25 September 2025

Eurobodalla Shire Council's operating deficit worsens

| By Marion Williams
Join the conversation
43
Eurobodalla Shire Councillors and former general manager Warwick Winn.

Eurobodalla Shire Councillors and former general manager Warwick Winn. Photo: Eurobodalla Shire Council.

Some key financial metrics for Eurobodalla Shire Council worsened last financial year.

Before grants and contributions provided for capital purposes, council’s consolidated operating deficit for the year to 30 June 2025 (FY25), was $14.27 million. That was larger than FY24’s deficit of $8.83 million and $11.45 million larger than the budgeted deficit of $2.82 million.

The papers for council’s general meeting on 23 September detailed $10.9 million of the $11.45 million shortfall against budget.

The largest item was $4.12 million due to the Commonwealth Government Financial Assistance Grant prepayment being cut from 85 per cent in FY24 to 50 per cent in FY25.

During the council meeting Councillor Sharon Winslade asked about the grant. Council’s director finance and corporate services Stephanie Speedy said the timing of the grant was the issue.

“The amount hasn’t changed. It is the timing,” Ms Speedy said. “We were to receive $10 million but only received $6.5 million. It will be received next financial year.”

The other two big items behind the shortfall against budget were $3.5 million of write-offs on infrastructure assets that were replaced or renewed, and $1.71 million associated with the deteriorating operating performance of council’s Community Care service and redundancies after council transitioned from the service.

READ ALSO Queanbeyan Train Station’s $4m revamp on board with improved safety, access

Also of note was a $28 million decline in grants and contributions for capital purposes from $69.3 million to $41.3 million. The council papers said that was primarily due to a $10.73 million drop in cash and non-cash developer contributions “reflecting current market conditions”.

On the positive side, unrestricted cash rose $2.33 million to $10.5 million. Council’s financial position also improved with net assets of $2.35 billion, up from $2.27 billion in F24.

The notes to the accounts included the financial performance of council’s activities. Among the most expensive are information and support services with a net operating deficit of $9.4 million, $7.17 million for recreation, $6.15 million for community facilities and spaces, $5.78 million for public order and safety which includes pets, parking, beach patrol and emergency services, and $5.1 million for corporate and community leadership.

The notes also showed that key management personnel’s short-term benefits, post-employment benefits and other long-term benefits jumped to $2.78 million from $1.52 million in FY24.

As well as the general purpose financial statements referred to above, council’s papers included draft special purpose financial statements. These assess the financial performance of council’s water supply and sewerage services, as well as its two declared business activities: Batemans Bay Beach Resort and Bay Pavilions.

The Bay Pavilions facade

The Bay Pavilions posted a $5.97 million deficit after tax in the last financial year. Photo: Eurobodalla Shire Council.

The water supply business posted a surplus after tax of $9.11 million. That was down from $30 million in FY24 and due to a $20.9 million drop in grants and contributions for capital purposes.

The papers for the council meeting said most of the variance was due to the timing and staging of the Southern Water Storage Facility project. “These fluctuations are typical of multi-year capital programs and reflect the delivery cycle of major infrastructure projects.”

The sewerage business posted a surplus after tax of $4.41 million versus $4.92 million in FY24.

Batemans Bay Beach Resort posted a surplus after tax of $704,000 versus $476,000 in FY24. The higher surplus was helped by a $195,000 fall in expenses on services and materials. The resort posted a 9.1 per cent return on capital versus returns of less than 1 per cent on the water and sewerage businesses.

READ ALSO Farewell to ‘gentleman’ and ‘person of principle’ Jim Snow, dead at 91

Bay Pavilions’ deficit after tax grew to $5.97 million from $5.3 million in FY24. An $837,000 increase in spending on materials and services was a contributing cause to the deterioration. The negative return on capital worsened from 8.3 per cent in FY24 to 9.5 per cent in FY25.

The net assets of the water supply and sewerage businesses and Batemans Bay Beach Resort increased.

In contrast, the net assets of Bay Pavilions fell from $59 million in FY24 to $58.86 million.

Councillors voted that the draft annual financial statements be referred to audit. The audited financial statements will be presented at the 26 November council meeting.

Free, trusted local news delivered direct to your inbox.

Keep up-to-date with what's happening around the Capital region by signing up for our free daily newsletter.
Loading
By submitting your email address you are agreeing to Region Group's terms and conditions and privacy policy.

