FROM THE EXAMINER
" Flexible rate proposal for Launceston
"A NEW rating proposal has hit Launceston City Council's agenda for Monday's general meeting.
The proposal, forwarded by Alderman Ted Sands, would see the council explore the mapping of a flexible differential rating structure and adoption of an average area rate for residential properties.
The motion would see council general manager Robert Dobrzynski prepare a resolution for 2016-17 financial year to allow for a differential rate across various use of land and vacant land to allow varying rates within each sector" ... CLICK HERE TO READ THIS ARTICLE
EDITORIAL OPINION: If the aldermen approve this move towards a new rating model and realistically identify a fixed or average rate component of the general rate this would represent a major shift in Launceston's rating system.
However, the General Manager and the Corporate Services Director seem to be saying that ratepayers need to be careful about what they wish for. The operational side of Council does not seem to be all that interested in the establishment of anything that disrupts "the way things are."
Seemingly, the notion that anything being discussed here is anything at all like a "flat rate" is a bit mischievous. In fact it would be better described as a 'variable flat rat' or a flat rate with discriminatory and discretionary variations. A Claytons Flat Rate even!
In line with true accountability, rate notices should identify the services, and their relative cost translated as a levy, that ratepayers are paying for.
For instance, for true accountability 21st Century style there needs to be levies identified for:
For instance, for true accountability 21st Century style there needs to be levies identified for:
- Council Corporate Services and Administration Levy;
- Public Works Levy (Capital);
- Infrastructure Maintenance Levy;
- Public Heath Services Levy;
- Waste Management (Resource Recovery) Levy;
- Recreational Services Levy
- Recreational Facilities Levy – York Park and L'ton Aquatic;
- Cultural Development and Cultural Services Levy;
- Cultural Facilities Levy – QVMAG and Princess Theatre;
- Community Development and Events Grants Levy; and
- Possibly other micro levies calculated evenly across all rateable properties.
Currently the technology exists that would enable and allow residents and ratepayers to monitor their Council's budget progress and fiscal management at any moment in time – say as it stood at the end of any week.
Interestingly, it seems that this kind of accountability is not currently available within the operation if what many 'operatives' report is to be taken seriously.
Interestingly, it seems that this kind of accountability is not currently available within the operation if what many 'operatives' report is to be taken seriously.
One would hope that 'management' would have, and would need to have, this information at their finger tips right now but it seems not.
Therefore any shift in fiscal management at the council would need to start with a truly INDEPENDENT AUDIT to establish a baseline to work from.
The aldermen, if they are serious about the equitability of the 'rating system', and interested in achieving functional accountability, should not see any impediment in taking this kind of course to achieve true accountability and equitability.
The aldermen, if they are serious about the equitability of the 'rating system', and interested in achieving functional accountability, should not see any impediment in taking this kind of course to achieve true accountability and equitability.
Elsewhere in Australia Local Govt. has been initiating CITIZENS PANELS or JURIES in an effort to govern and budget better via models developed and researched by the newDEMOCRACY Foundation.
Launceston council might well go down this track instead of say appointing an expensive outside consultant and as they say "lending them our watch and asking them to tell us the time".
Melbourne City Council has subjected its budget to such a jury as have local governments elsewhere ... SEE http://democracy21tasmaina.blogspot.com.au/
Launceston council might well go down this track instead of say appointing an expensive outside consultant and as they say "lending them our watch and asking them to tell us the time".
Melbourne City Council has subjected its budget to such a jury as have local governments elsewhere ... SEE http://democracy21tasmaina.blogspot.com.au/
3 comments:
Ald. Sands' proposal has its drawbacks ....but every system is likely to be flawed in some respects ... but freezing rates at their current level and:
• increasing them annually; and
• doing so equally across the board in total and in line with the CPI; and
• in accord with any increased cost of servicing Launceston's properties
This is quite likely to achieve a greater level of equity and acceptability right here and now without some fancy blowin consultant telling us what is good for us.
Increasingly this flattening method would do its work well into the future in so much as there would be an inbuilt levelling effect.
However, the best way forward is to cut the number of Tasmania's councils to 2 or 4 and reduce the numbers of unaccountable aldermen overall along with cutting the numbers in the administrative class.
Ald. Sands is at least trying for change! Just watch who runs away and as fast as they can.
Yes Betty, Basil Fitch has been advocating an approach like this for ages. He has been on council and he speaks from experience even if it was quite a long time ago now. There is nothing new under the sun is there?
OK the news is goodish. Just look what can be done when relevance deprivation starts to kick in. However “council staff” are going to have to work this over so let’s cross our finger that they’ll actually take the task seriously and do not return the verdict… IT JUST CANNOT BE DONE!!
Post a Comment