Hard News: After Len
106 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 2 3 4 5 Newer→ Last
-
Herald ’s view distorting Len’s:
no news there! -
Is Len Brown Auckland's Bill Clinton?
But seriously... People need to fairly appropriate blame for rates rises to the intransigence of central government to allow other forms of raising local revenue. We pay rates in Rodney as well as Waitakere, and things got better not worse after amalgamation. I only hope the next incumbent has the ability to follow through on the infrastructure vision that Brown has been able to establish.
-
Angela Hart, in reply to
I only hope the next incumbent has the ability to follow through on the infrastructure vision that Brown has been able to establish.
yup, that's crucial
-
The council was essentially set up to sell Auckland's assets, until that happens this govt isn't interested in helping Auckland in the slightest.
-
The FTE count may be lower, but you need the "fire alarm" count, which is how many people leave the building in an evacuation. The consultant/contractor/temp count is quite high I understand.
-
I agree Auckland's better and also still improving. And the CCOs might be instrumental: fresh mandates and all that.
But one thing strikes me as odd: Len's council equalised rates before equalising services. This seems to undermine the logic of amalgamation.
So, out west, our rates went down, but we also get fewer services (i.e. the same ones we had before amalgamation). We pay separately for our rubbish, we have to separate paper from plastic and glass, and we don't get the inorganic collection. And between Pt Erin and Piha, there's only one decent swimming pool, which is in Henderson.
If they'd equalised the basic services (OK forget the pool), then the suppliers might have been able to achieve greater economies, no?
-
Julie Fairey, in reply to
The timeframe on equalising rates was set in the legislation. Many local boards requested Council to go back to Govt to get another year or two to smooth the transition but the indication from central govt was dim at best so that wasn't pursued.
-
Glenda, in reply to
Slowly those assets are being sold...not the big ones but the little ones...some should be sold like tiny slivers of land Council did not know they had. But some are really important for intensification to work...such as land that will become small parks in the future...and Local Boards are fighting ACPL and the Governing Body to stop those small parcels being sold. It is tough going to stop the sales.
-
Glenda, in reply to
Oh don't forget pools....There is a great Mt Albert Aquatic Centre...not far from the Baldwin Train station...
-
Russell Brown, in reply to
But one thing strikes me as odd: Len's council equalised rates before equalising services. This seems to undermine the logic of amalgamation.
I believe they were required by central government to introduce a unified rating system within three years. Hence the pain.
-
kris_b, in reply to
We pay separately for our rubbish, we have to separate paper from plastic and glass, and we don't get the inorganic collection.
Sure, you pay for your rubbish bags. But in areas with wheelie bins, we pay a higher waste charge on our rates for it. Home on Te Atatu Peninsula Waste Charges: $88.68. Home in Newton Waste Charges: $225.56. And you also have the advantage of reducing your spend on rubbish bags if you reduce your rubbish output. I can't.
And no one gets free-for-all inorganic collections anymore, the new scheme is simply being phased in, as any large scale rollout should be. Hell where I live in the CBD we've never had inorganic collections!
I do however agree with the lack of public pools across the west and northwest, especially considering the massive growth planned for the northwest corridor. West Wave in Henderson is the only council-owned public pool in the area that stretches in an arc from Mt Albert to Albany. The North Shore, already flush with public pools, got a brand new National Aquatics Center right next to the existing Olympic sized pool at the Millennium Institute, and I understand another is planned for near North Harbour Stadium. Council owns I think 25 pools across Auckland, and ONE of them serves West Auckland.
-
(Orsman writes this morning that Brown "began with a strong mandate, put the structures in place for the Super City ..
It doesn't help civic discourse when a major media outlet's local govt specialist reporter either does not grasp or is willing to misrepresent who determined the structures. He has been consistently unhelpful and unprofessional for over a decade, yet still has a job.
-
But a majority of the council itself rejected stunt amendments from Cameron Brewer to freeze staff costs, ...
By the way, has anybody ever seen Cameron Brewer and Rick Moranis in the same room together?
