It is time to shine a light
on the dark, murky and shadowy past, current and ongoing financial situation of
the YRCC Asset.
POST SCRIPT
However the Shire of York can keep certain things in total darkness
BUDGET DEFICIENCY.
Within the Local Government Act 1995 it states “Where a Local Government- IN AN EMERGANCY proposes to impose a Supplementary General Rate or a Specified Area Rate it is NOT REQUIRED to give LOCAL PUBLIC NOTICE of that proposed SUPPLEMENTARY GENERAL RATE, SPECIFIED AREA RATE, Modified Rate or Minimum Payment.
Effectively- this could mean that if the Shire of York considers the YRCC as responsible for a ‘Budget Deficiency’ and considers this ‘An Emergency’, York ratepayers may not be provided with any information or reason for, a rate hike in the 2017-2018 Financial Year. (Isn’t that comforting to know?)
With just two months to go to the State Election in March, WA’s senior bureaucrats suddenly become extremely active to try and be indispensable should there be a changing of the political guard.
Opposition Leader, Mark McGown, has already stated publically that he will slash the number of senior public servants if elected. ‘Slash’ is a word that turns lazy, ineffectual hibernating incumbents into consternated, hyper-ventilating, knee-jerk reactionaries.
Through 8 years, 96 months, or 2,920 days and three Ministers, including one who resigned in disgrace, a Perth Lord Mayors’ probity compliance debacle, thieving CEO’s, misuse of municipal funds including credit cards and financial failures to the point of alleged mendicancy, Jennifer Matthews, the Director General of the Department of Local Government, has ruled as the dominatrix over her own departmental, local government compliance and governance disaster.
Maybe in hasty response to the WA Corruption and Crime Commission’s not so veiled criticism of her departments’ overall handling and involvement in the Dacre Alcock, Dowerin affair, Ms. Mathews has now issued her second edict TO ALL LOCAL GOVERNMENTS this year. It is, as you would expect, CIRCULAR No 02-2017.
Those of you who thought that local government rates policy is based primarily on the Gross Rental Value (GRV) or Undeveloped Value (UV) categorization of your property by the Valuer-General, with any increase exceeding the inflation rate supposedly deeply frowned on by the State Government, may have to have a quick, ’hip-pocket nerve’ re-think.
Given the GVR and UV slump in today’s WA property market you would expect to be entitled to a substantial Shire Council rates rebate or at least rate rises put on hold -or restricted to WA’s current annual Consumer Price Index (CPI) inflation figure of 1%.)
NOT REALLY!
According to Ms. Mathews’ BUDGET CONSIDERATION IN RATE SETTING 2017-18, “in accordance with section 6.36(3)(a) of the Local Government Act 1995 the advertised rates of a local government are to apply based on an estimate of budget deficiency”- like the $600,000 theft in Dowerin. (There is not one mention of GVR, UV, CPI or increased government funding.)
“The rate (you pay) in the dollar should be supported by the budgeted deficiency, which is based on the expected expenditure for the provision of community services and amenities as outlined in the strategic community plan and the corporate business plan” says Ms. Mathews. (What is not stated is that budget deficiency could be considered to be an endemic and systemic problem, mainly within Rural, Regional and Remote Local Government Areas.)
This, in York’s case, includes the York Recreation & Convention Centre (YRCC) as both a community service and amenity that has never had the word community in its name and, arguably, has never really served the community as the amenity it should have been.
POST SCRIPT
However the Shire of York can keep certain things in total darkness
BUDGET DEFICIENCY.
Within the Local Government Act 1995 it states “Where a Local Government- IN AN EMERGANCY proposes to impose a Supplementary General Rate or a Specified Area Rate it is NOT REQUIRED to give LOCAL PUBLIC NOTICE of that proposed SUPPLEMENTARY GENERAL RATE, SPECIFIED AREA RATE, Modified Rate or Minimum Payment.
Effectively- this could mean that if the Shire of York considers the YRCC as responsible for a ‘Budget Deficiency’ and considers this ‘An Emergency’, York ratepayers may not be provided with any information or reason for, a rate hike in the 2017-2018 Financial Year. (Isn’t that comforting to know?)
With just two months to go to the State Election in March, WA’s senior bureaucrats suddenly become extremely active to try and be indispensable should there be a changing of the political guard.
Opposition Leader, Mark McGown, has already stated publically that he will slash the number of senior public servants if elected. ‘Slash’ is a word that turns lazy, ineffectual hibernating incumbents into consternated, hyper-ventilating, knee-jerk reactionaries.
Through 8 years, 96 months, or 2,920 days and three Ministers, including one who resigned in disgrace, a Perth Lord Mayors’ probity compliance debacle, thieving CEO’s, misuse of municipal funds including credit cards and financial failures to the point of alleged mendicancy, Jennifer Matthews, the Director General of the Department of Local Government, has ruled as the dominatrix over her own departmental, local government compliance and governance disaster.
Maybe in hasty response to the WA Corruption and Crime Commission’s not so veiled criticism of her departments’ overall handling and involvement in the Dacre Alcock, Dowerin affair, Ms. Mathews has now issued her second edict TO ALL LOCAL GOVERNMENTS this year. It is, as you would expect, CIRCULAR No 02-2017.
