Rates affordability Debate

Economic Benefits - Revenue

Option 3

The resident argues that imposing additional storm recovery charges is unfair, especially given the existing financial pressures such as rising rates and other living costs, without corresponding salary increases. They suggest that funding for weather-related events should be the responsibility of the Central Government, as is common in other countries. Additionally, the comment proposes that the Council should cut non-essential expenditures and explore alternative revenue sources like advertising to alleviate the financial burden on the community.

Table of comments:

Point No

Comment

1259.1

I feel that it is extremely unfair and unjustified to add the additional $300 per year for the next 10 years for storm recovery charges on us.  The rates are already going up and so are the other expenses for us like insurance, mortgage, food prices, etc. whereas the salaries have not increased. Given the weather changes and chances of similar rain events in the future, would mean adding these recovery charges every time such an event happens which would be unfair. The funding for such weather events should come from the Central Government as is the norm in most other countries. On the other hand, the Council must cut wasteful expenditures like flower baskets in the city and spending over $100,000 per year on these. These are not essential at this stage and the Council must look at doing away with these expenses whilst there are much more important issues and expenses to deal with. Furthermore, the council should look at earning revenue from other sources like advertising, etc. to supplement the income