Waterway facilities enhance tourism

I refer to the letter to the editor by mayor Chris Holstein (Peninsula News, March 16) providing "clarity" over the council's position in relation to the dredging of the Ettalong Beach channel.

The mayor has repeatedly justified the council's decision not to contribute to the dredging based on the fact that the channel comes under the responsibility of Ports and Waterways and the responsibility for the channel lies with the Department of Lands.

I don't recall that anyone has ever actually disputed this fact.

However, historically across NSW, local councils have shared responsibility for channel maintenance as Gosford Council has done in the past.

This is despite the fact that council does not derive any direct income from the waterways, as the mayor has repeatedly told us.

This belies the fact that Gosford council derives considerable income from tourists and visitors who enjoy the waterways and consequently frequent holiday premises, cafes, restaurants, shops, clubs and other facilities.

But let's not split hairs!

The mayor also likes to tell us that it costs the council over $500,000 per annum to maintain the 54 public wharves-jetties and 33 boat ramps throughout the city.

And so it should as these are facilities that we pay for as ratepayers.

These facilities also go hand-in-hand with the very waterways that enhance tourism in the city but, in his view, should be fully paid for by the NSW Government.

I hope the Liberal mayor asks the NSW opposition to commit to the dredging should they win government in 2011.

Cr Holstein then laments that if the ratepayer were to fund half the cost, other services and vital infrastructure would suffer as a result.

The mayor is also very keen for us to ask the question as to where all the money goes that the State Government derives from jetty fees, licences and moorings which he estimates could be as much as $5 million.

That's a very good question to ask.

So good that whilst we are asking that question and lamenting the fact that we never seem to have enough money for roads, drainage and other community infrastructure, we should also the ask the mayor where the ratepayers investment funds have gone from council's $120 million General Investment Portfolio and Loan Investment Portfolio.

Council reported in the business paper on the February 24, 2009, that it had suffered $48 million in market value losses on its $120 million of ratepayers' investment funds.

It would appear from council's report that $40 million of these funds are developer contributions that are supposed to be spent on the very roads, drainage and community infrastructure that he complains about.

So yes, where has the money gone and why wasn't that money spent on infrastructure (and the half cost of the channel dredging for that matter).

It's very hard to pick on the NSW State Government over a trifling $250,000 when council is struggling to explain how it is going to account for nearly $50 million in market losses to the ratepayer.

And what was very interesting, not one single councillor listed the item for discussion at the council meeting.

I'm not surprised Mr Mayor - not a warm and fuzzy topic to discuss in these tough economic times.

Matthew Wales, Peninsula Chamber of Commerce