Nath@aussie.zone 2 weeks ago
No idea what’s going on in Victoria any more.
The ASU’s attack on Labor relates to its long-running campaign to lift a cap on rates that councils can charge residents, which has constrained their ability to fund higher wages for staff.
The left-aligned union claims it had a deal with Allan to lift the cap, which Carroll quickly scrapped after taking over the leadership, due to concerns it would increase cost of living pressures for non-council workers.
Wait a minute. The unions’ beef is that the State Government is refusing to allow Local Councils to raise rates enough on everyone, so that their workers in local government can get a pay rise? That’s why they’re upset with the Labor party?
I’m struggling to feel sympathy for this cause. We’re living in a bizarreo world where the unions are calling for higher tax rates? Council Rates are calculated based on the value of the property.
The formula for calculating the rates for an individual property is the property valuation multiplied by the rate in the dollar set by the council.
For example, if the Capital Improved Value of a property is $250,000 and the council rate in the dollar is set at 0.42 cents, the rate bill would be $1,050 ($250,000 x 0.0042).
So in a real-world scenario where a property has a CIV of $1 Million, the rates are $4,200 for that property. This is already a major increase, since property values have skyrocketed in the last five years. And the Unions are calling for more?
I’m so confused.
zero_gravitas@aussie.zone 2 weeks ago
I think I can help!
It’s not laid out in a way that makes it particularly clear but the key point of clarification is that council rates don’t grow with property values.
Allow me to explain…
First, the council first determines the total amount they will raise through council rates for a given year. The annual cap is a restriction on the growth of that total amount.
Secondly, they divide that total amount by the worth of all properties in the area.
That is to say, the ‘rate in the dollar’ is calculated each year only so that the council rates can be charged proportionally to each property. It is not a fixed rate such that council rates would grow in line with house prices.
This is outlined on the page you linked, just above the bit you quoted:
The ‘rate in the dollar’ has trended downwards over the last few decades precisely because property values have increased faster than local councils have increased their rates. You can find the full list of residential ‘rate in the dollar’ figures for 2000-2027 for the City of Melbourne on this page, but in summary, it was 6.4 in 2000/2001, and it’s 3.98 in 2026/2027.
The rate cap amounts since 2016/2017 can be found on this page.
I haven’t read it in full, but this report gives at least some indications that the cap hasn’t kept up with inflation:
Obviously if a major revenue stream doesn’t keep up with inflation, then there’s eventually going to be a squeeze on expenditures, including wages.
From an article in ‘Council’ magazine:
I’m sure the ASU is aware that increasing council rates is unlikely to be popular. This is evident when they specify “modest reform to the rate cap” in that ‘Council’ article. Also, their members are themselves rate-payers, of course. If they thought there was another way to secure a decent deal for workers, they’d be pushing for that instead.