Monthly Archives: July 2012

More on Rates

Posted on by

You Can Tell our Rates Bills are Coming

 

 

That would be especially the case with two more articles on Rates in this morning NZ Herald.

Lets take a quick look at both shall we:

Both articles from the NZ Herald

Most Auckland firms will face big rates increases

By Bernard Orsman

5:30 AM Tuesday Jul 31, 2012

About 8000 Auckland small businesses and 1700 large businesses face rates increases of more than 10 per cent for three consecutive years. Unlike households, businesses do not have the luxury of a rates cap and have to change to the new single rating system for the Super City in equal steps over three years. Seven out of 10 small businesses and six out of 10 big businesses face a rise in rates. About 11,000 businesses across the region will get a reduction in rates.

Auckland Mayor Len Brown said that while the value of rates being paid by business was being shuffled around, the 34 per cent of total rates collected from businesses was the same as under the former councils.

For every dollar in rates paid by households, urban businesses are charged $2.63 and rural businesses $2.37. In the case of Pukekohe businesses, the council has set the differential at $2.03. This is because the former Franklin District Council did not charge a business differential and a $2.63 differential would have had a “significant and extreme” impact on those businesses, Mr Brown said.

BUSINESS RATES

* Most businesses pay $2.63 for every $1 paid by households.
* Pukekohe businesses will pay $2.03.
* The $2.63 differential will be cut by 10c every year to $1.63 after 10 years.

 

So businesses get slugged rather heavily. Not particularly helpful when trying to encourage businesses into Auckland and either create or expand employment centres like Papakura, and Manukau City Centre which sorely need our existing and new businesses.

I must have a look over the conversations I have had with people since the Long Term Plan (which has set our rates) came into force. As I am for sure the Business Differential could be around the $1.50 mark if Council could balance its books properly. So much with a Business Diff at $2.63 for Auckland being the most livable city (when we rate our businesses into oblivion).

 

 

With this next article it is a case of you win some and you lose some:

Manukau hit by 41.4% rise in wastewater costs

By Bernard Orsman

5:30 AM Tuesday Jul 31, 2012

Auckland Mayor Len Brown’s old city of Manukau – home to many of the poorest suburbs in Auckland – is being hit with a 41.4 per cent rise in wastewater charges. Combined with a 3 per cent rise in rates, that makes the 95,000 households in Manukau the biggest losers of a single rating system for the Super City with an average increase of 10.3 per cent. The move to a single charge for wastewater has resulted in significant rises and falls across the region with residents in Manukau, Waitakere and the North Shore feeling the brunt of the increases.

The big winners are residents in the old Auckland City, who have been paying wastewater charges based on use through Metrowater, a council company, since 1997 when other councils subsidised the true cost of wastewater in their rates. Auckland City wastewater charges are falling by an average of 19.6 per cent, although some low water users will pay more. Mr Brown – the former Mayor of Manukau whose political career began on the streets of Otara – yesterday denied that Manukau had subsidised wastewater through rates.

 

Thank Lord I moved from Manukau to Papakura with incoming waste-water charges going up like that. If you compare the jump in water prices to your rates bill as shown in the embed below, maybe Orakei and Councillor Brewer got a sweet deal after all – because Manukau sure did not looking at the averages.

However averages are averages. VOAKL is interested to hear how you “feel” once your rates and water bill arrives in your letter box. Did you get stung or did you in the overall scheme of things get some savings? Comment below.

As for me:

Residents in the former Papakura District Council will continue to be billed by United Water, which has provided water and wastewater services since 1997 to about 15,000 customers under a 30-year franchise agreement.

So a sweet deal through to 2027?

 

Time to review the books again folks, especially as I see the following article from The NBR: NZ families fret over fraught financial situation – survey

Gates Installed

Posted on by

Gates Installed at Britomart

 

I was at Britomart this morning and saw these devices greeting me as I moved off my train and towards the main bank of stairs/escalators:

 

Ticket Gates at Britomart

 

They are not operating yet but will give the passengers some time getting use to “single file” through them.

 

 

 

CRL TIMETABLE AND OPERATION PLAN – PART THREE

Posted on by

CRL Timetable and Operation with Potential Passenger Capacity

 

Part of The City Rail Link Series

Debate on the City Rail Link continues with figures and all sorts coming out from both sides coin.

