Talk of bonuses is wide of the mark
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
I refer to Peter Cooke’s letter in 15 January 2014, titled “Bonus payments should be public”.
Simply Peter I do not get a bonus and there is full disclosure on what my payments are in the annual report.
I do make part of my contract “at risk”, as I personally believe that management should be paid on performance and private industry practice should be applied to public service. This “at risk” payment comes off my contract amount, not in addition and sometimes I do not get the full amount. As far as I am aware I am the only GM in NSW that is willing to make this arrangement, normally GMs would receive a bonus on top of their contract.
Peter it would be great to get facts right before putting pen to paper.
Shane Burns
General Manager
Armidale Dumaresq Council
Careful hand needed on rate rises
Like other ratepayers, immediately before the start of the Christmas holiday my wife and I received a letter from the mayor concerning the present financial position of ADC, and proposing that a special rate rise of 20 per cent should apply for a period of seven years to make good an $11.7 million deficit with respect to an accumulation of depreciation which the council had allowed to occur, and to balance Council’s annual budget deficit of $2.1 million in the future. The letter invited ratepayers to respond by January 10, a perhaps unrealistic date given that many would be on holiday.
The mayor says the present position has evolved over several years. There has, however, been no falling in of the sky. To the extent there is a problem, what is needed is a steady hand, meaningful, fully informed discussion and consultation over as long a period of time as is necessary. To my mind a community forum held in early February as suggested by the mayor with the present level of information would be premature in the extreme. What is not wanted is panic.
The fact sheet which accompanied the mayor’s letter makes a comparatively brief, and certainly inadequate, reference to a 2008/09 review report if the report is to serve as the basis for informed discussion and decision making. The report is extensive. It includes 34 graphs and a number of recommendations. It was signed off on August 25, 2009, some four and a half years ago. In my view it is essential that the report be available by being featured on Council’s website, which is not presently the case.
There are two other reports that should be similarly featured, the report of the NSW Local Government Review Panel and the Report on the Financial Sustainability of the NSW Local Government Sector, the latter by the NSW Treasury Corporation. They are also essential, both for the information they contain and as a check on the 2008/09 report.
Things have moved on since the 2008/09 report. It is expected that a sizeable amount of money will be retrieved from the disastrous derivative investment of some years ago. Why not apply it to the maintenance backlog?
The fact sheet says since the report Council staffing numbers have been reduced from 262 to 230. On the assumption that 32 were all junior staff, the reduction indicates an annual saving of $1.6 million, perhaps more, leaving an annual funds shortfall of $500,000 rather than the $2.1 million mentioned. That amount can be handled without great trauma.
Statistics have to be treated with caution. The report contains a graph showing the annual rates of growth of ADC’s operating revenues and spending over the period 2003/04 to 2008/09. The various rates of growth are measured in percentage terms and reflect the initial value on which each rate of growth is based. The rates, accordingly, are not comparable with each other. One ‘services’ has a growth rate outstripping those of the others. This does not mean that ‘services’ is experiencing greater growth in real terms. It may indicate its share is catching up. Again, ‘services’ can and does include some Council activities which some, including myself, might not look upon as providing a service so much as unnecessary interference.
Another item on the council’s website refers to a federal court award against the Council to a developer on grounds of negligence. The amount of the award was $1,479,576 plus interest. Add costs and the total amount involved could be of the order of $2 million. Where was this expenditure categorised? As a ‘service’? A similar question will arise when the loss on the derivative investment is finalised.
Incidentally, had there been no negligence the backlog would presumably have been $2 million less, $9.7 million. Perhaps this is a more relevant figure than the $11.7 million, bearing in mind that planning for the future is involved.
A diagram in the report shows the majority of two thirds of country and coastal local government areas were considered unsustainable and a minority vulnerable. Armidale, although considered vulnerable, was not categorised as unsustainable. Perhaps this gives perspective to Armidale’s situation and indicates there are problems which affect all country and coastal government areas. government areas. Roads and their maintenance seem to be the main infrastructure problem for Armidale, largely inherited from Dumaresq Shire, together with ‘Yarrandoo’.
In my view the mayor’s proposal would seem to be out of scale, a hammer to crack a nut. He needs to beat in mind that for many taxpayers local government taxes are more burdensome than those of other levels of government. It may be that in 81 per cent of cases the suggested 20 per cent rise in rates will result in increases of less than $300 per annum, but that does not adequately depict the consequences of such a rise. Many ratepayers are on fixed and limited incomes. Others will be required to pay a lot more than $300.
The owners of property in Armidale’s business area will experience large rises which they will either have to pass on in higher rents or accept lower returns on their investment. The market will determine the outcome, more businesses closing or a big drop in the value of property, or both. Neither will be minor and both will be disadvantageous to the future of Armidale. Higher rates will make Armidale a less attractive town in which to live. Further, the special rate rise rests on the assumption that Council has always spent and invested well, and operating expenses cannot be reduced. Is this the case? My own view is that it is not.
