South-west ratepayers can expect pain under the state government’s plan to introduce annual property valuations.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
This week we reported Warrnambool City and Moyne Shire councils would be forced to pay about $100,000 each every year for properties to be revalued, instead of $100,000 every two years. Corangamite Shire says the shift to annual revaluations could cost it another $50,000 a year.
Councils are already struggling to meet the expectations of residents after the state government introduced a cap on rates, restricting their revenue. That cap effectively means it’s harder for councils to undertake one-off projects that improve the lives of residents and their municipality. These projects, like a new walking track, or playground equipment, often make the paying of rates more palatable because residents can see where their money goes.
Councils argue every year the pool of money available for such projects makes up only a small amount of their budgets because they have to fund essential services and programs – many dumped on them by other tiers of government.
Cynics would argue the move to annual valuations opens the door for councils to raise more revenue. But they are restricted on how much they can raise from rates, meaning the percentage of the budget funded through rate revenue won’t change.
It’s hard to see any benefits from a switch to annual valuations. One certainty is that ratepayers will be worse off.
The Municipal Association of Victoria says the state government has not consulted councils on the plan, nor explained why and how the new system would work.
The government’s move is ill-considered. It needs to ditch the idea of annual revaluations and consider retaining the existing two-year arrangement or potentially pushing it out further to three or four years.
Corangamite Shire councillor Bev McArthur this week moved a successful motion calling for reviews every four years.
She argued yearly revaluations only added another cost to councils with no subsidy from the state government.
Any change to revaluations should benefit ratepayers. The government has failed to show any evidence its plan will ease the financial burden on families. The government needs to abandon its proposal and consult on the effectiveness of the existing arrangement and a switch to revaluations every four years.