Sunday 18 December 2016

LOSER PAYS


Misconceptions, restraint and commonsense

The West Australian for 12 July this year carried an advertisement headlined ‘Misconceptions on Council rates puts public in dark’.  The author was Cr Lynne Craigie, current president of WALGA.  

It seems Cr Craigie was on a mission to convince WA ratepayers that swingeing rate increases—of which we in York have had more than our fair share in recent years—are invariably justified by rising expenditures over which local governments apparently have little or no control.

The first ‘misconception’ she wrote about is that when property values fall, as they have in WA since the mining boom ended, rates should fall with them or at any rate shouldn’t rise.  She pointed out that the amount you pay in rates compared with what your neighbours have to pay is based on the rental value of your property relative to the value of theirs—the greater that rental value, the more you are required to cough up as your share of the expenditures set out in your council’s annual budget.  

The resale value of your property at any given time, whether it goes up or down or remains stable, plays no part in the calculation.

Lynne Craigie, President of WALGA (Photo: ABC)
The other ‘misconception’ is that the level of any rate increase should be pegged to the CPI. 

Actually, that isn’t a misconception. It’s an opinion, and one I happily admit to sharing—up to a point, anyway.

For Cr Craigie, rate increases simply reflect the ever-increasing cost of the services—‘local roads, waste services, parks and sports fields, libraries, pools and recreation facilities’—that local government provides. 

“Councils’ cost structures”, she wrote,

…are impacted by more components than the cost of living.  Wage and salary increases, reductions in funding, cost shifts from other governments and artificial restrictions on fees and charges all add to the pressure on rates.

I think it's more complicated than that.  Local government cost structures are also impacted by a variety of less tangible factors that Cr Craigie and the WALGA set generally would probably prefer us simple-minded forelock-tuggers not to think too deeply about. 
 
Those factors include the intelligence and wisdom of council members and the knowledge, skill, talent, experience and honesty of council employees, especially the CEO.

They include council’s willingness to make decisions that benefit the whole community, not just councillors themselves, their friends, relations, intimate partners past and present, sporting associates, drinking buddies and political supporters.

Above all, they include council’s readiness to exercise commonsense and restraint when deciding how municipal funds should be spent. 

Ah, commonsense and restraint…not much in evidence in York, especially when you consider the enormous financial burden, somewhere between $300K and $500K, that the hapless ratepayers of York are obliged to shoulder every year to repair and maintain our big white elephant, the York Recreation and Convention Centre aka the Splurj Mahal.

Turf wars

Which brings me to what reminded me of Cr Craigie’s instructive musings, namely item SY160-12 on pages 31-35 of the agenda for tomorrow night’s council meeting.

This item relates to the prospective award to West Coast Synthetic Services, the preferred tenderer, of a contract to replace the existing artificial turf on eight tennis courts at the YRCC with ‘Omni-Court Cool-Plus Synthetic Turf’ at a cost of—wait for it—$171,300 ‘excluding GST’.

Including GST, we’d be looking at an expenditure of $188,430—that’s around $54 for every man, woman and child in York, or just over $76 for each elector, assuming the population figures given on the My Council website are accurate.

We’re told that the current surface ‘is at the end of its life’. Alarmingly, it appears to have lasted for only about four years, perhaps less. 

Does this mean the turf will have to be replaced every few years at such a stupendous cost to the ratepayers of York, most of whom aren’t members of the Tennis Club and probably only take a passing interest in the game when Wimbledon is showing on the telly? 

The officer’s recommendation is for Council to delegate authority to the CEO to award the contract to West Coast Synthetic Services.  However, the officer advises Council that it has two further options: either to reject that recommendation and award the contract to another tenderer, or to put the contract out to tender again.

Well, folks, I can think of a much more sensible option. 

Here it is: postpone the resurfacing of the tennis courts (and any other major works project currently envisaged for the YRCC) until the fate of the centre has been decided comprehensively once and for all.

What would be the point of spending nearly $200,000 on new tennis court surfaces now if the decision is made next year—as it might well be—to save money and avoid further rate increases by mothballing the centre indefinitely, and maintaining it only to the minimal standard required by law and public safety, until we can find some way to make it pay for itself?

Here’s another option: go ahead with the contract, resurface the courts, but at the expense of members of the tennis club, not of the ratepayers in general.

I have a vague recollection of former CEO Ray Hooper telling us that the centre wouldn’t act as a drain on the public purse but instead would operate primarily on the principle of ‘user pays’. 

