State of rates confusion
In recent weeks the residents of the Shoalhaven have heard a number of contradictory and confusing messages emanating from Shoalhaven City Council in regards to the recently released 2016/17 draft budget.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
Firstly, at recent meetings to present the draft budget for community feedback held in Nowra, Ulladulla and Huskisson, we heard ratepayers would be required to pay an additional 10 per cent on top of existing rates for the 2016/17 to 2020/21 financial years in order to address the claimed $2 million budget deficit council is attempting to clear in order to meet future infrastructure needs and expand services and amenities.
The actual deficit figure we face is $13 million and the increase in the rates over the next five years is, in fact, designed merely to meet immediate expenditures and urgent infrastructure improvements, rather than the development of a real infrastructure legacy.
Secondly we heard from Mayor Joanna Gash the planned rate increases were only for the next two years and that the rate-payers of our city would only be required to pay an additional 2.5 per cent on top of the current rate in order to help the city get back into surplus within established time-frames.
In recent days I have heard deputy mayor John Wells stating the actual figure is 7.5 per cent, but the underlying deficit figure of $2 million remains.
The people of the Shoalhaven deserve better than this.
Ratepayers need to know exactly what the council intends to do with rates - both in dollar terms and in spending priorities - and what this will mean in terms of the kind of city council wants us to be going forward.
We are a low socioeconomic status region, with a large population of people on fixed-incomes, one where residents do not have the means to pay for massive increases in rates and where the services we receive are not commensurate to the needs.
Without a clear plan and a consistent message, I fear our reprieve of recent weeks may only be temporary.
M. Davis, Tomerong
Sports plan questioned
The rationale of the proposed sporting hub in Bomaderry is easy to understand. Construct aworld class facility with high quality training infrastructure to cater for the elite in different sporting disciplines and attract national and international competitions of the highest calibre. But one must ask, is this the best way the Shoalhaven City can spend $70 million?
There is a need to invest time, effort and resources in developing shovel ready projects but this proposal elevates sport to the most important social/cultural activity in the Shoalhaven or probably the state. The Ulladulla Civic Centre incorporating a library and a Visitor Information Centre only cost $10 million, the Shoalhaven Entertainment Centre $24 million.
While sport is a very important aspect of Shoalhaven culture does it justify having $70 million dollars of investment? Seventy million dollars would go a long way in providing services to improve transport nodes, employment opportunities, educational prospects, tourist infrastructure all of which would attract people to come to the Shoalhaven. Could be used to provide services for those with a disability, a mental health issue, for the needs of children or the homeless?
The council is considering spending $70 million on a state of the art sporting complex but has perennial problems with its existing sporting facilities. Last year the West Ulladulla Sporting Complex could only use its AFL ground four times for the season due to inadequate sub soil drainage. Other sports grounds in the Shoalhaven have failing assets and infrastructure with some change rooms are categorized as poor.
Many residents would like to see assets repaired and maintained before having a $70 million sporting complex. The exhibition goes on display shortly; make sure you voice your opinion and write a submission.