Are You suffering From Election Irrelevance Syndrome?

If you are up for some edifying commentaries this site is worth reading. Apparently it is written from Penny Wong's office or somewhere like that ...click here to read more

How to change the world: RECOMMENDED READING

Dorothy from the Midlands writes to tell us about this "change technique." Well it is worth a look and I would go so far as to say that every Alderman and Councillor in Tasmania should read this 12 page pamphlet. However, as Dorothy says "ratepayers trying to get through to their [elected representative] will find this useful" too!

Yes, Dorothy it may well be useful but some of our representatives believe they have been elected to make decisions and NOT to listen to their constituency on every issue that comes up for them. It is hard to have a productive conversation with them but it is worth trying. But we should not tar all our representatives with the same brush as there are quite a few who take their 'representation' seriously.

Then there are the unelected managers. Some of them believe that they have all the answers so listening to ratepayers and residents is often seen as a waste of their time. Nonetheless this pamphlet could be useful even in having a productive conversation with such an officer.

The website where you download this paper from is an interesting one and Les Robinson the author has some interesting things to say about economic rationalism. In fact he gives us "Eight tools to fight economic rationalism" with! Take a look, its worth the effort.

A Launceston Alderman Stands Up To Be Counted.

If you live in South Launceston most likely you will have received one of these leaflets in your letterbox. It is really good that our elected representatives get out and about doing letter drops and letting us know what they are doing for us. Its the kind of thing you are unlikely to read about in The Examiner anytime soon.Parking is one of Ald. Soward's hot topics and it is good to see that he has done a reality check and that he has discovered that in order to bring about change you need to get going and do some lobbying.

He also made some promises about rates that it seems he'll need to do a bit more work on in order to close the credibility gap. If you say one thing and vote another way there is a gap to be filled. Why did Ald. Soward vote for the rate increase despite the level of services Launceston City Council has to deliver shrinking somewhat now that the Sate Govt. has taken water management out of the equation?

However, South Launcestonians have been doing it tough in the parking stakes for a long time. So too have hospital patients, staff and relatives! CARe PARK AUSTRALIA has a grip on the situation that is going to be hard to overcome but all strength to Ald. Soward's elbow. Nonetheless he'll need the support of a few more Aldermen before he'll be able to make much headway.

We also need to remember that the hospital is cash strapped. No wonder the management has turned to CARe. It is going to be hard to wean the hospital's administration from that funding drip!

Darwin rates set to rise but Launcestonians think they are lucky

Darwin homeowners are heading for a council rate rise of 5.5 % – just like Launceston's rate rise.

The draft Darwin City Council budget for 2010- 11 sets the minimum rate for a single dwelling at $844, up from $800 this year – much lower than Launceston's.

The minimum rate for multiple dwellings or high density residential will rise to $888.

The rates for property owners in the Central Business District will remain the same.

Darwin's Lord Mayor says he thinks the city council's rates system is unfair ... click here to read more

About Launceston
Lots About Darwin

MEDSIA RELEASE: Expert Advice Sought for Valuation and Rating Review

The Minister for Local Government, Bryan Green, said today independent expert advice was being sought as part of a review of Tasmania’s valuation and local government rating systems.
Mr Green said Access Economics had been engaged to undertake a comprehensive analysis and report to the joint State and Local Government review.


“The review will consider rating and valuation models currently used in Tasmania and interstate,” Mr Green said.

“All options are on the table for consideration.

“The Government is committed to working with local government to address the concerns of ratepayers and councils about rating fluctuations and the need for greater clarity and flexibility of rating models.”

Mr Green said the Access Economics’ report would form an important part of the overall review.

He said he expected the report to be completed in October ahead of further consultation with councils and the community.

Any changes arising from the review are unlikely to be implemented until the 2012-13 rating year. “Valuation and local government rating are highly complex areas."

“The Government’s aim is to deliver a valuation and rating model in consultation with the community and local government that will serve Tasmania into the future."

In 2007 Access Economics undertook a review of the financial sustainability of local government in Tasmania for the Local Government Association of Tasmania and has recently completed a review of rating for Darwin City Council.

The terms of reference for the review and independent analysis can be found by CLICKING HERE

Further information: Matthew Sullivan 0407 816 462

Californian Ratepayers in Revolt

Are there lessons here for Tasmania?

