[Ian Clayton]

Hi Kim,

Sounds like an interesting situation. It’s certainly different circumstances than any that I’ve had to deal with. I think refusing the change to farmland is correct from what you’ve outlined.

In answer to the specific questions, I think I’d respond with something like :-

1) Section 525 of the LGA allows a rateable person to apply for review of a declaration of a rate category at any time.
2) The requirements for categorisation as Farmland are set out in Section 515 of the LGA. No percentages of overall land use are prescribed in the eligibility criteria and case law on this factor has been inconsistent and very much particular to the circumstances of the cases themselves. You may wish to seek your own legal advice to help clarify this factor.
3) Again, this is likely a question where you may wish to seek your own legal advice. However, I note the criteria outlined in Section 515 requires “a significant and substantial commercial purpose and character…” and must be “…engaged in for the purpose of profit…”. These factors may be difficult to achieve if all production is consumed on the property.
4) Classification for rating purposes does not, in itself, restrict farming activities.

Hope this is of some assistance.

Cheers
Ian

[Ian Clayton]

Hi Cherrie,

We at MWRC did go through and try to identify dual occ’s that weren’t separate some years ago. We asked the VG to split them, and some were & some weren’t.

The VG has a policy linked below on what should & shouldn’t be separately valued. Part 1.6 says the following is not to be separated :-
“dual occupancy where the planning scheme allows two occupancies on the one parcel of land
but does not allow subdivision or strata of that parcel”

If your planning scheme allows subdivision of a particular dual occ, it should be able to be split under the VG policy as long as the other physical separation requirements in the policy are met.

We used aerial imagery to show the physical separation & confirmed with the planners re subdivision before asking the VG to split them.

https://www.nsw.gov.au/sites/default/files/noindex/2024-05/Valuing_separate_parcels_policy.pdf

Cheers
Ian

[Ian Clayton]

Hi Kim,

There might be some different views on this across the industry, but We at MWRC have sold several properties over the years that were tenant/owner occupied. We did not take any action to evict or rehouse the occupants, but had clauses in the contract that vacant possession was not guaranteed. Essentially making it the purchasers issue.

The provisions of the LG Act are silent on this, and I’m not aware of any legislation that requires Council to act.

However, I know other Councils have taken steps to remove residents (EG Tamworth had an example some years ago I think). Your situation sounds more complicated than our experiences that were single properties. I don’t think there’s a problem if Council wants to assist the residents but I don’t believe you’re required to.

Cheers
Ian

[Ian Clayton]

Hi Anita,

We had a small coal mine shut down some years ago, and we left the category as mining until the mining lease was cancelled. The shut down & rehabilitation phase is still a mining use, in my opinion. As is the initial start-up/construction phase when a mine opens. Also, actual mining could potentially be extended while ever the lease remains active.

It could come down to the individual circumstances though, particularly if there is another use for the land. What is the dominant use? The owner is able to request a review of the categorisation at any time so any information they might submit would need consideration.

Pumped Hydro and solar farm would be business. If this is the same site as the closing mine it could be complicated by the remaining mining use. Dominant use needs to be considered. The land with the renewables might also need to be separately valued if it’s leased by the owner to a developer.

Cheers
Ian

[Ian Clayton]

Hi Matt,

At Mid-Western Regional Council, we have a $2500 delegation for the General Manager to write-off rates/water/debtors. There’s also a small $10 delegation to the Manager Revenue & Property intended to cover small interest amounts.

Because cl 131(6) requires the GM to advise the council of any amounts written off. we report all amounts to Council annually, separating those we need a resolution to write off, and to note the GM write offs.

Also have separate delegations for pension rebate & postponed amounts.

Cheers
Ian

[Ian Clayton]

Following is the text of Mid-Western’s letter in case it’s of assistance

Cheers
Ian

I refer to the above matter and advise that land classification data for properties within the Mid-Western Regional Council area were uploaded to the Revenue NSW MFT server on 28/11/24 in accordance with the provisions of the Emergency Services Levy Amendment (Land Classification) Act 2024.

The “Preliminary Land Classification Guidelines 2024” issued by the Treasurer under Sec 47E of the Act, and the accompanying “Preliminary Land Classification Manual for Local Government”, require Councils to provide details of the steps Council has taken in undertaking the land classification process.

