Reduce dependence on general charges

Referring to "Geographic Area General Works and Services Charges" on page 294 of the LTP. Marlborough is ahead of the rest of the country in the way we allocate rates, largely due to our decision to use land values as the determining factor for distributing general rates rather than full CVs including improvements.

To maintain this position, I propose we reduce the reliance on additional general works and service charges, which ignore land values in favour of per-unit pricing, and shift more of this funding onto the general rate.

The general public are feeling the pinch of inflation and cost of living increases, and so is the council. If you look at the benchmark properties on pp. 320-321 you'll see that most residential and rural properties would have been better off if their rates were based on land value alone. It is the additional charges that have made their rates increase and caused animosity towards the council.

A similar pattern is seen for the central commercial properties (i.e. our CBDs and shopping centres).

While properties in the Blenheim Vicinity area experienced substantial rates increases, they also benefited from even larger increases to their land value. Benchmark property #16 for instance grew their land value by more than $8.6 million but only needs to pay an additional $11k per year; less than 0.1% of their increased wealth.

It is important to ensure that owners of large and/or valuable pieces of land (who may not even live here) are not able to extract unearned wealth from the rest of our residents and workers. That is why we need to continue sourcing as much of our council revenue as possible from land values rather than improvements, commercial activity, and recreation.