-
Wildo, in reply to
You take that back about Rick Moranis
-
Matthew Poole, in reply to
But one thing strikes me as odd: Len's council equalised rates before equalising services. This seems to undermine the logic of amalgamation.
What Russell said. The law - Local Government (Auckland Transitional Provisions) Act 2010 - only provided for a three-year window to normalise rates across Megatropolis, opening 1/7/2012 and closing 30/6/2015. The Council's only choice was whether to stage the normalisation or to do it as a single big change in a single year.
It wasn't "Len's council" that did it, it was Hide and his mates in central government who wrote and passed the law. -
Morepork, in reply to
Lack of pools and recreation centres,in the west particularly in our poorest areas. I think there are 2 public pools/ recreation centres in the west, and 10 on the shore and 14 in the south, as well South's brand new performance arts centre. We have got 1 new arts centre in the West but we paid for a large share of that through the pokies and trusts. Add to that the West gives a complete monopoly to liquor with the revenue supposed to go to public good, we should be swimming in swimming pools. Alas, no. All is not well. Central and South have also enjoyed millions of investment from the power companies undergrounding their power poles. Council has said North Shore is next inline. Once again West Auckland is the poor cousin. They’ve had a rough run.
-
Did anyone hear Bill Ralston on RNZ this morning? "Debt out of control"..."some one needs to step in..."..."rates, rates, rates." What utter bullshit. But if he keeps repeating it, he'll likely win because even though Auckland's rates are amongst the lowest in the country, who wants to pay more? Even if we have woefully underinvested in the city for decades (thanks to our friends, the CitRats).
-
Russell Brown, in reply to
It doesn’t help civic discourse when a major media outlet’s local govt specialist reporter either does not grasp or is willing to misrepresent who determined the structures.
That was such a weird thing to write. The structures – with the exception of the Maori statutory board (which had to wait for councillors to set a budget) and the advisory panels – were put in place by the government.
Note that Hide made a pig’s arse of the Maori statutory board requirements too.
-
Russell Brown, in reply to
Did anyone hear Bill Ralston on RNZ this morning? “Debt out of control"…"some one needs to step in…"…"rates, rates, rates.” What utter bullshit.
There is nothing out of control. Ralston’s “most indebted ratepayers in the country” claim refers to the Taxpayers’ Union’s ropey “per ratepayer” number. It’s not about counting landlords, ffs. There is, for instance, one ratepayer for all the rates-attracting properties owned by Housing New Zealand in Auckland.
Also, Auckland Council has an S&P credit rating of AA: the same as the New Zealand government, better than most councils and better than all our banks.
-
Matthew Poole, in reply to
Debt out of control
As Bernard Hickey has said on RNZ more than once, most households would be thrilled to have a mortgage of only double income.
-
Glenn Pearce, in reply to
There is, for instance, one ratepayer for all the rates-attracting properties owned by Housing New Zealand in Auckland.
That is incorrect, "per ratepayer" figures refer to per "Rating Unit" which is basically 1 Certificate of Title so all Housing NZ would not count as 1 Ratepayer as you suggest.
-
Russell Brown, in reply to
That is incorrect, “per ratepayer” figures refer to per “Rating Unit” which is basically 1 Certificate of Title so all Housing NZ would not count as 1 Ratepayer as you suggest.
I stand corrected!
-
Rich of Observationz, in reply to
Or of less than 20% of their assets (I found the number: http://www.localcouncils.govt.nz/lgip.nsf/wpg_url/Profiles-Councils-Auckland-Council-F2
-
I've said it before; people want their pools and libraries (both around $10m plus operation) and they care about these much more than $50-100m roading upgrades.
Can someone near to Phil Goff get him to promise free pools across the city? People would go wild for it.
-
Glenn Pearce, in reply to
Asset backing is a poor measure of Council debt.
Most council Assets have little market value and those that do have a commercial value are income generating to help lower the debt.
Post your response…
This topic is closed.