October 8, 2014
A Nanango branch of the South Burnett Residents Action Group (S-BRAG) looks set to be formed after a public meeting was held in Nanango on Wednesday night.
The group set up a Wondai branch in August and called the Nanango meeting to assess local interest in the concept.
The meeting, at the Nanango Darts Club, was attended by S-BRAG chairman Don Pinwill, who chaired the night, secretary Terry Gordon and about 30 members of the public.
Mr Pinwill outlined the group’s aims and objectives, structure and rules, and then took questions from the floor.
He said the purpose of S-BRAG was to offer a platform for South Burnett communities to voice ideas and concerns about broad issues that affected them.
Mr Pinwill said the forced council amalgamations in 2008 had changed the region from being one composed of small shires, each with their own major centre, to a much bigger Shire with a single regional centre surrounded by smaller towns.
He said this had “changed the dynamics” of the system and both residents and Council had yet to fully adjust to this.
The consequence was that there were now far fewer councillors covering much wider geographic areas than previously.
This carried the risk they could lose touch with grass-roots issues, he said.
Mr Pinwill saw S-BRAG’s role as improving communication as well as acting as a “scrutineer” of Council decisions.
“We tend to elect and forget,” he said.
One result was that no one scrutinised Council decisions or looked at the outcomes of Council programs.
Mr Pinwill said this would be a natural role for the group.
He said S-BRAG had been started by seven people who now made up the management committee; these would face election at the group’s Annual General Meeting and all branch members would be entitled to a vote.
Serving Councillors and Council Directors are ineligible to become members of the group and any S-BRAG member who wished to run for election would be required to resign from the group.
However, Mr Pinwill said, this didn’t mean S-BRAG held any animosity towards the Council.
He said two Councillors who had attended the Wondai meeting in August had been supportive of the concept.
Mr Pinwill said S-BRAG hoped to put up a website soon and also distribute a printed newsletter.
In the question and answer session that followed his presentation, Mr Pinwill said no one from his group had yet held any discussions with the Council or individual Councillors.
This was because S-BRAG was new and was still discovering what issues were most important to its members.
But, he added, the group had recently asked its Wondai members to nominate the five top local government issues they faced from 12 possible topics.
From this, he said, more than three-quarters of members who completed the survey had nominated rates “as one of their top three issues”.
Mr Pinwill then handed out a three-page report prepared by S-BRAG which, he said, proved South Burnett rates were 15-20 per cent higher than neighbouring shires.
He invited those present to take a copy of the report home and challenged southburnett.com.au to print it.
- Download S-BRAG Rates Analysis (325kb PDF)
Related articles:
Comparing land prices on the Gold Coast to the South Burnett as part of the methodology of working out whether we pay too much in rates has some fundamental flaws. One is that it must be assumed input costs of services in the South Burnett are proportionally lower than the Gold Coast. For example a person in Kingaroy who maintains gardens is paid say $55,000 – this means that on the Gold Coast an equivalent employee would be paid $143,000 ($55,000 x 2.6). That is a nonsense.
My daughter’s land value is $400 Thousand. She pays $1600 per year in rates. My land value is $68 Thousand Dollars. My land rates are $2700. per year. Yes we pay much too much in the South Burnett District. We need some truth in the accounting dept. Please explain why our land at a lesser value pays more rates then a property of well over four times the amount. Where is the logic in that
Rebecca, if your daughter lives in Brisbane or one of the neighbouring regions the water and sewerage charges are charged separately through urban utilities or unity water. So this would significantly reduce the rates bill. Could you check that please?
Where is the logic? It is simple. Think about this (and the figures are just to keep it simple)
How much does it cost to bitumen 100m of road on the Gold Coast? Say it’s $1000.
How much does it cost to bitumen 100m of road in Wondai? Say it’s $1001.
It’s not going to cost less in Wondai than the Gold Coast – the input costs are the same or even higher.
However, on the Gold Coast, the cost of that $1000 worth of bitumen will be spread across 10,000 ratepayers.
In Wondai, the cost of the $1001 worth of bitumen will be spread across just 1000 ratepayers.
So the Wondai ratepayers will pay more on their rates than their Gold Coast counterparts.
Simple eh? It’s got nothing to do with how much your land is worth.
So a ratepayer in Wondai whose land is worth $100 will pay more in rates than a ratepayer in Wondai whose land is worth $10.
On the Gold Coast, a ratepayer whose land is worth $10,000 will pay more in rates than a ratepayer whose land is worth $1000.