In accordance with the above, please find following the steps undertaken by Mid-Western Regional Council in fulfilment of our obligations.

Classification :-

• Government Land – Examination of property ownership to identify land owned by a government agency in accordance with the Guidelines and manual. Further consideration was given to identified land leased for value.
• Public Benefit Land – Examination of property ownership and use to identify land eligible for classification as Public Benefit land in accordance with the Guidelines and manual.
• Farmland – All properties categorised as Farmland for rating purposes under the Local Government Act have been classified Farmland.
• Residential Land – All properties categorised as Residential for rating purposes under the Local Government Act have been classified as Residential.

Following are the steps taken or data sources referenced to determine “Vacant/Non-vacant” sub-classification:-
• Urban Properties – Water meter connected?
Postal address matches property address?
Domestic waste management charge?
DA, CC, OC?
Aerial imagery/satellite imagery.
Internet search of property addresses.
Physical inspection of 304 properties.

• Non-urban Properties – Council has no reliable data sources to determine if residential properties in rural areas are vacant. Aerial imagery is very dated and unreliable where native vegetation exists. Most of these types of properties are either residences, or are used for lifestyle “weekender” purposes. Typically these have some kind of shelter (eg a shed) or goods stored on the property. Given the above and the limited timeframe available, all of these properties have been sub-classified as non-vacant.

• Industrial Land – Examination of use of land not previously classified to identify land eligible for classification as industrial land in accordance with the Guidelines and manual.

Following are the steps taken or data sources referenced to determine “Vacant/Non-vacant” sub-classification:-
Water meter connected?
Postal address matches property address?
Non-domestic waste management charge?
Planning approvals – DA, CC, OC?
Aerial imagery/satellite imagery.
Internet search of property addresses.
Physical inspection of 178 properties.

• Commercial Land – The remaining properties were classified Commercial Land in accordance with the Guidelines and manual.

Following are the steps taken or data sources referenced to determine “Vacant/Non-vacant” sub-classification:-
Water meter connected?
Postal address matches property address?
Non-domestic waste management charge?
Planning approvals – DA, CC, OC?
Aerial imagery/satellite imagery.
Internet search of property addresses.
Physical inspection of 178 properties.

Specified Use – There are only a small number of properties within the Mid-Western region requiring designation under one of the specified use classifications outlined in the manual. These have been identified via a mix of existing property codes, ownership data and local knowledge.

Pensioners – Pensioners have been identified and flagged based on owners receiving a pension concession under Chapter 15 of the Local Government Act.

[Ian Clayton]

Hi Glynes,

Might be worth having a look at the judgement in the Supreme Court case Mangoola Coal Operations Pty Ltd v Muswellbrook
Shire Council on the Case Law page. This found that rates are protected by the Recovery of Imposts Act, which means Council would not be required to refund rates paid voluntarily more than 12 months ago. In your case, even if the property was rightly non-rateable in that previous period.

It’s probably up to Council how you wish to proceed, but this is really good precedent if you don’t want give the rates back in those past years.

Cheers
Ian

[Ian Clayton]

Hi Elizabeth,

My understanding is that conservation agreements are no longer under the NP&W Act, but are now under the Biodiversity Conservation Act. Cl 18(1)(c) of the Biodiversity Conservation (Savings and Transitional) Regulation extends legislative references to the NP&W Act to read as the Biodiversity Conservation Act.

We have recently received letters from the Biodiversity Conservation Trust when a new agreement’s been made. These give details of the area covered by the agreement, but little else. I’ve taken the position that the owner needs to provide a copy of the agreement before I process an exemption. The old agreements under the NP&W Act were in perpetuity, but the new agreements don’t have to be, and I don’t know of any other way to be sure if or when it ends.

The exemption is calculated on an area percentage basis as you have described.

Cheers
Ian

[Ian Clayton]

Hi Lee,

Mid-Western does restrict meters, and potentially disconnect as well.

Initially, there is the usual reminder, final notices issued, and our agent also does a field call to the property, or send a registered post letter before restriction action is considered.

