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

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