Rates freeze rejected

Press, 31 March 1981, Page 18

Rates freeze rejected

PA Auckland The Mayor of Auckland (Mr Colin Kay) has failed to have his rates-freeze plan accepted at. a meeting of the Auckland City Council’s resources and Organisation committee.

After heated exchanges between the Mayor and councillors the committee decided to delay the matter until Mr Kay could provide further details. Mr Kay’s rates-freeze budget was aimed at cutting $3 million from council spending, but the medicine was to be sweetened by a new money earner, a casino. Mr Kay said a casino could earn “hundreds of thousands of dollars” and, unlike some flagging council earners, have “no chance of losing any money.’’ He wanted the council to

consider the casino proposal urgently. However, the council would not run the casino, which Mr Kay said could be linked with a hotel development. The council would seek the Government’s approval on behalf of private operators.

Under Mr Kay’s scheme, profits woulld be shared between the nine local bodies in the Auckland isthmus, the Government through taxes, and the operator. Sharing among the other councils would help to achieve “some unity among other councils on the isthumus.” The money could also be used for special projects individual councils could not afford by themselves. Mr Kay’s casino idea was based on Hobart’s Wrestpoint casino which, he said,

resulted in an increase in jobs, revenue, and tourism and “no crime.”

The council was aiming to limit a ' rate increase this year to 10 per cent, but the Mayor’s rates freeze would cut out the needed extra revenue of $3 million by some cuts and revenue increases.

Mr Kay refrained from specific staff cuts in his proposals, although he said that many departments were overstaffed, with some “inefficient and even unecessary.” He said the public had given him a mandate to carry out his policies, and warned: “I believe the public will judge ..harshly councillors who ignore the public’s wishes.” However councillors described the Mayor’s plan as “fatuous” and too vague.