Financial Statements
Tuesday, January 27, 2015 at 5:21PM
Bill Barclay

I can find no adequate explanation within the Financial Statements regarding the proposed transfer of the $40m from Developer Contribution liability to ratepayer liability. The statements are totallly opaque in this regard, and in regard to the manner in which this is to be applied to rates, and over what period.   

This is of course critical, and the proposed increases outlined in the narative report simply do not equate unless there has been either a substantial reduction in Capex and Opex, of an substantial increase in borrowing. The Statements indicate a net increase in borrowing for Capital works of some $13m, but elsewhere show a net decrease in overall borrowing over the ten years of some $40m which appropriately equates with the proposd liability that is to be transferred. 

Targeted rates increase some 31% to $55m over the ten years, and one must assume that this is the source of funding to cover the liability.  There is no compulsion to cover the full amount over this period, but clearly they see a start as imperative, and $10-15m over the 10 year period appears most likely, but just why they need to keep the details so close to their chest indicates just how sensitive is this issue.

By the way, tomorrows meeing starts at 11am - that can only mean one thing - they are 'workshopping' for two hours to get all their ducks in a row - there is no way that they want any 'in-Council' debate of the LTP, and they will all come back in at 11am 'fully in-line' - I expect no debate - just a simple adoption of the Plan and associated consultation documents.

Such a pity - but it is the way this Council operates.  






Article originally appeared on BillBarcBlog (
See website for complete article licensing information.