The meeting, held on Monday, June 29, was chaired virtually by Mayor Brad Bunting, who joined proceedings remotely while overseas.
Labor Councillor Julie Griffiths moved the motion to adopt the budget, which incorporated the full special rate variation increase. Speaking for about four minutes, Cr Griffiths acknowledged community concerns around cost-of-living pressures but defended the proposal.
“Many families and businesses across Blacktown are experiencing cost-of-living pressures,” she said. “But, as a council, we have a responsibility to ensure Blacktown remains financially strong, sustainable, and able to deliver the services our community relies upon.”
Cr Griffiths also rejected claims the rate increase was driven by mismanagement, describing the SRV as a necessary measure rather than a corrective one.
Opposition emerged from Liberal Councillor Peter Camilleri, who introduced an amendment aimed at reducing the overall SRV impact. His proposal sought to cut certain expenditures by up to $21M and redistribute the rate burden evenly across residential and business categories.
Council modelling indicated that under the original plan, businesses would face significantly higher increases than residents, with most business rates rising by as much as 56 per cent over three years, compared to approximately 25 per cent for households. However, the amended motion did not formally present the new rate structure.
Cr Camilleri criticised the proposal and broader council spending but argued for a balanced approach, saying: “You say we are not here for mismanagement. We have been here fighting for years about the giveaways of this building.
“My heart says we should reject the rate increase altogether, the feedback we received suggest we should reject the rate increase.
“Community has been asked to tighten its belt in a cost-of-living crisis, everyone’s struggling. We have to balance that with what are we doing to tighten our belt and deliver the services that are required without over doing it.”
In a shift toward compromise, Cr Griffiths accepted Cr Camilleri’s amendment, signalling agreement between Labor and Liberal councillors on a revised, moderated SRV proposal.
However, the compromise failed to gain unanimous support within the chamber. Labor councillors Dorothy Del Villar and Talia Amituanai both spoke briefly in opposition, reaffirming their support for the original budget and SRV structure.
The meeting took a contentious turn when Cr Griffiths moved a procedural motion to close debate and proceed to a vote. Deputy Mayor Cr Carol Israel, an Independent councillor, objected, stating she had indicated her intention to speak earlier and had been overlooked.
Her concerns were supported by Independent Councillor Bob Fitzgerald, who also raised issues about the handling of debate.
Despite these objections, Mayor Bunting proceeded to call the vote “on the voices,” effectively pushing the motion through without further discussion. Councillors Israel, Fitzgerald, and Damien Atkins (Greens) formally recorded their opposition.
Labor councillors Del Villar and Amituanai who spoke against the motion allowing for the procedural motion to be put, decided to reverse their positions and vote for the motion.
The procedural handling of the vote has since intensified criticism of the meeting’s conduct and transparency.
Councillors Israel, Jess Diaz (Liberal), and Allan Green (Liberal) lodged a rescission motion the following day, June 30. The motion seeks to overturn the decision and instead implement the standard NSW rate increase of 5.2 per cent, rather than the proposed SRV.
Speaking to Blacktown News, Cr Israel said: “This is an important issue, and all councillors should have the opportunity to express their views — particularly when an amendment is introduced and accepted without providing the full impact on households and businesses. It raises more questions than answers.”
The rescission motion sets the stage for further debate, ensuring the future of Blacktown’s budget, and the scale of its rate increases, remains unresolved.
Council will now be required to reconsider the matter at a subsequent meeting, prolonging uncertainty for residents and businesses alike.
