Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Dun Laoghaire Thread. No traffic, commuting, transport chat.

Options
1202123252629

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 2,243 ✭✭✭Mav11


    You should try to read the post before starting the ffs's.

    The post read:

    That will certainly improve the ambience of the area over the summer.

    Not about the place closing or not. Also there are 2 places referenced not one!!



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,808 ✭✭✭crushproof


    Very frustrating, there is so much car parking around Dun Laoghaire that the loss of three on Patrick Street hardly caused an issue. The council rolling back on the outdoor dining is bizarre considering it's popularity both here and on the continent. I'm sure businesses are willing to contribute a fair amount for the outdoor space.



  • Registered Users Posts: 24,048 ✭✭✭✭Larbre34


    They really aren't. Don't forget they were granted that space for free for the times that were in it, if they were asked to pay based on the model in the City Centre, for example, they'd run a mile.



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,243 ✭✭✭Mav11


    They really aren't what? Bizarre? Of course they are, you just have to look at some of their other initiatives such as the baths to realise just how bizarre they actually are. This one, which flies in the face of contemporary best practice and thought, is equally weird.

    The rest of your argument is equally flaccid, DLR is not the city centre so why would a city centre model be imposed? I'm sure that the traders would quite happily pay a reasonable amount to avail of the additional outside space and a rational council would see the benefits that this would bring to the area.



  • Registered Users Posts: 599 ✭✭✭Yakov P. Golyadkin


    With regard to Zero Zero Pizza I understand there were issues with residential properties adjoining the business being negatively affected by the outdoor diners. İn that case at least I can sympathise.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 23,514 ✭✭✭✭ted1


    Are rates not waived for another 12 months in the city ?



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,013 ✭✭✭Blut2


    Could they not at least have waited until October to get rid of the outdoor seating? Getting rid of it just as the warm summer weather is starting in mid-May seems particularly poorly thought out timing by the council.



  • Registered Users Posts: 24,048 ✭✭✭✭Larbre34




  • Registered Users Posts: 24,048 ✭✭✭✭Larbre34


    Not really, you've already been told above that there were other issues at stake here other than the time of year.

    Some locations lend themselves to outdoor seating and service better than others. For the duration of the pandemic and recovery period, unsuitable locations like this one, like the one in Foxrock village were indulged to permit a transition back to normal.

    But Patrick Street isn't a suitable location in normal circumstances and so it is returning to its prior state.

    Frankly, the utter ingratitude from the owners, for the free untaxed and unrated public space they enjoyed the use of to make money in for a few years, is pretty ignorant.



  • Registered Users Posts: 621 ✭✭✭Phat Cat


    Does anyone know what's happening to the Old Senior College building on Eblana Aveune? I passed it on my lunch break today and there were several trucks parked outside with workmen bringing building materials inside. I thought that building was earmarked to be demolished?



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 2,243 ✭✭✭Mav11




  • Registered Users Posts: 2,243 ✭✭✭Mav11


    Interesting article from David McWilliams on the (mis)management of the area by the council. The only point on which I would disagree with him is his contention that the council is cash strapped because of a reduction in sources of income, rates, subvention etc.

    DLRCC is not cash strapped for these reasons. DLRCC has more than sufficient income but is cash strapped because of the wasteful way, without any consideration to value for money that it is spent, particularly on vanity projects.

    Think of it, instead of the stupidity in removing outdoor dining spaces in favour of car parking, just charge the restaurants a reasonable amount for the privilege?

    https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/2023/05/27/david-mcwilliams-why-should-prime-urban-space-be-set-aside-for-cars-money-most-likely/



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,453 ✭✭✭BlueSkyDreams


    Is DLRCC cash strapped though?

    It is the wealthiest council in the country and had 130 million in the bank back in 2015.

    I would expect significantly more now.

    They are wasteful, spending amazing amounts on renting private apartment blocks.

    The cash flow issue we haven't addressed, for the Dublin based councils in particular, is property tax.

    20%+ of property tax earned in DLRCC and other Dublin councils is transferred outside of Dublin to less populated counties.

