In Campaspe Shire’s case that will require estimated $38 million injection of funds to restore the devastated region’s infrastructure back to working order.
And while councillors recognised the $7.44 million injection of funds (an advance under the jointly-funded Commonwealth-State Disaster Recovery Funding arrangement) there was significant concern with the 80-20 funding ratio suggested by government officials.
That would mean — given the almost $40 million repair estimate — that Campaspe Shire would be up for almost $8 million and the government contribution would be $30 million-plus.
Campaspe Shire will join forces with Gannawarra, Buloke, Loddon and Swan Hill local government authorities to lobby for tens of millions in flood-funding following an announcement that only 80 per cent of the “bill” would be paid by the governments.
The second of five recommendations was that “certainty that 100 per cent of funding claims lodged to repair flood-damaged assets will be paid to councils”.
There has been mixed messaging delivered to council, initial advice by government representatives that they will only contribute 80 per cent of the requested funding now under question.
Mayor Rob Amos said things had changed since conversations earlier this year had indicated only 80 per cent of requested funding for repairing flood-damaged assets would be forthcoming.
“As a result of ongoing advocacy, recent indications from the state suggest that councils are now likely to receive 100 per cent of eligible claims,” he said.
Cr Paul Jarman, who has been at the forefront of Rochester community’s fight to re-build following the events of October last year, said clarity, timeliness, hope and care were priorities for Campaspe Shire residents.
“We need support and we need it in a timely manner, so the community can move forward,” Cr Jarman said.
“That is not to say we haven’t received assistance, we have, but there is lack of certainty in relation to funding.
“We (Campaspe Shire) struggle with financials at the best of time. We are extremely vulnerable in regard to infrastructure after the floods.
“Anything less than a full refund (for flood-damaged assets fromt he government) will be disappointing and impact other services.”
Cr Jarman described the council’s bid to access funding as “quite cumbersome and over burdened by red tape”.
“In some councils, because of the process and decision to allocate funding in increments of $500,000, some councils are required to submit up to 80 claims,” he said.
“That is impossible for already over burdened councils.”
Cr Jarman said a key objective was to access funding to ensure improvements were made to protect the communities in the future.
“Our communities need clarity around (Lake) Eppalock, so we can avoid this happening again,” he said.
The fifth component of the recommendation, which was unanimously supported by council was for the relevant authorities to provide “clarity on timing of Lake Eppalock’’.
A visit by Victorian Water Minister Harriet Shing to the water-storage facility at the centre of community debate was accompanied by a commitment to assessing the future operation and infrastructure of Lake Eppalock.
Council has backed a call for the state government to provide an “urgent solution” and a time frame on works to mitigate against the frequency and severity of any future spilling of Lake Eppalock.
The major fear of the Rochester community is that a repeat of flood events from 2011 and 2022 is almost a certainty unless something significant is completed at the site.
Cr Tony Marwood said it was disappointing that council had to form a recommendation like this given the suffering the communities went through.
“This is simply asking the state government to give us the support we need for our people to rebuild their lives,” he said.
Cr Daniel Mackrell applauded the wording of the recommendation, suggesting it was the first time in the six years he had been a councillor that he had seen the words “strongly” advocate used by council.
The emergency management agenda item ended by saying council’s aim was to have damaged community infrastructure repaired as quickly as possible and without negatively impacting on operational budgets or business-as-usual activities.
It said council staff resources should be used where they were most needed, supporting the community, and not unduly taken away from service delivery because of having to deal with systemic/process blockages and red tape.
Over to you Mr Andrews and Mr Albanese.
