$80,000 impost is ‘fair’

By Melissa Grant
A PROPOSED infrastructure contribution scheme which charges affected landholders $80,000 per hectare when they sell is fair, says the head of the Growth Areas Authority.
GAA chief executive Peter Seamer has rejected claims that the Growth Areas Infrastructure Contribution scheme disadvantaged people living in the Urban Growth Boundary’s fringe in Officer.
Those landholders have labelled the charge a rip-off, saying they will have to wait 10 years to sell or lose hundreds of thousands of dollars. But Mr Seamer says they are far from hamstrung.
“People can always sell at a time that suits them – no-one is going to sell land unless they’re doing well out of it,” he said.
Under the scheme, those brought into the UGB in 2005 are charged a levy of $80,000 per hectare. This increases to $95,000 per hectare for those included in 2009.
Mr Seamer said affected residents in Officer knew about the scheme when it was announced in 2005 and the value of their properties had since increased.
“The vast majority (of property), especially those brought into the UGB in 2005, is going to be worth a lot more money than the base rate for farming plus the levy,” he said.
Officer landholders Robin Hocking, John Holtham and Robyn Early previously said in the Gazette that the scheme would adversely affect their next eggs.
The trio want to retire, but say because of the levy they will have to wait for development in Officer to boom to make selling worthwhile.
Mr Seamer said the levy helped pay for infrastructure for new developments. “Someone is making a lot of money out of this – it seems appropriate that they pay some portion of their windfall profit,” he said.
“We think this is just as fair and well balanced as we can possibly do it.”
Mr Seamer couldn’t say how the government came up with the $80,000 per hectare charge as he wasn’t employed by the GAA when the figure was calculated.
He said the $95,000 hectare levy was $80,000 plus CPI.
Mr Seamer said most residents were excited to be declared as part of the UGB as it pushed up land values.
“Most people will be strongly in favour of their area coming in,” he said.
“We haven’t had many people coming in and saying I don’t want my land in the UGB.”
Mrs Early is trying to form a residents group to rally against the scheme before parliament considers the legislation mid-year.