Rates hike application ‘misrepresents community sentiment’

Central Coast Council Administrator, Rik Hart

Once again, Administrator Rik Hart ignores community sentiment in applying to IPART for a further rate hike (“Council forges ahead with request to extend 13% rate hike” CCN3280.

At least Council finally conceded the bulk of this rate hike ($15M out of $26M per year) is not to repay loans as previously suggested but to fund a recurring structural deficit that hasn’t been brought under control.

This structural deficit hasn’t been caused by lack of revenue because general rates have already gone up by significantly more than inflation over the past six years.

Council doesn’t have a revenue problem.

It has a management problem, a performance problem, and a productivity problem.

These problems are compounded when new leaders seek to embrace rather than change a rotten culture.

The Council’s planning documents supporting the rate hike are a dog’s breakfast.

There is no prioritisation and no strategic resource allocation to align scarce resources with priorities.

If everything is a priority then nothing is a priority.

In fact, the Council’s only discernible priority is slugging the ratepayer.

To this end, public engagement has become a tool of persuasion rather than consultation.

But the community hasn’t been fooled.

Even the Council’s handpicked sample group, who were fed spin and propaganda before being asked their opinions, rejected the rate hike option.

These poor people were given just two options: rate hikes or service cuts.

They must have felt as if a school bully had them in an arm lock and threatened: “give me your pocket money or I’ll break your arm”.

But a clear majority still voted for the so called “deteriorate” option rather than rate hikes.

Mr Hart ignored this result highlighting instead responses to loaded questions about services that did not include a price tag.

Well, of course, residents don’t want service cuts.

But they’ve also said loud and clear they don’t expect to pay 15 per cent more for services that have already been cut.

That’s why, without any prompting, almost 30 per cent wrote comments in the survey arguing for reduced internal costs and greater efficiency even though this was never offered as one of the options.

Mr Hart is misrepresenting the sentiments of the community.

Of course Council senior managers prefer rate hikes to the hard work of improving productivity and efficiency as requested by IPART.

In response, I urge everyone to write to IPART asking that for once our interests be put above those of a Council bureaucracy that both caused and benefitted from recurring structural deficits.

Email, Feb 8

Kevin Brooks, Bensville

2 Comments on "Rates hike application ‘misrepresents community sentiment’"

  1. Just another admission that government and councils have absolutely no regard for the public. Apathy allows these people to get away with almost anything so the blame can’t be totally placed upon them. But misappropriation of finances then raising rates claiming services could be reduced due to lack of finances is beyond absurd. Yesterday morning Sunday 13/2/2022 I observed and indeed spoke to someone in a apparent council mowing team. These guys were parked in the access area of the Council Dog Pound. I asked “Are you on smoke?” The reply was we are volunteering our selfs to mow the fields and park the council don’t want to do. The council lends us the Van trailer and gear to perform this work. Now I’m not saying he was lying but why would four men be out mowing council parks voluntarily on a Sunday morning when wages for this day would be set at around triple time.?????

  2. Well said Kevin i will write again to IPART with the words of Comment ” Rate Hikes application ”

    Misrepresents Community Sentiment

    ANDREW YOUR COMMENT it is only fair that Rik Hart comments on your post as the Community are asking what,s going on. We are paying extremely inflated rates and whom or who are these 4 men mowing on a Sunday?

Comments are closed.