Cromwell ratepayers are facing a 15% increase in the ward component of their rates bill for the 2010-11 financial year, despite concerted efforts to cut costs.
The Cromwell Community Board shaved $500,000 off its projected budgets for the next financial year during a nine-hour estimates meeting on Monday.
It initially faced a $918,000 (32%) increase in the ward component of rates, but managed to trim $502,000 off budgets to arrive at a final figure of $416,000.
Board chairman Neil Gillespie said a 32% ward component increase was neither sustainable nor reasonable, and although some ratepayers would likely be angry about a 15% increase, that was the real cost of providing basic services.
"I wonder whether up until now the true cost of providing services to ratepayers has not been fully understood or paid for, and now it's coming home to roost," Mr Gillespie said.
Cromwell ratepayers will not know what their final bills will be until the Central Otago District Council's general component is decided.
Each year the district's four community boards make recommendations to the council about projected budgets for the services, amenities, and assets which impact on the ward components of rates.
Maniototo, Vincent, and Roxburgh board members will go through their budgets at meetings on February 4, 15, and 18 respectively.
Their recommended budgets will be considered by the council, which will also set accounts for general district services.
Once ward differentials are added to the general district rates component, ratepayers are able to see how their bills will be affected, and make submissions accordingly through the council's annual plan process.
The annual plan - including projected rates - is finalised and adopted after the submission process, before being implemented.
Budgets for Cromwell's main services, including water schemes, some roading, and the Cromwell Swim Centre, were largely untouched by the board.
Members expressed frustration at having to fund depreciation of ward assets, which contributed to a large portion of increased rates, as utilities and buildings had been re-valued.
Rating examples
(based on 2009-10 financial year)
Orchard, $730,000 (Land Value), $930,000 (Capital Value), $1993.43 (Rates).
Commercial, $230,000 (LV), $470,000 (CV), $2074.21 (R).
Farm, $2,450,000 (LV), $2,950,000 (CV), $4594.76 (R).
Large farm, $5,150,000 (LV), $6,600,000 (CV), $8518.40 (R).
Lifestyle block, $365,000 (LV), $880,000 (CV), $1354.65 (R).
Major hotel, $1,525,000 (LV), $6,900,00 (CV), $18,014.11 (R).
Motel, $670,000 (LV), $1,650,000 (CV), $5206.61 (R).
Residence, $194,000 (LV), $380,000 (CV, $1600.41 (R).
Storage, $1,175,000 (LV), $2,500,000 (CV), $5693.85 (R).
Different components
Uniform charge: Set charge each ratepayer must pay.
Ward rate: To fund costs of functions delegated to a community board (parks, swimming pools, halls, community centres, museums, sporting facilities, water schemes, cemeteries etc).
General rate: To fund costs of functions not delegated to a community board (housing, district grants, regional identity/promotions, roading, noxious plant control, district-funded public toilets, airports etc).