    As property prices go up, residents pay more property tax and more of residents money is spent outside of the local area in which it is generated.

    If commercial rates fall, residential rates will rise to compensate, so we need to make sure we are keeping the money we are earning from all local taxes, especially property tax.



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,243 ✭✭✭Mav11


    Absolutely spot on.

    I expect that the council apologists will be out shortly, with the usual attempt to defend the indefensible!!



  • Registered Users Posts: 11,343 ✭✭✭✭duploelabs


    The folly that is the gate redevelopment of Killiney Hill Road shows that the council is definitely not short of funds



  • Registered Users Posts: 24,048 ✭✭✭✭Larbre34


    You have to understand how Council financing works.

    They have two budgets. A budget for revenue items and services, which is basically all the day to day outgoings like cutting grass and cleaning streets and repairing footpaths and painting Council houses and running the libraries etc. That is paid for by revenue income, like housing rents, commercial rates, car parking charges etc. The shortfall in income over expenditure is made up by the LPT fund, just like motor tax receipts used to comprise the local government fund of old.

    Obviously that shortfall is greater in Counties with a lower economic base and that is why the proportion of LPT funds repatriated to those Counties from more populated urban areas is greater.

    The capital budget is a very different a animal. It is made up of the levies collected on planning applications and from direct grants from Government Departments and other agencies to pay for one-off major infrastructure items and acquisitions.

    For example, the Baths redevelopment didn't come from your LPT, it came from development levies and grants from the Depts of Tourism and the Marine.

    The same goes for Housing. If the Council buys a block of apartments from a developer or pays rent to them on behalf of Council housing tenants, it gets that funding straight from the government strategic housing fund, not your LPT or commercial rates.

    So, when it is said the Council have no money to do some things and an apparent abundance to do others, it's perfectly true and the Council has no discretion to spend capital reserves on day to day operations.

    Mind you, that's exactly how it would also work in a private organisation, day to day Operations must wash their own face, but capital outlay is usually funded by borrowings, asset sales or reserves.



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,453 ✭✭✭BlueSkyDreams


    Thanks, interesting info.

    But still true that DLR are the wealthiest council in the country I imagine?

    I assume that DLR has no deficit for the first budget, given the large amounts of money in the bank?

    It also still seems unfair that LPT is transferred to make up a shortfall.

    Since the persons paying their LPT are not seeing any return for it. I know you dont make the rules :) but would it not be fairer for the govt to fund that shortfall centrally, so that local authorities that are self sufficent at least get a full return on their investment.



  • Registered Users Posts: 24,048 ✭✭✭✭Larbre34


    Well I mean it depends how you evaluate wealth.

    They would have decent reserves and what not, but in terms of the balance sheet, DLR wouldn't touch the City Councils, or Cork County. And the reserves are sort of academic because they are prohibited from running a large cash balance anyway. That's something that crystallises at central government level.

    I couldn't be certain how DLR would rate against South Dublin and Fingal these days, but for the first 20 years of the Dublin reorganisation, DLR was very much the poor relation. The reason for that was, that the rates base was crap.

    Fingal had the Airport and all its feeder activities, South Dublin had a couple of massive shopping centres and a traditional industrial belt of business estates and large warehouses.

    In fairness, DLR have caught up, with Dundrum Town Centre and the absolute gold mine that Sandyford / Leopardstown has turned into, as well as Cherrywood, but I don't know off the top of my head where that puts them in a league table.

    Yes DLR contains the highest concentration of high value homes in the Country, but that does not affect the Council's fortunes in any meaningful way.



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,243 ✭✭✭Mav11


    Yes DLR contains the highest concentration of high value homes in the Country, but that does not affect the Council's fortunes in any meaningful way.

