Respondents to a consultation on rates reform have rejected the idea of a centralised rate collector.

A majority of respondents actually supported a central authority, but were split over how the money, once collected, would be spent and by whom.

The collection of non-domestic rates by a central authority was suggested which would see the money either spent on ’national community projects’ or a percentage given to local authorities with the rest kept in central funds.

The question on who should collect rates was part of the consultation onto planned rates reform, which has been criticised by local authorities who fear it would leave them short to pay for community services and amenities.

Respondents were told: ’Rating authorities would be able to apply, either on their own or in conjunction with other authorities, for funds with which to undertake projects, such as regeneration of specific areas or for national community policies without needing to significantly increase rates to cover loan repayments.’

They were then asked: ’By whom should non-domestic rates be raised and retained?’

Of the 341 respondents, 153 (44%) said that local authorities should retain the power to collect the rates and spend them in the communities.

The second most popular response was the central collector with a percentage given back to local authorities with 101 (29%) supporting this suggestion. And 87 people (25%) supported the money remaining with a central authority.

However, the local authorities who responded all rejected the proposal, with most citing loss of finances and local democracy. They said residents should have an input into where the money is spent in their community.

Peel Commissioners rejected the idea of an all-island rate. They said: ’The setting of rates is a critical issue for local authorities which permits locally elected politicians to set budgets, assign financial priorities and manage the local authority’s financial resources.

’The commissioners want rate setting to remain the responsibility of the local authority for which locally elected commissioners can be held accountable.’

Other objectors included Ramsey, Garff, Onchan, Lezayre, Michael and Braddan local authorities.

The results included:

â?¢ 65% (224 respondents) said there should be an ability to apply a reduction to the rateable values of properties in a particular sector or to different types of property.

â?¢ 63% (217) said they don’t want to see the non-domestic rate based on the footprint size of a property.

â?¢ 78.3% (271) favoured any new legislation containing provision for the use of rates as an additional method of encouraging the owners of properties to keep them in good order and to a useable standard.

â?¢ 61% (211) believed charities and/or charitable purposes should receive an exemption or discount with 50% reductions proving the most popular.

â?¢ 53% (183) supported an all-island non-domestic rate which is applied equally across all non-domestic properties on the island.

There are four meetings scheduled for the people to hear plans for rates reform, due to be released this Thursday, which will be brought before the October Tynwald by Minister for Policy and Reform Chris Thomas.

Meetings take place from 6pm to 7.30pm on the the following dates:

â?¢ Castle Rushen High School on Friday, October 4;

â?¢ Queen Elizabeth II High School, Peel, on Monday, October 7;

â?¢ St Ninian’s Lower School (Bemahague) in Onchan on Tuesday, October 8;

â?¢ Ramsey Grammar School on Wednesday October 9.