"California Official's $800,000 Salary in City of 38,000 Triggers Protests

By Christopher Palmeri - Jul 20, 2010

Hundreds of residents of one of the poorest municipalities in Los Angeles County shouted in protest last night as tensions rose over a report that the city’s manager earns an annual salary of almost $800,000" ... Click the Orange Button to go to the source

FREE ONLINE NEWSLETTER

QUESTION OF THE WEEK: To do with your superannuation

If your Council was a 'Super Fund', would you entrust your superannuation to them on the expectation of them delivering a return?

Please leave a comment below and tell us what you think!

SPORTS REPORT: The Lonnie Rubbish Meet Last Monday at Town Hall

Public meetings are sometimes a lot like a game of medieval and gladiatorial street football – even if its played out in slow motion.

When you unpack the tactics on display its usually pretty clear what is going on and who has what at stake. The thing is the rules … well, they’re a little bit obscure. They are kind of there but by and large they are made up on the fly.

In general the rules are close to being open slather. Nonetheless there are some rules that are adhered to even if only to avoid the bodies being carried off the field of play in public view. That’s not a good look while the game is actually in train.

Assassinations etc. are best dealt with beforehand. Likewise, executions are advantageously left until after some bureaucratic transgression or other – and best carried out well away from the glaring lights of public scrutiny.

All that said, this is the kind of situation a 100 or so Launceston ratepayers and residents walked into at Launceston’s Town Hall at 6 pm last Monday. The home team of suits was laying in wait for them in the Reception Room. After some reasonably polite formalities the whistle was blown and it was GAME ON!

So to this match last Monday at Town Hall. Well it had all the promise of being a well planned fizzer. Except, somehow the word had got out despite the best efforts of some of the suits to keep the crowd small and compliant. But there is always an enthusiast who’ll frustrate the promoter’s intentions, isn’t there?

It is surprising that the match pulled a crowd of 100 plus but there you go. However, there were some conspicuous absentees on Town Hall suits’ squad – had they been there the score may have been a little different or the game may have been played a little differently.

Early on it was clear that this was going to be a rather uneven match. Actually, both sides underestimated the scene. The bureaucrats kicked an early goal but after that they very quickly lost control of the game on the night. Indeed, the eventual score was Suits one and Citizens four – with two own goals for the Citizens in that. This is only a rough estimate because the home side failed to supply an official score keeper but it is indicative of the match. The suits were outclassed!

A win is a win, is a win. Now the task is about getting down to business. Having identified at least some of the problems that need to be dealt with the needs that now need to be met are to do with finding ways:
• To inform ratepayers and residents what their options are;
• To disseminate the information needed to change outcomes;
• To win equity for ratepayers and residents;
• To work for improved democratic processes and participation in local government decision making;
• To work for accountability and good governance in local government; and
• To promote the return of local government to local control.

The job is ahead and for the moment all that can be said is “watch this space”.

Can pigs fly? Well, the aim is to find a way to get a pig of an idea of the ground and air born.

For an interesting article on our Victorian cousins click here

THE AFFORDABILITY OF GOVERNMENT RATES AND CHARGES

Tasmanians are facing a cost of living affordability crisis. For many it is already upon them and the promise is only for more of the same.

Taxpayers and ratepayers are increasingly being set upon by the bureaucracies in Tasmania masquerading as 'service providers' and sadly aided and abetted by the people's 'elected representatives.' Basically, productive people are being bled by 'government' at all levels who devise projects and programs to keep them employed and well superannuated beyond retirement. If any are actually productive the TRA would like to hear about them.

Salt is rubbed into the wounds when taxpayers and ratepayers attempt to represent themselves and they are treated with scant regard.

A great many elected representatives, and their civic functionaries, are oblivious to the plight of their constituencies as demonstrated by this correspondence thread. Its is never so clear as when it is a fixed income pensioner who is involved!

Please click on the graphics to enlarge them

Please click on the graphics to enlarge them

Please click on the graphics to enlarge them

Please click on the graphics to enlarge them

Comments, articles and letters welcomed!
Please email TasRatepayers@7250.net

Budget Overview 2010

The LCC Budget Overview (click here to access the document) is a most instructive document but more so for what it does not say.