Join the conversation

43
All Comments
  • All Comments
  • Website Comments
LatestOldest
Black sooty suncatcher11:23 am 04 Oct 25

Poor financial management continues in the Eurobodalla. As usual, local ratepayers and NSW and Australian taxpayers ‘carry the can’ for the Council’s incompetence.

cannedbeeria10:57 am 01 Oct 25

So, here we are. A “stranded assett already. “We told you so!” But, yes I know, different council (thank goodness). We threw the last lot out because of the attitudes, hidden procedures/agendas, and WASTE. The Pav is but one of many.
How are WE going to pay for what WE didn’t want, nor need? We are (were) told “It’s progress! We Gotta have PROGRESS!”
And now we are witnessing that attitude happening all over again….
The major redesign of the Batemans Bay “city”. 100 metre high canyons WE have to survive in? A “cityscape” just like Sydney, or Melgloom, one even Canberra.
Visitors come to “the Bay” because it is different – coastal- small, manageable, easy to get around in a relaxed easy-going community. Tourism is easy. It doesn’t even require a second thought. There IS a reason it is so popular.
And I see by the growth predictions it will stay that way. 40,000 people is still a small coastal town. So why the hype and “need” to change it? Why the 100 metre building heights? Has the public any idea how it will feel?
And with ONLY 40,000 people – most elderly and retired, WHO WILL PAY FOR IT?

patricia gardiner3:21 pm 26 Sep 25

Why did councillors not follow the advice of the consultants WE paid for by renegotiating the Pav contract – reward the contractors for improving financial outcomes while imposing consequences when they don’t.

Crikey! if Council were a household, its occupants would see the property lost or repossessed!! Staff benefits up 83% in a year?! In that state of financial strife, a business would either go under or necessarily SLASH EXPENDITURES & OUTGOINGS, but be assiduous in maintaining highest-possible operating standards; and approaching such a precarious position, a responsible, thinking household ‘management’ would insitigate drastic belt-tightening and expenditure cuts. A start for Council: stringent review of all positions and remuneration levels, SELL-THE-BLOODY-PAV to a reputable hotel operator [to become ‘THE EURO’], with a deal for council to ‘cop’ a 5%-of-all-revenue commission for the decade following sale and acquisition, chop community those grants which represent a kowtowing to certain minority self-interests, review all other assets for potential sale and with buy-back clauses, major infrastructural & internal waster reduction; and cease hiring expensive external ‘consultant specialists’. … and, PLEASE! never repeat useage of that photo of a bunch of beaming, smiling council representatives when associatig those ‘responsible’ people with such disatrous outcomes. Give the Euro public genuine desication to & representation-of-interests.

cannedbeeria1:57 pm 30 Sep 25

Agreed – mainly. Selling off council assets and services, only shifts (and amplifies!) the cost to ratepayers.
At the very least, keeping council responsible for assets and services allows us ratepayers to throw them out! As we did last time. And will do again if needed!
Sadly missing the Beagle right now…

Trish Hellier10:43 am 25 Sep 25

In relation to the Bay Pavilion – it is currently being operated by a contractor until March 2026. Unfortunately there is a clause in the contract any shortfall in costs including operating costs and wages the Council has to cover – ie us the rate payers. Trish Hellier.

Trish Hellier10:31 am 25 Sep 25

Hi Dianne West – the $1,000 bonus the staff received came from a direction of the State Government Premier Chris Minns. All Public Servants and Council Employees received this bonus. Trish Hellier

Trish Hellier8:29 pm 24 Sep 25

David Campbell – do you realise the Pav is ran by a contractor until March 2026?

Is it me or the esc relies on grants to survive ? Thats like anyone running a business and saying I hope I get money to run my business for the next year but lets spend it anyway Maybe they should do a budget on what they know they will get IE rates and really cut the fat from services and staff not required and a prime example of how they miss spent grants was the money for boat ramp repairs in the shire which seen 80% funneled towards the bay Pavilion which is a roaring success

Daily Digest

Do you like to know what’s happening around your region? Every day the About Regional team packages up our most popular stories and sends them straight to your inbox for free. Sign-up now for trusted local news that will never be behind a paywall.

By submitting your email address you are agreeing to Region Group's terms and conditions and privacy policy.