But overall, the Wondai ratepayer could still pay higher rates than the Gold Coast owner because (a) Council costs are the same (b) there’s fewer people to carry the load.
Instead of whingeing you should be thanking council for keeping rates as low as they are. They could be 10 times as bad.
BTW I hate the road levy. It’s not fair that a farmer who has kilometres of frontage pays the same as a person in town who has 20 feet in front of their property. If the farmer has two blocks of land, he only pays once. If the townie has two blocks, they pay twice. This is not fair. This is what you should be complaining about.
Well said Peter – it probably explains better what I was trying to convey
Peter, Nice to hear from you again. A Farmer makes money off their land. Does a pensioner make money from their block of land. Yes and there are plenty of pensioners that are treated unfairly and not only the road levy also two lots of sewerage even if they have one toilet. Two lots of water because the pipe is in the ground.
Pensioners get a rates discount from the Council and the State Government that farmers and all the rest of us don’t get. If you’re paying two sewerage charges for one pedestal or two water rates for one connection, you should get on the phone to the Council
This simple scenario as presented may appear correct at first glance and convenient for the purpose of evaluation but any reasonable comparion between the two shires’ overall infrastructure and one will quickly realize this is not correct or comparable with South Burnett roads and their current serviceable condition. A single kilometre of six or four lane highway or two lane suburban road cost many times that of a single lane sealed kilometre of road in the South Burnett. These roads are built and maintained to a higher standards catering for significantly heavier traffic volumes. In contrast a large proportion of South Burnett roads remain unsealed with many secondary sealed roads remain almost unserviceable after decades of neglect. The overall size of Gold Coast infrastructure, the road network, the sewage treatment plants and water treatment plants along with the reticulation systems dwarfs that of anything seen in the South Burnett. South Burnett infrastructure degradation is directly related to spending practices stretching back generations. Why is this so? Knowing that roads reticulation and garbage are the three must-do items under council control, councillors and their consortships venture into various schemes then directing public fund to support these non-essential adventurous whims whilst neglecting basic service necessities.
Jack Black. Well said, the thing that gets me is there are people like Peter who seems to treat the public like they are idiots. I spent a lot of time on the study of psychology and know when an attempt is being made to brainwash. Maybe I need to reply using a male name. And Jack Black as I have stated previously, please keep up your words of wisdom a very rare commodity in today’s society.
Rebecca. I bow to your better education. I am sorry I have not studied psychology or anything else like that. I was just trying to explain things in a simple way because there are other people explaining council rates in a way that makes no sense and I know is wrong and is just misinformation designed to light the fires of rebellion in people who feel they are missing out on something in life because other people are getting a free ride.
I am not trying to brainwash anyone. From now on I will believe the sky is blue because a paint tin has been emptied from heaven. It makes as much sense as the crap that is being spread around by the new ratepayers action group.
Rod Long. Am so sorry not to reply to your information sooner, could you tell me what the results may be if pensioners did contact their Council. You seem to have knowledge that would be very helpful to their cause. I would appreciate any help on the subject. Thank you again.
Peter. My concerns are for every day people including Pensioners. I believe if people or ratepayers are not misinformed there is no need for rebellion. When people believe they are being unfairly treated this leads to as you say rebellion, as then they the rate payer believe there is no other resourceful way to be heard. I am not a member of any action group. I will not go into the subject of people feeling like they are missing out on something, or the free ride, you discussed above because I feel this achieves nothing but anger.
Why should it cost less to maintain a kilometre of road or water main or sewage main in Wondai than it does in Kingaroy? Why should people in Wondai pay less than those in Kingaroy? All that will happen is that people in Kingaroy paying more will subsidise those paying less in other towns. The unimproved capital value process for determining rates is grossly unfair as it does not reflect a person’s ability to pay or the impact they have on Council services. Instead of these hillbillies from SBRAG getting together to have a major whinge session why not put their efforts in to helping to change the system to something that is more fair for all concerned?
To compare the cost of any reticulation system only on a per kilometer of pipe line length will distort the actual cost of that system in it’s entirety. Simply applying this scenario system to system conveniently overlooks the many variations between the two systems, overall infrastructure requirements, overall pipe size and length, pumping facilities, treatment plant capacity, maintenance and staff requirements to name but a few. Pipes and pump size must equal the volume of liquid removed or delivered at a sufficient volume to meet the requirements of each town. Treatment plant capacity must also meet these requirements and can not be separated from either system. Now add the $20 million plus spend on new treatment facilities to the above appraisal. The assumption that Kingaroy subsidizes all other systems as based on a per kilometer of pipe line length is misleading trickery. Kingaroy cannot afford to undertake construction of their new treatment facilities Top Cat let alone subsidize other systems.
