Hawkesbury ratepayers are being asked to fund a cumulative 39.41 per cent increase in council rates over four years, despite the Independent Pricing and Regulatory Tribunal (IPART) acknowledging that Hawkesbury City Council failed to comply with reporting requirements attached to a previous Special Rate Variation.
The question now being asked by some residents is simple:
If the outcomes of the previous rate rise were never properly reported, why was another one approved?
The issue has been highlighted in an independent review commissioned by the Hawkesbury Gazette and prepared by retired IBM executive and Hawkesbury ratepayer Bob Gribbin.
Mr Gribbin spent decades in business analysis and governance roles with IBM, assessing organisational performance, financial systems, project delivery and accountability frameworks in both the public and private sectors for Australia's top 100 companies. Following IPART's approval of Hawkesbury City Council's application to increase rates by 8.66 per cent per year for four years, he conducted a detailed examination of the Tribunal's final determination.
His report identifies a finding that may surprise many ratepayers.
According to IPART's own determination, Hawkesbury City Council did not comply with reporting conditions attached to a previous Additional Special Variation approved in 2022-23. In plain terms, Council did not provide the required reporting demonstrating how funds raised under that earlier increase were spent. IPART referred the non-compliance to the NSW Office of Local Government but approved the new Special Rate Variation regardless.
For Mr Gribbin, the issue is not whether Council needs more money, but whether accountability should come before additional funding.
"The new approval relies on the same reporting mechanism that previously failed," he notes in his report.
The previous Special Rate Variation, approved between 2018 and 2021, increased rates by more than 31 per cent. Mr Gribbin argues that before approving another significant increase, ratepayers should have received a clear and independently verified explanation of whether the earlier increase achieved its stated objectives.
IPART took a different view.
The Tribunal's determination makes clear that it does not audit councils, assess individual spending decisions or evaluate the success of projects funded by previous rate increases. Instead, its role is limited to determining whether councils meet the legislative requirements for a Special Rate Variation application.
That distinction lies at the heart of the debate.
Many of the concerns raised by residents during the consultation process related not to accounting figures but to project delivery and performance. Issues such as Fernadell Park, WestInvest projects, the Berambing telecommunications tower, Windsor Paddlesports and the sewer scheme were all raised by submitters. IPART acknowledged those concerns but considered them outside its statutory remit.
The result is a question that extends beyond Hawkesbury.
If IPART is not responsible for assessing whether councils successfully delivered projects funded by previous rate rises, and if it does not independently audit council spending claims, who is?
The NSW Office of Local Government oversees councils. The NSW Audit Office audits financial statements. Councillors are elected to provide governance and oversight. Yet for many ratepayers, the approval of another major rate increase before the previous one had been fully reconciled leaves unanswered questions.
The issue is not whether roads need upgrading. Few dispute that Hawkesbury faces significant infrastructure challenges.
The issue is accountability.
Should councils be required to demonstrate that previous Special Rate Variations achieved their intended outcomes before receiving approval for new increases?
Should reporting conditions be enforced more rigorously?
And should ratepayers be entitled to a clear, independently verified account of how previous increases were spent before being asked to contribute more?
Download the Report
The full report prepared by retired IBM executive and Hawkesbury ratepayer Bob Gribbin, Matters Raised in My Submission That IPART's Final Report Did Not Address, is available for download below. The report provides a detailed examination of the determination and the issues Mr Gribbin believes remain unresolved.
