Wednesday, May 03, 2006

Anyone seen the paddle?

With confusion abounding in the minds of most about rate increases, who better to calm the disquieted citizenry than... that well known economist, Dotty.

"Although the quantum sum of each ratepayer's regional rate was still considerably less than district council rates, the percentage increase in Horizons' rates was unnecessary," she opines in the latest Council media release. "We look at rates on a percentage basis, not just as a quantum sum, so percentages are a relevant measure of rates".

Mmmm hmmm? Percentages are a relevant measure of a lot of other things too. But do we ask the butcher for "37.75 percent more mince"? Or the tailor to let out our pants by "14.25 percent" if we've eaten too much of it?

No, because there are more relevant measures of these and most other things - in the case of rates, how many more (or less) dollars we'll be paying. And the "quantum" is that while Horizons will be slugging Wanganui ratepayers around 35 or 40 cents more, Dotty, the Diva and the Dwarves want a whole dollar.

Or, to keep Dotty happy - they want 60 to 65 percent more in extra rates each week than does Horizons. And the percentages being bandied about by her boss apply only to certain properties. "Results may vary", as the fine print usually says.

We reiterate our comment that both Councils could have applied a little web wizardry and created an online calculator that allowed people to punch in their property value, their land use type and whatever else is needed, and come up with an exact dollar (and even percentage) value. That would have stopped all this nonsense. Even a printed table, though that probably would have ended up being so large that distributing one to every household could have jeopardised supplies of three-ply. But they didn't, and hence we have a handful of examples (a mere three in the case of Horizons) being extrapolated out to "prove" anything the Diva wants people to believe.

The other hard fact is where the money's going. Horizons wants to use theirs to eradicate possums, restore the Whanganui and Manawatu rivers, improve water quality and drainage, invest in regional parks, protect native habitats and encourage sustainable land use. Mickey wants to build a swimming pool. And let's not forget the dollar he's dipping into your pockets for is on top of income from asset sales and an increase in user charges.

Admittedly, a dollar a week isn't much, though we're regularly reminded it'd feed a small African child for a week or so. So why is this such a problem? Let's turn to none other than the Diva himself:

"... with regard to ability to pay and debt servicing costs. The latter will be much worse over the next couple of years as the wastewater treatment plant is built."

Wanganui's LTCCP "tough but fair" - 10 April 2006

The council's net debt will increase from a projected peak of $47 million in 2008/09 to a new peak of $64.2 million in 2005/16. And instead of tracking steadily down, as predicted by the last council's LTCCP, it will stay at roughly that level for the foreseeable future.

Mayor's e-Column - 18 April 2006
So debt servicing costs are set to increase, and net debt is higher than expected and anticipated to stay that way "for the forseeable future". As (ex councillor) Stephen Palmer pointed out in a well-written letter in yesterday's Chron:


Michael Laws and Rangi Wills have said that the enlarged Splash Centre will not increase rates because it will be financed from asset sales. If we repay debt instead of spending it then less interest will mean less rates. It’s not rocket science.

Current revenue from the splash centre is about $300,000 short of operating costs, which are projected to double with the enlarged facility. Even if revenue doubles, which I think is unlikely, the operating loss is also going to double to $600,000. Plus additional loan servicing costs?

So much for the brake on rates.
In economics, sacrificing one thing (the ability to repay debt and thus minimise interest) for another (a flash new pool) is called opportunity cost. In other words, any cash siphoned off from asset sales to build Mickey and Philippa et al a gym in Springvale isn’t being used to reduce debt. And debt continues to grow.

Way back when the gang was on the vote-buying trail he was talking about selling assets to reduce debt. Debt was the big bogey man, remember?

Last week, the Council’s finance manager Dave Foster handed our elected officials a document that showed Wanganui’s projected net debt to peak at almost $60 million. That’s roughly $2,000 for every adult living in the district boundaries.

Wanganui Chronicle - Monday, 14 April 2003
Selling assets was "sold" to the public as a means of reducing debt, not building pools. But the Diva has always maintained that the he wouldn’t do so without "consent of the people".

No assets will be sold by the council without the prior consent of the Wanganui people.