That hasn’t happened yet.

So far, it’s been overwhelmingly a matter of ‘loser pays’, the losers being the ratepayers of York.

Let’s see if Council acts true to form tomorrow, or opts instead for restraint and commonsense.



*******

NEWSFLASH 201216


Lisa Buckingham, proprietor of Hairitage Hair, has won the Best Decorated Business Competition for Christmas 2016.

At yesterday’s council meeting, Shire President David Wallace presented Lisa with two trophies, a large perpetual trophy and a smaller personal one, and a huge laminated cheque for $500.

Swan Lodge, as runner-up, received a cheque for $250.

Congratulations to both winners, and thanks to all contestants for adding a welcome touch of Christmas sparkle to the town.  Thanks also to the Shire of York for sponsoring the event.

The photo below shows Lisa with her trophies and cheque standing next to Roma Paton.  As a member of the Christmas Decorations Working Party chaired by Cr Pam Heaton, Roma organised the competition, donated the smaller trophy and paid for the engraving on both trophies.  The splendid perpetual trophy was crafted and donated by Ron Macey.


 

30 comments:

  1. The courts weren't done properly in the first place James as you are aware. So whilst this cesspit of wasted money gives me te shits there are a few other things I have considered.

    If the courts aren't repaired they'll be unusable. If we want York to grow or at a minimum be sustained we need ammenities that attract residents to want to live here.

    Whilst only a select few might play tennis, the same can be said about footy, netball etc. What happens if they don't repair it and then the footy oval needs repairing, they'd have to be consistent and we'd end up with a town in more disrepair than it has become already.

    I don't think they've ever hinted at mothballing the whole venue just the managing body. The clubs could ill afford to pay $180k, this sort if thing no matter the managing body and licensee will always be the burden of ratepayers.

    We should not however put one more cent into a tavern until a decision has been made about its fate because this is not an ammenity we need hete and now to sustain or grow our population.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Bill, do you know of a single resident who moved to York to enjoy the sporting facilities offered by the Splurj Mahal?

      As a rule, younger people would move here in pursuit of work, not for the chance to play tennis, and older people come here primarily to retire.

      The Shire Council and administration are living in dreamland if they believe there is the slightest chance Ray Hooper's Folly will ever provide York's ratepayers with a return on their investment or even merely cease to be a financial black hole.

      At its meeting this afternoon, Council predictably decided NOT to pursue the path of commonsense and restraint. It's back to the old days, folks, but thankfully without the licensed thuggery and threats of visits from the ranger.

      Delete
    2. Young famlies will want decent sporting facilities for their kids.

      Most towns have a rec centre. Northam has one where the bar and meals are managed by the clubs for their club members and not the general public.

      The Shire though still have the burden of maintaining everything else at a significant cost. Mind you they have very good function rooms which are hired out regularly. We do not have that luxury due to poor initial design.

      Delete
    3. We used to have decent sporting facilities, owned and managed by the clubs with an occasional leg-up from the Shire.

      Municipal sports centres don't build community spirit, they erode it. They take responsibility for establishing and maintaining facilities away from the people that want and use them.

      If young families are attracted to a town, it's because work is available there, not because the local council spends hundreds of thousands a year to ensure that a tiny proportion of residents can pursue their hobbies at the expense of everyone else.

      Once upon a golden time, when young families wanted decent sporting facilities for their kids they clubbed together with other like-minded young families to get them. That was an important, vibrant and invigorating aspect of community culture in rural towns.

      The fact that most towns have a rec centre is beside the point. A community centre with function rooms for hire and some basic sporting facilities isn't such a bad idea. A poorly designed and ludicrously expensive monstrosity like the YRCC - so expensive that this council like its predecessors is studiously concealing the overall cost of construction - has nothing to commend it at all.

      Delete
  2. And what then will happen to Cathryn Brown and Nick Russo? These two are reliant on their incomes from the YRCC, Ms Brown has a Shire house to boot, where then would she live.

    No, we as ratepayers owe it to these loyal employees to ensure they are not left in the lurch. You can't just stop spending money and/or increase rates, for instance, we need lots of staff to manage the workload, who do you suppose will manage the extra funds generated by increased rates.

    Your talking rubbish Bill, of course we need to spend money on tennis courts, the select few you refer to pay rates as well, therefore, they are entitled to have a share of the pot. Just because you may not play tennis doesn't mean that no one else should.

    Personally, I would like to see more tennis courts and sport facilities, a tavern license is a fantastic plus for the Shire and something we should all be very proud of, to own our own pub.

