Read the Auckland Council statement below:
Auckland, it’s time to tell us what you think.
Auckland Council released its draft annual plan today and is encouraging people to provide feedback by 1 April.
The draft plan which outlines the council’s proposed activities for the year 1 July 2011 to 30 June 2012, is available online at www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/annualplan and at libraries and council service centres across the region or by calling (09) 301 0101.
Aucklanders’ rates go towards paying for the things contained in the draft annual plan so it is important that people take the opportunity to make their views known. The draft plan explains the Auckland Council’s plans and budget for the 2011/2012 year which are contained in the council’s Long-term Plan 2010 – 2019.
This long-term plan consolidated the plans and financial projections of the previous councils.
Key proposals include:
- A proposal to spend $1.8 billion on services across the region and $773 million on capital projects. -
A proposed rates increase of 4.9 per cent. (That's an increase to what the council calls a "transition rate" for 2011/12 from what Auckland region's ratepayers' previously paid. Watercare also wants a 4.5% increase to the waste water rate from what was collected in 2010/11).
- Aligning the way rates are charged across the region by introducing four rates instalments per year for all ratepayers, a 1.5 per cent early payment discount and a 10 per cent penalty for late payment.
The draft annual plan also includes Local Board Agreements which outline the activities the region’s 21 local boards propose to undertake within their communities over the next 12 month period from 1 July.
A summary of the draft annual plan will be delivered to all households in the region from today. The pamphlet includes a freepost feedback form for people to fill in.
For more information, please contact: Angelika Cutler External communications Auckland Council 027 474 3695 Auckland Council
28 Comments
So what to do about it Bernard?
The megalomania of our councils has to stop, the "Super City" was supposed to be more efficient, the councils have made lots of money in the last years by simply increasing rates not only every year a percentage higher than the inflation rate, but just think about the increase just because the valuations of properties (base for rating) have gone through the roof! It is obscene!
One sample: I checked lately the sales history and CV of a property , was bough in 2002 for $147.500 ( Land only), the person did put a Lockwood and garage on it and hi presto, in 2007 the CV was $1,450.000 ( Land valued $1,225.000).
And it is not a clifftop mansion, but rather in a quiet backwater with some very distant sea view in the Rodney District (now Supercity) with no street lighting, footpath, water service or sewers (tankwater and septic is used), no rubbish collection.
There should really be a rate payers revolt.
Gareth Morgan on house prices:
His views on house prices seem very bearish compared to the bullish comments that have come out from Infometrics over the last couple of years
Kind of weird!!!!
HAMILTON The new Mayor has opened the books and it is a sad state of affairs. 8% rate rise being talked about. Previous council of idiots spent ratepayers money like there was no tomorrow. V8s in debt for $30+ million, $68 million new events centre with a third of the budgeted bookings to cover loan repayments, maintenence staff etc. Garden Place revamp needing another $800,000 that was not accounted for to finish the unwanted revamp. It goes on and on. The sad part about it all is that a lot of the previous councillors are still there and wont resign! The useless buggars are unfit to get a real job. Why do no hopers love spending other peoples money? Ony ideas Wolly?
http://gregpytel.blogspot.com/2011/02/why-does-bank-of-england-not-increase.html
The current figures show that the growth of broad money supply in the UK is very low and is lower than the growth of narrow money supply (see graphs below). This means that money multiplier is going down (as money multiplier can be expressed as a ratio of broad money to narrow money). The financial market keeps balancing itself but in the meantime the currencies have little credibility and investors want to minimise a risk of holding them by moving to commodities. Therefore Bank of England faces unprecedented situation: the inflation is going up but raising interest rate would not stop it as the inflation is not a result of high growth of broad money supply. In fact raising interest rate can further damage economy and make things worse by slowing the growth thereby ability to repay the public debt.
Raising interest rate is not a solution and Bank of Englad knows it. Its Governor acts wisely but does not say everything. The problem is, however, that the money multiplier is so high that inflation caused by it is likely to be going up for quite a while. We are getting poorer thanks to the pyramid scheme engineered by the financial industry. The Bank of England Governor Mervyn King observed that "inflation could cause serious problems for families over the next three years". You can say it again, Mr King. And in the meantime the captains of the financial industry keep rewarding themselves handsomely with the money raided from the middle classes since this is what high taxes, spending cuts and inflation are all about.
Well duh it was OBVIOUS the super city idea is up there with all the other ideas with vested interest's at the helm(status quo)...end result, YOU PAY!
Wake up this tactic has been employed for years, if you think voting in the other side is going to make any difference forget it. It's the same party with the same AGENDA and that agenda dosn't include the majority.
Is it not obvious by now?
Que Bono?
Try living in Dunedin where we face a combined rates rise of over 20% for three years. Oh, but we are getting a $200m roofed stadium (17,500 permanent seat capacity to replace Carisbrook's around 30,000 seat stadium) which has been touted as the saviour of the city's economy. Today in the local paper was a request for another $4m funding for such "extras "as sufficient toilets, kitchens, scoreboards and lights to assist with the grass growth. And we only have a ratepayer base of 46,000 accounts. So quit your moaning Aucklanders! And if you come to any of our pool games at the RWC, go to the loo before you head to the stadium.
That Dunedin stadium is bound to be a white elephant. ChCh City Council is having to bailout its own subsiduary company, which owns and operates the AMI Stadium, to the tune of $45 million to stop it going bankrupt. ChCh has a population 3X the size of Dunedin, there's no doubt that DCC is going to have to go begging to Central Gov't to pay for that mistake. Who would have thought that would happen?
The Dunedin people are going to have to sell assets to bail-out this disaster.
The Port, Airport, Forests and Delta should be on the chopping block - What a disaster for the generations of Dunedin people who built this asset. To be blown away by a slim majority of councilors.
Waikato Rugby union cant pay last years ground rent charges to the Hamilton City Council. They owe $900.000.00. After the World Cup hype has gone look out all over NZ for the same scenario.Waikato averaged only 5,000 paying customers for last years ITM domestic competition. The stadium is another grand idea from free spending councillors gone wrong yet again. I pity Dunedin ratepayers.
Gst charged on a new home 15%..councils pump the valuation on their est of the capital value increase...then they charge rates on that...and the govt puts gst on top....oh what a lovely way to steal money from households...and an even better way to make sure people build fewer homes....
A cheapy new home has about $45000 tax on top(300K).....councils val push that with the land and hey presto rates are $2500 minimum....of which about $450 every bloody year is GST to the thieving govt.....
hmmm - all Local Govt activities are fuelled, one way or another.
That's at $110 a barrel equivalent, so all Local Govt activities will cost more than they did when it was $60 a barrel.
Also, that scarcity is cherry-picked, so the calorific return per litre will be reducing (not in the delivered barel, but in EROEI terms).
So, methinks discussing 'rates rises' in isolation, and using percentages in linear form to describe them, (rather than cumulative, real-time axis) doesn't help.
Bernard's relating it to 'inflation' is a valid q, as 'inflation' must react to energy too.
We welcome your comments below. If you are not already registered, please register to comment.
Remember we welcome robust, respectful and insightful debate. We don't welcome abusive or defamatory comments and will de-register those repeatedly making such comments. Our current comment policy is here.