening, IRBS. Actually I would see it as an even bigger burden on FRs, emergency rooms etc as the calls will still come, ODs will still turn up at hospitals and then you have people dedicated to saving someone's life having to make a life and death decision. I just can't see them standing aside and watching someone die knowing they could have intervened.