Two Good Things: 27 August 2024

(1). It seems that the Council are currently working with ‘Policy to review these situations’. That is really good news.

(2). My grapevine has also indicated that the private ‘arbitrage’ where a facilitator takes 50% of the reassessment value is not happening now. As people have become informed, this route has not been active. This is extremely pleasing.

Meanwhile, I am attaching a letter/email (as screen clips) that I sent to Council a few weeks ago.

It summarises the basis for my objections and provides supporting references. It may help others that want to understand and support their own reassessments as who knows how long the Council will take. The evidence is available on my website if you need to locate the reports etc.

I suggest that if you have had a development where stormwater makes a significant contribution — this includes other councils where they may apply a ‘fixed’ unit of demand (rather than an ISA basis), it may be worth thinking it through.

Note: I have helped a few people and have noted that there have been basic mistakes in the original assessments. The system is highly subject to human error.

I need to put a bit of time into reviewing the budgeted capital expenditure for Papakura v received money (I have the information now via LGOIMA) to see how much was taken (over budget — I have done a quick desktop but have been too busy to tabulate it).

Ideally, I will get another area too because there was less, possibly even none (?), reassessed outside of Papakura on the ISA inequity basis. I don’t know this so it is a wild assumption based off street information.