 |
| CLICK ON THE IMAGE TO ENLARGE |
Launceston has given its ratepayer a 1.9% rate rise but it appears as if 'the council' sees itself as an empire rather than a service provider.
At no time soon are ratepayers likely to see open accountability for council's spending just so long as the current Local Govt Act is the guiding light.
The Act is overly complex, outdated, riddled with ambiguities and is arguably no longer 'fit for purpose' in a 21st Century context.
Likewise the council's accounts are far from being transparent or easy to read. If ratepayers wish to delve into 'council affairs' in the way they might for a corporation they have shares in ... forget it! Asking for information on financial matters is ever likely to get you nowhere – or into an unrewarding confrontation if you persist.
For instance, SECTIONS 65 and 62 of 'the Act' give rise to much consternation and despite its apparent good intention in 1993, in 2016 they offer a great many constituents little or no comfort despite the Minister's recent GOOD GOVERNANCE GUIDE. The effectiveness of 'the guide' is yet to be proven.
The State government's 'experiment' in all-in-all-out four year councils seemed a good idea at the time but it has done nothing for 'aldermanic accountability' let alone accountability in its wider context.
Likewise the council's accounts are far from being transparent or easy to read. If ratepayers wish to delve into 'council affairs' in the way they might for a corporation they have shares in ... forget it! Asking for information on financial matters is ever likely to get you nowhere – or into an unrewarding confrontation if you persist.
For instance, SECTIONS 65 and 62 of 'the Act' give rise to much consternation and despite its apparent good intention in 1993, in 2016 they offer a great many constituents little or no comfort despite the Minister's recent GOOD GOVERNANCE GUIDE. The effectiveness of 'the guide' is yet to be proven.
The State government's 'experiment' in all-in-all-out four year councils seemed a good idea at the time but it has done nothing for 'aldermanic accountability' let alone accountability in its wider context.
Ald. McKenzie's push for the collection of rates from the residents of properties owned by charitable organisations has raised the ire of people living in retirement villages etc.
These ratepayers see themselves as being vulnerable and the prospect of their being "targets" is clearly not being welcomed. Its not for the first time that they've seen themselves as targets.
On Tuesday June 21 there is to be a postponed Public Meeting is being held in Albert Hall arising out of the council's decision to gift land to UTas. [CLICK HERE FOR MORE INFORMATION]
More information can be gleaned from recent entries on LCC News [LINK] relative to the petition that is now being circulated in regard to Ald. McKenzie's 'charitable institution rate push'.
REFERENCES:
These ratepayers see themselves as being vulnerable and the prospect of their being "targets" is clearly not being welcomed. Its not for the first time that they've seen themselves as targets.
On Tuesday June 21 there is to be a postponed Public Meeting is being held in Albert Hall arising out of the council's decision to gift land to UTas. [CLICK HERE FOR MORE INFORMATION]
More information can be gleaned from recent entries on LCC News [LINK] relative to the petition that is now being circulated in regard to Ald. McKenzie's 'charitable institution rate push'.
REFERENCES:
- Retirement villages rates report for Launceston Council CLICK HERE
- City of Launceston council passes rates changes CLICK HERE
- Charitable institutions rates motion CLICK HERE
No comments:
Post a Comment