Environment Levy and why we need it.
sue June 20th, 2008
The ‘old’ Hervey Bay City Council introduced an Environment Levy which has been used to purchase land to protect it from development. Last year as I recall, the levy was $25. Many neighbouring Councils have a higher Levy than $25 but I hope to retain an Environment Levy within the new Fraser Coast Regional Council.
Although the price of living continues to rise I truly believe that this Levy is a small sacrifice for each of us to pay and results in enormous benefits for our region. The Levy has already been used to buy 3 large blocks of land at Booral. These blocks are thickly covered in natural vegetation and hopefully will assist in the linking of areas that are known koala habitat.
I expect in the future the carbon credits obtained from this land will be of a financial benefit to our entire community. An Environment Levy will allow us to place your investment directly into land ownership in your community. This land becomes your land! You directly assist in the preservation of our local biodiversity by protecting our natural areas from development.
Please let me know what you think and whether you support a $25 Environment Levy for the coming year? $25 is less than 50cents a week! I think it is an excellent and essential investment in our future.
- Environment & Sustainability , Uncategorized
- Comments(9)
I agree with the $25 levy but think $35 would be more appropriate.
Sue,
I support an environment levy, but suggest it be increased to $50 per year. Land purchased should be right across the Fraser Coast Regional Council area. Not just Hervey Bay.
Regards,
Sadman
Hi Sue
I also agree that the levy is important but it may perhaps be good to consider whether there should be other options for the way it is used eg could be used to support conservation on private land as well as purchasing land for conservation.
This may help to ensure the levy is more equitable as people people living in the more rural parts of the council area could benefit directly from it through incentives to conserve on their own land. If the levy is only used to protect land from development by tying it up, this is may focus more on urban areas within the council and therefore benefit rural areas less.
Overall, the most important thing is that the levy is used to help achieve strategic conservation objectives. I reckon more flexibility in how the levy can be used would help achieve this. (The research also needs to be done to ensure these objectives are established)
As far as the amount goes $25 is entirely reasonable given that other councils in neighbouring regions (prior to amalgamation at least) paid up to $60 if my memory serves me correctly. I’d agree with Sadman and suggest a higher levy is worth considering (could perhaps be means tested?)
Good luck with it!
Tanzi
Hi Sue the levy must be re set for 2008/9 and must rise to about $50.00 to keep up with inflation more and more vol inters are working to help the environment, money has to come from some where thy need new tools and equipment and petrol ore transport support look to the future not the past vol inters will need more support from council ore we wont have vol inters ore the bush to look after sad
From JP
Hi Sue,
I agree with all the foregoing & also believe that the levy should be $50. It would cause an uproar in the community if it was any more than that (although I’d like to see it as $100).
Thanks for the opportunity to express our ideas, concerns etc. Cheers, Bev
Dear Sue,
The Environment Levy is an excellent idea. I think it should be spent locally so that those paying residents can have the benefit - the areas should be used for education and enjoyment as well as species and habitat conservation and reference points.
My family and I own a property in Maryborough and a property in Hervey Bay. We are certainly happy to pay the levy on both properties.
I would prefer that the monies spent be for public land for all to benefit.
Jenny
Hi Sue - We support an Environmental Levy and agree with Tanzi’s comment - support for conservation, as well as purchase of land,would broaden the scope and advantage more areas.
Also, we agree with your proposal to set up a group - ‘Save Our Region’ might be an appropriate name. We live in a coastal village and have also had many occasions to fight for the proper application of the City Plan in relation to development proposals in our area.
Keep up the good work, Sue - you certainly have our support in what you are doing to maintain the wonderful, natural attributes of our unique and beautiful area.
if people can afford to own land and therefore pay rates then the levy is a very small but collectively significant contribution to make
G’day Sue - I think an environmental levy is a great idea as long as the funds raised are used equally throught the FCRC area including both the densely populated areas together with the rural areas with sparse population density.
As you would be aware, Tiaro Shire had a Road Improvement Levy of $122 which we all thought was a bit on the high side, and for a long time didn’t see any road improvements happening, especially in the Glenwood area. Is there any thought of continuing that in the new FCRC area - if so an additional $25 Environment Levy is possibly more than I and lots of other rate payers can comfortably afford.
Perhaps if both levys were continued, but reduced in size, especially the road levy, the community may benefit.
And I still haven’t heard any more about the fig tree.
Cheers,
Wendy