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.

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

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.