SA Footy

morell wrote:No, transparency and accountability about the big stuff and important issues/projects. Leaving resources to make them as effective as possible.

Instead of appeasing people with no lives and too much time on their hands.

Clearly, you're still struggling with the concept the sensible people are discussing.

The irony now etched in stone

Council4life

You literally have double my post count.

But whatever, you'll never listen. Next time you're down at you holiday house pop in to your local council office and say hello, I'll bring you through and show you the tripe I have to deal with day to day.

So now we've established that the policy of Rate Capping is complete waff. Sign the petition below:

https://www.megaphone.org.au/petitions/ ... l-services

morell wrote:So now we've established that the policy of Rate Capping is complete waff. Sign the petition below:

https://www.megaphone.org.au/petitions/ ... l-services

Nah, I don't do petitions.

I'm against rate capping because I don't think it achieves anything.
That said, I don't believe the LGA are doing a good enough job to convince people that's the case.

The problem the LGA has is SA ranks the highest when it comes to rates (see "taxation" in the below) collection.

Trader wrote:

morell wrote:So now we've established that the policy of Rate Capping is complete waff. Sign the petition below:

https://www.megaphone.org.au/petitions/ ... l-services

Nah, I don't do petitions.

I'm against rate capping because I don't think it achieves anything.
That said, I don't believe the LGA are doing a good enough job to convince people that's the case.

The problem the LGA has is SA ranks the highest when it comes to rates (see "taxation" in the below) collection.

Absolutely agree with all of the above.

I'm not convinced rate capping is the answer either if the councils can just get around it by upping the charging of fees for every action to keep raising revenue.

What I would like to see is legislation obliging councils to stick to running basic services and obliging them to not get into socio-political agendae and to not use residents money for self-promotion or pushing other objectives by funding bike races and other such activities that are not basic services.

In particular I am concerned about some pressure groups trying to use getting members into councils to drive their particular agenda there because they can't gain enough support to have a big influence in state or federal politics where voting is compulsory and so try to use people's passivity about council voting to their advantage.

Psyber wrote:I'm not convinced rate capping is the answer either if the councils can just get around it by upping the charging of fees for every action to keep raising revenue.

What I would like to see is legislation obliging councils to stick to running basic services and obliging them to not get into socio-political agendae and to not use residents money for self-promotion or pushing other objectives by funding bike races and other such activities that are not basic services.

In particular I am concerned about some pressure groups trying to use getting members into councils to drive their particular agenda there because they can't gain enough support to have a big influence in state or federal politics where voting is compulsory and so try to use people's passivity about council voting to their advantage.

Correct on all counts, Psyber.

So we have everyone on board against rate capping.

Except for Jimmy.

I reckon if we can get him over the line, such is his influence, we might just defeat it.

C'mon Jimmyyyyyyyyyy. I'll buy you an Australian Greens Tshirt if you do.

Im for rate capping

mighty_tiger_79 wrote:Im for rate capping

You're not the only one.
And, as I have said, at least its put the Councils on notice that the lolly shop door is closing.

Do we need to go over the math again? That article has effectively proven the point that rate capping will do naff all.

Asisde from the policies already mentioned by Trader and I, the very method that is used to calculate rates should be reviewed.

And council's have been "on notice" for a very long time. Anyone that's sat through an AGAC meeting, as I have, would attest to that!

Having worked directly with Cr Hewitson over the years I'd say he's part of the problem, not the solution.
Ask him about all those "pet projects" he voted for.

He says it himself, even this year with his sleepless nights he couldn't meet a target they set. So why do we expect them to be able to do it once rate capping comes in?

But seriously, when the state government is increasing the waste levy (predominately paid by Councils) by 15%, how is it reasonable for the state to then limit Council's expenses to 2.5%, or some other set figure?

Exactly.

It's time for...

#CourageousCouncils

The other thing a lot of people don't realise is...

Local Government is beholden to the State for its legislative requirements. It literally must do what it is told, by law. Under the Act there are some liberties afforded, but ultimately, if the State says LG must deliver a service or collect a levy, it has to do it.

So given the above, what do you reckon the State has been doing for a decade? Literally passing the buck to Local Government. Env. health. Waste levies, social programs etc

This is why that referendum to get LG recognised in the constitution was floated a while back, so Council's could fight back a bit....

Trader wrote:But seriously, when the state government is increasing the waste levy (predominately paid by Councils) by 15%, how is it reasonable for the state to then limit Council's expenses to 2.5%, or some other set figure?

Finally someone comes up with the obvious argument instead of bull$hit
The State Govt has been moving costs onto both the Feds and councils
But, interesting which one the LGA finds the most distressing to spend taxpayers money on
Councils, like Labor, believe in big government and taxes.

http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/sout ... 6fc59eda47

I made the same argument like three times Jimmy. Perhaps not as eloquently as Trader but I'd hope you're judging my posts based on their content and not the author

By the way, appreciate you posting that article with the Councillor so everyone can read it.

I also referred to cost-shifting (and pork barrelling) in my initial posts on this issue.

morell wrote:So we have everyone on board against rate capping.

Except for Jimmy.

I reckon if we can get him over the line, such is his influence, we might just defeat it.

C'mon Jimmyyyyyyyyyy. I'll buy you an Australian Greens Tshirt if you do.

Not quite...
I'd support rate capping - if it is based on a fair and reasonable assessment of the funding needs to maintain basic services - to ensure they don't use elevated rates to expand into other areas as I stated above, but I'd also want a block on them the being able to resort to jacked up fees to raise money for the other stuff they tend to get into.

Similarly, I support the ABC and its role in radio and TV, but I think they now run to many stations and fill the gaps with crap programming compared to the past.

Psyber wrote:

morell wrote:So we have everyone on board against rate capping.

Except for Jimmy.

I reckon if we can get him over the line, such is his influence, we might just defeat it.

C'mon Jimmyyyyyyyyyy. I'll buy you an Australian Greens Tshirt if you do.

Not quite...
I'd support rate capping - if it is based on a fair and reasonable assessment of the funding needs to maintain basic services - to ensure they don't use elevated rates to expand into other areas as I stated above, but I'd also want a block on them the being able to resort to jacked up fees to raise money for the other stuff they tend to get into.

Similarly, I support the ABC and its role in radio and TV, but I think they now run to many stations and fill the gaps with crap programming compared to the past.

More than reasonable.

As an aside rate increase capping already exists for most Council's as an internal Financial policy. I know we have it...