    Figures attached here would suggest otherwise. LPT is both meaningful and very material.

    https://assets.gov.ie/201959/0508056e-4025-47a4-9268-80ebcf2ab88f.pdf



  • Registered Users Posts: 9,304 ✭✭✭markpb


    €33m of which they can decide how to spend €10m? I’m not sure about the total DLR budget but DCCs is in excess of €1.2bn. LPT is a tiny portion of most councils budgets.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 3,453 ✭✭✭BlueSkyDreams


    Thanks, thats interesting.

    Not sure if i understood correctly, but it looks like DLR had 52 million revenue but ends up with only 33 million.



  • Registered Users Posts: 24,048 ✭✭✭✭Larbre34


    You understood it perfectly.

    My point on the irrelevance of property values stands.

    DLR Councillors have consistently reduced the LPT by the max 15%, purely for the reason of the inequity of the system. And as has also been highlighted another 20%+ of revenue locally goes into equalisation anyway.

    The specific reason I say local property values are immaterial to the Council's wealth, is that if values were less, DLR would give less to equalisation or get more back from it as the case may be, or if they were higher, that €17 million gross loss of potential revenue budget would only expand.

    In short, the great wealth in built private assets locally is not reflected in the local authority.



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,453 ✭✭✭BlueSkyDreams


    Thanks.

    Is Column L the LPT reduction decided by the council? -15% for DLR.

    If so, isnt this reduction working against the council, since it is introducing a 2nd charge.

    DLR is losing 35% of its revenue in total.

    Whereas Kildare, which is also in Surplus, only loses 10% of its revenue because column L is +10% and generates a credit rather than a 2nd debit.



  • Registered Users Posts: 24,048 ✭✭✭✭Larbre34


    It might be working against the Council, somewhat, but Councillors aren't thinking about Council's revenue budget in this case, they are thinking about getting reelected.

    And so they all (Councillors) make great hay out of the fact DLR residents are getting screwed by LPT and that they are in the vanguard fighting against it!



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,453 ✭✭✭BlueSkyDreams


    Indeed.

    And screwed the residents of DLR clearly are! :)

    It effectivley means that 1 in 3 home owners in DLR gifts 100% of their Local Property Tax to the rest of the country and invests not a Cent into their local community.

    Madness.

    Not only do they pay the highest LPT in the country, but they are ultimatley rewarded by seeing none of their payments invested in their community!

    Perhaps national Govt are a modern day Robin Hood. They are certainly Robbin'.



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,243 ✭✭✭Mav11


    Correct and is the second highest, after Dublin City in terms of retained income by any local authority in the country.

    So, despite some views here, it is a considerable chunk of change and is both meaningful and material in the councils budget. Particularly meaningful in that it allows for the engagement with vanity projects which, they might have otherwise to think about. All of course financed by the screwed residents!!



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,453 ✭✭✭BlueSkyDreams


    2nd highest retained income because it has the 2nd highest revenue!

    It also gives away more money than any other council outside of DCC.

    Its a joke that any council has to give away a third of its local property tax.

    Every third house in DLR and DCC contributes nothing to its local council.

    They shouldnt be paying that tax if they get nothing for it.

    Let the govt fund the shortfall centrally if some councils cant pay for themselves.



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,453 ✭✭✭BlueSkyDreams


    The percentage in column L also seems odd.

    If i understand correctly, the council can increase or discount the LPT by 15%.

    DLR choose to discount by 15%, which means a resident pays 15% less on their LPT, but then 15% of the total revenue is transferred out of the county!

    Surely DLR would be better not discounting the rate at all and keep 80% of total revenue.

    I could be wrong with how the percentage in column L is calculated, but if not, i dont see any reason to apply the discount?



  • Registered Users Posts: 24,048 ✭✭✭✭Larbre34


    The discount is applied simply so that the householder doesn't pay as much.

    Take two married state pensioners who bought a 3 bed semi in 1970 and paid duties and paid a mortgage all their lives.

    Now it so happens that house is worth €750k in 2023 and irrespective of their fixed pension income, they are expected to find €765 for LPT.

    Most of the Councillors think that's a bullshyt situation and so they apply the full 15% discount that they are empowered to, reducing that to €650.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 24,048 ✭✭✭✭Larbre34




Advertisement