Commercial Rates in City to drop by 20%

7upfree · 09-01-2014 9:45am

Black Suir wrote: »

T'was either cut Waterford city or raise Dungarvan's. I don't think any Fine Gael or Labour TD right now would have the balls to suggest the latter. And you could not blame them either for not suggesting it. We are one after the local elections, no more them and us when it comes to councils, and rightly so.

Like in Cork and Galway? There will always be a "them" and "us" divided along GAA lines.

7upfree · 09-01-2014 9:46am

Hoffmans wrote: »

GRAND OLD HEADLINE claptrap :pac: with the local elections coming up and all that in may.
now lets read the fineprint how is all this good news being paid for wel the main contributer will be you through new water charges on private dwellings and no doubt a modest increase on the Lpt...

Very true. In a week where we started to celebrate Waterford 1100, with a magnificent show on the Quay, what occupies the front page of Waterford Today? FG Press releases, with the Quay show relegated to the inner pages.

Unbelievable.

AdMMM · 09-01-2014 12:52pm

Just really reading through this for the first time. Talk about political spin, Fine Gael should be ashamed of themselves for trying to mislead everyone. The wool was definitely pulled over the eyes of those in charge of the Waterford Today however, or maybe they're thinking towards potential advertising revenue for the local elections?

In reality the headline should be "Slightly less than expected increase for local businesses" which isn't really anything to get excited about is it? In particular when you consider the art that Fine Gael have mastered that is telling people that things are going to be really, really, really, really, really ****, but in the end they're only really, really, really, really **** which is something we should be apparently delighted with.

Sully · 09-01-2014 12:59pm

AdMMM wrote: »

Just really reading through this for the first time. Talk about political spin, Fine Gael should be ashamed of themselves for trying to mislead everyone. The wool was definitely pulled over the eyes of those in charge of the Waterford Today however, or maybe they're thinking towards potential advertising revenue for the local elections?

In reality the headline should be "Slightly less than expected increase for local businesses" which isn't really anything to get excited about is it? In particular when you consider the art that Fine Gael have mastered that is telling people that things are going to be really, really, really, really, really ****, but in the end they're only really, really, really, really **** which is something we should be apparently delighted with.

We could say the same about you spinning here, Adam!

It's not just Fine Gael supporters on here (though thin on the ground, I think I am the main supporter on here) commenting on political news and pushing their own agenda out front.

It's not spin - there is a 20% reduction. That's the figure. There was a cash injection, that's not spin either. Rates are being reduced as a result, that's not spin. No wool over anybody's eyes. Rates were increased for a small portion of businesses as part of the revaluation and now they (amongst those who saw a decrease originally) will see a drop in rates by a small but welcome percentage. That's the facts on the table and that's what the media are discussing.

Now if there was a 20% increase in rates, and that was the headline, I can't see you coming on here giving out that the media didn't run with a "Slightly higher than expected increase for local businesses".

Yes Boss · 09-01-2014 1:03pm

Black Suir wrote: »

T'was either cut Waterford city or raise Dungarvan's. I don't think any Fine Gael or Labour TD right now would have the balls to suggest the latter. And you could not blame them either for not suggesting it. We are one after the local elections, no more them and us when it comes to councils, and rightly so.

So a decision was made to drop the City rates in line with the County ones, to save face. Will this supplement be annual or will the new combined Local Authority have to find the deficit elsewhere moving forward. If it is an Annual contribution by Central Government - does that mean the Merger is actually costing money rather than the crystal ball savings that was mooted by FG?

7upfree · 09-01-2014 2:00pm

Sully wrote: »

We could say the same about you spinning here, Adam! It's not just Fine Gael supporters on here (though thin on the ground, I think I am the main supporter on here) commenting on political news and pushing their own agenda out front.

And there are others like me who have no political affiliation and who's only agenda is Waterford City. Glass houses and stones come to mind.

Sully wrote: »

It's not spin - there is a 20% reduction. That's the figure.

On a 100% increase in some cases. That is spin for those misfortunates.

O Riain · 09-01-2014 6:31pm

7upfree wrote: »

Very true. In a week where we started to celebrate Waterford 1100, with a magnificent show on the Quay, what occupies the front page of Waterford Today? FG Press releases, with the Quay show relegated to the inner pages.

