FOURTEEN public submissions were received by the Shire during the recent 2021-2022 draft budget feedback period.<\/p>\n
Three of those residents had five minutes to speak at an online council meeting on Tuesday, 8 June, including former council candidate Cameron Steele, who commented on the Shire\u2019s \u201cextraordinary debt load.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cIn the budget, by 2024 to 2025, we\u2019re projected to go from $9 million out to $13 million,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n
\u201cWe have moneys coming in from Lomandra Drive sales. I think that\u2019s $2 million for the first two years and $2.5 million after that. That\u2019s $9 million.<\/p>\n
\u201cI really fail to see why that hasn\u2019t been directed at drawing down the debt that we\u2019ve incurred for both the offices and the Heart. On reading the budget, that was extraordinarily glaring… and I\u2019m hoping it will be of deep concern to you, the council group.\u201d<\/p>\n
Mr Steele suggested the municipal charge move to the recommended 10 per cent, and that the Shire look at rate relief, with the support of income from the Golden Plains Wind Farm.<\/p>\n
\u201cGeelong uses rate relief from their industry. We should be looking to do the same here,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n
Waste charges were a concern of former Golden Plains Shire councillor David Evans.<\/p>\n
\u201cThe issue is the amount of money that we have sitting in surplus at the moment. Every year we\u2019re always over on our surpluses by a lot because we weren\u2019t able to work our waste charges,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n
\u201cBut the greater concern here is the issue of the removal of the roadside dumps. In no way should that be included as a waste charge; that is a civil administration issue that should have been dealt with by the outside staff when they were putting those together.<\/p>\n
\u201cYou need to go to the State Government on the rate-capping arrangement and ask for a special levy. You do not transfer stuff across to waste charge that should never have been there.\u201d<\/p>\n
Russell Coad spoke in support of the continuation of a rate differential for Shire farming properties, said he would like to see more \u201cequality\u201d in the \u201cresidential and rural\u201d rate-paying spaces.<\/p>\n
Five public feedback submissions were received regarding mayor and councillor allowances, but none requested to speak.<\/p>\n
The 2021-22 draft budget proposes a rate increases of 1.5 per cent, the maximum allowed by the State Government.<\/p>\n
Operating revenue is listed at $49.3 million, and the capital works program has $14.6 million, with $9.6 million of that being municipal funds. A $500,000 budget deficit is predicted.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
FOURTEEN public submissions were received by the Shire during the recent 2021-2022 draft budget feedback period. Three of those residents had five minutes to speak at an online council meeting on Tuesday, 8 June, including former council candidate Cameron Steele, who commented on the Shire\u2019s \u201cextraordinary debt load.\u201d \u201cIn the budget, by 2024 to 2025, […]<\/p>\n