Hawkesbury Council 70% rate rise in a decade...

HAWKESBURY GAZETTE ANALYSIS

Hawkesbury City Council is consulting on a new Special Rate Variation (SRV): 11.73% per year for three years from 2026/27 to 2028/29 (including an assumed 3.9% annual peg), permanently added to the rate base with normal peg limits resuming from 2029/30. Council’s case leans on a $99.1 million asset renewal shortfall today, forecast to hit $170 million within ten years without extra funding. Roads and stormwater are the centrepiece.

This critique puts that proposal in context, tests the numbers, and sets out the minimum transparency the community might consider before saying “yes.”

The missing history: a permanent 31% already banked (2018)

In 2018, Hawkesbury received IPART approval for a three-year SRV that compounded to about 31% and was kept permanently in the rate base. That wasn’t a temporary emergency levy; it stepped up what we all pay forever.

If the public story is “we can’t catch up because costs surged and disasters struck,” the community deserves a clear, line-by-line accounting of what the 2018 rise delivered, how much backlog it actually removed, and what structural issues (scope creep, overruns, contractor capacity, flood recovery, supply inflation) erased those gains. Right now, there’s no easy, single “SRV ledger” a resident can audit to reconcile 2018 promises against delivered works.

Takeaway: Before asking for another permanent rise, Council could show project by project what the last permanent rise achieved to assist the community in making a decision

Mind the compounding: it’s not “just three years at 11.73%”

The new SRV headline is “11.73% a year for three years.” But rates compound. Across those three years, the increase is roughly 39–40% on its own. When you stack that on top of the ~31% permanent lift from 2018, households are looking at a total increase well over 70% within about a decade.

The community impact is far larger than the neat 11.73% headline suggests. If Council wants trust, it must communicate using cumulative effects on an average bill, not annual slices that understate the real world hit.

Takeaway: Be upfront about the total compounded change since 2018 so the community can decide on the value it is recieving for the rate rise.

Outputs aren’t outcomes: where are the gains?

Council’s exhibition outlines activity outputs: more kilometres resealed, more patches, more culverts renewed, more park furniture, more playspace upgrades. Useful, yes. But they are inputs to improvement, not the improvement itself.

What ratepayers need to see are outcome metrics, such as:

• Pavement Condition Index (PCI) trends.
• Defect rates and roughness trends by road class.
• Percentage of the network in poor/very poor condition (before vs after).
• Backlog movement—the actual dollar reduction, not just spend totals.
• Unit costs (e.g., $/lane-km for reseal/rehab) and how they’re tracking.

If a permanent 31% rise in 2018 did not bend these lines the right way and the backlog still sits at $99.1 million the community needs a clear explanation: where did the money go, what assumptions failed, and how will this time be different?

Takeaway: Show hard, comparable condition data over time, not just activity lists.

Permanence cuts both ways

Like 2018, this SRV would stay in the base permanently. Permanence is powerful—Council gets a stable revenue step, but residents never get a step back. If Council wants another permanent uplift, it should match that with permanent transparency:

• A living, public SRV Works Ledger that tracks every SRV-funded job, scope, before/after photos, location, contractor, budget vs actual, and completion date.
• Quarterly outcome dashboards (PCI, defect rates, % network at end-of-life, backlog trend).
• A legally ring-fenced SRV reserve, with opening balance, inflows, outflows, and commitments.
• An independent external audit every year, plus random site verification.
• Service standards residents can feel: pothole response, reseal cycle by road class, and a rolling 12-month program with a publicly reported “hit rate.”

Takeaway: If the rise is permanent, so must be the transparency.

