CLICK HERE TO GO TO THE STORY |
Launceston council looks at flat rate
By JAMES BRADY Oct. 29, 2015, 10:23 p.m.
A FLAT rating system for Launceston could be introduced for the city as early as 2017.
‘‘Serious investigations’’ into a differential flat rate model have been conducted by Launceston aldermen, which have included information sessions with Brighton Council.
Brighton was threatened with legal action when it moved to introduce a flat rate about eight years ago, however its model has since been approved in legislation.
Brighton mayor Tony Foster said Launceston engaged their council to have modelling created for the city.
Launceston City Council general manager Robert Dobrzynski said the council re-adopted its annual assessed value policy for the 2016-17 financial year, but had explored different models for the future.
‘‘The council has spoken with representatives of Brighton Council and other councils and authorities about various different ratings models, but the council has no position on a future ratings model at this stage,’’ Mr Dobrzynski said.
Alderman Robin McKendrick said he had pursued a flat rate model for the past 18 months, and expected further discussion with the council in the coming months........ ‘‘AAV is a wealth tax on a property, whereas with a flat rate everyone is treated on same rate – you can adjust that accordingly to make sure everybody gets the same service,’’ Alderman McKendrick said.
....‘‘There have been serious discussions with Bright Council to get detail of how it could operate in our city – there is no reason, I believe, why it won’t work,’’ Alderman McKendrick said.... Cr Foster said the model took angst out of rate rises over and above CPI, and that Brighton had CPI increases for the past nine years.
... Launceston mayor Albert van Zetten said Brighton’s suggestion, if the system was to be delivered, was to wait until the next revaluation of property in 2016-17.
... ‘‘My understanding of their discussion, when they came to our workshop, was that it was a better timing,’’ Alderman van Zetten said.
...‘‘I’ve got to see the modelling yet; it wouldn’t change largely the rates we bring in, but it would distribute the rates differently.... My point of view is that those in the Northern suburbs should not be significantly disadvantaged.’’
... Deputy mayor Rob Soward said there was a lot of positive feedback regarding a flat rating system in Launceston ...‘‘I’m very excited about the opportunity; the information we got from Brighton sets us on a very, very good path moving forward with what we do for developing our rating systems .... Aldermen Darren Alexander and Hugh McKenzie said they were open to any conversation that may mean the community may pay less in their rates ... Local Government Minister Peter Gutwein said each council was responsible for its own rating system, which was dictated by outlines in the Local Government Act.
... CLICK HERE TO GO TO THE STORY IN THE EXAMINER
OUR NOTE: Well it seems pretty clear that Launceston Council's AGM is immanent and that the growing contention over 'Council performance', strategically, Council is attempting to reclaim the agenda.
The 'flat rate' issue is an issue that'll deliver every time and you only need to look at the comments section below this EXAMINER STORY for the evidence.
The 'flat rate' issue is an issue that'll deliver every time and you only need to look at the comments section below this EXAMINER STORY for the evidence.
Basically Launceston Council is increasingly under pressure to deliver which is why in part we see Council start to embrace 'social media' – something it should have done eons ago.
There are so many 'furphies' floating about in regard to service delivery at 'Launceston's Town Hall'. 'Spin doctoring' is becoming the standard in what passes for marketing at Town Hall. Its interesting that Town Hall seems to have stopped posting its MEDIA RELEASES March 2014 in favour of greater opacity and a predisposition towards Machiavellianism.
We can only hope that this latest foray in the 'Flat Rate Debate"will deliver something more than it has up to now. All this is starting look a tad Claytonesk! What is most bemusing is the notion of a variable flat rate across the municipality. In any event t'd be good to hear how Launceston's rates were going to FALL to bring them in line rates with elsewhere.
There is a book being run at the moment on Launceston's rate-take falling and currently its 100 to 1 on. Let's see where all this goes with LGAT calling for an increase in Aldermanic allowances today!
We can only hope that this latest foray in the 'Flat Rate Debate"will deliver something more than it has up to now. All this is starting look a tad Claytonesk! What is most bemusing is the notion of a variable flat rate across the municipality. In any event t'd be good to hear how Launceston's rates were going to FALL to bring them in line rates with elsewhere.
There is a book being run at the moment on Launceston's rate-take falling and currently its 100 to 1 on. Let's see where all this goes with LGAT calling for an increase in Aldermanic allowances today!
Tandra Vale
2 comments:
Launceston City Council claim that Aquatic Centre visitation is 390,419 and to put it into perspective, say it is more than Mona and other sites surveyed in the Tasmanian Visitor Survey.
This is a deliberately misleading perspective that only shows how desperate Launceston City Council is to cover up and confuse the
community about matters concerning the Aquatic Centre. It also shows it is clueless about the Tasmanian Tourism market and the Tasmanian Visitor Survey. Look at the facts.
Tasmanian Visitor Survey. http://www.tourismtasmania.com.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0019/36712/MONA-Vis
itor-Profile-YE-June-2015.pdf states:
"Of the 330 700 visitors who indicated that they went to MONA, 65 per cent were on a holiday trip, 19 per cent were visiting friends or
relatives and the remaining 16 per cent indicated they had travelled for business or some other reason."
This shows that 330,700 individual tourists visiting Tasmania visited Mona. By definition they paid either $20 of $25 per head to enter, say a minimum of $6million in revenue. It also does not count the Tasmanians that continue to arrive at Mona in droves.
The Aquatic Centre visitation by by barely a few thousand people visiting many times and paying less per week than for a single Mona
entry.
The whiff from senior management at council is a lot worse than that from Wim Delvoye's Cloaca installation.
Why doesn't the council stop peeing our money away and put management of the pool and gym out to private tender? That would stop the losses!
Post a Comment