![Accountant and former Goulburn Mulwaree councillor, Nina Dillon, is organsing a public rally against a proposed rate rise. Picture by Louise Thrower. Accountant and former Goulburn Mulwaree councillor, Nina Dillon, is organsing a public rally against a proposed rate rise. Picture by Louise Thrower.](/images/transform/v1/crop/frm/FkT3ZusFw5YrTvZCipmLUF/c99b77d2-8c6b-49c1-9696-61f61e84dd48.JPG/r0_10_4288_2850_w1200_h678_fmax.jpg)
Accountant Nina Dillon is upping a campaign against Goulburn Mulwaree Council's proposed rate variation.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
or signup to continue reading
The former councillor is organising a police authorised public rally on Saturday, November 4 at Saint Saviour's Common in Bourke Street at 10am. It will protest the council's suggested special rate variation (SRV) and includes speakers from a charitable organisation, the rural sector, herself and others.
The organisation is pushing two options during community consultation - a 47.1 per cent cumulative rise in general rate revenue over two years, or a 51.2pc cumulative increase over two years, the latter of which spreads the load more evenly. A third, less preferred, option is to stick with the existing state government rate peg.
READ MORE:
The rally follows a hastily-organised one outside the council chambers on Tuesday, October 17. Ms Dillon said some 75 people attended the "peaceful" gathering at short notice.
"People were horrified about the rate variation. They're asking whether the council is really doing that badly," Ms Dillon said.
"...The biggest concern is the financial cost to ratepayers and residents. Business people are worried because retail sales are down and there is not as much discretionary spending."
She argues the variation is not justified and the council's inclusion of depreciation on a revalued asset base is not giving people the full picture. On this basis, she says the council will "never" register a profit.
Ms Dillon described depreciation as a non-cash cost which was "solely" included in budget calculations to "reduce profit to minus $10.7 million." The council's consultant, Morrison Low, stated that without intervention, the organisation would register annual $10.7m deficits for the next 10 years.
Consolidate depreciation and amortisation is calculated to be $22.66m in 2023 and $22.68m in 2024
"I have no problem with them including depreciation provided they also factor in grant money, which they've chosen not to do in coming up with the $10.7m deficit," she said.
Ms Dillon pointed out that the council's long-term financial plan last November allowed for $22.37m in grants and contributions in 2022/23, returning a $14.9m surplus in the general fund. But subsequent years only included $1.24m in grants and contributions, which produced deficits of between $5m and $6m over the ensuing six years.
However the council's corporate services director, Brendan Hollands, said the large drop in operating grants was due to the fact that much of the government funded flood damage work was finishing up.
"But we also just don't have the certainty that the same level of grants will be there for capital works as previously," he said.
"We're coming out of a pretty extraordinary period period of grants (following) COVID and stimulus funding after the 2019/20 bushfires and we certainly don't like budgeting for income we're not sure of getting."
![The council has to depreciate its assets appropriately to ensure sufficient funds for their renewal, says corporate services director, Brendan Hollands. Pictured above is the Wollondilly Riverwalk. Picture by Louise Thrower. The council has to depreciate its assets appropriately to ensure sufficient funds for their renewal, says corporate services director, Brendan Hollands. Pictured above is the Wollondilly Riverwalk. Picture by Louise Thrower.](/images/transform/v1/crop/frm/FkT3ZusFw5YrTvZCipmLUF/482ac8d5-0d70-46ba-8d7e-fe34760b0267.jpg/r0_36_4032_2957_w1200_h678_fmax.jpg)
Mr Hollands said all messages coming from government signalled less grant funding.
Regarding depreciation, he rejected Ms Dillon's claim it didn't affect cashflow. Mr Hollands said councils had to cashback depreciation. This was unlike business that could claim it as a tax expense.
The state government's 2014 'Fit for Future' required that asset renewal expenditure be 100pc of the depreciation rate.
"That's where most of the new money (SRV) will go - straight back into asset renewal - because that's where we're short," Mr Hollands said.
"That has occurred because of (the required) revaluation of our assets but that's the expectation. One of the key indicators in Fit for the Future was that if you're not revaluing your assets, they are deteriorating and the backlog will just get worse."
The council has more than $1 billion worth of assets, including buildings and infrastructure.
Mayor Peter Walker said depreciation was just one reason the council was considering a rate variation. State government cost shifting, power, insurance and wage increases were among the extra expenses councils had to absorb.
"We are one of numerous councils in rural and regional NSW that have to pick up the pieces and that's why so many are applying for rate variations," he said.
Ms Dillon has also argued the council should delay any application for a rise until the state government considers a review of the the rate pegging methodology. The Independent Pricing and Regulatory Tribunal handed this report to the local government minister in July. She said this could result in a higher rate peg, beyond this year's 3.5pc for councils, allowing them to raise more general fund revenue.
But Mr Hollands said even a six per cent rate peg wouldn't address the infrastructure backlog. In addition, the council had to advise IPART by November 30 whether it intended to apply for the SRV.
"The timeframes are such that we need to keep moving forward with it," he said.
![Mayor Peter Walker speaks to Goulburn ratepayer, Jannine Devery at one of the recent consultation sessions on the proposed rate rise. Picture by Louise Thrower. Mayor Peter Walker speaks to Goulburn ratepayer, Jannine Devery at one of the recent consultation sessions on the proposed rate rise. Picture by Louise Thrower.](/images/transform/v1/crop/frm/FkT3ZusFw5YrTvZCipmLUF/6fdd3589-bbc9-4535-9f63-0dcd42340f10.JPG/r191_76_4003_2735_w1200_h678_fmax.jpg)
Community consultation has finished and Cr Walker said more than 1000 public submissions had been lodged.
Councillors will decide whether to apply for the rate rise at their November 21 meeting.
If Ms Dillon has her way, it won't go ahead. She said she'd been bombarded by calls from city residents, businesspeople and farmers, with the latter concerned their rates had already "doubled" in some cases due to land revaluations.
"I never wanted to look at the figures. All I wanted to tell the council was that people couldn't afford it," she said.
"...I have no axe to grind with the council. I just want them to be transparent. If, for whatever reason, they believe their figures are what they are, they need to explain them a lot better and say why we are in this situation."
Our journalists work hard to provide local, up-to-date news to the community. This is how you can access our trusted content:
- Bookmark our website
- Follow us on Twitter
- Follow us on Google News
- Make sure you are signed up for our breaking news and regular newsletters