Is differentiated party fee solution for FeFo?

FeFo manages almost every reason in Finnmark on behalf of the county's inhabitants. The reason and resources basically belong to the people of Finnmark. Nevertheless, the debate on FeFo's role as a landowner has increased in recent years. This applies in particular to high party fees on residential plots in press areas such as Alta. This challenges several ideological and value -based principles that the labor movement stands for, especially when it comes to housing policy and social planning.

Who earns on today's model?

The Finnmark Act states that FeFo should manage the reason for the benefit of the citizens. As party fees increase in areas of housing shortages, people in Finnmark have to pay more and more to access their own land. This especially affects young people, newly established and people with low income. This raises the question: Can FeFo differentiate the party fees to better safeguard the community's interests?

Possible solutions, a more fair party fee

One possible way ahead may be to introduce a differentiated party fee based on societal and financial considerations, as the municipalities can do with property taxes. This can be done in different ways:

1. Lower party fee for primary housing. Those who live and live in Finnmark on a regular basis should have a lower party fee than those who buy land for leisure use.

2. Moderate party fee for holiday homes. Holiday homes can have their own rate that takes into account both accessibility, demand and whether the owner lives in Finnmark.

3. Higher party fee for business players. Companies that make money on Finnmark's land should pay a larger proportion of value creation back to the community.

4. Highest party fee for large industry and utilization of resources. Actors in the mining industry, power development and the like should have the highest fees, as they use the community's resources for private gain.

5. Geographic differentiation. The attachment fee may vary depending on where in Finnmark the site is located. In order to prevent land costs from pushing people out of the housing market, the fees can be kept lower in the districts and higher in press areas. This can stimulate settlement, business development and recreational buildings where the need is greatest.

A simpler model can be three -part:

1. Low bracket for housing, with geographical adjustment. Lowest in the districts, somewhat higher in urban areas.

2. Moderate party fee for holiday homes, with geographical adjustment. Lower where development is needed, higher in popular areas and residence adjustment.

3. High party fee for industry and resource utilization. Larger contributions from actors who utilize the community's resources, regardless of location.

Is this in line with FeFo's mandate?

The Finnmark Act states that the land in Finnmark will be managed for the benefit of the inhabitants. Differentized party fees will ensure that the community's interests are prioritized. Municipalities already have the opportunity to differentiate the property tax based on property type and location. Shouldn't FeFo be able to do the same with the party fees?

This is a matter where the labor movement must take a clear position. Fair access to housing and plots is not just about finances, but about social planning, social justice and how we manage the community's values. FeFo must change his practice. The administration will strengthen the Finnmark community. Do not create financial obstacles for people who want to live and work here.

Ronny Wilhelmsen

Leader of Lo Alta & Omegn