Unbelievable.

Actually have to agree with you. The dominance of Fine Gael on the front page was sickining. Was like a propaganda machine in Nazi Germany in full swing!

7upfree · 09-01-2014 7:20pm

O Riain wrote: »

Actually have to agree with you. The dominance of Fine Gael on the front page was sickining. Was like a propaganda machine in Nazi Germany in full swing!

As we say in Waterford "There'll be a new moon tonight" (we're agreeing with one another!).;)

Smiley Burnett · 09-01-2014 7:26pm

geeksauce wrote: »

So no source then

:rolleyes:

Smiley Burnett · 09-01-2014 7:27pm

O Riain wrote: »

Actually have to agree with you. The dominance of Fine Gael on the front page was sickining. Was like a propaganda machine in Nazi Germany in full swing!

admit it---what really sickened you is the fact that the reduction in commercial rates of 20% doesn't really tie in to your narrative that theis Government is doing down the city!!

7upfree · 09-01-2014 7:32pm

Smiley Burnett wrote: »

admit it---what really sickened you is the fact that the reduction in commercial rates of 20% doesn't really tie in to your narrative that theis Government is doing down the city!!

WTF? Seriously. That's been flogged to death at this stage. Some businesses received a 100% increase in their rates bill. So it's 20% off THAT. Nothing to see here as they say. And the City IS being "done down" as you so eloquently put it......

I asked you earlier Smiley - are you a sitting City/CountyFG representative? No need to be shy now.......:P

AdMMM · 09-01-2014 7:33pm

It's Damien Geoghegan or someone very, very close to him.

7upfree · 09-01-2014 7:34pm

AdMMM wrote: »

It's Damien Geoghegan or someone very, very close to him.

Smiley?

AdMMM · 09-01-2014 7:37pm

Yup

wellboytoo · 09-01-2014 7:43pm

AdMMM wrote: »

It's Damien Geoghegan or someone very, very close to him.

Like in the biblical know him sense ?????

jennygirl · 09-01-2014 8:01pm

7upfree wrote: »

WTF? Seriously. That's been flogged to death at this stage. Some businesses received a 100% increase in their rates bill. So it's 20% off THAT. Nothing to see here as they say. And the City IS being "done down" as you so eloquently put it......

very few is any local businesses got a 100 % rates increase. i know of 2 who got "significant" ones - but they were no valued since 1985/6

im not sure if the new system is equitable, but most seem reasonably happy with it, and very happy with the 20% increase! A first for Waterford.

also - i believe there was money from government for non viking triangle capital projects too

jennygirl · 09-01-2014 8:05pm

and btw - This City of ours is what we make it
if your not happy - petition a local councillor - thats what they are paid for
Make an appointment to see the City Manager - he's well paid for that.
dont wait for other people to do it, stand up, be positive about our city,make a difference, and support all our retailers, festivals, events by going to them, not slandering them. the far away hills may be greener, but our city is loved by a few of us and thousands of tourists!

O Riain · 09-01-2014 9:08pm

Smiley Burnett wrote: »

admit it---what really sickened you is the fact that the reduction in commercial rates of 20% doesn't really tie in to your narrative that theis Government is doing down the city!!

My attitude is starting to change with regards to Fine Gaels downgrading of our city BUT there's still a lot more for them to do and it doesnt excuse the political bombarding they did on the front page of the paper.

ALSO!!

A month ago it was reported that the IDA were applying for planning permission for 25,000 square foot advanced technology buildings for Limerick and Waterford. What do I read recently in the paper? Only that Cork and Galway are getting them too.

It seems like 1 step forward 20 steps back all the time.

Sully · 10-01-2014 12:02am

7upfree wrote: »

WTF? Seriously. That's been flogged to death at this stage. Some businesses received a 100% increase in their rates bill. So it's 20% off THAT. Nothing to see here as they say. And the City IS being "done down" as you so eloquently put it......

I asked you earlier Smiley - are you a sitting City/CountyFG representative? No need to be shy now.......:P

AdMMM wrote: »

It's Damien Geoghegan or someone very, very close to him.

In all fairness folks, if someone doesn't want to reveal their identity they should be allowed post away as such. Nobody is asked to declare their political connections / interests or details. I know both of ye and I don't think it's fair to disclose identities or push ye to do so.