The so called ‘Budget Overview’ is labelled a ‘fact sheet’ that purports to inform the Launceston ratepayers about the budget. No doubt it is designed to make the ratepayers feel good about their rates bill after the budget has been set.

Despite the fact that a budget is usually about dollars, there is scant data on the dollars in the budget. It takes until the last page for the reader to discover that the combined operating and capital expenditure program of the council is $86.2 million. At best, the document gives information on about than $24 million, or less than 30% of the total budget. Where the remaining $60 million spent is not explained in this fact sheet.

The document treats expenditure under a series of headings; Services, Capital Programme, Community Facilities, and Parks and Recreation.

Services

The document leads with this category. The table below summarises the headings provided and the expenditure data provided on. Note that a ‘special project’ is a mobile maintenance crew, raising the question, are the others crews immobile?CLICK ON THE TABLE TO ENLARGE

Capital Works

The information provided on this is the most comprehensive of all the categories, we are told the total capital programme is $22.4 million and we are given information of about one third of this expenditure, just over $8 million.

The wording used is interesting generally the smallest budget allocations merit the largest amount of spin. The section of flood protection on page 5 deals with the $62 million Flood Levee Redevelopment Programme and states that work has commenced yet does not explain how much has been budgeted for this project.

The following much longer paragraph, waxes lyrical on $500,000 expenditure for Kings Meadows Flood Mitigation. The paragraph after this, - The Stormwater reports on $1.4 million that has been allocated to stormwater reticulation and that this includes the $500,000 allocated to Kings Meadows Flood Mitigation under flood mitigation.

CLICK ON THE TABLE TO ENLARGE

Community Facilities, Parks and Recreation.

By now the reader has probably given up, overwhelmed as she/he would be from having to process so many facts. The remaining categories are Community Facilities and Parks and Recreation. In most cases the figure given is for capital expenditure. Throughout the document there is occasional reference to what is likely to be operational expenditure – immunization program and mobile maintenance crew for instance, but it is not generally clear.

In summary, the ‘fact’ sheet accounts, at best, for about $24 million of expenditure in a budget of $86.2 million, as such, it poses more questions than it answers. You too can share in the joy of reading it, go to the link below and judge for yourself.

GM Robert Dobrzynski should be congratulated on setting yet another benchmark for spin and opacity.

CLICK ON THE TABLE TO ENLARGE

You could contact the aldermen seeking further clarification, but then again they are unlikely to have been given, or demanded, much more information than this before they went about setting the rate.

INVITATION: The TRA welcomes your comments. It matters not whether you agree with this assessment of Launceston's new GM's first budget for the city or not, TRA would like to hear from you. Make a comment below and if you feel so disposed please give it a mark out of 10 as a RATEPAYER.

Bagdad Bypass Heritage Submissions

Tasmanian Ratepayers Association in collaboration with MY COMMUNITY TASMANIA facilitating a network of ratepayers, residents in the Southern Midlands looking to protect a cultural landscape and heritage values in their region.

The Hobart Resource Option

Yet Another Rates Letter

NOTE: Remember to challenge the valuation your rates are calculated against. It is claimed that the amount is correct but it is always worth checking!

The Issue of Waste

There is an old Yorkshire saying that goes "where there is muck there is brass". So it is totally unsurprising that when waste disposal issues arise the 'Muck Vultures' can be seen circling the scene looking for a free lunch.

Here "waste" is an interesting word because typically what is passed off as waste is in fact a resource. LCC using "Launceston Waste Centre" to brand its 'tip' is a rather revealing Freudian slip that reveals a mindset. It would be much better to brand the site as Resource Recovery Centre to not only market the site but also to engender a somewhat different mindset within the community.

It seems fairly clear that an organisation looking for a solution would normally proceed 'top down' in dealing with waste (?) issues.

Overall the process might look like this...

1) Identify opportunities or threats in existing waste management operations

2) Explore the possible implications of the items found at 1) - COMMENT - Good time for public participation to establish whether opportunities/threats are valid and their implications for those represented by the Council

3) Devise alternative means of dealing with the issues and their implications at 1) & 2)

4) Commission independent reports to identify and validate all options

5) Discuss implications of report recommendations - COMMENT Good time to get back to public to explore implications of report recommendations

6) Tender or similar to develop approaches to the issues

In the case at LCC this might have meant....

