NORTHERN
TERRITORY – VALUER GENERAL
Within
the Northern Territory, there are very real geographic and climatic
challenges, to the provision of an effective and efficient valuation
service, that are not experienced to the same extent elsewhere in
Australia.
Given
the challenges of climate, distance and isolation previously referred
to, there are obvious benefits to be gained by adapting new
technology to the requirements of a busy and diverse valuation
service.
A
number of computer-based options are currently being investigated as
to their suitability for use under Northern Territory conditions, in
consultation with other areas of the Northern Territory Government.
REVALUATIONS
During
the year ( 1999/2000) , revaluations under Section 10 (3) of the
Valuation of Land Act in respect of the City of Darwin, the
Darwin Rates Ordinance area and the [then] Town of Palmerston.
There
was ongoing consultation with property practitioners during the
valuation process; and, on its completion, members of the Australian
Property Institute, Australian Property Council and the Real Estate
Institute of the NT were briefed as to the effect and implications of
the revaluation.
Similarly,
councillors and staff of Darwin City Council, and the Mayor and
officers of Palmerston Town Council were briefed as to the effect and
implications of the revaluation in relation to their councils and
ratepayers.
Approximately
30,000 Notices of Valuation were posted to property owners on 19
November, 1999. It is considered that the current objection period of
thirty days from the posting of the Notice of Valuation is
inadequate.
As
a means of ensuring that any property owner, who was unhappy with the
valuation applied, took the opportunity to object, or at least, seek
clarification, statements were provided to the Darwin media alerting
property owners to their rights. There was extensive coverage of
this, and related issues, on television, radio and in the Northern
Territory News.
About
480 telephone enquiries were received in relation to these Notices.
Most of these were resolved by an explanation of the purpose of the
valuations, and what Unimproved Capital Value actually represents;
however, 84 proceeded to formal objection under the provisions of
Part V of the Valuation of Land Act.
These
properties were then reinspected by valuers, usually in company with
the Objector, and the valuation reconsidered in the light of any
matters raised by the property owner. Of these, 28 were sustained on
the recommendation of the valuer, and the remainder were disallowed.
No disallowed objections proceeded to the Valuation Board of Review.
PROPOSED
AMENDMENTS TO THE VALUATION OF LAND ACT
There
has been consultation with officers of the Northern Territory
Government, and local government, in relation to recommended changes
to the Valuation of Land Act.
Recommended
amendments to the Valuation of Land Act, include a proposed
extension of the objection period to 90 days from the date of the
Notice of Valuation. This is comparable to the objection period
allowed in other jurisdictions.
These
suggested changes attempt to simplify some of the procedures and
concepts covered by the Act; and provide for a more equitable
objection process, while maintaining the options open to local
government in relation to the frequency and basis of future
revaluations. The amendments also recognise the benefits to be
obtained through the effective use of electronic data storage and
transfer.
NATIVE
TITLE
In
attempting to quantify the effect of native title claims, and to
assess ‘just terms’ compensation for the acquisition of native
title rights and interest valuers are confronted by a situation
which, although the subject of much debate and commentary, has not
been adequately resolved in practice within Australia.
Although
‘native title’, or its equivalent, is a significant issue in
Canada and New Zealand as well as Australia, judicial precedent and
land administration practice in those countries are of considerable
interest but currently, for historical reasons, offer no direct
assistance to
Australian
valuers.
Despite
critical comment from this Office and Department of Lands, Planning
and Environment, a Guidance Note in relation to native title matters
was issued by the Australian Property Institute. This was, however,
largely academic in style and did not provide the practical advice
which is anxiously awaited by practitioners.
As
well as monitoring legal and other technical developments in this
area within the Northern Territory and Australia-wide, this Office
forms part of an informal network of valuers and land administrators
in Canada, New Zealand and Australia who share issues of mutual
concern and interest.
Although
no universally accepted valuation approach has yet emerged, the
expertise of this Office is recognised by the frequency at which
advice and guidance is sought by the Valuers-General of other
jurisdictions.
3