Hi Tammie and Clover.
Again thanks for responding on behalf of Clover. I am not surprised Clover would not support, what press reports indicate draconian powers, for the benefit of the Property Council members, and State treasury.
I would be pleased to receive Clovers comments on my comments raised in the attached email 19/4, and headed.
- The Premiers Breathtaking hypocrisy .
- Development madness.
- Watch these areas
- Is it all about affordable housing
- Councils [ rate-payer’s] being used to source government housing stock by approving overdevelopment [FSR bonuses] in return for government rental housing stock.
This is occurring in most inner Sydney LGA;s areas where affordable rental crises exists,exacerbated by government policy to undermining privately funded rental housing ,
YET silence about the State Governments obvious double standards ,a Sate governments with an agenda to ‘To impose a State Land Tax policy that deliberately undermine private funding of rental housing, especially, if exclusively rental housing on freehold land’.
Clover may not have voted for the massive 20% increase in SLT from july 2009 . An increase clearly designed to further inhibit private investment in freehold rental housing or small business.
The Premier has removed Councils from development approval process,and their roll to supervise compliance. Also lowered local building and development standards.
The Premier said in parliament ” I’m no-body’s girl ” I doubt that very much.
Regards
Mike Danzey
On 27/04/2010, at 4:40 PM, Tammie Nardone wrote:
Dear Mike
Clover asked me to let you know that she does not support sweeping powers to allow a new bureaucratic body to cherry-pick private property to hand to developers. She has consistently opposed laws which take the community out of the planning process and allow for developer deals behind closed doors without public scrutiny. Clover will closely assess the legislation when it comes to Parliament.
Regards
Tammie
Tammie Nardone
Research Assistant/ Policy Officer for Clover Moore MP
Independent Member for Sydney
Ph: 02 9360 3053
Fax: 02 9331 6963
Email:Tammie Nardone
If you live in Clover’s electorate, we may add you to the list for Clover’s weekly eNews bulletin to keep you up to date.
>>> Mike Danzey 19/04/2010 10:49 am >>>
Please replace previous email with following.
Hi Clover, and Tammie
Thanks for a response.
I would appreciate your response to the following additional comments.
On Clover?s relayed comments, [via Tammie email attached]
The State Governments proposal to introduce legislation that allows compulsorily resumption of private property
Quote.
” For private companies to construct and sell housing for a profit.”
” To partner council to rezone it “
Clover, waiting for such legislation to be introduced, can give the impression you support the Premier?s agenda in principle, only awaiting the detail.
Outrageous attack
Yet, the intent appears an outrageous attack upon the rights of property owners, by a Premier using the rhetoric that massive density strata housing increases are necessary to address housing affordability and rental accommodation crises.
Breath taking hypocrisy
Her hypocrisy is breath taking, because the Premier is aware of State Treasury land tax agenda is designed to undermines privately funded housing especially if used exclusively as rental housing on freehold land [Blocks of residential flats]. Also aware Treasury land tax agenda has/is exacerbated demand for government rental housing.
Draconian
The Premier’s proposed draconian State planning powers, will primarily target freehold land use, although, both strata and company title blocks are threatened, especially smaller blocks of 4 to 8 units were this housing was once freehold rental housing driven to strata by State land tax policy.
Premier invitation to Intimidation
Already a case is rising where a speculator has purchased 3 units in a block of 4, now wants the block sold to a developer to profit.
The minority owner has been reminded of the Premier Keneally’s compulsory resumption threat, to intimidate this minority owner.
This example is in the seat of Coogee, it will be interesting if a local council becomes a partner with the Premier to acquire, then value add by rezoning, then sell to the private developer.
Development madness.
This compulsory resumption proposal reeks of a Government possessed by Development madness.
The constant dilution of the Wran’s governments planning legislation [1981] has been significantly accelerated by this government, advised by a conniving State Treasury.