1) Waste management is both costing too much and creating pollution issues for surrounding areas (e.g. SWOT analysis)

2) Rates and charges too high, lost opportunities to achieve revenues, groundwater toxin threats

3) Review all possible means of dealing with issues at 2)

4) Select alternative means of dealing with issues at 2) (e.g. cost/benefit etc)

5) Public meeting to discuss options, opportunities and approaches

6) Impartial tender for services etc

The "community workshop" to be held on Monday 19 July 2010 from 6.00pm in the Reception Room, Town Hall might be a bit like this then again maybe not. It might go the way of other LCC consultation processes where all the consultation has been done "within Council," a report is produced and the meeting is merely held to inform 'the public' of the outcome rather than engage them in the problem solving.

The process set out above might be a reasonable yardstick to measure the meeting, its outcome and past performance against.

A Letter from Ald. Norton – Launceston City Council

Congratulations on the new website, Tasmanian Ratepayers Association. I’m encouraged by the professional content of your site and see it as a way for community engagement regarding transparency and accountability in the way councils do business.

Social inclusion will deliver social harmony outcomes, and what better way is there for community to contribute for the common good. Your blog site offers this opportunity for local government and community to build a working relationship.

Having recently attended a conference on sustainable living and climate change, only reinforces my resolve that we can do better, and must step up to the plate to bring about a more sustainable and community orientated future.

Open space and social interaction coupled with a revue on recycling of waste, renewable energy options, and a complete revue of planning policy statewide can bring about sustainability as the finite mineral resources pass their tipping point.

I cannot over emphasize the need for more open community consultation as part of the process. I have seen how it can benefit development partnerships and give certainty and assurance to developers, both domestic and in the business sector. It doesn’t have to be as complicated as we make it. Public forums will go a long way to deliver acceptable policy that fits within statutory frameworks.

Rates and the AAV are always contentious and I know that there has to be a better method of setting rates, perhaps your site would be a good platform to start the process. Certainly the subject is topical and everyone has an opinion. Why not engage community and contribute to the discussion.

Positive proposals can deliver positive outcomes. Criticism is valid but it it is more productive if followed by suggestions for improvement.

Recent criticism at a public meeting held by council, highlighted the need for line iteming in the budget spreadsheet. The blurring of boundaries led to confusion and frustrated for those wishing more clarification. If we are to truly engage in open and transparent representation, then perhaps we need look at the way we do business, starting with the budget bottom line.

There are many more possibilities that can be explored, and this may be the right forum to commence the process. I look forward to being a regular communicator in the discussion. I believe in a peoples council policy where we all can contribute towards better and conciliatory outcomes. It can all start here. More positive input please.
--
From the desk of:
Ian Norton,
Alderman,
Launceston City Council,
Town Hall, St. John Street, 7250
Phone: 0407 951 437 (24 hour)

Punishing the poor

Richard Barton writes on 'My Community' about rate rises and how Tasmania's politicians, Aldermen and Councillors are relatively oblivious to the plight of those on fixed incomes, pensioners, retirees, et al ... Click here to read more

The Official Media Release from Launceston Council on Rubbish

Have your say on the future of waste. Do you have ideas about resource recovery in Launceston? Then we would like to hear

from you!

Launceston City Council recently commissioned a review of the strategies used for resource recovery at the Launceston Waste Centre and the options for the future. This report is now available for public comment.

The report will be presented at a Community Workshop on Monday 19 July from 6.00pm in the Reception Room, Town Hall. This will be followed by an expert panel question and answer session which the community are invited to participate in.

Launceston City Council Director of Infrastructure Services, Harry Galea said "We're all aware of the importance of reducing our impact on the world. Although there is a great deal of recycling and recovery happening at the Launceston Waste Centre, since the retirement of EcoSal there are many in the community seeking a 'Tip Shop'. This report was commissioned to enable Council to find, and implement, the best options for resource recovery."

The report is available from the Council's website at www.launceston.tas.gov.au or by contacting Council's Customer Service Centre on 6323 3000. [At the time of posting this entry this information was NOT available]
Submissions can be made by emailing council@launceston.tas.gov.au or by writing to Launceston City Council, PO Box 396, Launceston TAS 7250 by 6 August 2010.

