SUBSIDISED hard waste, green waste and mattress drop-off services will be implemented by the Moorabool Shire Council sometime in the 2026-27 financial year.<\/p>\n
A subsidised hard waste kerbside pick-up service for a maximum of 500 properties annually for \u2018unable\u2019 or elderly residents, capped at two cubic metres, was also approved.<\/p>\n
Cr Sheila Freeman successfully moved the introductions at last week\u2019s monthly council meeting, prompting a lengthy debate.<\/p>\n
Her move was in response to an officer\u2019s report on the issue in the meeting agenda, which was itself a response to a notice of motion in May that called for an investigation of subsidised waste services.<\/p>\n
The report outlined a range of subsidised service options, with consideration of their benefits, limitations and indicative costs.<\/p>\n
The officer\u2019s recommendation was for councillors to consider the report, but Cr Freeman moved an alternative recommendation that subsidised services be introduced in the 2026-27 financial year.<\/p>\n
Her motion also recommended that the costs of the subsidised services be included in that year\u2019s budget process.<\/p>\n
The motion called for a subsidised hard waste drop-off service at the Shire\u2019s transfer stations in the form of two one-cubic-metre allocations annually, with no charge at the gate.<\/p>\n
It also sought a subsidised green waste drop-off service at the transfer stations at no charge for one month a year, and a half-price subsidised mattress drop-off for one month a year.<\/p>\n
In addition, Cr Freeman sought a subsidised hard waste kerbside pick-up service for \u2018unable\u2019 or elderly residents through a two-cubic-metre allocation at 500 properties annually.<\/p>\n
\u201cThis is about fairness, accessibility and restoring confidence in our waste services,\u201d Cr Freeman said.<\/p>\n
She said many residents had made their feelings very clear since green and hard waste services were removed last year.<\/p>\n
\u201cThey have expressed frustration, confusion, and in some cases genuine distress about the loss of services they relied on,\u201d she said.<\/p>\n
She said her alternative recommendation responded to those concerns by providing clarity and certainty for residents.<\/p>\n
But Cr Tom Sullivan was one of several councillors to speak against the recommendation, arguing that Cr Freeman\u2019s motion was to actually implement the services rather than refer them to a budget process.<\/p>\n
\u201cSo fundamentally we\u2019re asking for a blank cheque,\u201d he said, adding that every ratepayer would pay for the services even if they did not use them.<\/p>\n
Cr Rod Ward, who seconded Cr Freeman\u2019s move, responded by saying that not all residents used the Shire\u2019s sporting reserves, the Ballan Library, the Navigators Hall or the West Maddingley Learning Centre, but they had paid for them through their rates.<\/p>\n
\u201cI pay GST on goods and services I buy; part of that GST goes to roads in WA. I can\u2019t dictate where my GST is used,\u201d Cr Ward said.<\/p>\n
Cr Ward said councillors had to make decisions they considered were in the best interests of the community.<\/p>\n
\u201cI think this \u2026 is fantastic and it\u2019s going to please the majority of the population,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n
Cr Ally Munari\u2019s contribution to the debate was: \u201cI can\u2019t vote on something that was dumped on my desk two to three hours ago. It\u2019s as simple as that.\u201d<\/p>\n
Cr Munari was referring to Cr Freeman\u2019s circulation of her alternative to the agenda recommendation.<\/p>\n
But Cr John Keogh spoke in favour, saying that hard waste tip passes were the biggest issue for residents in much of the municipality.<\/p>\n
\u201cTo resolve this matter early gives our residents certainty in the future,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n
Cr Paul Tatchell spoke against the motion.<\/p>\n
\u201cI\u2019ve been here 13 years and I don\u2019t think I\u2019ve ever voted on a financial matter for the budget (for) the next year that\u2019s not costed,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n
\u201c[I\u2019ve] never done it and I\u2019m not going to do it today.\u201d<\/p>\n
Cr Moira Berry also spoke against, primarily because there had been no time to consider all the separate issues after Cr Freeman circulated her alternative.<\/p>\n
Closing the debate, Cr Freeman reiterated that the ending of last year\u2019s trial green and hard waste services generated significant community concern.<\/p>\n
\u201cResidents have told us again and again that they have felt unheard and that the change created uncertainty and disadvantage \u2013 particularly for those with limited mobility, limited income or limited means to transport waste,\u201d she said.<\/p>\n
\u201cThis alternate recommendation is a constructive and responsible response.\u201d<\/p>\n
Cr Freeman said costings were in documents already supplied to councillors.<\/p>\n
When mayor Cr Steve Venditti-Taylor called for a vote, Crs Freeman, Ward, Keogh, Venditti-Taylor and Jarrod Bingham voted in favour.<\/p>\n
Those against were Crs Berry, Sullivan, Tatchell and Munari.<\/p>\n
Hard waste collection report noted<\/strong><\/p>\n Cr Freeman\u2019s move was preceded by an earlier agenda item on consideration of an officer\u2019s report regarding engaging a contractor to collect up to one cubic metre of hard rubbish directly from residents\u2019 homes, once per household, for one month each year.<\/p>\n That report was a response to a notice of motion \u2013 also in May \u2013 that officers investigate a kerbside hard rubbish collection service.<\/p>\n It said providing a subsidised service recognised the challenges faced by residents of a \u201cgeographically large and diverse municipality\u201d where access to transfer stations or contractors was not always practical or affordable.<\/p>\n \u201cRising landfill costs, combined with community expectations for more sustainable waste solutions, mean that councils are increasingly required to balance cost recovery with the delivery of socially and environmentally responsible services,\u201d it said.<\/p>\n The report said an option of a one-month, shire-wide kerbside hard waste collection with a limit of one cubic metre per household would apply to about 15,000 properties across 2110 square kilometres.<\/p>\n It said properties not eligible for kerbside collections due to inaccessibility or very low density would not receive it.<\/p>\n The report said that many other municipalities had moved away from blanket services because of high costs and inefficiency.<\/p>\n \u201cThis demonstrates the challenge of achieving meaningful resource recovery through blanket services, which contrasts with the better outcomes of drop-off or booked models,\u201d it said.<\/p>\n The report also said that a program would probably not be rolled out until July 2028 given the complexity of arranging contracts and planning its implementation.<\/p>\n The report was received without debate.<\/p>\n Updated Dunnstown reserve plan received<\/strong><\/p>\n Councillors voted without debate to receive the updated Dunnstown Recreation Reserve Master Plan.<\/p>\n A draft master plan was presented to the September meeting, which endorsed its exhibition for public comment.<\/p>\n The comment period ran from 4 September to 6 October and received 880 views, 472 downloads and nine submissions.<\/p>\n An officer\u2019s report said community feedback had been \u201coverall positive.”<\/p>\n It said the main themes were that netball and cricket upgrades should be concurrent, as should the aligning of the oval and the netball court upgrades, and that lighting and shelter considerations form part of the reserve frontage and pedestrian zones.<\/p>\n All these were incorporated into the master plan.<\/p>\n