Eurobodalla
– Not fit for the future?
Eurobodalla
Shire currently fails 4/5 criteria set by IPART for independent viability. Our
Shire has an inadequate rate-able base to sustain its infrastructure and
even basic essential council services, AND THIS SITUATION WILL WORSEN if
jobs are lost and income generating residents are forced to leave.
Analysis
of current and projected ABS economic data reveal that Eurobodalla fails the
"Fit for the Future" fitness test and the forecast is for a downward
spiral into poverty, business closures, forced relocations and community
fragmentation.
Eurobodalla residents have little to no capacity to sustain increased economic pressure:
Eurobodalla residents have little to no capacity to sustain increased economic pressure:
Our economic profile:
55% of residents have an income < $1250 a fortnight
30% are retired, many are on fixed incomes
< 10% of the Shire population earns over $2000 a fortnight, compared with the state average of almost 30% (2011 census).
40% youth unemployment above NSW state average
30% of residents are employed (13300 out of 37600)
The average yearly income comparison:
NSW =$68000
Bega Valley = $45000
Eurobodalla = $33000
NSW =$68000
Bega Valley = $45000
Eurobodalla = $33000
Rates
in the Eurobodalla:
Despite a compromised capacity to pay, our charges are
higher than Bega and Shoalhaven. Councils’ debt projections are set to increase
by $40 million over the next ten years, unless they are permitted to keep
putting up the rates. This means repeated increases of 26% plus every four
years. On top of the base average $800 p.a. rate are the other 43% of charges
which include water and sewerage availability.
We
need to increase our rateable base:
As Council already subsidises thousands of dollars in rate
subsidies for those that cannot afford their rates, those that who can will
have to pay more, as will businesses. But what
happens if those people who can pay decide to leave the shire? Some
commentators believe that 100,000 people are now the minimum number of
people to sustain a local government area. With our reputation for
obstructive and unresponsive local government, it is unsurprising that
prospective investors and potential residents opt for the neighbouring
shires.
Examples of the anti- development attitude include the attempts by investors to open a retirement village and run the airport. The Bunnings development took nearly eight years of negotiations sending a message to other companies not to waste time, effort and money considering Eurobodalla.
Our shire is seen by others as lacking in both foresight and economic development, and the requisite fiscal responsibility to sustain our own communities and environment. A risky place to commit to or invest in. Move on, nothing to see here.
Examples of the anti- development attitude include the attempts by investors to open a retirement village and run the airport. The Bunnings development took nearly eight years of negotiations sending a message to other companies not to waste time, effort and money considering Eurobodalla.
Our shire is seen by others as lacking in both foresight and economic development, and the requisite fiscal responsibility to sustain our own communities and environment. A risky place to commit to or invest in. Move on, nothing to see here.
Which brings us to the big question
- are we Fit for the Future?
T Corp, the government’s financial arm, told us in
2013 that the economic outlook for the Eurobodalla Shire was rated as MODERATE, versus SOUND for
Bega and Shoalhaven. With the underlying financial statement of long term
losses, many councils have been told that unless they improve,
they will die. ESC tenuously meets only 1 of the 5 criteria for viability.
Economic activity and sustainable jobs growth are the
ONLY way to ensure a viable future for the whole community - especially our
youth. Councils’ blatant misrepresentation that we are “forging ahead” is
starkly illustrated in the table below:
Residential Building approvals figures comparing the
Eurobodalla with Bega Valley and Shoalhaven shires since the
turn of the century:
Year ESC
Bega Shoalhaven
13-14
174 168
524
12-13
122
136 499
11-
12
95 150
399
10-11
83
180 486
09-10
127
138 504
08-09
91 119
378
06-07
163
90 434
05-06
236 150
460
04-05
292
189 734
03-04
419 215 993
02-03 445 244 1065
01-02
407 270 1168
( ***Shoalhaven are about 2.4 x the size of our population, Bega
just slightly smaller)
This data begs the question...What happened to our
Shire between 2007 -14? What was the planning departments’ agenda
and policy direction during this timeframe? Government cannot create
wealth - at best through sound policy, and allowing adequate growth, they
preserve the capacity for enterprising communities to realize their
potential.
Ask yourself a few questions:
What happens to this equation if those who generate the wealth
leave?
Are you currently getting more or LESS service for your increased
outlay compared to 5 years ago?
What are the services we get actually worth? What do they COST? what
should they ACTUALLY COST?
Which services are essential and can only be, and should continue
to be, provided by the council?
Which services and operations should council axe? How many unnecessary
services are jobs for the boys?
What is the ERA position?
ERA assures you that there will be a scare campaign that unless we
stay ‘as we are’ things will only get worse - such as the unproven
claims by the mayor that we would have to pay higher rates if we amalgamate. Many in the ERA would
like to see the council maintained, but changed dramatically to become
efficient. Good management is a start. Others passionately believe that
amalgamations are the only way forward. The problem is there is NO debate.
Community debate on a
sustainable future lacking:
Will council comply with the directive to engage with
the community towards a sustainable future? Perhaps like Victoria, the State
government will have to step in and force through change because the local vested
interests are too strong. Allowing
the council to solve the problem on their own will be a disaster, as they
cannot recognise there is a problem. It is a
problem that may require substantial staff reductions and the discontinuation
of a range of services and operations.
By now, Council should be in full discussion with its
community on how it sees the council in the future, if there is to be an
adequate debate by June 30th. However there has been an
irresponsible silence on the issue, despite Council having been instructed to
engage with the community, to discuss everything from mergers of backroom
services to amalgamations. This amounts to a failure to recognize the gravity
of the situation. So called efficiencies
in closing tourism offices and associated personnel will save about 1% of
the budget. Why is trivia being discussed and not the big picture?
What is the solution?
We need more wealth generating people to come and
live here, and more wealthy people to visit, live and spend money here -
at the moment, both these groups are being diverted to shires north and south
by the policies and attitudes of our council.
Our local wealth generation is dependent upon tourism
and hospitality, building, manufacturing and primary production. We need
council to desist from stifling economic growth by withholding
building approvals and business development that create real, meaningful
sustainable jobs. We need council to facilitate the development of local
enterprises, value adding to existing resources, and the building
of local infrastructure. We need to be unencumbered from developing
existing markets, products and services that other people value.
Perhaps the best result for the community would be for Eurobodalla Shire
Council to cease to exist, if it cannot respond to meet the needs of the
community, and chart a course for a sustainable future.