FOR THE LCC'S CURRENT GARBAGE & WASTE POLICY CLICK HERE

CLICK HERE TO ACCESS THE REPORT MENTIONED ABOVE

Trying to get another Eco Salv tip shop in Launceston

A forum is happening at the Launceston Town Hall on Monday July 19 organised by Alderman Jeremy Ball.

Time: 6pm
Date: Monday July 19th
Place: Town Hall, Launceston City Council, St John St Launceston.

Ald. Ball put a motion to the LCC requesting that we hold a public forum exploring the possibilities for resource recovery at the Launceston tip and the opening of a new tip shop.

Anyone interested should come along to the meeting. Nothing is being recovered from the tip drop off point at the moment as everything is trucked to Spreyton and crushed.

If you are interested in Launceston becoming a sustainable community demonstrating your interest might go some way towards Launceston Council adopting some new strategies for reducing WASTE.

It will be very interesting to see which Aldermen turn up BUT more importantly, which Council officers turn up and participate positively in the forum. Bring your note pads!

It is at 6pm on Monday the 19th of July at Town Hall (Launceston City Council) which is in St John St Launceston.

Bureaucrats and Politician Try to Explain Rate Rises

Just as soon as there is a ruckus about issues like rates the bureaucrats and politician emerge from the haze around an issue to try to put some kind of spin on it – here it is rate hikes in Launceston. Read with an eye to the spin, this story reveals much and mostly that Local Govt. management is not all that interested in pensioners' plight. There is no empathy here for the pensioner's ability to pay.

If you are managing a Local Govt. budget it is within your interests that the gross budget is as high as possible given that salaries tend to be set in relation to the budget being managed. A diminishing budget offers no incentive for a manager looking for an incremental salary rise.

Perhaps more to the point is the opacity of Launceston City Council's budget. Apparently the Auditor General finds the method of reporting acceptable but a ratepayer trying to make sense of it – even ratepayers with accounting backgrounds – find the budget not all that informative. One might think that shareholders in a large corporation might well find them wanting in their style of presentation and their relative opacity.

For instance, it has been reported to TRA that when asked at a recent public meeting concerning the budget, the relevant council officers were unable to identify what proportion of the Councils debt was attributable to an aspect of Council operations – and thus its impact upon rates. If ratepayers are unable to garner this kind of information, even on notice, it is little wonder that Aldermen do not seem to have a handle on this kind of issue – the TRA would be happy to hear from any Launceston Alderman that did.

It seems that it is time for ratepayers to begin to lobby for not only transparency in reporting but also clarity. The State Govt. needs to be setting a minimum standard that includes program funding and thus program budgeting along with line item reporting.

Petar Hill

ARE YOUR RATES IN THE 5.5% INCREASE RANGE?

This Launceston ratepayer is suffering it seems and it also seems that Launceston City Council's rate increase is sometimes far from an average of 5.5%. How many more ratepayers like this are out there?

16%, well that's way outside the promised average and what this ratepayer hasn't mentioned is that there are water rates yet to be paid.

The promise was of course that rates would fall with the new water management arrangements. Well that promise hasn't been delivered on – and neither does it seem that correspondence is going to be entered into in regard to this issue.

Then there is the argument that rates are a kind of "Wealth Tax" and one that's within the powers of Local Govt. If it is , Aldermen/Councillors have not been out there on the hustings promoting that idea when they were looking for votes. No prizes for guessing why!

All the evidence seems to be pointing towards it being Council officers determining the rates in virtual isolation from ratepayers' representatives. Only one Launceston Alderman voted against the recent rate rise. There seems to be a message there for ratepayers and residents.

Meanwhile a pensioner's rates increase by 16%, against the promise of a decrease. It seems that there is nobody at Town Hall – Aldermen or officers – who is paying any real attention to the issue – and using all manner of excuse for not doing so. And, it seems that very little attention is being paid to cost cutting or the minimisation of waste.

Petar Hill

Wherever You Go Pool Problems Seem To Follow

Pools seem to generate problems for bureaucrats no where they go and how much you pay them.

RESIDENTS in the Maroondah Leader 's catchment "will need to double the number of times they take a dip if Ringwood’s proposed mega-pool is to deliver its promised financial return to ratepayers, council documents show."
Maroondah Council’s budget has revealed plans to build a $48 million Regional Leisure and Aquatic Centre in Ringwood.

