Table of Contents
The Hawkesbury Sports Council, a community-managed organisation responsible for the operation of the LGA’s sports grounds, faces a critical decision: to accept a new, riskier contract with Hawkesbury Council or to disband entirely, leaving each sporting club to stand alone and negotiate directly with the council.
For over 30 years, the Sports Council has operated effectively under an agreement with Hawkesbury City Council, receiving $1.35 million annually in exchange for maintaining community sports fields and equipment and ensuring facilities are safe and available each week. The model has produced favourable outcomes for clubs and players across the LGA until now.
Following a recent risk management review, the Council is requiring the Sports Council to sign a new agreement. However, the Sports Council is wary, and rightly so. On at least two separate occasions, Hawkesbury City Council insisted on taking over projects that the Sports Council had planned to complete at a lower cost. The Council carried out these projects at a significantly higher price, yet the Sports Council was still compelled to shoulder the financial burden.
Benson's Lane, Richmond, required hoods to be installed to direct lighting downwards; the Sports Council was quoted $12,500 for the work.
Hawkesbury Council carried out the installation, which eventually cost the Sports Council $52,000. In another example, Hawkesbury City Council removed lighting from Icely Park in Richmond, forcing the Sports Council to pay for reinstalling it so sporting teams could train and play after dark.
These issues have only recently arisen since the Hawkesbury City Council chose to act independently of the Sports Council.
“They believe they know more about sport than the people who play it and are determined to assert their authority over sporting infrastructure,” says a Sporting Club member who did not want to be identified. “The trouble is they don’t.”
With no recourse or reimbursement, the Sports Council has valid grounds to view its procurement policies as a risk to cost-effective project delivery rather than a safeguard.
However, Hawkesbury City Council has not provided any evidence that its procurement processes have been reviewed or improved. There are no guarantees, no policy shifts, and no accountability.
For the Sports Council, the stakes are high. Sign up and risk being drawn into costly procurement processes that would increase the expense of sport across the LGA. Or stay out and leave each club to manage its own uncertain future with the Council.