The mayor refers to ‘rate ‘pegging’. It is a necessary protection for ratepayers. Local councils should not be able to set rates without restriction. Their interpretation of statistics might be faulty too.
There are flaws in the structure of local government and perhaps the mayor’s proposal is indicative of one. Those flaws need to be removed, certainly before a special rate rise which appears not to be necessary and to which there are alternatives.
To my mind we should move carefully and wait to see how things unfold. There are other local government reports in train. Other local government areas are in the same boat. The mayor’s proposed frontal assault with ‘colours flying, drums beating and bayonets foxed’ will likely leave Armidale a ruin.
F.P. Smith
There are more than two merger options
I refer to the editorial, “Say no and it will go away” (Express, 10/01/2014).
The Independent Local Government Review Panel ignored a third option for ‘voluntary’ amalgamation of our local councils; re-structure Armidale Dumaresq Council by dividing the area at Dumaresq Creek, Waterfall Way and Bundarra Road, with the southern portion passing to the dynamic Uralla Shire Council and the northern portion becoming part of a greater Guyra Shire Council.
Previously, the Kibble Report noted this proposal from a ratepayer without further comment.
The merit of this radical proposal would be removal of the irregular financial management and unusual staffing practices reported at ADC over the past 13 years.
It would be an outstanding example of decentralisation of government functions into smaller urban regional centres linked by high speed National Broadband network connection.
Moreover, it would allow the accumulated financial assets of the two beneficiary councils to be dispersed against the huge debt load created at ADC while passing the few remaining public assets in Armidale into competent financial management.
Ratepayers in ADC prefer this outcome to the currently proposed 20 per cent rate increase.
Our experience with the forced merer between Dumaresq Shire and Armidale City Council in 2000 shows that the NSW government prefers foisting accumulated financial costs onto ratepayers rather than undertaking proper auditing of council financial practices.
Thinking ratepayers recognise that Armidale is a community led by a divided council pursuing a 1955 future which squeezes family owned businesses with inappropriate shopping centre developments.
Meanwhile, other job creating businesses are actively discouraged by obfuscation and prevarication from various ADC paid officers. It may be an opportune time to fix the ADC problem once and for all by simply abolishing the ADC problem.
Jack Arnold
Join the battle to stop coal mines
Just before Christmas, on the invitation of local residents, we went to join the protest against the clear-felling of the Leard State Forest near Boggabri for an additional and vast open-cut coal mine.
Walking through the forest with its vibrant life we were appalled at the contrast when we reached the gigantic dead hole of the existing Narrabri coalmine – nothing lives in that rock, dust and rubble.
If the Maules Creek open cut mine goes ahead, more than half of this precious forest will be destroyed forever.
We urge others to go and see for themselves what is happening, and consider the balance between the huge expansion of Australia’s coal exports and the health and well-being of our communities and our environment. Who gains and who loses?
It’s understandable for big business to want to make profits, but what is the role of government in protecting the people, the land the water?
Patsy Asch and Barbara Finch
Truckies should say no
GPS every truck. This has been the latest suggestion from government. We know that suggestions too often become law.
Of course we are told that it would reduce ‘illegal’ driving hours and save billions of dollars. We aren’t told how that figure was computed.
I thought that the new and improved Driver’s Log Book, with its heavy fines, and demerit points, was meant to make truck driving safer. Now we are to go deeper into the technological age.
The GPSing cost will be met by the truck operators --- naturally.
It is time that truck operators said, “Enough is enough!”
Aren’t they all tired? Maybe truck operators need to take a month’s holiday, and have a good rest. We’ll see then how Australia operates without trucks.
As long as truck operators continue to bow the knee to BIG government’s controls they will continue to dream up more schemes to harass the trucking industry.
Jay Nauss
Thankyou Armidale for giving
On behalf of the entire Kmart team and our friends at The Salvation Army, I’d like to say a big thank you to all who contributed to the 2013 Kmart Wishing Tree Appeal.
Australia’s largest gift appeal has again provided much needed Christmas cheer with 470,658 gifts donated for people in need across the country, an increase of 27,336 on last years total.
Kmart stores in Queensland collected a total of 85,847 gifts.
This unprecedented generosity is thanks to people who have spared a thought for those who would otherwise go without at Christmas time.
The 2013 Appeal also saw a 624% increase in business participation, with 181 organisations donating gifts and money to the Appeal.
For the first time ever, Prime Minister Tony Abbot also got behind the Appeal, erecting a Wishing Tree in Parliament House.
I’d like to thank you for supporting this great and much loved Christmas Appeal, once again showing the strength of the great Aussie spirit.
Guy Russo
Managing Director
Kmart
Letters to the Editor
Mail:
The Armidale Express
115 Faulkner Street
Armidale
NSW, 2350
Email:
lydia.roberts@fairfaxmedia.com.au