Where Did Our Money Go?

March 8, 2023

by Dafyd Martindale

Social media claims that Kingaroy receives the majority of the South Burnett Regional Council’s funding have been demolished by a new report on Council spending.

The report – which details Council’s income and expenditure over the past decade – was tabled at the SBRC’s February General Meeting after a request from Cr Kirstie Schumacher at October’s General Meeting last year.

Cr Schumacher, who represents Division 4, said she was tired of reading social media comments that Kingaroy was receiving more than its fair share of funding.

She requested staff produce a report on Council income and expenditure covering the past 10 years to show what Council actually received in ratepayer income and where those funds had been spent.

The report – something that has never been done before – shows that funding has been spread fairly evenly over all six of the region’s Divisions during the past decade.

It lists the amount of general rates generated by Kingaroy, Nanango, Blackbutt, Wondai and Murgon during the past decade and the number of ratepaying households in each major town.

The report shows that Kingaroy – the region’s largest town – accounts for almost 30 per cent of all ratepaying households (5249) with Nanango holding second place (2881).

In total, the five major towns contributed $152,768,519 in general rates between 2013 and 2023.

The report then includes the amount of general rates generated by rural properties, villages, other properties, shopping centres and power generation sites such as the Tarong Power Stations and Coopers Gap Wind Farm.

These “special” categories contributed a further $101,922,835 over the same period.

In total, this combined funding (ie. towns and special categories) of $254,691,352 – along with grant funding received for particular projects – was spent on a wide range of capital works covering roads, footpaths, parks and other general infrastructure across all six divisions, each of which are individually detailed in the final report.

The project lists show the majority of the Council’s general rates funding was spent on upgrading or maintaining the region’s 3200km road network, most of which services rural properties, and the balance on maintaining or upgrading existing Council infrastructure.

The report also shows that in some years, each Division received more than its ratepayers contributed in rates. In other years, it was less.

However, it also shows that on average over the past 10 years, funding has been spread fairly evenly across the region, and no Division has been treated any better – or worse – than any other.

(NB. Divisions 3 & 4 cover Kingaroy and surrounding areas.)

The report also separates general rates funding – which can be used on capital works projects – from water, sewerage and waste management charges, which are separate items on every Rates Notice.

These areas of Council operations are run as business units that are required to be self-funding and use whatever revenue they collect to maintain and upgrade the region’s water, sewerage, and waste management services.

In general, these systems have fixed running costs that remain largely the same from one year to the next.

However, these business units also need to reserve excess funds for multi-million dollar upgrades to water and sewerage processing plants and proposed new landfill or waste transfer sites, which may only be replaced every 10 to 70 years.

In the past decade, major upgrades have been carried out to Kingaroy’s waste water treatment plant and the Gordonbrook water treatment plant.

But replacements for similar systems in other towns are planned for future years, and this is where unspent funds in these categories will be put in the future.

• External document: SBRC Income and Expenditure Report 2013-2023 (18.7Mb)

* * *

Editorial Comment:

Cr Kathy Duff (Division 5) vehemently opposed the creation of the income / expenditure report at the first and subsequent council meetings where it was discussed, saying it would create division between towns and ratepayers.

However, other councillors, citing social media comments, said those divisions already existed and the report could have the opposite effect.

Sadly, that does not seem to have been the case.

A post on social media by Mayor Brett Otto, shared by Cr Duff, showed amalgamated figures (see right) and provoked many comments, including:

“The figures say it all, what a joke”

“So 35% divided by the 10 smallest areas of the district becomes 3.5% divided by $83m, oh I can certainly see that “

“This is a disgrace. Following in the footsteps of the State Government? Where have they spent all this money? Looking at Kingaroy now, what a shambles”

“Kingaroy… u can put lipstick on a pig, it’s still a pig”

Mayor Otto was accused by one commenter of “creative accounting” which he vigorously rejected.

When taken to task about his social media post by Cr Kirstie Schumacher at this week’s Liveability Standing Committee meeting, it emerged Mayor Otto had included expenditure on water and sewerage projects in his Divisional spending calculations.

This was despite the fact the original report made it clear that water, sewerage and waste were separate business units outside the scope of the report’s capital works focus.

Mayor Otto argued that funds spent on water and sewerage works were capital works, just the same as those listed in the main body of the expenditure report, so they should be included to give ratepayers a more complete and balanced picture of where Council spent their money.

However, what Mayor Otto neglected to tell his Facebook fans was that while upgrades to Kingaroy’s Waste Water Treatment Plant and the Gordonbrook Water Treatment Plant had indeed cost a combined $53 million during the past decade, Kingaroy ratepayers paid almost $56 million in separate water and sewerage charges over the same period – in addition to their general rates – to cover this cost (as shown on the Council’s report for the Water and Waste Water business unit’s income and expenditure summary).

The Mayor also overlooked telling readers in Nanango, Blackbutt, Wondai and Murgon that similar big sums would be spent in future years to upgrade or replace water and sewerage treatment plants in those Divisions, and residents connected to those systems will pay the costs of these upgrades, too, when they occur.

What the Mayor could have told residents, instead, was the information shown in the table below, which is drawn directly from Council’s own report and the number of enrolled voters in each Division.

It shows that during the past decade Kingaroy (ie. Divisions 3 & 4) actually received the lowest amount of capital works expenditure per voter while Murgon (Division 5) and much of the former Wondai Shire plus Kumbia (Division 6) received the highest amounts.

  Council