Table of Contents
Hawkesbury City Council has voted 7–4 to advance a multi-year Special Rate Variation (SRV) despite clear and overwhelming community opposition, igniting fresh anger from residents who say councillors have ignored the results of their own consultation.
At the 18 November meeting, councillors endorsed an SRV of 8.66% per year for four years, to be submitted to IPART.
The cumulative increase, around 39.4% over four years, was described by Cr Zamprongno during debate as “the most expensive option… not a compromise.”
The decision came after five public speakers addressed the chamber, all urging councillors to reject the SRV and choose a rate peg increase which is 3.1% only.
“Why did you ask us if you were never going to listen?” residents ask
Council is required to undertake a community consultation, costing $80,000, included surveys, Your Say submissions, meetings, and a Micromex poll. Those findings were unequivocal:
- 70% of residents rejected any form of SRV
- 81% understood services may be reduced without it
- 72% were willing to accept reduced services to maintain affordability
After the vote, residents expressed disbelief.
“Why spend all that money surveying us if you were always going to ignore the result?” asked Michael Jabor of North Richmond.
The proposal put up by Cr Kotlash and supported by the majority of Councillors was not included in the consultation process, raising further concerns about the purpose of the consultation process.
Creed’s alternative to SRV rejected 7–4
Councillor Mike Creed proposed an amendment that would have halted the SRV for 2026/27 and required a root-and-branch financial improvement program. His plan included:
- A full spending review
- Internal cost restructuring
- A new rating system based on capacity to pay
- A strengthened hardship policy
- Updated modelling incorporating household savings from the Windsor sewerage divestment
He argued that the hard decision was to fix Council first, not increase rates.
His amendment was defeated 7–4, with Mayor Sheather and councillors Wheeler, Lyons-Buckett, Ryan, McMahon, Kotlash and Reid voting against it.
Councillors supporting the Kotlash motion say they faced a ‘hard decision’ - community says it was the easy way out
Several councillors described voting for the SRV as “the hard decision,” framing it as necessary to maintain basic services.
Deputy Mayor Sarah McMahon said she could not:
“go home knowing [she] put the council in a position where it could not function again.” She conceded the original SRV proposal was “too much” but argued that Option 3 was a “softer, yet still professionally balanced approach.”
Cr Lyons-Buckett warned that delaying action would intensify the infrastructure backlog and lead to even higher future increases.
“If we don’t do this now, the situation will escalate.”
However the results of the community consultation took the opposite view with an overwhelming majority of 72% of residents surveyed willing to accept decreased servcie delivery.
Multiple speakers asked why councillors considered “going with the flow” endorsing the administration’s recommended revenue increase to be a courageous act, while the genuine hard decision was to interrogate why the last major rate rise introduced by previous Mayor Cr Lyons Buckett of nearly 30% in 2017/18 failed to eliminate the backlog, as it was promised to do.
The meeting offered no detailed explanation of why the previous SRV failed, nor how the new one will succeed where the last did not.
A growing fear: is Hawkesbury throwing good money after bad?
Throughout the public forum, residents repeatedly questioned Council’s capacity to deliver large projects, citing the administration’s own public statements that it lacks the resources to implement major infrastructure programs.
One speaker, Bob Gribbin of Oakville contrasted Fairfield’s delivery of a $16 million WestInvest project for Endeavour Park, completed on time and on budget, with Hawkesbury’s still-unfinished designs for Tamplin Field, Turnbull Oval and Richmond Pool three years after funding was received. “Hawkesbury cannot afford more failures,” he warned.
How Each Councillor Voted
1. Creed Amendment: To halt the SRV for 2026/27 and instead implement a financial improvement program
Purpose: To halt the SRV for 2026/27 and instead implement a financial improvement program including a spending review, revised rating structure, improved hardship supports and updated modelling before any future SRV.
Result: Defeated 7–4
FOR: Cr Mike Creed, Cr Nathan Zamprogno, Cr Shane Djuric and Cr Paul Veigel.
AGAINST: Cr Amanda Kotlash, Cr Jill Reardon, Cr Danielle Wheeler, Cr Mary Lyons-Buckett, Cr Peter Ryan, Deputy Mayor Cr Sarah McMahon, Mayor Les Sheather
Kotlash Motion: To endorse an SRV to be implemented over 4 years.
Purpose: To endorse an 8.66% per year for four years Special Rate Variation (cumulative ~39.4%) and lodge it with IPART.
Result: Carried 7–4
FOR: Cr Amanda Kotlash, Cr Jill Reardon, Cr Danielle Wheeler, Cr Mary Lyons-Buckett, Cr Peter Ryan, Deputy Mayor Cr Sarah McMahon, Mayor Les Sheather
AGAINST: Cr Mike Creed, Cr Nathan Zamprogno, Cr Shane Djuric and Cr Paul Veigel.
The Gazette will continue to follow this story.
