Local resident verified (requested identity to be withheld, fearful of council targeting and backlash).

25 June 2024

Dear Editor

We refer to two articles by Malcolm King in The Bugle of 1-14 June 2024, which are ostensibly news reports, but include unattributed quotes from interested parties and personal opinions of the writer on the financial position of Kiama Council. 

An example of this is the statement: One strategy would be to resolve the sale [of Blue Haven Terralong] after the September council elections in the hope of removing some of the Councillors who either don’t agree with the figures or place social justice issues above solvency.

This statement is wrong in many ways, although it confirms a view promulgated by some on Council that meeting the needs of senior residents is no longer “core business” for Council. Surely Council’s responsibility is to act responsibly in providing services for all the community, which are socially just and environmentally sustainable, while ensuring that it manages its finances transparently and in line with legal requirements. This could have been achieved in the past financial year if it had not squandered $5 million on legal fees.

It is also worth noting that much of the capital cost of the Terralong Blue Haven site was met by community fundraising and generous donations of private land at no cost to Council. How can these now simply be divested as Council “assets”? This at a time when other regional communities are moving in the opposite direction as they recognise they can’t rely on for-profit private organisations to fill the growing gap in provision of such services. One recent example is the community-based programme at Bombala to provide assisted living accommodation for older residents recently forced to move up to 500 kms away to obtain care.   

Mr King’s articles overlook the established history that over four decades Kiama Council treated Blue Haven Terralong independent living units as a cash cow, by using substantial surpluses estimated at nearly $70 million to fund recurrent expenditures, depriving that facility of appropriate depreciation reserves and in practice allowing the Council to keep rates lower for residents. A current year budget analysis is wholly inadequate if it ignores this historical reality to justify a further fire sale of income-producing assets. While the care home may have been running at a loss, all other Blue Haven entities bring in annual surpluses to Council. 

In what appear to be unattributed quotes from Council sources, Mr King also claims there has been a growth in depreciation costs, with no growth in revenue. Why is this so, when the population is growing, rates are rising and other funding sources are apparently not adequately accessed?  

We strongly hope that in future editions of The Bugle opinion pieces and media releases from Council will be clearly identified, and not reported as if factual news.

Concerned long-term residents of Kiama.