What do Aucklanders pay rates for?

Forums › Off topic › What do Aucklanders pay rates for?

1 | 2 | 3 | 4

9119 posts

Uber Geek

Subscriber

#1300016 7-May-2015 16:52

MikeB4: This is why I maintain and have so for a looooong time, local body Government and administration is way over due for a review and overhaul. I believe Councils be they normal or super city be abolished and the management of cities and towns done by Central Government.

Can you imagine how big central government would get. They'd need another city the size of Wellington to house all the new bureaucrats..

Regards,

Old3eyes

old3eyes

9119 posts

Uber Geek

Subscriber

#1300018 7-May-2015 16:53

kiwitrc: I believe Auckland rate payers are currently paying $1 million per day in interest only. Maybe its time to rename the place Athens.

Edit: Actually scratch that idea, you are still paying so a difference.

Maybe call it Detroit. It went bankrupt..

Regards,

Old3eyes

SaltyNZ

8225 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

2degrees

Lifetime subscriber

#1300020 7-May-2015 16:54

They could call it 'Golgafrincham'.

iPad Pro 11" + iPhone 15 Pro Max + 2degrees 4tw!

These comments are my own and do not represent the opinions of 2degrees.

MikeB4

18435 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#1300024 7-May-2015 16:58

old3eyes:
MikeB4: This is why I maintain and have so for a looooong time, local body Government and administration is way over due for a review and overhaul. I believe Councils be they normal or super city be abolished and the management of cities and towns done by Central Government.

Can you imagine how big central government would get. They'd need another city the size of Wellington to house all the new bureaucrats..

It wouldn't need that much more. The services contracted out to private enterprise via contestable bidding.

Geektastic

17943 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1300051 7-May-2015 17:33

SaltyNZ: They could call it 'Golgafrincham'.

Gigafrincham surely these days? ;-)

surfisup1000

5288 posts

Uber Geek

#1300075 7-May-2015 18:59

MikeB4:
Our building standards are designed to meet the requirements of our environment and are appropriate.

I disagree, and I was talking more about public infrastructure such as roads and infrastructure, rather than privately owned buildings such as houses.

I don't think it is appropriate to make building costs so high as to be unaffordable to lower income people.

The house I lived in as a kid was an old villa and would fail to meet current building codes on so many levels. But, it was fine for us.

And, the authorities are saying Auckland buildings must be earthquake strengthened, at a cost of many hundreds of millions or even billions of dollars. This is over engineering given the low earthquake risk in Auckland and I reckon the engineers have self interest in this.

MikeB4

18435 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#1300078 7-May-2015 19:09

surfisup1000:
MikeB4:
Our building standards are designed to meet the requirements of our environment and are appropriate.

I disagree, and I was talking more about public infrastructure such as roads and infrastructure, rather than privately owned buildings such as houses.

I don't think it is appropriate to make building costs so high as to be unaffordable to lower income people.

The house I lived in as a kid was an old villa and would fail to meet current building codes on so many levels. But, it was fine for us.

And, the authorities are saying Auckland buildings must be earthquake strengthened, at a cost of many hundreds of millions or even billions of dollars. This is over engineering given the low earthquake risk in Auckland and I reckon the engineers have self interest in this.

Are you saying that public buildings, roading and other infrastructure should not be built to meet the weather and seismic risks etc?

Lenovo

Shop now for Lenovo laptops and other devices (affiliate link).

surfisup1000

5288 posts

Uber Geek

#1300142 7-May-2015 20:11

MikeB4:
Are you saying that public buildings, roading and other infrastructure should not be built to meet the weather and seismic risks etc?

I'm not saying that at all.

I'm saying we are exceeding standards to the point of unaffordability. It is pointless applying the same earthquake construction standards to a building in auckland and christchurch, for example.

And of course buildings should be weatherproof -- that is a core standard (although tell that to the people with leaky homes). But, we have a lot of 'nice-to-have' standards which add to the cost such that some people cannot afford a house at all.