Vision Wanganui Policy Release - 24 August 2004
But despite the perilous state of Wanganui's finances, funnelling asset sales and a rates increase into a facility that - however much it might be a wonderful amenity everyone would enjoy - isn't exactly a crucial priority, is apparently okay. Because while Wanganui might be up to it's neck in the proverbial while the Diva and Dotty dig deeper, Palemerston North is worse. That's alright, then.


Now this is 'net' debt... Per capita, it would make Wanganui one of the most heavily indebted councils in the country. The kind of case that Income Support would normally shunt off to Budget Advisory. Or where your bank manager calls you at two in the morning and threatens to break your leg...

Of course there are some important qualifiers to the above figures. Like it assumes that Wanganui wants to... have the same sort of amenities as a Palmerston North or a Hamilton. In other words, that $60 million will only occur if every spendthrift’s wish list is granted – like refurbishment and extensions to the Museum, the Art Gallery and the library. Like an Olympic-size Splash Centre.

Although before we start to beat ourselves up over the size of our council debt, I've had the opportunity to review the draft LTCCPs of other councils that are roughly our size. Hastings' net debt is estimated to peak at $93 million (ours will be $64 million) while Palmerston North's will be $210 million! They will be paying annual interest bills alone of over $18 million. Horrendous.

Mayor's e-Column - 26 April 2006
Quantum, schwantum. Your boss is preaching doom and spending like someone who actually believes the end is nigh, Dotty. And you're sitting there blowing the party squeaker.

Comments on this post are now closed.

13 comments:

Anonymous said...

So Dotty (along with other unnamed councillors) tells Mid-Weak readers she feels like “the meat in the sandwich”.

She must mean Baloney Sandwich and it just so happens that Mickey’s Special Baloney Sandwiches are on special at the Guyton Street Deli this week.

The Horizons special is 20% bigger than the Vision regular size which requires borrowing of $2.5 million, sales of your grandparents’ house and underwriting of the cost of declaring war on Palmerston North.

The recipe for Mickey’s Baloney Sandwich is a closely guard secret which he shares only at clandestine Vision caucus meetings and with the entire readership of the Sunday Star Times. But according to the formula found on a sheet of three-ply in the waste bin beside his make-up mirror in the mayoral dunny, it is:

Take two sheets of gullible white (and brown) councillors with a nutritional value less than the equivalent in LTCCP paper; smear liberally with lashings of Michael’s Own Fat-Free Bullshit; cut generous slices of Mickey’s Special Recipe Offal and Pig’s Guts Baloney, at least two councillors thick; fashion into one super-sized Baloney Sandwich.

Feed to Dotty and the Dwarves and wash down with lashings of Diva Devotion Potion.

Anonymous said...

Ah the internet. The whole trail of lies from go to whoa. One of the best things about the web is that everything gets archived. That means that in 100 years time if anyone ever googles "Michael Laws" (as though anyone in 100 years will even care) the good old web will take them straight here, to the Lawswatch archive, and they'll be able to read all this, which by then will probably be his entire legacy.

Cheers, Mickey.

Anonymous said...

Now you've really stuffed yourself LW - I can't believe you wrote the following ...

"But despite the perilous state of Wanganui's finances, funnelling asset sales and a rates increase into a facility that - however much it might be a wonderful amenity everyone would enjoy - isn't exactly a crucial priority, is apparently okay"

But you did.
It was the people of Wanganui you twat that decided the above and not ML or the Council and they were all told, as was I, that the funding for the Splash Centre would come from asset sales. The mayor was VERY uopfront about it.
And didn't he dish your mate Kuten this morning in the Letters column. Shee-eet!

Anonymous said...

Anon wrote -

Ah the internet.

The same internet that will faithfully record that Laws won the mayoralty in 2004, had his Vision team elected as a majority, won the by-elections 9both) in 2006 and was re-elected (with his team) in 2007.

Anonymous said...

The "quantum" of Wanganui's debt does not seem large by other city or district standards. Check out Palmerston North. $210 million!

Anonymous said...