SBRAG is only one of several organizations within the South Burnett recently established and dissatisfied with this currant council and their administration that I am aware of. The tactics used by these organization are remarkably similar to this council and its supporters modus operandi but less refined to date but I expect that will improve. I must admit the idea that ordinary ratepayers banding together to press local issues in smaller communities is attractive as services to those communities have been slashed whilst rates and charges continue to escalate.
[The unimproved capital value process for determining rates is grossly unfair] The same can be said for the current system, ratepayers have little control or influence as to council’s revenue gathering activities or the final destination of funds. Unfortunately rates are not percentage based according to income so low income earners are hit hardest by any price increase.
Top Cat I can only reintegrate that tax minimization and avoidance by business interests and their influence on tax policies, their ability to gain favorable subsidization and grants from governments are a good place to start if living standards are to be maintained in this country.
No Jack, rates aren’t assessed on income. Is anything? Is a loaf of bread in Woolworths 60c cheaper if you are poor?
Pensioners already get a discount on their rates.
Reality check. If you are too poor to pay your rates, you are too poor to own land. You rent. If you can’t pay the registration on your car, you’re too poor to own a car. You walk or use a pushbike.
Generations of Australians understood this and worked hard to get ahead. If someone in our family fell on hard times, we banded together and helped them out. These days everyone blames the government and whinges.
Peter for a moment lets assume all government assistance to low and medium income earners here cut and what the ramifications to a area like the South Burnett would be. Pensions, rent assistance, public health funding, unemployment assistance, public education, rural assistance drought relief and many other services along with the many millions of dollars injected into this areas communities and local businesses each and every fortnight cut. Ponder this scenario for a moment if you will Peter then ask yourself is this reality the future you wish to embrace.
Jack Black Again well said. Peter your views are out of touch with reality, where are these people supposed to live under a bridge, would that make you happy. I think you have views similar to our current Government. The rich are doing very well thank you. Thanks to the fact some huge business interest pay only 1% tax is this fair no it is not. The pensioners of today are the ones that worked hard and had excellent work ethics, many started work at 14 years of age. In your Reality check, would you consider that people who worked in timber towns did not receive a large wage. As well they had to provide a home for their family and then provide them with food and clothes with very little help, and the people I know would be much to proud to let anyone know they were struggling. So it took years of struggle to pay for their home. Your comment Pensioners already get a discount on their rates, why are so many people having trouble paying their rates as well electricity because the rates are too expensive. I think you steal from Tony Abbott if people are poor they don’t own a car he was slammed for this statement. If these people lived in a city they could get transport and all facilities close by. But this is the country and large distances are traveled through necessity for instance groceries, Doctors many people have to travel to Brisbane they may also have family in other towns, do you suggest only the elite can visit family. Your views are very elite.
Jack Black – I don’t mean to sound disrespectful but I’m not sure you know what you are talking about and am not sure where to start debunking what you have said. The sizes of pumps and pipes has very little impact on the cost overall of providing the infrastructure in the first place. Main pipes are standard in all towns because all towns require the same level of access to water in urban areas. When they need to be replaced I reckon companies supplying the pipe do not ask how big the town is and then give a price based on that. Also last time I checked electricity costs the same in Kingaroy as it does in Wondai or Blackbutt along with labour to run these things 24/7 and make sure they meet the required environmental requirements.
I’m not if you’ve noticed but all infrastructure charges are the same in all towns. It stands to reason that Kingaroy with a large population has the ability to spread the costs of its system across a large number where Blackbutt has a smaller population to spread it across meaning their costs would be higher. It would be safe to asssume that Kingaroy would be helping to keep the cost down for other towns in the region.
I agree that Kingaroy will struggle to afford the cost of the new system but what other choice is there? Just keep going with a system built in the 1950s for a community with standards set in the 2000s? All infrastructure needs to be replaced at some point when communities continue to grow. Should we just not allow any more growth in our region? Tell that to our businesses owners!
Top Cat I can only suggest research the subject on google or contact your nearest irrigation and pump supplier professional regarding pipe and pump sizes and their capacity for a given task, they will also be helpful regarding running costs and installation.
To date every argument forwarded by council and its supporters imply Kingaroy subsidizes all activity in this shire and defend that stance vigorously, this is a most unusual situation. If the residents of Kingaroy and their leadership believe this to be correct it’s not in their interests to support this council’s proclamation unless the presumptions I make are reasonably accurate.