MikeB4

18435 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#1300145 7-May-2015 20:18

surfisup1000:
MikeB4:
Are you saying that public buildings, roading and other infrastructure should not be built to meet the weather and seismic risks etc?

I'm not saying that at all.

I'm saying we are exceeding standards to the point of unaffordability. It is pointless applying the same earthquake construction standards to a building in auckland and christchurch, for example.

And of course buildings should be weatherproof -- that is a core standard (although tell that to the people with leaky homes). But, we have a lot of 'nice-to-have' standards which add to the cost such that some people cannot afford a house at all.

By weather risk I was referring to adverse weather events, also, Auckland like anywhere in NZ it is not immune from earthquakes.Our building codes are about saving lives and that is a good thing.

old3eyes

9119 posts

Uber Geek

Subscriber

#1300384 8-May-2015 08:49

MikeB4:
surfisup1000:
MikeB4:
Are you saying that public buildings, roading and other infrastructure should not be built to meet the weather and seismic risks etc?

I'm not saying that at all.

I'm saying we are exceeding standards to the point of unaffordability. It is pointless applying the same earthquake construction standards to a building in auckland and christchurch, for example.

And of course buildings should be weatherproof -- that is a core standard (although tell that to the people with leaky homes). But, we have a lot of 'nice-to-have' standards which add to the cost such that some people cannot afford a house at all.

By weather risk I was referring to adverse weather events, also, Auckland like anywhere in NZ it is not immune from earthquakes.Our building codes are about saving lives and that is a good thing.

But way less likely that say Wellington , CH or Napier so the one rule for all is pointless and expensive though it does become a council revenue stream for compliance costs. Now with the revelation yesterday that various parts of Auckland could have a new volcano in your back yard are you going to need special volcano insurance up here??.

Regards,

Old3eyes

kiwitrc

4123 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#1300388 8-May-2015 08:56

old3eyes:
But way less likely that say Wellington , CH or Napier so the one rule for all is pointless and expensive though it does become a council revenue stream for compliance costs. Now with the revelation yesterday that various parts of Auckland could have a new volcano in your back yard are you going to need special volcano insurance up here??.

To be fair I dont think Christchurch was regarded as an earthquake prone area either.

I do wonder how much of these costs are related to the compliance and conditions imposed on work and planning by the councils and central government themselves.

MikeB4

18435 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#1300394 8-May-2015 09:02

A huge chunk of building costs in NZ is made up of tag on expenses, E.G Compliance, Legal, Duties, Fees, Tax, Tax on Tax, additional materials due the inevitable unforeseen , exchange rates, transport, Tax again.

hashbrown

463 posts

Ultimate Geek

#1301079 9-May-2015 10:02

timbosan:

Pretty graph, but given interest charges on council debt are of the order of $300 million a year, some wedges seem to have been left out. Or are we just going to keep borrowing forever?

DarthKermit

5346 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#1301083 9-May-2015 10:19

It seems to me (yup, I'm a home owner and rate payer), that councils simply have no real incentive to contain their costs on rate payers and anyone else who has to use their services in the communities they're located in.

Well why should they contain their costs? They're monopolies and have us all by the balls.

Whatifthespacekeyhadneverbeeninvented?

Dingbatt

6755 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#1301096 9-May-2015 10:26

The NZHerald (#shabbylittletabloid) had pictures of the councilors and the way they voted on this rates rise. I have cut it out and stuck it in the drawer to ensure I vote for none of the those that approved it next time round.
A survey that keeps getting referenced to say that the majority of Aucklanders surveyed support this increase. From what I understand the only options the respondents were given were 'Do you want to eat a sh!t sandwich, or a sh!t sandwich with extra sh!t?'
The biggest dilemma is picking the sweet spot where house prices have reached their zenith to sell up and leave.

“We’ve arranged a society based on science and technology, in which nobody understands anything about science technology. Carl Sagan 1996

1 | 2 | 3 | 4