Show the alternatives next to the SRV

A convincing business case sets out options, not just the preferred path. Ratepayers should see, side-by-side:

• Industrial land activation (e.g., Woodlands at Wilberforce): timing, proceeds, staged releases, and how those proceeds reduce pressure on rates.
• Surplus land rationalisation: what assets, what safeguards for amenity, what valuations, and what net proceeds are realistic.
• Grants: what’s secured vs speculative; the delivery risks; the match funding required.
• Debt vs rates: in a high-inflation, high-cost environment, when does prudent debt, repaid from growth in the business/industrial rate base, beat another permanent hit to households?
• Efficiency and structure: executive overheads vs front-line crews, contract models vs in-house capability (e.g., permanent local road crews responsible for defined zones), and savings redirected to asset renewal.

Takeaway: Publish a table that compares mixes of SRV + land + grants + debt + efficiencies, with risks and timelines.

Delivery risk is the elephant in the works yard

The biggest reason communities lose faith is over-promise and under-deliver. Flood seasons, contractor shortages, price spikes, and supply bottlenecks can all blow out schedules. A credible SRV case must bring risks to the front page:

• A delivery risk register with mitigations (contingency budgets, alternative suppliers, ready-to-go packages).
• A phasing plan that prioritises safety-critical corridors and flood-prone assets.
• Clear escalation triggers (when targets are formally revised and why).
• Transparent unit-cost benchmarks so the public can tell whether we’re paying above market.

Takeaway: Don’t ask for permanent revenue with a “trust us” delivery plan.

EDITORIAL - No blank cheques. Not this time

Before Hawkesbury says yes to any permanent rate rise, Council should resolve to:

1. Publish the 2018 SRV ledger (promises vs projects vs outcomes) and lessons learned.
2. Show the cumulative bill impact since 2018 and through 2029 for an average household and typical farm/business, not just yearly percentages.
3. Ring-fence and report SRV funds quarterly, with project-level transparency and independent audit.
4. Commit to outcome targets, not just activity volumes: lift PCI by X points, reduce poor/very poor network by Y%, cut defect call-outs by Z%.
5. Table the alternatives (land activation, grants, prudent debt, efficiencies) so the SRV size and permanence can be trimmed where feasible.
6. Strengthen delivery capacity—including permanent local road crews responsible for defined zones—to improve responsiveness and accountability locals can actually feel.

Verdict

Hawkesbury is being asked for another permanent step-up after a permanent ~31% rise in 2018. Framing the new proposal as “11.73% for three years” hides the real-world compounding that pushes total increases to well over 70% within about a decade.

If Council wants a mandate, it needs to prove past value, show cumulative impacts, publish a ring-fenced and audited ledger, and present genuine alternatives alongside the rate rise.

The Hawkesbury Gazette will continue to follow this story.

HAWKESBURY COUNCIL PUBLIC INFORMATION SESSIONS

• Session 1: Tuesday 14 October 2025 - 10am -11am – Council Administration Building, Windsor
• Session 2: Wednesday 15 October - 2025 6:30pm – 7:30pm – Online Session
• Session 3: Thursday 16 October - 2025 12pm-1pm – Online Session
• Session 4: Thursday 16 October - 2025 7pm-8pm – Hawkesbury Central Library, Windsor

To book for a session, please visit www.hawkesbury.nsw.gov.au/for-residents/rates/special-rate-variation-community-information-session(External link). Online session attendees will receive an email closer to the date with your online session URL.

How to make a Submission

Have your say on the proposal between 11 September and 26 October 2025.

Key documents including the FAQ’s and example Capital Programs are listed under the Documents tab on this page, or can be viewed at:

• Council’s Administration Building, 366 George Street, Windsor, Monday to Friday during opening hours.

Hawkesbury Central Library, 300 George St, Windsor NSW 2756 and Richmond Branch Library, 29 West Market St, Richmond NSW 2753 during opening hours.

Council will receive submissions via:

• The Survey Tab below
• In writing addressed to the General Manager, by mail to Hawkesbury City Council, PO Box 146 Windsor NSW 2756, or
• By email to council@hawkesbury.nsw.gov.au

The last day for the receipt of submissions is 26 October 2025.