The council plans to borrow between $38 million and $40 million to fund the new pool, which is set to open by 2013.

The existing Ringwood Aquatic Centre is set to close in May next year, with the 90 staff at the centre being made redundant.

The council budget will see rates jump by 9.8 per cent as the council attempts to end it’s budget deficit, but 1.1 per cent of the rate hike will be used to help plan for the new pool. If any of this sounds familiar to Launcestonians that is no surprise at all.

The Maroondah Leader won access to parts of the Ringwood Aquatic Centre Redevelopment Feasibility Study (unsurprisingly this is not publicly available), and it outlines the Maroondah Council’s $48 million new swimming centre plan.

There were consultants, the Simply Great Leisure Group (SGL), and they it seems developed the new pool’s business plan. That plan had some "key assumptions” it seems. Anyone receiving a report from a consultant who makes "assumptions" should be very worried. Yes it seems they did survey 500 residents but an assumption is an assumption.

It is being assumed that the new centre will attract "600,000 to 720,000, compared with the existing pool’s 287,426 visitors in 2008-09". TRA has been informed that for Launceston's facility:

• the old pool attracted something in the order of 120,000 visits pa
• The assumption upon which the new pool was built was approx 420,000 visits pa
• The budgeted deficit for its first year of operation was approx $450,000
• The actual deficit was in the order of $1 million.

If Launceston could turn back the the clock it is hard to imagine ratepayers, and even some Aldermen, approving the folly of building Launceston's Aquatic Centre – or at least the way it was built and where. It is a magnificent facility but it has contributed significantly to Launceston's average 5.5% rate rise this year.

The Maroondah Leader story has a thread .... click here to read more
However, does any of this ring a bell?

"MAROONDAH Council’s budget has revealed plans to build a $48 million Regional Leisure and Aquatic Centre in Ringwood. The council plans to borrow between $38 million and $40 million to fund the new pool, which is set to open by 2013. The existing Ringwood Aquatic Centre is set to close in May next year, with the 90 staff at the centre being made redundant.

The council budget will see rates jump by 9.8 per cent as the council attempts to end it’s budget deficit, but 1.1 per cent of the rate hike will be used to help plan for the new pool."

Petar Hill

A BLAST FROM THE PAST: A promise about rates

In the Jun-Sep 09 issue of the Launceston News published by the LCC, on the front page is the following statement...

"Water and Sewer: As of 1 July 2009, three local government owned corporations took over the delivery and maintenance of water and sewer services in Tasmania. In the north, Ben Lomond Water will provide these services. In the past, the fee for water and sewer services has been included in your rates bill. You will now receive a separate notice from Ben Lomond Water (BUW) for these services. As a result of this, your Council rates will be substantially less than last year...."

Now it is just possible that someone will try and explain this away but when you put things on the record at ratepayers' expense it might be a good idea to try and keep the promises that are made.

As they used to say on the radio ... "keep those cards and letters coming in folks!"

Are you paying your rates on the right valuation?

This letter in today’s Examiner has been drawn to the attention of Launceston City Council's General Manager along with the Mayor and Aldermen. The writer, Mr Frank Deane, is a respected expert in valuation procedures in Tasmania. He worked for the state valuation office until he retired.

If Mr Deane is correct in his assessment of the situation in respect to valuations used to strike rates in Tasmania, then it is an imperative that every Council using the AAV system – Assessed Annual Value system – to strike a rate should thoroughly investigate the methods they are using to strike this year’s rates.

However, ratepayers need to test the veracity of the valuation upon which their rate has been struck for themselves. Mr Deane offers very good advice it would seem. Ratepayers would be well advised to act upon his advice – even those who do not get to read The Examiner.

Council officers may not welcome the fact that this advice has been offered but ratepayers need to satisfy themselves that they are at least paying their rates on the appropriate valuation for their property.

Local Government: What's legal and what's illegal

Wat's legal and illegal in Local Government is often the subject of contentious debate. If you are a ratepayer you are ever likely to told what your obligations are but rarely are your rights explained to you it seems. Likewise, it seems that Aldermen & Councillors are often unclear about what the Local Government Act has to say about an issue and more than a few report that they receive confusing advice from Council officers.

