25.11.86
2.15 to 5.00
Date:
Time:
Reporter:
JPM
1
2
3
4
5
6
8
9
10
situation whereby for example, the new markets built by the Urban Council now charge rentals much nearer to the current market rental than the old markets, and where the Regional Council is also adopting the same policy. It is easier for the stall holders to understand that for some time now, they have had the benefit of quite a large disparity between the concessionary rental and the market rentals
7 and as and when the Urban Council intends to reduce the subsidy on market operations, then they should pay more but it is a matter of the money from the stall holders going into general revenue in the form of rates, or going to the Urban Council but in the end, I would agree with the DFS that really as far as the public interest is concerned, perhaps it would be more cost-effective and more efficient for an exemption on the understanding that the stall holders are not necessarily paying less.
11
12
5 0
CHAIRMAN:
Well, could I ask about cost-effectiveness,
the DFS mentioned on cost-effectiveness of the whole exercise of assessing rates in market stalls. Is it because of administrative costs or is it because you have to assess stall by stall, or is it because of the implementation of collection of rates is difficult, or what is the cost-effectiveness that you mention in your view, that it is not cost-effective to collect rates from market stalls?
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
ent
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
DFS:
I think I can give you an idea of how
difficult and expensive we believe it will be in the first year, should we decide to rate these market stalls. Year one, the estimated costs would be $2.8 million yield in general rates, less $7.2 million, giving a loss of $4.4 million; the $7.2 million is made up of appeals assumed by the Commissioner for Rating & Valuation to be only about 1% of all assessments, but nevertheless costing $4.5 million to deal with, and objections assumed as 75% of all assessments, $1.8 million.
SMS:
If I may also mention one factor on the cost-effectiveness formula Sir, the figures just mentioned are worked out on the assumption that all the stalls are occupied, but to date only 85% of the stalls in the urban area are occupied, 15% being
65