Those of you who thought that local government rates policy is based primarily on the Gross Rental Value (GRV) or Undeveloped Value (UV) categorization of your property by the Valuer-General, with any increase exceeding the inflation rate supposedly deeply frowned on by the State Government, may have to have a quick, ’hip-pocket nerve’ re-think.
Given the GVR and UV slump in today’s WA property market you would expect to be entitled to a substantial Shire Council rates rebate or at least rate rises put on hold -or restricted to WA’s current annual Consumer Price Index (CPI) inflation figure of 1%.)
NOT REALLY!
According to Ms. Mathews’ BUDGET CONSIDERATION IN RATE SETTING 2017-18, “in accordance with section 6.36(3)(a) of the Local Government Act 1995 the advertised rates of a local government are to apply based on an estimate of budget deficiency”- like the $600,000 theft in Dowerin. (There is not one mention of GVR, UV, CPI or increased government funding.)
“The rate (you pay) in the dollar should be supported by the budgeted deficiency, which is based on the expected expenditure for the provision of community services and amenities as outlined in the strategic community plan and the corporate business plan” says Ms. Mathews. (What is not stated is that budget deficiency could be considered to be an endemic and systemic problem, mainly within Rural, Regional and Remote Local Government Areas.)
This, in York’s case, includes the York Recreation & Convention Centre (YRCC) as both a community service and amenity that has never had the word community in its name and, arguably, has never really served the community as the amenity it should have been.
In May 2016, Dr. James
Plumridge, wrote to the Shire asking fair and reasonable questions regarding
the construction costs, municipal fund diversion, running and repair cost and
profit and loss statements for the YRCC, as is his right. (He was also fully
entitled to a lucid response over what he considered to be a potential case of
a Budget Deficiency- that he never
received.)
At that time the Shire should have been taking budget efficiency measures based on the estimate of any possible budget deficiency for the next Financial Year. It should and must have known the answers to Dr. Plumridge’s questions regarding the YRCC when he asked them, even if it was based on the past year’s figures. (His request was not date specific!)
As of the 31 of December, 2016, or within two (2) months of receiving the current annual audit report a shire council is automatically called on to accept this report. In the case of York it should be at the first Ordinary Council Meeting held in February 2017.
York’s report must contain proper accounts and verifications, specifically and formally related to the operations and debt repayment of, and for, the YRCC for the financial year. (Ratepayer should consider this to be a non-negotiable demand.)
Dr. Plumridge followed his first request up in November, 2016, with a number of pertinent questions regarding the Shire’s Business Plan for the YRCC for which he received a less than satisfactory response from CEO, Paul Martin, dated December 6, 2016.
However, the icing on the community mud cake came on Thursday January 12, 2017 when Ms. Suzie Haslehurst, Executive Manager Corporate & Community Services stated that many of these questions could not be answered because the answers were still being sourced. (Some may consider this response as being next door to total bullshit!)
With regard to the continuous questioning of YRCC costs since its inception, a lack of any response from the Shire suggests that ratepayers could expect a budget deficiency that could cause further major rate-gain pain because it has not effectively ensured legislative compliance and budget efficiency in 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15, 2015-16 and through 7 months of 2016-17 Financial Year (with a possible repeat looming in 2017-18.)
It should be assumed that Ms. Haslehurst has by now made herself familiar with the LOCAL GOVERNMENT BUDGET PROCESS-TIMELINE in relation to the most pressing problem in her personal portfolio-the YRCC.
Between January and March this year, Ms. Haslehurst should estimate the YRCC’s financial position at June 30, review its corporate/business plan, its expected revenue, its expenditure, including efficiency and effectiveness, consider any alternative sources of funding, the amount to be raised from differential general rates to cover YRCC costs and the impact that will have on the different categories of ratepayers.
Around March/April she should do a reality
check, taking into consideration the amount of rate revenue required to fund
the YRCC for the year, ensuring the amount is reasonable, fair and equitable
and develop objects and reasons to ensure it is legislatively compliant.At that time the Shire should have been taking budget efficiency measures based on the estimate of any possible budget deficiency for the next Financial Year. It should and must have known the answers to Dr. Plumridge’s questions regarding the YRCC when he asked them, even if it was based on the past year’s figures. (His request was not date specific!)
As of the 31 of December, 2016, or within two (2) months of receiving the current annual audit report a shire council is automatically called on to accept this report. In the case of York it should be at the first Ordinary Council Meeting held in February 2017.
York’s report must contain proper accounts and verifications, specifically and formally related to the operations and debt repayment of, and for, the YRCC for the financial year. (Ratepayer should consider this to be a non-negotiable demand.)
Dr. Plumridge followed his first request up in November, 2016, with a number of pertinent questions regarding the Shire’s Business Plan for the YRCC for which he received a less than satisfactory response from CEO, Paul Martin, dated December 6, 2016.