Is a 21st C context this should no longer be the case because the Local Government Act. is very accessible and really quite strait forward. Certainly there are complexities in the Act but Council officers should be able to clarify (in Council or privately) an issue for an Alderman/Councillor where these things impinge upon a Council decision. If this is not the case then ratepayers have something to worry about and especially if it turns out that Aldermen/Councillors wind up working with flawed or inadequate advice – it seems that in some cases this may be happening.

It is also important that ratepayers be aware of the laws governing Local Government. Unless they are there is no real way they can lobby their representatives on Council – or even negotiate effectively with Council officer when they need to.

There are some links below to parts of the Act that are all too often 'Hot Issues'. However, there seems to be a need for 'Ratepayer Groups' to start to be somewhat more proactive than they have been in educating ratepayers about their rights and obligations along with what they should be able to expect from their elected representatives and Council officers.

• LOCAL GOVERNMENT ACT 1993 - SECT 20 20. Functions and powers
• LOCAL GOVERNMENT ACT 1993 - SECT 28 28. Functions of councillors – 28(2) (iii) & (28) (3) (a) are of particular interest
• LOCAL GOVERNMENT ACT 1993 - SECT 22 22. Delegation by council – 21 (1) (a) & 21 (4) (a) are of particular interest
• LOCAL GOVERNMENT ACT 1993 - SECT 62 62. Functions and powers of general manager
  

The Vexed Question of Rates in Tasmania

Council in Tasmania are striking their 2010-2011 rates and for some ratepayers it is not a happy time. In Launceston the rate rise is on average 5.5%. So long as rates continue to rise incrementally the ability of a great many ratepayers decreases incrementally. Launceston's ratepayers have been advocating a change to the method of striking the rates but they have had no joy at all to date.

By and large their Aldermen have let them down and it seems that the tail is still wagging the dog at Town Hall in Launceston. Council officers seem to be delivering Alderman with an ultimatum that is otherwise called a budget. It seems that they (the officers) decide upon the method that suits their purposes best. Yes, that's the one that maintains status quo staffing levels, determines salary levels and delivers bonuses plus benefits the higher up the pecking order you go. In short it seems that their is no incentive whatsoever for Council officers to lower the rate base.

Then we come to Aldermen and Councilors. Again it seems that they are presented with budget that is in fact a 'fete de compli'. It also seems they do not have the appetite to take their officers on in the cause of delivering a more equitable system. Some officers even go so far as to suggest that "rates are a kind of wealth tax." From the luxurious position of being relatively highly paid and being appointed rather than elected that's a bit rich – and somewhat inappropriate as well.

The question about the legality of the models used by Devonport, Georgetown, Brighton Councils has been around for quite some time – there has been plenty of time to fix the legislation, and that can still be done if Councils lobbied for it. Of course, the opinions about the legality of these flat rating or capped rating municipalities are nothing more than that, opinions. The so called "delinquent councils" have been told that they are out of order – but they continue nonetheless. So why can’t other councils join them ? Launceston even?

Focusing on Launceston again, Rob Soward, paraphrased, promised to fix the system. He may have been a little naive in imagining that he could effect change all by himself , but there you go. He could only count on one vote in twelve – but after all it was election time. Interestingly only one Alderman on LCC voted against the 5.5% rate rise, Ald. Ball, and Ald. Soward was missing in action – he voted for the rise. Nonetheless Ald Soward has said that he had :

• "a detailed and extensive briefing (on two seperate occasions) around a number of rating models and what they can offer for Launceston (benefits/ negatives etc) . I am in favour of the so called Devonport model where rates are capped ... It is a model that would lead to very very slight increases in some rating areas (low SES areas like Waverley, Ravenswood etc) and huge reductions in prime residential areas. There would be some increases in business property rates but these would be far less than the reduction in prime residential rates- the only people who would be worse off in my view under the new "Devonport"model would be a Waverley ratepayer and resident who owned a large factory in Launceston (and I don’t think there would be too many of those) The areas that would see an increase would see an increase of around 2 percent- under CPI."

Well, Launceston's ratepayers are not happy, and have not been since the massive increases were implemented. There are over 8,000 (out of 27,000) ratepayers affected by unfairly high rates . Many ratepayer’s found their rates reduced, static or not rising in accordance with CPI during this period. However, Launcestonians pay higher rates than residential ratepayers in many interstate suburbs whose property values are several times more valuable than they are in Launceston.

