Rodney Stevens

A controversial move to charge owners of pontoons at Yamba a lease application fee every five years plus an annual lease fee, which has seen Clarence Valley Council accused of ‘double dipping’, has been deferred so councillors can workshop the proposal.

Prior to the reclassification of council drainage reserves at Yamba from Community to Operational land in 2021, landowners with a pontoon, jetty or boat ramp located on the adjoining drainage reserve were charged an annual fee ($76.50 for 2023-24) to allow their structure to occupy Community land.

The Local Government Act 1993 permits council to issue a five-year term for water recreation structure leases and when they are due for renewal, jetty, pontoon and boat ramp owners can lodge a renewal application for a further 5-year term a new charge of ($262.35 for 2023-24).

If council “allow water recreation structures to occupy Council land without a valid tenure agreement, council is at risk of becoming liable if a person is injured, or property damaged, due to the water recreation structure being located on public land.”

When council staff issued renewal notices and renewal applications to all jetty, pontoon, and boat ramp owners due to renew their agreements on July 1, 56 per-cent of water structure owners lodged applications and paid their fees, 40.5 per-cent of owners haven’t responded, and 3.5 per-cent or 10 owners of water recreation structures have contacted council advising they refuse to comply and will not enter into an agreement.

Council received 8 written submissions against the proposal, with several ratepayers who refuse to pay the new lease application fee stating they have their own public liability insurance for their structure.

In a submission to council before the August meeting, Yamba resident Lynne Cairns asked whether council would be repaying the annual fees it charged before the land was reclassified in 2021.

“In my opinion this is double dipping…I hope council will give favourable consideration to charging one fee. Administratively and economically, it makes sense to have one fee,” Mrs Cairns told council.

At the August 22 council meeting, Cr Bill Day moved a motion, which was seconded by Cr Greg Clancy that council:

1.Advise in writing the owners of water recreation structures that the matter of the cost of leasing of council community/operational land for these structures will be reviewed in a councillor workshop and invite submissions.

2.Council then hold a workshop to review these issues before the November ordinary council meeting OCM for decision at that OCM.

General Manger Laura Black then questioned the lawfulness of council reviewing a legislative requirement to lease operational land.

“I am just querying if that’s a lawful thing for the council to resolve to do,” Ms Black said.

Ms Black said it was required by legislation for council to lease operational land.

Cr Day accepted the land needed to be leased under legislative requirements but said the argument from ratepayers was over the application fees and the cost.

Ms Black told the meeting she would check if the fees were a statutory requirement, or they are ‘user pays’, to determine whether Cr Day’s proposed motion was lawful.

Then Ms Black suggested council defer the matter.

“If this is what council want to do is have a discussion about this at a workshop, can I recommend that the matter be deferred,” she said.

Cr Debrah Novak asked if there was any legal risk to council if the item was deferred.

“Council is carrying a legal risk at the moment, by deferring it you are continuing to carry that risk for a period longer,” Ms Black replied.

Cr Karen Toms then asked what the consequences of deferring the item would be for the staff in terms of legislation.

“At the moment our staff are going through the process of ensuring as many people as possible are compliant with legislation and they will continue to do that,” Ms Black said.

Councillors then voted on a motion to defer the item so councillors can hold a workshop on the issue which was carried 8 votes to 1 with Cr Allison Whaites voting against.

Clarence Valley Council advised it will respond to questions from the CV Independent after the councillor workshop is held.