If the above fails to get payment or an arrangement we restrict where there are at least 2 quarters unpaid, and the amount is over $200.

We will also take legal action after restriction, but this is fairly rare. The restriction process is pretty effective.

We will also consider disconnection of the service in extreme cases, usually where the restrictor is tampered with.

Our Debt Management and Recovery Policy sets out the framework :-
https://www.midwestern.nsw.gov.au/Council/Policies-plans-and-reporting/Policies/Debt-Management-and-Recovery-Policy

Cheers
Ian

[Ian Clayton]

Hi Steven,

We do include a standard additional statement as follows :-
This property has been sold by Council under the provisions of Chapter 17, Part 2, Division 5, Sections 713-726 of the Local Government Act 1993. Costs associated with the sale process are yet to be finalised and are not included in the above figures.

We feel the quoted legislation will explain to the conveyancers what happens with the outstanding amounts, so don’t give any more detailed explanation on the certificate.

Cheers
Ian

[Ian Clayton]

Hi Emma,

I haven’t had this situation (yet), but have tried to follow the legislation.

Local Government Act – Sec 555 (1)(b1) – … land that is the subject of a conservation agreement (within the meaning of the National Parks and Wildlife Act 1974 ),

Biodiversity Conservation (Savings and Transitional) Regulation 2017 – Clause 17(3) – After the commencement of the new Act, a conservation agreement cannot be entered into under section 69B of the National Parks and Wildlife Act 1974 ……

Biodiversity Conservation (Savings and Transitional) Regulation 2017 – Clause 18(1)(c) – (1) A reference in any Act or statutory or other instrument, or in any contract or agreement— (c) to a conservation agreement under section 69B of the National Parks and Wildlife Act 1974 of a kind referred to in clause 17 (2) is to be read as a reference to a conservation agreement under Division 3 of Part 5 of the new Act.

Biodiversity Conservation Act – Division 3 of Part 5, Sections 5.20 to 5.26.

The provisions of this division seems to allow agreements to be funded, and are not required to be in perpetuity. Unfortunately, if the agreement is made under this division, exemption from rates may well to apply.

The changes to the exemption provisions that are yet to commence could see certain conservation agreements remain rateable under the environmental category, subject to the making of regulations defining the agreement types. This seems to be the most difficult amendment for OLG to work through so there’s no indication when this might happen. Existing agreements would remain under the current provisions (ie non-rateable) due to the savings provisions in the amendment act.

Hope this helps.

Thanks,
Ian

[Ian Clayton]

Hi Cherie,

Basic calls are handled by our Customer Service team. Our 603 updates are done by the Revenue team. We do all our 603 updates via email, and have the request form on our website. Customer Service will send the requests through to us if they get a call.

Thanks
Ian

[Ian Clayton]

Hi Pete

Current = 6%
Propose = 6%

At Mid-Western

Regards
Ian

[Ian Clayton]

Hi Jeanette,

When we have had new mines commencing in our area, we have used the date of commencement of the mining lease. This was appropriate in our cases, as approvals were already in place and works to start mining were commencing.

It’s important to remember the dominant use test. A mining lease on it’s own with no mining related activities having commenced might not be sufficient to categorise the land as mining. The case Andrew has pointed to is essentially around the determination of dominant use.

I’d suggest carefully examining what activities are actually occurring on the land and what approvals are in place. The development approval should help identify what mining is proposed and the intended timeframes.

Regards,
Ian

[Ian Clayton]

Hi Everyone,

The matter of unpaid bushfire rate relief payments was raised at the RP Executive meeting on 23/8/21. OLG are aware that not all payments have been made to Councils and will take the matter up internally and with Service NSW.

In order to assist OLG to follow up, they have requested a list of Councils still awaiting payments.

If your Council is effected by non-payment, could you please reply to this post, or email admin@revpronsw.dev.nucleoserver.com outlining the unpaid amounts. Please respond by 31/8/21 so we can collate a list & forward to OLG.

Hopefully this action will help resolve the issue for our effected ratepayers.

Thanks
Ian

MMR-Bushfire Rate-relief-extended-for-bushfire-victims-22062020

MMR-Council-Bushfire rates-relief-26072021

[Author]

Posts