Headlines
2.75% rate increase (the maximum allowed)
2.72% rise in the default waste charge to $203.60
Most fees and charges increase 3.65 per cent
Pensioner rates rebate increases 4.8 per cent to $220
Key dates
Community feedback open until 13 May
Special council hearing Wednesday 14 May
Council will approve budget Wednesday 26 June
Inflation, cost of living pressures, rate caps and a council election year are set to combine in a perfect storm of ‘interest’ in this Council budget.
Council, like households, businesses and community groups, are facing budget short falls as costs rise and inflation erodes purchasing power.
This is the context that surrounds the draft budget for 24/25, now out for community feedback until 13 May.
There will also be a public hearing at Council on 14 May.
Fractious and testy debate at first opportunity
No sooner had Councillors voted unanimously to send their much-considered plan and budget out for consultation, they started to disagree vehemently about a swag of eleventh-hour amendments.
With elections looming in October, councillors proposed and voted on a series of changes that served as ‘proxies’ for widely differing points of view.
Points of disorder
At stages in this first debate, the proceedings bordered on farce with repeated petty points of order disrupting the comments of various councillors. Although this Council (like most others) agrees on most things, they are passionate about the things they differ on. These last-minute amendments read like a search for points of difference in the upcoming election.
The budget amendments were ….
$250K extra for St Kilda Festival – carried
Supporters argued that this was ‘backing a winner’ and ‘keeping up with inflation’. The opponents argued that the Festival should work within a budget, just like other programs.
For: Crs Crawford, Martin, Baxter, Bond, Pearl, Nyaguy (corrected 22 Apr – error in Council minutes)
Against: Crs Clark, Sirakoff, Cunsolo
$119K extra for EcoCentre programs – carried
Supporters argued that the extra monies would be good value following the funding of the new $7M EcoCente which will open later this year. The extra funds will maintain programs against inflation and enable the Centre to open on weekends for an 18 month trial.
For: Crs Crawford, Baxter, Martin, Cunsolo, Nyaguy
Against: Crs Pearl, Bond, Clark, Sirakoff
CCTV funded by council – carried
A tricky “open cheque” motion proposed that council fund CCTV renewal and upgrade over the next two financial years because attempts for external funding (read State Government) have so far been unsuccessful. The opponents Crs Baxter and Nyaguy argued it was clearly the State’s responsibility.
For: Crs Clark, Crawford, Martin, Cunsolo, Pearl, Sirakoff, Bond
Against: Crs Nyaguy, Baxter
$10 per day increase in Long Day Care fees – carried
An increase in long day care fees of $10.00 per day from $147 to $157 representing a 6.8 % increase. Not popular but necessary said supporters.
For: Crs Bond, Pearl, Clark, Sirakoff, Cunsolo
Against: Crs Crawford, Martin, Baxter, Nyaguy
$250K to support renters in Port Phillip – lost
Cr Nyaguy proposed a late motion to give financial support to organisations supporting renters. This was by far the most fractious debate with opponents arguing that it was too vague, ill considered and not the role of local government.
For: Crs Crawford, Baxter, Martin, Nyaguy
Against: Crs Clark, Bond, Cunsolo, Sirakoff, Pearl
Asking the next council to allocate $1M pa to social housing – lost
The proponents Nyaguy/Baxter noted that Council’s annual $500K commitment to social housing ends next year, so they wanted it to double the commitment to $1M for a decade from 25/26. The opponents said that was up to the next Council.
For: Crs Crawford, Baxter, Martin, Nyaguy
Against: Crs Clark, Bond, Cunsolo, Sirakoff, Pearl
$90,000 to trial methods of saving the iconic palms from Fusarium Wilt disease – carried unanimously
Protecting the iconic palms was something that every councillor could support. (How it was not in the budget was not explained)
For: Crs Clark, Crawford, Martin, Cunsolo, Baxter, Bond, Pearl, Sirakoff, Nyaguy
Against: Nil
Have your say on the Draft Budget and plan at the Council website before 13 May
Budget ‘spicy’ bits
Hey big spender …
85% of new public space spending went to one purchase …
…in Port Melbourne.
“Budget 2024/25 capital works expenditure of $115.9 million has significantly increased due to the $45 million capital commitment to purchase land as per Council’s public space strategy.”
The unprecedented capital expenditure in 24/25 is dominated by the $38.8M purchase of an Australia Post site in Port Melbourne for conversion to open space – this represents about 85% of the increased expenditure.
Council is tight lipped about other open space purchases but has indicated they will probably be in Balaclava and St Kilda East.
FYI Council is expecting to earn about $1.75M per annum for two years on the Aussie Post site until the posties relocate.
Interest rate windfall supports ‘positive’ result
Surplus doubles from last year
While mortgage holders are feeling the squeeze of interest rates, the cash savvy Council has enjoyed a higher than predicted income from interest paid on reserves – a whacking $4.6M.
The high interest income, parking revenue and delayed operating portfolio spend (including operating spend on capital projects) helped Council to predict a healthy recovery in operating surplus.