However, the icing on the community mud cake came on Thursday January 12, 2017 when Ms. Suzie Haslehurst, Executive Manager Corporate & Community Services stated that many of these questions could not be answered because the answers were still being sourced. (Some may consider this response as being next door to total bullshit!)
With regard to the continuous questioning of YRCC costs since its inception, a lack of any response from the Shire suggests that ratepayers could expect a budget deficiency that could cause further major rate-gain pain because it has not effectively ensured legislative compliance and budget efficiency in 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15, 2015-16 and through 7 months of 2016-17 Financial Year (with a possible repeat looming in 2017-18.)
It should be assumed that Ms. Haslehurst has by now made herself familiar with the LOCAL GOVERNMENT BUDGET PROCESS-TIMELINE in relation to the most pressing problem in her personal portfolio-the YRCC.
Between January and March this year, Ms. Haslehurst should estimate the YRCC’s financial position at June 30, review its corporate/business plan, its expected revenue, its expenditure, including efficiency and effectiveness, consider any alternative sources of funding, the amount to be raised from differential general rates to cover YRCC costs and the impact that will have on the different categories of ratepayers.
As of May 1, 2017, begins the notice period where the Shire of York can advertise its intention to impose differential general rates that could be impacted by the financial position of the YRCC.
Therefore, from January to May, Ms. Haslehurst should be continuously engaging in community consultation with all stakeholders to comply with her documented YRCC, four-stage, YRCC Management Review Plan conclusion date-being prior to June 30, 2017. (It should be around May 23, 2017.)
If she does not- then it is “Houston we have a problem”.
The definition of Differential General Rates is that it is an equitable and fair rating system in response to the different categories of ratable land, which takes into account access to, or consumption of, council services that include amenities such as the YRCC which may have extensive financial losses.
Twenty-two days after the date of publication of the advertisement the Council considers the related submissions and determines the level of differential rates subject to the amount of budget deficiency.
This will be the time that the Shire of York Council’s financial ability and senior executive performance could be severely tested with the past ‘honeymoon period’ well and truly over.
Good luck in restoring faith in Local Government in York.
David Taylor.
God almighty David you've done it again! I'm well aware of our position re the YRCC, but every time you document it and it is succinct, it makes me feel quite ill.
ReplyDeleteIf our rates go up again I can't be held responsible for what I might do. Im almost certain they will.
They make me so furious!
Thank God we have you David (Taylor).
ReplyDeleteI reiterate the previous request, please nominate for Council in October and become our Shire President.
Was Shire President Wallace ever going to inform the good people of York rates can include increases to cover budget deficiencies? In other words - bad management and irresponsible control of public monies by councillors.
If Shire President Wallace and councillors think for one moment ratepayers of York will blindly accept a rate increase this year to offset budget deficiencies, they have another thought coming.
We all know who is responsible for any budget deficiencies in York and it is not the Ratepayers.
Those holding position of Shire President at the time the deficiencies were incurred must be held accountable and it is up to Shire President Wallace to see this happens. Wallace took the top job, now he has to do the honourable thing by ratepayers and go after those responsible.
If Wallace needs ratepayers approval to do this, he can call a Ratepayers meeting and let us vote. We are paying the fees you collect as Shire President, so please don't insult our intelligence by ducking behind 'LG protection clauses'.
“In order to escape accountability for his crimes, the perpetrator does everything in his power to promote forgetting. If secrecy fails, the perpetrator attacks the credibility of his victim. If he cannot silence her [them] absolutely, he tries to make sure no one listens.”
Delete― Judith Lewis Herman,
Thank goodness we have David Taylor, making sure people know the truth.
I smell a rat Mr. Taylor - would this 'budget deficiencies' have anything to do with preparing for justifiable future law suites against W.A. local councils?
ReplyDeleteHas LG realised the impending tsunami looming on the horizon because THEY failed to heed the warnings about LG misconduct, mismanagement and bullying of people. My guess is yes, and they are preparing to cover their own arses.
People in W.A. rural towns have for years had incompetent fools elected by extended family members, sporting groups, infiltrated organisations and the 'small town' mentality. Many of these councillors had no respect or appreciation of the responsibility with which they were entrusted. It had a more to do with complete control of 'their' town, keeping 'outsiders' out and oversized egos.
17 January 2017 at 21:28
DeleteA tactic by Local Government, Councilors are there to take the flack for what the Shire Administration does. Shire Administration staff are overpaid overstaffed they use bullying tactics against ratepayers who are sCrewed and make no valuable contribution as worthwhile citizens to the town. Councillors are their scapegoats.
I had hopes with a new CEO York residents would see some honest, open and accountable information being given to us, particularly are all the years we have suffered fools running this town.
ReplyDeleteWho is stopping the information from being made public?
If information is being withheld from ratepayers, is the Shire President consulting all councillors to obtain a consensus to do this OR is he making a captain's call.
Surely the Councillors would not agree to hide information from us....would they?
Doubt faith will ever be restored David.
ReplyDeleteAll three levels of Government have systematically destroyed peoples's faith and trust.
That is why BREXIT happened and why Trump became President. People across the World are fed up with being shafted by those they elected and trusted. It is no different here in York.