(And this is from experience of doing so and the backlash that resulted)

7upfree · 10-01-2014 12:21am

Sully wrote: »

In all fairness folks, if someone doesn't want to reveal their identity they should be allowed post away as such. Nobody is asked to declare their political connections / interests or details. I know both of ye and I don't think it's fair to disclose identities or push ye to do so.

(And this is from experience of doing so and the backlash that resulted)

It's one thing a private citizen posting anonymously (and in fairness Sully you've been dropping enough hints regarding my gender and job yourself here - breaking, no doubt, several boards rules in the process) but a publicly elected representative (if it is true) posting under a nom de plume???

Not acceptable really.

Sully · 10-01-2014 12:46am

7upfree wrote: »

It's one thing a private citizen posting anonymously (and in fairness Sully you've been dropping enough hints regarding my gender and job yourself here - breaking, no doubt, several boards rules in the process) but a publicly elected representative (if it is true) posting under a nom de plume???

Not acceptable really.

I have (genuinely) no idea if Smiley is a politican. Fully entitled to comment if he is as he is doing so in a private capacity and has nothing to do with Waterford City. Plus rumour mill suggests Damien is leaving FG.

As for yourself, several people pointed out your gender and we post in similar areas so it's kinda hard not to know publicly disclosed information about people. But I'm not going to publicly name you or suggest you reveal your identity nor other people with political links who I know post here.

7upfree · 10-01-2014 8:43am

Sully wrote: »

I have (genuinely) no idea if Smiley is a politican. Fully entitled to comment if he is as he is doing so in a private capacity and has nothing to do with Waterford City. Plus rumour mill suggests Damien is leaving FG.

As for yourself, several people pointed out your gender and we post in similar areas so it's kinda hard not to know publicly disclosed information about people. But I'm not going to publicly name you or suggest you reveal your identity nor other people with political links who I know post here.

As a mod you're not supposed to. But my own opinion is that ANY public representative should post under their actual name - given that they are elected by the people.

As I said already I have no political agenda. I merely highlight discrimination against this City. However, there are people posting here with political agendas. Some of these attempt to ridicule those who choose to highlight said discrimination.

This is not right. If you're an elected rep then at least have the balls to declare yourself. It is bad enough that the City has been steamrolled without this type of carry-on ensuing.

Put up or shut up.

7upfree · 10-01-2014 8:46am

jennygirl wrote: »

and btw - This City of ours is what we make it
if your not happy - petition a local councillor - thats what they are paid for
Make an appointment to see the City Manager - he's well paid for that.
dont wait for other people to do it, stand up, be positive about our city,make a difference, and support all our retailers, festivals, events by going to them, not slandering them. the far away hills may be greener, but our city is loved by a few of us and thousands of tourists!

Jenny - I check most of the above boxes. But as for positivity: do we sweep the discriminatory approach to Waterford City under the carpet in order to "remain positive"? Really?

Sully · 10-01-2014 12:19pm

7upfree wrote: »

As a mod you're not supposed to.

News to me. What you choose to put in the public domain on Boards can be seen by absolutely anybody and everybody. I don't particular care who I know and don't know, but it's a bit rich for you to be complaining about privacy and then trying to 'out' other posts identity.

But my own opinion is that ANY public representative should post under their actual name - given that they are elected by the people.

Well, that's again their own choice. Their posting in a personal capacity and in this case does not represent Waterford City. There are lots of politicians on Boards posting away, i'd wager. There are also (even in this forum) people posting who have strong connections to TDs / Cllrs. That's their business, their fully entitled to engage in discussions as long as it's just not 'promoting' the individual.

As I said already I have no political agenda. I merely highlight discrimination against this City. However, there are people posting here with political agendas. Some of these attempt to ridicule those who choose to highlight said discrimination.

But you ridicule people who disagree with you and claim they are associated with a political party. Not everybody agrees with your POV. Welcome to life.

jennygirl · 10-01-2014 12:47pm

7upfree wrote: »

Jenny - I check most of the above boxes. But as for positivity: do we sweep the discriminatory approach to Waterford City under the carpet in order to "remain positive"? Really?

much of the good things going on in the city are not reported. Everyone talks about the shops closing - not about anyone opening, of which there are a few. We got substantial monies from Government - but we prefer to grumble that others got more - look to the positives, and petition everyone to make it a better City.
Everyone says what a city night life we have, but if people support the bands, clubs, bars, festivals - there will be a lot more of them!

