Two New England councils are asking the state’s pricing regulator for permission to increase rates well above the annual rate peg, arguing that without more income they cannot keep up with rising costs, maintain infrastructure or avoid service cuts.
Glen Innes Severn Council is seeking a cumulative increase of 48.3 per cent over three years, while Uralla Shire Council has applied for a 58.06 per cent cumulative increase over two years. Both applications are now before the Independent Pricing and Regulatory Tribunal and open for community comment.
Glen Innes Severn Council: rebuilding financial sustainability
Glen Innes Severn Council has applied for a permanent Special Rate Variation that would increase ordinary rate income by 21.5 per cent in 2026–27, followed by 12 per cent in 2027–28 and 9 per cent in 2028–29, resulting in a cumulative 48.3 per cent increase over three years.
Council says the request is not about funding new services, but about stabilising its finances and protecting what already exists. In its application, it states the purpose of the SRV is to “restore long-term financial sustainability (by 2029/2030) by addressing a significant and ongoing operating deficit in the general fund” and to “maintain the delivery of current services at existing levels”.
An independent Financial Sustainability Review found that the council is not financially sustainable without significant changes. Even after making operational improvements and cutting costs, Glen Innes is still forecasting an average operating deficit of $4.7 million per year over the next decade. In simple terms, it is spending more than it earns, year after year.
To keep operating, council has already taken out $10 million in external and internal loans over two years to shore up its working capital and avoid its unrestricted cash balance going negative. Council warns that once those loans expire, and without an increase in revenue, it is likely to fall back into a negative unrestricted cash position. That would mean it does not have enough flexible funds available to meet day-to-day obligations.
A major pressure point is infrastructure, particularly roads. Roads are identified as the most significant backlog asset class, currently sitting at 12 per cent. The proposed rate increase would allow more money to be directed toward renewing and maintaining roads, bridges, buildings, drainage and open space, and reduce reliance on grant funding that often requires councils to provide upfront contributions before reimbursement.
Council says that without the SRV it would be forced to “significantly reduce service levels over time across core and non-core service areas including but not limited to: road maintenance, parks and open spaces, community facilities & services, including the ongoing delivery of aged-care, NDIS, youth and child-care services, regulatory services, and waste management services”. It also warns that its ability to co-fund government grants would be severely constrained, limiting future infrastructure upgrades.
During consultation, residents raised strong concerns about affordability and the size of potential rate rises. Key themes included worries about income levels, calls for council to focus on basic services and demands for further cost savings. Many residents said they preferred a smaller increase spread over a longer period rather than a sharp jump. In response, council reduced its originally preferred option from a cumulative increase of more than 60 per cent to the current 48.3 per cent proposal.
The well researched and developed proposal is expected to be approved by IPART with little resistance.
See the full Glen Innes Severn application and have your say here.
Uralla Shire Council: maintaining services and avoiding insolvency risks
Uralla Shire Council has applied for a permanent Special Variation that would increase ordinary rate income by 28.5 per cent in 2026–27 and 23 per cent in 2027–28, amounting to a cumulative 58.06 per cent increase over two years.
USC says the main purpose of the increase is to maintain existing services and assets while correcting a growing financial imbalance. Its application explains that the SV is intended to improve financial sustainability by addressing a significant operating deficit in the general fund, maintaining roads and community assets, continuing community-based services at current levels, reducing heavy reliance on grant funding and addressing a forecast negative unrestricted cash position.
Like Glen Innes, Uralla says it has very limited opportunities to raise additional revenue outside rates. It states that increasing rates, combined with operational efficiencies, is “the only viable solution for a financially sustainable Council to maintain current service levels”.
Without the rates increase, USC forecasts its operating performance ratio will deteriorate significantly, moving from minus 10 per cent in 2025–26 to minus 27 per cent by 2035–36. That would indicate the council losing more and more money, year on year. Council says that without additional income it would have no option but to either increase revenue or significantly reduce service levels to close the financial gap.
The additional revenue would be used first to address the operating deficit, second to repair and stabilise unrestricted cash reserves, and third to improve financial performance indicators to meet state benchmarks. USC emphasises that while it may appear to have cash reserves, much of that money is legally restricted for water, sewer, waste and grant purposes and cannot be used to fund general services.
Uralla Shire Council has been criticised for ineffective consultation during the development of its proposal, but the request is expected to succeed based on its application answering all the criteria.
See the full Uralla application and have your say here.
How to have your say
The Independent Pricing and Regulatory Tribunal is now seeking community feedback on both applications.
IPART Chair Carmel Donnelly said, “Community feedback is an important part of the Tribunal’s assessment of special variation applications”. She encouraged ratepayers and community members to complete the online survey or lodge a written submission.
The consultation period it open now until 9 March 2026. Submissions can be made through the IPART website, where the full applications and supporting documents are available for review.
IPART assesses each application against criteria set by the Office of Local Government, including whether councils have demonstrated financial need, shown that the community is aware of and understands the proposal, established that the impact on ratepayers is reasonable, and explained efforts to improve productivity and contain costs.
Final decisions are expected by June 2026.
Got something you want to say about this story? Have your say on our opinion and comment hub, New England Times Engage