VOAKL will cut right down the middle and look at my own proposal on potential passenger capacity that could be moved post CRL (but pre North Shore Line)

It is time for a discussion and VOAKL will provide one – for everyone with a VIEW

 

Potential Passenger Capacity on Post CRL Rail Network

So far in my City Rail Link Timetable and Operation Plan Proposal I have covered the foundation of my proposal on passenger train operations and frequencies once the $3.6b (Rail Fallacy applying of course)  CRL was opened and under way. You can get a full recap at my CRL TIMETABLE AND OPERATION PLAN – PART TWO post.

In this post I build upon the proposed frequencies from Part Two and apply what potential capacity the Auckland Passenger Rail network could have post CRL. Now remember as of current in my proposals I have three lines of operation – they are:

 THE THREE PROPOSED LINES

The three lines for CRL and wider Auckland rail service delivery are the following (fancy names and colours later) (each line is also bi-directional):

  • The South to West Line via Newmarket and Grafton (brown on the map)
  • The East to West Line via Britomart, CRL and Mt Eden/Kingsland Station (red on map)
  • The Onehunga Loop via Newmarket, Britomart , CRL, CRL East Link, Grafton,Newmarket(or vice versa – bi-directional loop system) (pink on map)
 For more information on the baseline proposal, read the proposal post
The proposed frequencies I was proposing in Part Two can be seen HERE (latest workings added).

 

 

Knowing that the new  CAF Electric Multiple Units (EMU’s) can hold 375 passengers per standard 3-car consist and 750 passengers when running as a Double EMU 6-car consist I crunched some numbers based on my proposed frequencies (as well as giving some baseline stuff to “base it off”).
Here is the number crunching I did in Excel. The baseline capacities are given first, then the capacity if my proposal is used – both in 3 and 6-car configurations:

 

You can see the wide ranging capacity figures depending on what frequency and EMU-consist Auckland Transport decide to use. The passenger movement capacity ranges from 1,500 people per hour right up to 10x that level at 15,000 per hour. So just looking at the baseline stuff, we have the potential to either move a lot of passengers or sweet bugger all depending which way you swing the frequencies.
But while baseline capacity based off baseline frequencies is one thing, actual capacity from proposed operations is another. Looking at page two of the embedded Excel document you can see the wide range of frequencies on the different sections of the network. From a pathetic 1,500 people an hour on the CRL East Link, and the Newmarket – Britomart via Parnell section; to a staggering 13,500 people an hour on the Penrose to Newmarket section there is a wide range of variances in the amount of people that can be moved per hour. However looking at the individual break down per section of the network I used for the number crunching I can see we have a few issues.

 

1) First of all the Onehunga Line which is a single line at the moment – and is very busy in the twin peak periods needs to be duplicated before the CRL opens as the Passenger Movement Capacity Per Hour numbers are in honest opinion pathetic for a EMU fleet.

 

2) Second thing I have noticed is that the 3-car consist PMCP/H figures across all bar the Penrose-Newmarket section are too low to move the amount of passengers needed in a growing city like ours let alone encourage more people to use the trains. Effectively from Papakura to Britomart) using the East to West Line (the only direct service from the south to Britomart) you are only moving 2,250 people per hour, basically less than what we move now with the diesel fleet. So to get the numbers up to a more respectable level (although 4,500 PMCP/H is still quite low) the East to West Line AND the South to West Line will need to run the 6-car EMU consist. The Onehunga Loop with its very high frequencies can be worked with the standard 3-car EMU consist with little issue with at minimum 12 trains per hour or 4,500 PMCP/H  proposed in the operation plan. To get the PMCP/H higher, especially in the Inner Circuit (New Lynn – Otahuhu on all lines) where there is either high patronage or the simple fact those passengers can not board a train as it is already full from passengers from the Outer Area (Otahuhu – Pukekohe and New Lynn and Waitakere); inner circuit shuttles like then old Otahuhu Shuttles would need to be run.

