Not the whole rates story
THE comparison of rates payable in various metros for certain house valuations is enlightening but doesn’t tell us the whole story.
We understand – or most of us do – the rationale behind the figures and the challenge to collect sufficient income from the limited number of full ratepaying households.
However, I should like to see a comparison between the metros of other income sources and certain cost items expressed per 100 000 population served.
How does NMBM compare in, say, income derived from tourism, traffic fines, electricity distribution, water and sanitation etc?
Are we spending more per 100 000 population on some items than other metros?
What measurable portfolio service delivery indicators does the metro use?
How do these indicators compare with other metros?
Does the NMBM have a service delivery charter which defines these indicators and the targets to be achieved?
Tony Wadsworth, Port Elizabeth