Premier Keneally recently removed local council?s from the building approval process, also their powers to supervision and enforce compliance
Local building and development standards have also been reduced.
So what is next? The forced resumption of private property ,then value add by rezoning, then on sell to a private developer for them and State treasury to profit .
Has government gone mad?
Watch these areas
Areas also planned for massive increases in housing densities, lay within the City of Sydney council area. They contain freehold land used for general industrial services.
— Alexandra — Botany–Redfern –Rosebery — Zetland — Waterloo etc.
The Premier is also -Minister for Redfern, and Waterloo?
Freehold land use in these areas will be subject to State resumption for subdivision into strata lots . Will they also be subjected to the State and Council becoming partners to resume then value adds by rezoning, then on sell to developers to profit.
Already the State is undermining freehold land in these areas with a rapacious land tax policy, directed at small business ,and rental housing on freehold land .
Oh what a potential Machiavellian scenario.
The Green Square program for example will inject massive increased housing density into this area subdividing freehold into numerous strata lots.
A large percentage of which will be government /subsidized rental housing.
These areas are in the Federal Seat of Port Jackson, where the member constantly calls for increased housing densities , to be significantly financed by the Federal Treasury.
Aware such density can only be provided on the existing freehold land stock, also aware of State Treasury land tax agenda to undermine freehold existing use .
Planning by economist [God help us]
We have suffered from economist directing our society. ,some attached to banks have been reported saying “State Land Tax is good an efficient tax” – whatever that means.
Do Banks pay land tax on their massive registered equity interests in mortgaged lands? = NO. Perhaps Bank economist is saying “land tax is a good efficient tax for Banks”, it manufactures numerous strata title from freehold land compounding their lending opportunities.
That appears to be Bank economic philosophy for good and efficient planning , and so detrimental to planning, as greed to often drives Planning .
Silence- as Land Tax attack upon rental housing
NSW State government members? silence on these issues is disconcerting, yet, they call for action to address the rental and housing affordability crises, saying nothing about State Government land tax policy, I repeat is deliberately designed to undermine existing rental housing, on freehold land if privately funded.
We live in times of government selling essential services [as our free market economist], and sees almost everything corporatized –BUT ! not government rental housing that is a growth industry a government domain for political manipulate, and advantage.
Is it all about affordable housing?
There is good reason to believe calls for increased government rental housing has a strong element of Labor’s concern of gentrification impact in once safe Labor seats.
Councils used to grow Government housing stocks
Considerable Government housing is also sourced by Council’s approving generous FSR bonuses ,for residential strata developments on freehold land.
This over-development bonus is conditional on the developer donating ,or leasing back at reduced market rental a percentage of total Units.
The City of Sydney participates, and like other councils various housing groups, exempt from land tax, often manage this rental stock.
It is disappointing no Sydney region council has publicly raised concern about the impact of unpegged State land tax ,on their districts rental housing stocks.
They also have not raised concerns about unpegged State land tax being imposed in direct competition with council pegged land tax we call rates.
We hear local government leaders calling for an end to council rate pegging . I do not believe this possible unless state land tax is withdrawn, or significantly amended.
Radio commentator critical of Valuer General conservative land values.
The commentator criticized the Valuer General for imposing conservative land values for the taxing of liable land
The Valuer General now values land up to market value , but councils receive no advantage because their land rates are pegged .
All the additional tax went/goes to State government from unpegged State land tax boosted by increased land value.
Rental housing ,and small business were the victims, much to the joy of State treasury ,and the development lobby.
The commentator may not have been aware How/why State treasury exploits the mass valuation process the V.G is bound to apply, a process intended to set council valuation rolls ,these rolls the Carr government withdrew from public access.
I have attached samples of the 08-09 survey comparing Council rate revenues ,with State land tax raised in council areas.
The attached councils are —City of Sydney —- North Sydney—- Waverley. All council are available . including tracking State land tax since 2001.
Sydney
Waverley
North Sydney