 

3) And that leads to my third thing: Otahuhu Shuttles. To get the Train Per Hour count to 12 between Otahuhu and Britomart via Glen Innes (existing Eastern Line and part of the proposed East-West Line) whether using 3 or car-car consists I would need to reintroduce the Otahuhu Shuttles again. However with my yet to written Rail Efficiency Program, I might be able to turn the Otahuhu Shuttle into a Inner Circuit Loop that increases connectivity on the rail network. I will run a post on this most likely in Part Four of the CRL TIMETABLE AND OPERATION PLAN once I have drafted The Rail Efficiency Program.

 

But for now using what we have got you can see the potential People Movement Capacity Per Hour in my CRL TIMETABLE AND OPERATION PLAN. Of course the PMCP/H will change around as I draw up a draft timetable and look at dedicated Inner Circuit services and the issues of transfers at interchange stations.
In Parts Four and Five with this CRL Timetable/Operation Proposal, I shall try to (this time) create a mock-up timetable and network map based on my ideas presented so far. I will also build in Inner Circuit whether shuttles to help increase frequencies and move passengers inside the Inner Circuit (between Otahuhu and New Lynn) which are the heavy areas in terms people movement (owing to our urban development).
As always, Comments and thoughts (constructive) are welcome 

Commentary from David Thorton

Posted on by

David Thorton’s Commentary on Auckland Rates

 

Note: The material below was written by David Thorton – all credits and rights belong to David

 

‎30 July 2012

COMMENTARY by David Thornton – on Auckland Council rates.

Mayor misleads ratepayers – and only Parliament can protect ratepayers.

Mayor Len Brown misleads ratepayers with his repeated claim that his new rating system is ‘fairer to everyone’ because properties of equal value will pay exactly the same amount of rates. What he studiously ignores is the fact that, the household incomes of ratepayers of equal value homes, are not equal.
When Mayor Brown talks about an average rates increase of 3.6% he is toying with the reality of the situation. This figure of 3.6% refers to the increase in the amount of total rates income the council wants to raise.
Of course Mayor Brown follows this same misleading path all councils use to explain their rate increases. Very few ratepayers pay the ‘average’ increase.

The facts in Auckland are that 46% of residential ratepayers will have increases of between 5% and a maximum capped at 10%, while only 29% will receive a decrease of a maximum capped at 5.6%. The remaining 25% will get an increase or decrease of up to 5% – and maybe a few in this group will in fact get Mayor Brown’s 3.6% increase.

These percentages were provided to me by officials at the council and disprove Mayor Brown’s statement in today’s NZ Herald that ‘Most people will be around the average’. More disturbing is the ‘Winner and Losers’ table published in the NZ Herald which clearly demonstrates that, generally, the heavily populated North and Central/Eastern suburbs suffer the greatest increases, while suburbs in the South and West mostly enjoy decreases or increases below 2%. With average changes ranging from a decrease of 3.9% in Franklin to an increase of 8.4% in Albert-Eden, the level of wealth redistribution can only be considered as unacceptable.

Will ratepayers revolt by withholding their rates?

In the 2003/4 Regional Ratepayers Rebellion 140,000 ratepayers withheld all or part of their rates when the former Auckland Regional Council rates bills were sent out. Over a period of 18 months most of those rebels finally paid up but that rebellion was acknowledged as the cause of the downfall of many ARC councillors at the 2004 election.

But, with or without a similar rebellion, it is not difficult to forecast that a similar fate may well befall many current members of the new Auckland Council, and probably the Mayor as well.
The effect of this year’s rates increase is arguably greater than in 2003, but this time there has been a very expensive advertising campaign to soften up ratepayers by aiming to sell the Mayor’s vision of ‘the world’s most liveable city’ and by the ‘fairer rates’ campaign. It seems that the public has largely refused to accept this vision, nor has the public accepted the Mayor’s claim that his rates policy is fair to all.

But with the rates bill now on the way to the letterbox what can the individual ratepayer do?

There is hope on the near horizon in the form of the Local Government Amendment Bill, currently before Select Committee, which will have the effect of limiting council spending and levels of rates increases. The Bill passed first reading by only one vote – and all local councils have announced their opposition to key parts of the Bill. On the other hand many ratepayer groups and individuals have made submissions welcoming and supporting the Bill. Mayor Brown is deeply concerned that if the Bill becomes law in its present form the Auckland Council will have to rewrite its Auckland Plan and the 10-year budget with its 4.9% annual rates increase.