Matt - do we really need this kind of immaturity?

smear liberally with lashings of Michael’s Own Fat-Free Bullshit; cut generous slices of Mickey’s Special Recipe Offal and Pig’s Guts Baloney

Anonymous said...

Like most of your analyses LawsWatch - this latest effort is flawed on a number of levels. i note that you don't publish postings about your stuff-ups but here goes anyway. All the below info is from publicly available sources either council agendas or minutes or Chronicle reports.
The new Splash Centre will have no additional operational expenses for ratepayers so Palmer is wrong. If he uses that logic then no wonder he was turfed off council in '04.
If you're going to convert one asset to another (land into Splash extension) you haven't sold it but coverted it from a land asset to a community asset. You could use that money to repay debt but then you'd build no new community amenities ever until all your debt was repaid and Wangas would stand still. I was one who voted in the referendum for Splash and I'm delighted it will be built and available to my kids as are most of my mates and neighbours. You obviously don't have kids or swim.
As for the rates detail it is all in the LTCCP plan I picked up from one of the public meetings. It gives a range of residences and value and shows the rate increase for each. I picked up Horizons LTCCP and there is nothing.
If you're going to play the economist Lawswatch why don't you do some research. I'm just an ordinary plod who is interested in council politics and even I can see the flaws in your argument.

Anonymous said...

I know you're doing a great job L/Watch but this blog entry was too long. Keep it more concise for us normal types will you?

Anonymous said...

Matt - do we really need this kind of immaturity?

**********************************

I'm not Matt, nor am I the author of the comments that so upset you, but wait a second, do I read you correctly? Perhaps you'd prefer it if Mickey's effluent were referred to as "a yellow putrescence with no discernable solid material".

Anonymous said...

The new Splash Centre will have no additional operational expenses for ratepayers
__________________________________

Bullshit.

It seems even "an ordinary plod who is interested in Council politics" can tell bare-faced lies.

Anonymous said...

Re the apparent need to replace the Spin Fairy with a suitably sycophantic member of the ML fan club.

I’d like to nominate John Maslin. He’s extraordinarily well pre-qualified to become Spin Wizard, having missed no opportunity for PDAs (public displays of affection) with Mickey and has an army of little child wizards, also under Mickey’s spell, being groomed at his Chronwarts school down by the river.

Best of all, this would cut out the middle (wo)man and ratepayers’ money can go directly for the purchase of more word games, ranting right wing editorials, pretty pictures for page 2.

Anonymous said...

"All the below info is from publicly available sources either council agendas or minutes or Chronicle reports." and some people like anon 10.16pm actually get sucked in by it.I guess the spin machine is working for some.
Read P76 of the LTCCP " The Splash Centre Operating costs are expected to increase by $280,000 pa from 2008/09. Mayor Laws says that this wont cost the ratepayer anything - a straight contradiction of the Councils own plan. Read P80 The rates requirement is ( this year $549,000) 06/07 $649,000, 07/08 787,000, 08/09 896,000 09/10 $939,000, 10/11 $913,000 11/12 $1,258,000 12/13 $928,000 13,14 $932,000 14/15 $1,373,000. You might also notice in the LTCCP that the allowance for debt servicing cost is only $30,000 pa. This is obviously wrong $2.5M at 7.5% is $187,500. Now if you believe the spin that there are all these surplus assets just waiting around to be sold would you be interested in buying the London Bridge off me? .

Anonymous said...

While talking about quantum debt and comparing Lawsville with Tanguay Towers (or PNorth as it is also known), some of your readers might like to think about the ABILITY to service debt rather than the size of it. With about 72,000 people, PN is in a far better position to cope with increased debt. It contains, after all, about one third of the Manawatu-Wanganui region's people.
It also has some innovative ideas about raising funds (wind farms, for a start) and keeping costs down (see PNCC's landfill gas-powered electricity generator for example, which was paid for by selling carbon credits to the Austrian government). When ML gets his head out of his arse and looks at his neighbours, he will see that some of them are being a bit more outward-looking and proactive about raising money, trather than being an insular "tighten your belts" merchant. And then, of course, PN has had lower rates than Wanganui for some years now, so we can afford the odd increase. Since most of us over here have proper jobs....