In response to ROPP’s advocacy, Council conducted a cost review to identify options for ongoing cost reductions that would enable Council to consider adopting a zero percentage rates increase in financial year 2023/24. However, the cost review was not conducted in good faith and was an appalling waste of time and money. The process was politicised and disingenuous.

Council undertook a review of spending in 28 service areas over a series of eight workshops and months to identify cost savings. A cost saving of $5M or 2% of total expenditure of $248M was required to deliver a zero-percentage rate increase (i.e. freeze rates) and Council was only able to find $87,000 of savings. The Cost Review was a farce and an appalling waste of time and money. 

Councillors were invited to identify services to be cut rather than cut wasteful spending. Services do not have to be cut to reduce rates. The Cost Review process was fundamentally flawed and politicised. The result of the Cost Review was to propose a reduction in the Cultural Development Fund for artistic and creative projects from $187,000 to $100,000 from the 2023/24 draft budget. The Cost Review 2022 was completed outside of the normal budget process and a temporary agency staff resource was engaged at approximately $70,000 to assist in the Cost Review. 

The $87,000 cut to the cultural development program represents less than 1% of the $17.3 million budget for the Arts, Culture and Heritage which spends $415,000 on cultural development projects and grants. Another $345,000 is spent on Community grants in Community programs and facilities. COPP provides $760,000 of generous funding and grants for Cultural Development across two service areas: 

• Community programs and facilities and 
• Arts, culture, and heritage. 

We disagree with claims that COPP operates efficiently. The Council Officers should have been asked to find 2% efficiencies of total expenditure of $248M (ie $5 million) to deliver a zero-percentage rate increase (i.e. freeze rates).

Often consultants are brought in to do the work that officers can do such as facilitating meetings and preparing reports. Each of the 28 service areas produce a glossy policy document based on a community consultation littered with vested interests. Writing reports is not delivering a service and efficiencies should be made by the reduction in the unnecessary use of consultants.

For example, COPP is seeking community feedback on its draft Housing Strategy which is budgeted to cost $365,000 over two years. Council have spent a lot of time and money on preparing the policy document, but it completely overstates the role of local government in the supply and design of housing. Is that good value for money? Is this another policy document that merely reports and monitors statistics and just sits on the shelf?  

Sources: 

Item 13.1 Cost review in the meeting agenda and minutes of 15 February 2023 https://www.portphillip.vic.gov.au/about-the-council/council-meetings/2023-meetings-and-agendas

Vol 3 Draft Council Plan and Budget https://haveyoursay.portphillip.vic.gov.au/council-plan-and-budget.