The Tauranga City Council has raised concerns around equity with its future rates policy. Photo / Tauranga City Council
Tauranga City Council commissioners have raised concerns about equity in two rates relief policies.
In Monday's Strategy, Finance & Risk Committee meeting, commissioners reviewed recommended changes to policies on rates remissions and postponements - one general policy and the other applying to Māori freehold land.
Regarding the general policy, staffsaid the council should remove most criteria for a ratepayer in financial hardship to apply to postpone a rates payment, to make the application process easier.
The only criteria they recommended keeping was that the applicant should have at least 25 per cent equity in the property and must not be able to access support from private-sector financial institutions.
Commissioners added a requirement that the ratepayer must have applied for a government rates rebate assistance before coming to the council.
Tauranga City Council commission chairwoman Anne Tolley said she felt "nervousness about not requiring people to [try to] take advantage of a government scheme" before involving the council.
"We certainly want to work on getting a postponement process that is reasonable and doesn't put too much of a financial burden on our ratepayers."
Tolley said the person in need may not meet the criteria for government assistance but should demonstrate they have sought it.
Commissioner Stephen Selwood said the report did not explain why people weren't required to seek government assistance first.
"We have to have a good reason why we would provide assistance to someone who hadn't gone to the government."
The council accepted the report's recommendations with that added requirement.
The council had similar concerns with the Remission and Postponement of Rates on Māori Freehold Land policy recommendations.
Based on a law change, staff recommended removing all criteria for remission for land subject to development except a requirement to meet one of five benefits listed in the Local Government (Rating) Act 2002.
The benefits are to the district by creating new homes, to the council by increasing the rating base, to district Māori by supporting local marae and to the owners by "facilitating the occupation, development, and utilisation of the land".
Tolley said the council needed "a better explanation of the intent of the legislation" to explain what was trying to be achieved.
She said it needed to "think through how we're going to explain that equity [between Māori freehold land and other land] to other ratepayers."
Tolley asked staff to make changes to the report to include an explanation of the difficulties for developing and selling Māori freehold land.
"There's very little understanding of the process that they have to go through – I think that would help."
"If we don't address it [why there's a difference], someone else will."
Selwood said he wanted to ensure ratepayers understood why Māori freehold land should have unique rules.
"Why is one component of the community paying differently? ... I want to be able to explain to someone who asks me the questions what are the justifications for that."
Rohario Murray, tangata whenua representative on the committee, suggested the policy could include an explanation of how Māori value their land intrinsically, beyond its capital value.
She said that "might go some way to explaining why it is different to general land".
The council asked staff to return the report to them when these changes had been made.
They also directed staff to work alongside the Western Bay of Plenty District Council to make policies for freehold land consistent.