Ratepayers could not care less about Mayor Brown’s plans – all they care about is the size of the rates bill about to arrive in the letterbox.

The best chance ratepayers have to change all this is by enlisting the support of MPs, of every Party, to support the Amendment Bill in Parliament.

Despite the cries of outrage about the loss of local democracy in the Bill, councils are creatures of statute, and only Parliament can now protect ratepayers from extravagant and unresponsive councils.

ends

Reply to David’s Commentary from VOAKL

What can we the average ratepayer do? Well I ask that question and gave a lengthy response to it in an earlier post and is worth a read. I also called for the head of the Chairperson of the Council Strategy and Finance Committee as well. As for this:

Mayor Brown is deeply concerned that if the Bill (Local Government Amendment Bill) becomes law in its present form the Auckland Council will have to rewrite its Auckland Plan and the 10-year budget with its 4.9% annual rates increase.

I say BRING IT! The Auckland Plan I ranked as a “C-” Grade plan with the only two things preventing the Plan from failing out right was the City Rail Link and the 60:40 Brownfield:Greenfield urban development split which both I supported and advocated for via my submission to The Auckland Plan. As for The Long Term Plan; well I am in opposition to it as I rated that Plan a dismal failure so a rewrite to that would be most certainly welcome from me! And The Unitary Plan? Well that is not up for submission yet so can not comment just yet on it ;) .

 

On the note of:

Despite the cries of outrage about the loss of local democracy in the Bill, councils are creatures of statute, and only Parliament can now protect ratepayers from extravagant and unresponsive councils.

This is my reply to it in the embed below:

 

Links

Submission to The Auckland Plan

Submission to The Long Term Plan

 

And remember come 2013 Auckland Council:

From Councillor Cameron Brewer

Posted on by

A Media Release From Councillor Cameron Brewer of Orakei Ward

 

 

A previous media release from Orakei Ward Councillor – Cameron Brewer

 

256,000 Households Face Average Rates Increase Of 8.1%

Auckland Councillor Cameron Brewer

Media release

28 June 2012

256,000 Households Face Average Rates Increase Of 8.1%
Auckland Council signed off its $58 billion 10-year budget today with over a quarter of a million Auckland households facing significant rates rises from next month,” says Auckland Councillor for Orakei, Cameron Brewer.

“We hear a lot from the Mayor that the average rates increase will be 3.6% for 2012/13, but that includes all those getting huge decreases. When you take out those households receiving rates decreases, the average increase is 8.1% for those 256,000 residents facing an increase. That’s higher than the overall increase of 7.8% for Christchurch residents and that rating base has been decimated and the city destroyed.

Mr Brewer says information provided by the council’s finance department also shows that from the nearly 24,000 business facing increases, the average increase is 12.8%, including 4,410 businesses facing average rates increases of 50.4%. Those 8,000 in the ‘farm and lifestyle’ rating category facing an increase can expect an average increase of 7%.

“This is after the council’s rates transition management policy is applied, which will see residential rate increases capped at 10% in the first year with the difference spilling over subsequent years, and increases to business rates evenly phased in over three years.

“The capping and phasing policy may lessen the instant pain but it arguably just prolongs the agony,” he says.

Mr Brewer says about 133,000 Auckland residential ratepayers will have to pay at least 10% more, including about 47,000 who will pay at least 20% more albeit capped, with 62.5% of his Orakei ward expected to pay the full 10% cap.

“The council’s advertising material is promoting the new rating system as “fairer all round”. However it’s far from fair if you’re on the wrong side of the ledger.

“This is going to bite a majority of Auckland householders and businesses when they don’t need any more cost. So much for amalgamation making things less expensive. This council had plenty of tools and options to lessen the increases but chose not to apply them. Instead the Mayor has gone on a massive spending spree which will also see council debt skyrocket,” says Cameron Brewer.

The five councillors who voted against the Long Term Plan were Cameron Brewer, Calum Penrose, Dick Quax, Sharon Stewart and George Wood.

 

 

Commentary continues with the next subsequent post relaying commentary from No-More-Rates spokesperson David Thorton