Four candidates at the next Goulburn Mulwaree Council election may be members of a newly formed ratepayer action group but say their ticket is independent of the body.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
or signup to continue reading
Nina Dillon, Christopher O'Mahony, Chloe Hurley and Keith Smith form the independent ticket standing at the September 14 election. A fifth yet to be determined person will be added, enabling above the line voting.
Ms Dillon said the ticket was not linked with the Goulburn Ratepayer Action Group (GRAG), formed during her campaign against the council's proposed 51.2 per cent rate rise. Ultimately, the Independent Planning and Regulatory Tribunal only endorsed a 22.5 per cent rate rise over one year.
The Goulburn accountant has hailed the outcome as a win for people power. Community members lodged 799 surveys to IPART, with 92pc opposed, 132 submissions, all rejecting the rise, and signed a 12,000 plus signature petition, rejecting the hike. In addition, up to 600 people attended a community rally.
On Saturday, June 1, GRAG hosted a 'thankyou and information update' function at the Goulburn Workers Club. Some 45 people attended.
Ms Dillon said in January, 2024 businessman, Tony Lamarra, approached her to form a ratepayers action group. Members "spent hours" collecting signatures opposing the rate increase.
There are now about 10 active members, including herself as chairperson and M Hurley, Mr O'Mahony and Mr Smith. Ken Halliday is treasurer.
The rates campaign spurred the four to run for council but Ms Dillon said the ticket was quite separate to the not-for-profit rate group, which now had an ABN.
"We thought that could be a conflict of interest (if we were elected)," she said.
"At the very beginning, GRAB said it wouldn't endorse any particular candidate."
![Business and rural property owner, Fiona Battiste, and Vicki Rath attended the Goulburn Workers Club event. Picture by Louise Thrower. Business and rural property owner, Fiona Battiste, and Vicki Rath attended the Goulburn Workers Club event. Picture by Louise Thrower.](/images/transform/v1/crop/frm/FkT3ZusFw5YrTvZCipmLUF/a8b6de59-d5ad-42ed-8067-67a0021ee0cf.JPG/r0_0_4288_2782_w1200_h678_fmax.jpg)
The group recently wrote backing letters for Goulburn man, Anthony O'Neill, who challenged the council over his $15,645 water bill. Councillors reduced it to $120, saying the water usage was "a mystery."
GRAG has a charter of rules and a website. It aims to advance residents' "social and public welfare," act on people's behalf on council matters and "promote open, transparent and open democracy," among other functions.
Ms Dillon said ordinary, organisational and associate membership fees applied and people could donate but money would go towards the group's advocacy work and expenses. It would not fund the candidates' ticket.
Mr O'Mahony said GRAG was meeting weekly.
"We are also opening it up to 'Friends of GRAG.' We want it to be a conduit between people who feel hard done by, and the council," he said.
"This (on Saturday) is not a political event but is about community concern. We want the group to be constructive, not destructive."
On Saturday, the Goulburn Workers Club made the venue available for free.
Ms Dillon recounted hers and the group's campaign against the rate rise and said the council did not have to implement the 22.5pc rate rise.
"There is absolutely no reason why a smaller rate increase of perhaps 10 to 12.5pc could not be approved for the 2024/05 budget - with the remainder carried forward and applied to the 2025/06 year," she said.
"It may even restore a little confidence in this council."
Cr Andy Wood was among those attended. He was one of six councillors who voted for the rate rise. He told The Post he was there to hear what GRAB had to offer.
He plans to re-stand at the election, pending Shooters, Fishers and Farmers party endorsement.
Resident, Pam Klower said the original rate increase was "exorbitant" and she felt the council needed to "better explain where the money was going."
Attendees split into groups and came up with suggestions and feedback for the council.
Ms Dillon said this included comments that "the council wasn't listening," that councillors and the executive were "difficult to contact" or didn't return calls and emails, "long timeframes" on building and development applications and that more money was needed for rural roads.