I have nothing to lose if debunked and can only acquire knowledge for reference, but for you to do so is to reveal your association with council’s inner workings and their operation procedures.
Rebecca: I just did a bit of Googling and found that in 2007-08 average rates in Blackbutt were $1430pa and now they’re about $1980pa (including the $200pa road levy). That’s a rise of $550 over the last six years, and that’s without including any pensioner discount (which is worth about $300 a year)
But in the same same six years the single age pension has risen from $14,000pa to $20,194pa or more than $6000 a year.
So your argument that rate rises are to blame for pensioners doing it tough doesn’t make sense. Since 2008 they’ve accounted for less than 10% of the single aged pension increase.
What’s really making it tough for pensioners are all the other cost of living rises like electricity, petrol and other basic living costs, and all of those can be laid at the feet of the State and Federal Governments. What you should really be arguing for is an increase in the aged pension. Pronto.
Rod Long don’t believe I mentioned Blackbutt but thank you. The average as you say would be spread around the outskirting properties in any town. Does this mean rates in a town for instance are much higher. I know from experience yes they are and as I said above many also pay as I pointed out two lots of sewage fees for 1 toilet and two lots of water connection fees again for 1 connection. So this makes it tough, you didn’t get back to my answer to you about help for these people. I have spoken to 1 couple they have said it is a waste of time, Council do nothing and do not care. How sad as council are public servants paid by rate payers. OK by now you should realize I do not go into this lightly. So yes added to this all the other costs of living increase of living rises especially in a country area and country people are hit hard. State and Federal Government have shown some contempt for pensioners. For instance the one used above by Peter if you are to poor to own a house statement, and also the statement about people who are to poor shouldn’t drive or own cars, they should walk or ride a bike. Which I find belligerent. I thank you for your thought especially as I have not found one put down of other people. You were obviously bought up to treat people with respect, which is much appreciated. And as I said to you if you could tell me what should happen with the extra charges it also would be appreciated.
Rod Long Are you and all members of the Kingaroy Chamber of Commerce and Industry prepared to support increases to pensions and low income remunerations [employees wages] to offset cost of living expenses as described in your comment?
Rebecca. You don’t know me. It is ironic when I read your slur of me as “elite” I was just thinking it was 24 hours since I had eaten anything. You probably have more in your pocket that I have.
There’s been a lot of crap poured on me here by Jack Black and you about what I said so I’m quitting this conversation now.
But before I go. Understand this. I stand in solidarity with the poor. Only structural change will make a difference in our society! That is, make the big businesses pay their fair share, stop raping the land and sending the profits overseas.
By spewing your venom at council you are aiming at the wrong target. I believe councils are made up of people like you and me who really want the best for this local community. Talk to a few councillors and former councillors. They don’t have horns and they are not stashing up gold bars in Swiss bank accounts.
It really is simple. Council have to do certain things fix roads, run water plant etc and this costs money. They used to get more dollars from the state and federal governments than they do now.
The only way they pay for these things is to charge rates from people who own land in the area. They have no other option, other than NOT do things – and let the infrastructure deteriorate to a point where it is not usable, dangerous and a threat to the environment. This is basically what the old councils were doing before amalgamation.
So, back to what I said before which has caused you to go ballistic and accuse me of elitism. The bottom line is if you can’t afford to pay your rates, you can’t afford to own land.
That does not mean you have to be homeless or live under a bridge. It means you rent. There’s no shame in renting. Generations of Australians did it. The other alternative is free social housing provided by the state. That is not a bad thing but if you look at the Soviet Union there can be consequences when the profit incentive is totally removed from the system. People like to improve their circumstances through hard work, get ahead. Not just be a slave to the state and live in uniformity.
And Jack, to think that I am advocating scrapping pensions and all the other benefits of the welfare state is insane.
Pensions should be increased. The basic wage should be raised. There should be a cap on CEO salaries and directors remuneration. There should be a cap on company profits. Super profits should attract super taxes. Cartels like Coles and Woolworths should be smashed. Companies that direct their profits overseas instead of re-investing locally should have their assets seized.
The commonwealth government should nationalize the Commonwealth Bank and Telstra immediately, and all the public utilities that have been flogged off for short term benefit.
Rebecca, Jack. You are wasting your effort on the wrong target and doing harm to people who are no different than yourself. Councils are the victims in this economy not the bogeymen. Agitate for real reform.