A SUGGESTION to limit rate rises to 1.5 per cent annually in future led to much debate between Frankston councillors at the latest public council meeting after newly-elected councillor Lillian O’Connor proposed council officers investigate the feasibility of the cap.
Councillors voted 7-2 to see a report from officers about a possible 1.5 per cent annual cap in 2017-18 “or other outcomes” to be lodged at a council meeting next year.
Cr O’Connor noted annual rate rises in Frankston had not dipped below a state government recommended annual cap of 2.5 per cent in 2015 for the past 16 years.
“We need to just only rely on rates for revenue,” she said.
“We need to look at other ways of getting revenue. We need to be better and smarter with our money.”
Cr Glenn Aitken said rising rates are becoming “very burdensome for a lot of people” because of the region’s mix of wealthy suburbs and less expensive properties.
“In Seaford for instance, land valuations have risen quite dramatically. Seaford is seen as a really hot suburb real estate market wise. The sheer reality is there are still a lot of older residents in Seaford and there are many instances, I believe, of people being asset rich and cash poor.”
He said single mothers and those without stable employment can struggle with rate rises.
“I don’t think there’s any harm whatever in seeing what different rating structures would do to the city’s services and the city’s income.”
Cr Colin Hampton said capping rate rises at 1.5 per cent each year is “crazy economics”.
“To think that you could reduce the rates in this town to 1.5 per cent … you need also to say what services you’re going to cut to reach that 1.5 per cent [rise].”
The long-term Labor Party member said he had been critical of the Labor state government’s rate-capping policy.
“It’s a policy that will cause this state to run down,” Cr Hampton said.
He noted 60 per cent of New South Wales councils “went broke” and the rest “were struggling” because the NSW state government capped rates.
Cr Hampton said council provides more than 100 services to ratepayers with “3 per cent of the total tax revenue in this country” including school crossing supervisors, animal registration, swimming pools and health services.
He said state governments collect 18 per cent of taxes and federal governments 79 per cent of total tax income.
“We [councils] are the most cost-effective form of government in this country. That is unreservedly true,” Cr Hampton said.
“And for people to go around and say that they want to reduce the rates [rises] to 1.5 per cent is absolutely crazy.”
Crs Aitken, Kris Bolam, Brian Cunial, Quinn McCormack, Sandra Mayer, O’Connor and Steve Toms to have council officers investigate rate capping at 1.5 per cent and “other outcomes” in a budget forecast.
Crs Hampton and Michael O’Reilly voted against the proposal.
“Rate capping benefits people who own houses and … property investors, like myself,” Cr O’Reilly said.
“I pay rates to three different councils so if anyone if going to vote for rate capping and a reduction in rates it’s going to be me but I benefit but I don’t want to see it.”
He said he sees how rates revenue benefits “the most vulnerable” that need services in the community.
“I’m prepared to pay because I see the results.”
Cr Mayer said ratepayers won’t thank councillors for saving them “$15 for the year” in rates.
“I am a healthcare card holder. That $15 doesn’t make or break me. I’m not going to be able to go on a holiday for that.”
She said council could look at allowing rates relief for people who are on a low income and are struggling.
