Stormwater service charges
Last year, the State Government brought in new laws allowing for the introduction of a stormwater service charge. This new charge recognised the need for councils to raise funds specifically to tackle the issue of stormwater and drainage infrastructure.
At the time, Council adopted a flat rate of $25 per property for both residential and business ratepayers. This year, Council is looking for community discussion around three options proposing a change to the way the stormwater charge is applied to business.
Option 1 - $25 per 350m2 capped at $5,000.
Option 2 - $25 per 350m2 capped at $3,000.
Option 3 - $25 per 350m2 capped at $1,000.
The proposed changes will not affect residential ratepayers who will continue to pay the flat $25 rate per property.
The stormwater service charge has provided for a significantly expanded program to maintain,upgrade and improve the city’s stormwater and drainage infrastructure to address the $33 million backlog identified in the 2006 Percy Allan report.
This online discussion forum has concluded. You can still browse the site but the discussion area will no longer accept new comments or votes.
fredo Comment 1 30 Apr 2008, 2:47 PM
Recent storm events show we need to spend more on stormwater management to get the network up to scratch and to prevent future floods.I like option 1 as it would raise the most money and get the backlog fixed quickest.
Reformer Comment 1.1 4 May 2008, 4:02 PM
Fredo have you read the financial budget papers and have you any ideas about where the money could come for city services?
Take a guess at these:
1.what percentage of council expenditure goes on staff related expenses,plus consultants such as lawyers.
2. Where did the extra 100+ jobs go to during the 8 Dore years, when at the same time all staff got huge real pay increases?
If you can't find the numbers, ask Graham Clark on Monday and he will gladly post the numbers on this site.... He's that sort of guy!
fredo Comment 1.1.1 5 May 2008, 9:35 AM
Reformer I understand that you and some others have an issue with council management.
My concern is preventing flooding and I prefer option 1. You banging on about council inefficency does nothing to address my concerns and really I am not very interested.
They say they are efficient, you say they are not. I just dont want to get flooded and think Option 1 is the best approach.
dipsy Comment 2 1 May 2008, 9:05 PM
I agree this is important because it effects safety.
Bigfeller Comment 3 4 May 2008, 12:41 PM
How much of the money collected is handed over to Hunter Water as they are the cosuppliers of drainage and stormwater management to the Newcastle LGA?
Hunter Water also charge property owners for the very same service.
Is this not double dipping?
As I see it NCC should only be able to collect from property owners the difference between the Hunter Water charge and the $25.
fredo Comment 3.1 5 May 2008, 9:38 AM
Bigfeller, please see my comments to reformer above. You seem to be trying to save yourself $10, I dont want my house to get flooded.
I dont care about the ins and outs of water charging I want Council to have the resources to properly manage our storm infrastructure and I am happy to pay for that.