Sign In
or Create a new account
Understanding the Water Services
This online discussion forum has concluded. You can still browse the site but the discussion area will no longer accept new comments or votes.
The Port Macquarie-Hastings Council water system provides over 31,000 water connections. The system includes two off creek storage dams, four water treatment plants, 36 reservoirs and over 750 km’s of water mains. Other associated equipment includes chemical dosing units, additional pumping stations, telemetry equipment for remote monitoring and technical instruments.
In order to maintain and sustain the current service level it is proposed to continue to increase your water annual charge by 6% each year. This enables the current service level to be maintained whilst also providing for additional growth in the region. Network growth will continue to be met by both increased developer charges and rate income as required.
This online discussion forum has concluded. You can still browse the site but the discussion area will no longer accept new comments or votes.
Relates to website: http://www.hastings.nsw.gov.au/www/html/2814-introduction.asp
Comment 1 8 Sep 2010, 3:28 PM
It may have helped not to have wasted so much money on the unecessary flurodation of our water supply. 99% of our water goes from our tap to our drain. Less than 1% in consumed in our household. That's a lot of $ flushed down the drain. 6% rise each year (compounded) is a heavy burden for our pensioners already struggling with everyday price rises.
Comment 1.1 8 Sep 2010, 5:02 PM
Tough one. I understand that peoples rights not to have flouride in the water probably exceed my want for it. It just seems to me that the benefits far outweigh the negatives on that one. What's easier, for all the people who want it to Flouridate their own water supply some how or for the 5% of people who don't to be given rainwater tanks? But I agree,what's with 6% PA?
Comment 2 8 Sep 2010, 5:04 PM
Why does the cost of maintaining an already established water system rise by 6% every year? Maybe I should by shares in the business somehow...seems like a pretty reasonable return for the current economic climate we're in.
Comment 2.1 8 Sep 2010, 6:15 PM
I'd guess it accounts for inflation in the price if goods and services, new works/expansion, and the increased maintenance cost of servicing those new works.
I would hope that some of this money goes to council staff pay increases. as they deserve them as much as anybody else if not more.
Comment 2.1.1 8 Sep 2010, 8:16 PM
Donnaf, you are either on the council or you are winding me up! Pay increases? Are you having a laugh!!!!!!
Of all the people who do a good job in this world and region....of all the people that don't get a fair shake of the economic pie...you list council workers??? Cut my eyes out cos I'm already blind!
I hope you respond to this cos I love an argument when its one as stupid as this!
Inflation (which is probably about 2% at the moment) refers to costs of materials, goods and services...So you've doubled up there. New works..well I'm pretty sure it more…
Comment 2.1.2 9 Sep 2010, 10:48 AM
If you you want to talk about who deserves what, walk a couple of blocks south from the Glasshouse and you will find TWO soup kitchens struggling to provide the basics for survival solely on donations. This is a sad indictment on our society and tragically, diminishes us all.
Comment 2.1.2.1 9 Sep 2010, 11:20 AM
A little off topic ,don’t you think?
Comment 2.1.2.1.1 9 Sep 2010, 12:10 PM
Certainly not if you are discussing the ability of Council to provide basic services and the negative impact the Glasshouse, in its current form, has on its ability to achieve this. You comment suggesting pay rises for council staff under the current economic and budgetary restraints the council faces is the one off topic, don't you think? Why do you think council employees deserve more than others?
Comment 2.1.2.1.1.1 9 Sep 2010, 1:01 PM
I have never said they deserve more then other , but they also don’t deserve less then other either, They get up every morning and go to work and do a job, just because mistakes were made in the past by the past management and councilors I don’t see why the staff now have to still pay for this mistake,I’m sure if you work you get a pay rise each year? I worked my whole life and got a pay rise each year, why don’t you think the current council staff deserve this ?
Comment 2.1.2.1.1.1.1 9 Sep 2010, 2:29 PM
You said..."they deserve them as much as anybody else if not more"
End of discussion.
Comment 2.1.2.1.1.1.1.1 9 Sep 2010, 2:39 PM
I didn’t say the deserved more of a pay rise, just that they deserved a pay rise maybe more then other people. For example the GM.
Comment 2.1.3 9 Sep 2010, 2:57 PM
I agree Donna, Workers are just workers and some of the comments attacking anyone with a job at Council are just silly. Council workers still have to provide for their families just like the rest of us.
I am concerned though by 6% rises in costs each year, sounds like management should be working to keep these increases in check and to find efficiencies not just passing costs on to the rate payers - that's the easy option
Comment 3 10 Sep 2010, 10:30 AM
It is only reasonable to expect that costs will increase over time, however I am concerned that part of the 6% pa increase is attributable to network increases which are NOT fully met by developers. I dont want to subsidise development, and I dont see much benefit in increased population. All network growth costs should be met by developers not the general rate paying public. I would like to know how much that subsidy is? It is also only reasaonable that there will be increases in labour costs ( Council workers) whilst ever there is inflation - they have to eat & pay bills that increase with inflation, and pensions have increased in line with cost of living increases.
Comment 4 13 Sep 2010, 6:57 PM
Hi to all! One assumes that the budget projections are predicated on the available historical data. We all have been well advised of the problems faced by much of australia in securing our water supply! I find it interesting that an arbitrary 6% has been mooted when the hastings has only recently commissioned the cowarra storage facility (We assume that that project was fully funded and considered the heeds of the hastings into the medium future). Was this under funded at he time? A pegging of increases to the official inflation rate seems a reasonable alternative. That increase should generally cover the cost increases associated with the water services as described (3-4%?).
Comment 5 14 Sep 2010, 8:39 PM
if infrastructure lasts about eighty years one would expect 2% annually to be the maintenance cost but if population growth is 4% one would then expect a 6% cost by my rought estimate .. can anyone explain it any other way.. those of us paying are subsidizing the new developments and growth it would seem