    If this means having to suffer large rate increases so be it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Mr Jones read it again. My comment is in support of the money being spent on the courts. The tavern however I do not support. If the tavern is managed by the clubs they'll still need paid staff. A house though? C'mon be sensible

      Delete
    2. Good article James.

      Who cares about Ms. Brown and Russo - other people lose their jobs every day. Why should they keep their positions at Ratepayers expense when we cannot afford them. Ratepayers are not running a charity!

      Let them join Tyhscha Cockrane, Gail Mazuik and Gordon Tester.

      The difference between the Northam Rec. centre and York's WRECK centre is: The Northam rec centre IS a Recreation Centre usable for ALL residents. It may not be a 'pretty building' from the outside but by comparison it is a magnificent multi usable building inside. They have indoor net ball, basketball and it can be used for functions. The bar in Northam is just that - a bar - it does not take up half of the area of the building like ours does.

      Ours was designed by fools and approved by fools. The size of the bar shows where their priorities were. Those same fools should be paying for the replacement turf.

      Why should ratepayers, who were not consulted about this abortion of a building. (they were dictated to by the bullies on council and the then CEO) have to pay for the stuff ups.

      The turf has not come to the end of it's life - it never had a life to begin with. It buckled within weeks of it being installed. Then it got flooded and became a 'tiny tots wading pool' until 'the fools' realised they had not installed drain holes in the side walls. The drain holes in the centre of the courts probably ran uphill - like the sewerage pipes that needed replacing in the toilet area after they backed up after the first use.

      Relinquish the liquor licence, let the sport club members - who pushed for this centre - get their own liquor licences and let them run the place - at their costs.

      Enough is enough.

      Delete
    3. Maia, was the spelling Tyhscha's surname a freudien slip?

      I am shocked councillors are even considering the replacement of the tennis turf. Obviously councillors are not in touch with those struggling. They should try talking to residents and learn to listen.

      The fact people are unable to pay their rates should tell councillors to stop spending money on the wreck centre - we cannot afford it!

      The tennis club wanted the new courts regardless of what the majority of York people wanted. They were happy to accept the dodgy brothers standard used on the whole complex, even though several members of the community were ringing the warning bells loud and clear. No one would listen! Let the Tennis club members fund the replacement.

      Is it true David Wallace brother was on the committee when the Tennis club was over the other side of the river?

      We wont see any improvement in our rates $ drain into the wreck centre until David Wallace, Denese Smythe and Trevor Randell are off council.

      Wallace was the President of the Hockey club during the wreck centre planning. He is now a life member of the hockey club, so he will be looking out for them at every opportunity.

      Randell would still be listening to his old teacher mentor, who was up to his neck in the idea of the wreck centre.

      Smythe - well what can I say?

      Pat Hooper refused to listen to any of the issues raised by residents - arrogant sod!

      The Ray Hooper team of bullies were sent out to target anyone who dared ask questions about the wreck centre.

      Ex DCEO Tyhscha Cochrane was a member of the Hockey club so she would have put her twopence worth in.

      I am surprised there's no plaque set in concrete at the wreck centre listing the names of the cretins who thought this project was a good idea. Perhaps there was a plaque and it disappeared down one of the sink holes or got covered in the sewerage when it backed up.

      Delete
    4. On 7 June last year I posted an extract from the website of Green Planet Grass, which was contracted to provide synthetic turf for the bowling greens and tennis courts.

      Here it is:

      "Green Planet Grass

      We’re delighted with the design and construction of our 2 new bowling greens. Green Planet Grass has been exceptional to deal with at every stage of the project. The drainage exceeds expectations.

      Ray Hooper, CEO, Shire of York"

      I suppose GPG laid the surface of the tennis courts as well, although rumour has it that the clubs wanted the Shire to give the job to Tiger Turf. If so, another victory for the Sage of Alexander Heights, now also known as the Wise Old Mucker of Mukinbudin.

      The turf has probably not reached the end of its [natural] life as the Shire would like us to believe. My understanding is that a good while ago, when the turf began to buckle and corrugate, the Shire invoked the the warranty but GPG refused to comply because the surfaces hadn't been properly maintained.

      Shameful if true, and no less shameful if the Shire Council and administration is hiding the truth about why the turf is having to be replaced at our expense so soon after being installed.

      Anyway, well done, Shire of York...the turf gets laid, and again the ratepayers get screwed.

      Delete
    5. As a ratepayer, I can state I am SICK OF BEING SCREWED!