Psychedelic · 10-01-2014 2:36pm

O Riain wrote: »

My attitude is starting to change with regards to Fine Gaels downgrading of our city BUT there's still a lot more for them to do and it doesnt excuse the political bombarding they did on the front page of the paper.

ALSO!!

A month ago it was reported that the IDA were applying for planning permission for 25,000 square foot advanced technology buildings for Limerick and Waterford. What do I read recently in the paper? Only that Cork and Galway are getting them too.

It seems like 1 step forward 20 steps back all the time.

Waterford Today made the decision to put the Mayor's press release on their front page, hardly a "political bombarding" by FG. It was big news so fitting for front page coverage and it was totally appropriate for the Mayor to be the one issuing that piece of news. It does have some FG self-backslapping but in fairness they are the people who helped make that rates reduction possible. What's your opinion on the four councillors (SF, WP, Ind) who actually voted against such a positive Budget?

The IDA advance building is going ahead in Waterford. Cork and Galway are not getting one: "[The IDA] is also considering facilities in Galway and Limerick and will continue “to assess the requirements in other regions on an ongoing basis”.
http://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/ida-to-build-regional-manufacturing-bases-1.1643410

Hoffmans · 10-01-2014 10:49pm

dress it up how you like but fact is domesticwatercharges are forecast to pay for this sham rates baloni ..

That's if anyone pays them seeing theconsultant cronies have got a 50 million head start on Irish water

jennygirl · 11-01-2014 11:43am

Hoffmans wrote: »

dress it up how you like but fact is domesticwatercharges are forecast to pay for this sham rates baloni ..

That's if anyone pays them seeing theconsultant cronies have got a 50 million head start on Irish water

whats that got to do with Commercial Rates. Commercial rate payers pay crazy water rates and have done for years. 4 Years ago we were paying .023 per q metre for water. The The Powers that be decided to charge for Water in and Water our. Even though they cannot measure Water Out! Thats the future of Domestic Water Rates!

7upfree · 12-01-2014 2:05pm

jennygirl wrote: »

much of the good things going on in the city are not reported. Everyone talks about the shops closing - not about anyone opening, of which there are a few. We got substantial monies from Government - but we prefer to grumble that others got more - look to the positives, and petition everyone to make it a better City.
Everyone says what a city night life we have, but if people support the bands, clubs, bars, festivals - there will be a lot more of them!

What you're misiing, jennygirl, is that we got a few cents, while others got hundreds of millions. Parity with our peer cities is what it's about.

7upfree · 12-01-2014 2:10pm

Sully wrote: »

News to me. What you choose to put in the public domain on Boards can be seen by absolutely anybody and everybody. I don't particular care who I know and don't know, but it's a bit rich for you to be complaining about privacy and then trying to 'out' other posts identity.

Again, as a moderator, you should lead by example.

Sully wrote: »

Well, that's again their own choice. Their posting in a personal capacity and in this case does not represent Waterford City. There are lots of politicians on Boards posting away, i'd wager. There are also (even in this forum) people posting who have strong connections to TDs / Cllrs. That's their business, their fully entitled to engage in discussions as long as it's just not 'promoting' the individual.

Indeed. 'Promoting the party' seems to be the order of the day. As I said already - no balls. If I were a public representative I would have my own website, fully transparent, and post under my own name on forums such as this. I think it is the courageous ting to do if you truly wish to serve your public.

Sully wrote: »

But you ridicule people who disagree with you and claim they are associated with a political party. Not everybody agrees with your POV. Welcome to life.

Lol! Right back at ya boy! You have a great track record in it yourself. The difference between you and I is that I see political parties for the leeches that they are. If they reward Waterford I will give them the credit they are due.

While they continue to discriminate against this city and its populace then I - and others like me - won't give you and yours an easy ride. Perhaps when you mature a little you will look back and realise just how silly you were to defend a shower that will go just as quickly as they arrived.

Commercial Rates in City to drop by 20%

Comments