First, it is false to publish that the residential charge exceed 0.078 as there is a clear difference between 0.078 for residential properties and 0.78 charged properties used for commercial purposes.
Second, it is false to publish that there is no recourse to independent valuation. In actual fact, one of the unique advantages of this law is that it empowers every property owner with the formula for calculating the charge and vests property owners with the right to self-assessment. Futhermore, it provides for a tribunal where you can contest your bill within 30 days of the service.
Thirdly, it is inaccurate, misleading and contradictory to define the process of assessment as ” government determined market rate”. Compared to the 2001 law which was government determined rate, the 2018 assessment is based on the market value of the land and building at There is a relief regime which seeks to protect the vulnerable members of the society. Besides a 40 percent relief applicable across board to all categories of property owners, there are additional reliefs of 100 percent to pensioners and retirees who own properties, 10 percent for properties owned by septuagenarians, 10 percent for properties owned by the disabled. Businessday readers who run non-profit organisations should be empowered with the intelligence that they are entitled to additional 20 percent and that properties built 25 years ago can get 10 percent additional reliefs. So shouldn’t our business newspaper be helping readers know how to save money by demonstrating that a property owned by a not for profit that benefits from a general relief of 40 percent plus a not-for profit relief of 20 percent and timely payment relief of 15 percent actually pays 25 percent of the valuation?
It would have been easy to overlook this evidence of biased news judgment if the editorial of the newspaper same day had not demonstrated that something indeed was amiss. The editorial is the voice of the newspaper, its opinion on controversial issues and a clear index of its perspective on how it treats news.
Purporting to advise the readers on the “Imperative of citizen engagement to save democracy” the editorial states: ” Indeed, one of the defences of the Lagos State Government for the obnoxious (italics mine) land use legislation is that representatives of the people in the State House of Assembly debated and passed the bill. Citizens should have raised their objections at that stage!”
This intemperate use of language, followed by a further description of the law as the “Lagos taxation whammy” in a newspaper of sober reflection and deep analysis, leads to the conclusion that the newspaper’s decision to “welcome the middle class as a bastion of civic engagement on the issues of land use charge in Lagos” is a declaration of aggression. This should not be so because the Lagos State Government is a media-friendly organization.
KEHINDE BAMIGBETAN
BAMIGBETAN is the SPECIAL ADVISER TO THE GOVERNOR ON COMMUNITIES & COMMUNICATIONS, MINISTRY OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT & COMMUNITY AFFAIRS