      I bet GPG were exceptional to deal with at every turn (and buckle).

      Does any one know if there was any renumeration for this glowing endorsement?

      Is there GPG in Alexander Heights?

      Gail Mazuik was the project manager. Surely she would have made absolutely sure the Shire carried out the maintenance to the letter of the law to protect our investment. After all, she took her role very very seriously, protecting the CEO and the Administration with every breath in her body. I cannot imagine she would have let us down on this....or did she?

      Delete
  3. close it all down we cant afford it

    ReplyDelete
  4. Has anybody heard of GRASS? You know, stuff that grows, gets cut/mowed, grows again, despite people running around all over it, will survive days without getting wet and will survive days where it does get wet. Tennis can be played on its surface, quite readily. In fact, real grass grew at the old tennis courts - for years and years and years. All the tennis club has to do is raise enough money for them to purchase the appropriate grass seed, and have a weekend busy bee and then make sure it is watered enough and regularly, (using the 'grey water' the shire stores, would help costs). Job done. There used to be a turf business here in town, although I don't know if it still exists, but if it does - well there is another option. AND damned sure it wouldn't cost nearly $200,000.00 of OUR money. The Shire Councillors really need to get a grip.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The turf business has long gone but there's a ready supply of grass if you want it, although this will stunt your growth but then again, anyone who partakes wouldn't really care anyway.
      Anyway, what's everyone complaining about, the artificial tennis surface(s) have only cost 400k over the past 5 years, that doesn't sound to bad to me, less than 100k per year, it would cost much more than this to maintain Wimbledon, so we should be counting our blessings.
      I would like to see the YRCC car park floodlit for the evening patrons, after all, the Castle customers have the luxury of being able to see in the car park.
      It would be nice to see Council invest in some shrubs and plants for the outside areas of the facility to enhance the experience of those who use it.

      Delete
    2. I'm sure they do have a grip, Jan - the question is, what are they gripping?

      At the risk of being unfair, and without claiming a shred of expertise regarding the relative merits of grass and different varieties of artificial turf, I confess to having an uneasy feeling about this contract.

      What makes me uneasy is that in spite of anodyne assurances of ongoing community consultation (something I’m currently writing about) it’s pretty clear that Council and the administration have already made up their minds that the YRCC is to remain forever a financial burden on York’s ratepayers. Otherwise, they would have postponed a decision about resurfacing the tennis courts until their much vaunted consultation process had concluded with the publication of a business case justifying whatever fate had been decided for the centre.

      I'd like to know not only how many tenders were received, but also exactly why this one ticked more boxes than the others. I’d also like to know whether Wheatbelt firms tendered, and if so, why, in general terms, their tenders were not given preference. This isn't idle curiosity. That kind of information should accompany every report of a tender process – we need more than just a bland intimation that 'We think these blokes will do the best job at the fairest price'.

      Delete
  5. Come on Jan you expecting these people to have common sense.

    It's becoming more evident something happens to the brains of people elected onto our council. The minute they are allowed to make decisions on spending other people's money - that's our money - common sense evacuates the brain.

    Councillors: do us all a favour, go and look at the old tennis courts.

    As you all keep yourselves tucked away in your own little world of self importance, you may need directions. Travelling east from the CBD, go passed the now defunct Carriage Coffee place, cross over the Glebe Street bridge (that's the bridge just near Avon Park) and you will find the old tennis courts on your right - directly opposite the Croquet Club.
    The tennis club lawn has not been watered for years and it still grows and get's mowed. Not rocket science.

    By the way, the Croquet club has real grass and it is green and smooth. Members mow it themselves - they don't expect ratepayers to care for it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The Croquet Club players no doubt appreciate the benefits and the coolness of playing their sport on natural grass. Unlike the synthetic turf that generates heat, deteriorates, needs replacing at an excessive cost and what use is the old synthetic turf no doubt goes to landfill where it does not even rot down. Synthetic turf is nothing but an environmental disaster.

      Delete
    2. I am hoping the Shire will see the value in re-using the turf from the tennis courts.

      Delete
  6. Hark! The Herald Angels Sing

    York has decent decorations at last.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Jingle bells, Jingle bells
      Jingle all the way
      Oh what fun it is to have ...
      a Christmas without Ray

      Delete
  7. How about spending $200k on some drainage to eleviate some of still water that sits around town for months at a time. It will help with the mosquitos and the threat of meningitis among other things.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Don't be silly backtobasics- they spray the mosquitos with chemicals!!! That is using the same common sense used when the decision was made to install plastic lawn.

