Should the Council decrease, maintain or increase the existing level of built assets and infrastructure?

over 6 years ago
CLOSED: This map consultation has concluded

Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin Email this link

  • eyevest over 10 years ago
    There is enough money collected from poor ratepayers to meet most needs
  • doggone over 10 years ago
    I live in a village with very little infrastructure that is accepted as minimum standards in some of our more populated areas. However, I do think that the Council needs to do something about facilities that do no pay for themselves and are subsidised by ratepayers across the mountains eg if ratepayers in one part of the LGA want a facility which isn't paying for itself such as sporting complex or a pool then they should pay for it.
    Hide reply (1)
    • Lawsonite over 10 years ago
      Whether we use a sports oval, the library or only a footpath, all residents benefit in some way from other ratepayers. It's called community.
  • bwright over 10 years ago
    The Council should either maintain or decrease the existing level of service of its built assets and infrastructure. To clarify, no new assets should be added (particularly buildings) when the Council is finding it tough to service its existing assets.
    Hide reply (1)
    • Lawsonite over 10 years ago
      Absolutely agree here. If it's not too late then the Katoomba Centre should cancelled and its building and maintenance will be a huge saving.
  • waratah over 10 years ago
    Built assets should be retro fitted to reduce impact on the environment.
  • Lawsonite over 10 years ago
    If the new poorly-designed and VERY poorly-built Lawson township is an example of how Council builds its assets then I think serious consideration needs to be given to the tendering process and project control.

    The quickly deteriorating Lawson new township is going to be a drain on Council resources for ongoing maintenance.

    It's hard to believe that the Katoomba Cultural Centre and Springwood township changes are not going to be just as poorly carried with large ongoing maintenance costs as well.
  • cladinshadows over 10 years ago
    To start with the council needs to get some real town planners before starting to increase any of their assets... everything has been bungled up...look at lawson... even years ago with katoomba...everythng is inadequtae and no forsight into the future
  • Timbeck over 10 years ago
    What about asking if Council should reduce its overseas expenditure or increasing the leases on cars for an additional year or actually looking after local residents first before buying all the frilly things that make them warm and fuzzy inside.
  • Deonast over 10 years ago
    Perhaps the council should consider charging rates to Churches. For example the Blue Mountains City Church in Mount Riverview from my understanding is charged $1 a year by council for the rental of the council owned land, while other churches pay no rates on their own land. This is revenue lost to council and subsidised by rate payers.

    Historically churches received tax and other breaks due to their charity work in times when governments did less for the poor. In most cases these days Churches are there to benefit their parishioners only, with no direct benefit to the community.
  • MikeParker over 10 years ago
    I have just had a look at what the Special Variation of Rates is going to be spent on in Fact Sheet 9 “Proposed Expenditure of Special Variation Revenue” and I would scrap the lot and start again. In fact, I suggest you publish, in detail, on this website all the proposed capital works and let the community comment what they really want their money spent on.

    There are items in this list which have merit and also items in the existing capital works which have merit but in my opinion there are a lot which can easily be delayed or removed totally.
  • MikeParker over 10 years ago
    The council should only do what it can afford.

    First the Council should identify what is has got, what the community values and what it costs to maintain. Then the Council should scrap or delay anything that the community does not want to pay for.

    The council is proposing to borrow $6,145,000 to be utilised in capital infrastructure works for 2010-2011. Whatever capital works can be delayed in 2010-2011 will save that amount of money in 2010-2011.

    How about the Council putting a full list of proposed capital works, in detail, for 2010-2011 on this website and let the community vote which projects should go ahead and which projects should be delayed and which projects should be scrapped.
  • Pat1 over 10 years ago
    We are bombarded with enough taxes by all levels of Government. I for one would like to see more done for the youths in our communities as opposed to money being wasted on non-essential and/or purely aesthetic projects.
  • money over 10 years ago
    Has anyone reserved a thought for the impact that a large supermarket in springwood will have on the winmalee shoppingtown,notably on it's small buisneses;the owners of which have invested heavily and work long hours.Will they survive?
    Hide reply (1)
    • Lawsonite over 10 years ago
      In this day and age of rising costs, ordinary people need to cut those costs where they can. The opening of Aldi in Katoomba has resulted, at last, in competition and residents have been the beneficiaries. The idea of supporting small business is fine but in reality the cost of doing so is just too high if you have to live on an ordinary income.
  • Blaxlandite over 10 years ago
    Increase - definately not.

    Maintain - possibly so, but the community must have a say in those decisions. How about on a website like this to vote on each item?

    Decrease - a hard ask without knowing what has to go. The community needs to be involved in this decision. Where is the list of what is to go?

    How about a community vote on each of the built assets and infrastructure?

    Our elected Councilors need to get more involved in these issues, to stop arguing between themselves, and to serve their respective townships better. I just can't wait for the next Council elections! The Ward 4 lot will certainly have to go.
    Hide reply (1)
    • BigMack over 10 years ago
      I have to agree with Blaxlandite on all points, except the last. I would be more inclined to say "The lot will certainly have to go."
  • Keithm over 10 years ago
    Like almost all others in this forum, I am comprehensively opposed to the proposed rates increase. My reasons are largely covered by other contributors.

    Most importantly though, all concerned parties should note that this forum does not carry any weight and as such your comments and concerns are unlikely to be considered to any degree by council. On one page on the council website appears the following fine print:

    "This ( website is independent of Council. You can browse the information or 'Sign-Up' to provide comments on any aspect of the Draft Plans via the ‘Forum’ section of the webpage. Please note that COMMENTS MADE THROUGH THIS WEBSITE ARE ANONYMOUS AND AS SUCH CANNOT BE CONSIDERED AS A FORMAL PUBLIC SUBMISSION on the draft plans."

    So if you want you voice to be heard you need to lodge a formal submission by downloading the form here:

    and sending it back to the council by email by 5.00pm today. Methinks this may just be another bit of jiggery-pokery by council to engineer a way in which residents’ express concerns can legally be ignored.

    NOT impressed!

    Send in your submissions the “official” way today by 5.00pm and make sure your voice is heard!