![\"\"](\"https:\/\/static.timesnewsgroup.com.au\/prod\/uploads\/sites\/2\/2022\/10\/In-Article-59.png\")
\u201cI would hope they take this up relatively quickly, and though I\u2019m not sure how the state election will play into it, it will ultimately be something for whoever gets into government to decide on.\u201d<\/p>\n
A spokesperson for the Borough of Queenscliffe said it did not support the proposal and already charges property owners who list on short stay accommodation sites 110 per cent of standard residential rates.<\/p>\n
The City of Greater Geelong was not present for the state council meeting but had previously stated it was yet to form a position on the CoGB motion.<\/p>\n
The Surf Coast Shire’s executive manager of strategic projects and partnerships Damian Waight said council understood the intent of the motion, \u201cwith the Surf Coast certainly feeling the impacts that short-term holiday accommodation has on housing affordability.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cHowever councils can implement their own differential rate type for holiday rentals without needing Victorian government support, therefore Surf Coast Shire abstained from voting on this MAV state council motion.\u201d<\/p>\n
Cr Metcalf said the task of council\u2019s individually having to identify properties that are listed on short stay sites was too onerous for local governments and would be better managed through a state government policy decision.<\/p>\n
\u201cThere\u2019s no point if we increase the rates but it costs us more to identify the properties than we raise in rates,\u201d she said.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
PROPERTY owners who list their homes on short stay accommodation sites could face higher rates under a proposal that will be presented to the state government. The City of Greater Bendigo (CoGB) policy was approved by a vote of 76 to 36 at last week\u2019s state council meeting of the Municipal Association of Victoria (MAV), […]<\/p>\n