      York is hot enough with all the trees cut down, plastic turf and brick paving.

      Lets get some lawn in, use recycled water and plant some street trees......if possible before I die!

      Delete
    2. Question: Can the decision to install the fake lawn be rescinded?

      As far as I know, the decisions made at Council meetings have to wait until they are confirmed before they can be considered as legal - if this is the case then CEO Paul Martin can rescind the recommendation and look at the real lawn option.


      Delete
    3. I've never heard of chemicals being used to control mosquitos In York, and nor should they ever be. Pesticides are generally non discriminate.

      Delete
    4. Shire Finances December Minutes.
      Inv. 23966 4 Farmers insecticide (bifenthrin) 20l $187.00

      Bifenthrin is a member of the pyrethroid chemical class. It is an insecticide and acaricide which affects the nervous system and causes paralysis in insects (1, 2). It is very highly toxic to fish and aquatic organisms (2, 3). The U.S. EPA has classified bifenthrin as Toxicity Class II-moderately toxic.

      http://apvma.gov.au/node/12396
      Bifenthrin Chemical Review Completed
      Bifenthrin is an agricultural insecticide used for the control of borers and termites in timber, insect pests in agricultural crops (bananas, apples, pears, ornamentals) and turf, as well as for general pest control (spiders, ants, fleas, flies, mosquitoes)

      Delete
  8. Why isn't the Shire Administration waiting till after the review/investigation of the wreck centre BEFORE ratepayers are hit with another huge bill for repairs to the tennis courts, or are we back to smoke and mirrors to protect people.

    I am not surprised people are not paying their rates - they are sick of increases and financially supporting the wreck centre.

    The wreck centre is a shambles. It is not rocket science - if out going $'s are greater than incoming $'s - it means it is unviable.

    Is it true this new fake lawn will only last 7- 8 years before it needs replacing AGAIN ?

    If Settlers has outstanding rates, why are they still allowed to stay open? Are they receiving special treatment because Randell works there?





    ReplyDelete
  9. Ah, anonymous - Dec 20 @ 00.36. We do live in hope.

    Anonymous - Dec 20 @ 23.34. That is v.v. clever and how appropriate. Well done. We should all be singing it - outside the Shire offices, just to let the current councillors know we are thinking of them.

    Re - the pretend lawn to be removed. Perhaps it could be placed over some of the brick paving in the main street, with tables and chairs placed on top, just to make it all 'look pretty' Children could play on it, dogs could lie on it. Water, coffee and food etc. could be split on it and it would just need a quick hose down and be ready for use again. I'm sure we could all find a use for it. My real lawn looks a bit 'iffy' (lack of any water and ferts.) so would be happy to tizz the place up with something green, if only just for 'looks'.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Jan December 2016 at 22.57

      Synthetic turf generates and holds the heat it not a healthy environment for little kids or dogs, brick paving and cement is cooler than that stuff

      Delete
  10. From the December 2016 Shire Minutes - last item
    “That Council approves the write-off of the rates and service charges for the 2015/16 financial year on A60855 plus any accrued interest.”

    This write off is unfair and discrimination against those in York who go without heating in winter so they can pay the Shire of York Rates. I had to ration wood for my stove this last winter so I could pay my rates.

    No one on council and in the administration cares about the financial struggle the elderly in york are going through trying to meet the increases in rates.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Anon Dec 22, 18.59 Having never had any contact with pretend turf, I wasn't aware of the 'downside' of the stuff. If this stuff does all this, WHY would anyone want to place it on a tennis court, where I assuming, one would get quite hot, just running around the court. Real grass on the other hand would be a much better product to use. Perhaps we should start an 'environmentally sound' club and really push the tennis club to go back to real grass. Lasts longer and all the jazz and based on above info, much better product to work with. Was this stuff chosen so that tennis club members didn't have to mow the grass each week? Or perhaps the shire staff could apply some effort and shire equipment and do it for them. Also based on some above info, real grass is and would be so much cheaper, water, ferts and all!

    ReplyDelete
  12. Just like to wish all bloggers, readers, participants, supporters and even our antagonists a very Merry Christmas and a wonderful, prosperous, enjoyable and relatively uneventful 2017.
    Please do take care on the roads, watch out for all the idiots (keeping in mind that we do have our own fair share of them) and enjoy having your family and friends around you. Give a thought to those who have less than you and support them where and when you can.

    Take care, stay safe.

    ReplyDelete