Clearly, there is an equity issue to be answered here not to mention the fact that other budget restraints are necessary. Over the same period, council’s budget increased by $30 million. Who benefits form this? It certainly isn't the ratepayers. This an issue that is not going to go away and it is one where Aldermen/Councillors and Council officer alike will be called upon to engage with their constituencies

CLICK ON THE IMAGE TO ENLARGE Comments and opinions are welcomed.
Please use the comment section below.

Launceston's new General Manager sets some benchmarks,

Launceston's new General Manager, Robert Dobrzynski, has used Launceston City Council's Quarterly Newsletter to tell ratepayers who he is and provide them with some benchmarks. It is always refreshing when new people on the scene do this. Congratulations Robert!

The trouble with this kind of thing however is that these newsletters appear in ratepayers' mailboxes along with the Junk Mail. Many ratepayers never read these newsletters and more than a few rail against them charactorising them as "yet another waste of ratepayers' money."

In the 21st Century we might expect Local Government to be more sophisticated, and cost effective, in their marketing strategies and communication methods. Yes a great many ratepayers do not have easy access to many of the contemporary 'communication platforms' but many do.

For those outside the loop, well Councils still have snail mail at their disposal and regular rate mail-outs via which to deliver 'the news' to ratepayers. It has been said that the disadvantage in communicating in this way is that "ratepayers are more likely to read any information that comes with their rate notices." For some that is not always a good thing.

However, with this newsletter there is a rare entry. A General Manager has put on the record his goals and likewise has identified the challenges he needs to address. At last there are some documented benchmarks to work with. We are documenting this rare event here so that ratepayers have some benchmarks to measure performance against.

Click on the image to enlarge it and read the GM's goals.

Tasmanian Ratepayers' Strategic Planning Process

Tasmanian Ratepayers Association Inc. is in its early days of reconfiguration and now is a good time to take another look at Tasmania's ratepayer association's/group's/network's reason for being. So an attempt is being made to articulate a model Strategic Plan and one that is settled upon in consultation with people in the Tasmanian ratepayer network. Once a common purpose is established 'ratepayer groups' are more likely to be effective and better placed to achieved stated goals.

All too often ratepayers hear from their elected representative "we have been elected to make decisions/govern." Likewise all too often this can be taken to mean that once the election process is over it is assumed that you, as the ratepayer, have abdicated your entitlements to participate in decision making until the next election. If you are in conflict with your local council on any issue this is not only disempowering it is intended to be.

Not all of our elected representatives take this position but many do. What is more concerning is the increasing range of 'authorities' a great many local government bureaucrats assume for themselves.

Please read the draft below and use the Comments Section below to make suggestions – improvement to the wording, an additional aim, whatever.

DRAFT #1

Statement of Purpose

Tasmanian Ratepayers Association Inc. has been set up to:
• Function as a network hub that disseminates information on issues and processes relevant to local government in Tasmania
• Provide education opportunities for formal and informal community ratepayer groups throughout Tasmania
• Work for equity for ratepayers and residents in Tasmania
• Improved democratic process and participation in local government in Tasmania
• Work towards local government in Tasmania being more accountable in the delivery of good governance in
• Work towards all tiers of government, and other relevant bodies, being more accountable to their constituencies;
• Promote the return of local government to local control

Aims

To facilitate a network of ratepayer community groups and individuals across Tasmania to :
• Provide mutual support in regard to local governance issues;
• Share information within ratepayer networks in order to empower Tasmanian ratepayers
• Provide lobbying strength for Tasmanian ratepayers
• Provide input to the development of local government policies and related planning processes

NOTE: To match the above there is a need to identify the rationales for these aims/goals and a set of strategies/tactics by which the aims/goals can/will be met. Please use the comments section below to put forward your suggestions.

Key Links

Local Government Links:

• Councils in Tasmania
• Launceston City Council
• Local Government Association of Tasmania (LGAT)
• Tasmanian Electoral Office

Key Tasmania News Links:

• Mercury
  
• Examiner
  
• Advocate
  
• Tasmanian Times

Australian Newspapers Online – history & archives