Ensuring we balance income and costs.

While you often see large headline figures attached to projects, these have a smaller effect on your annual rates bills as the overall cost is spread out over decades.

The main driver of your rates bill are the day-today costs such as staff and contractor salaries and costs of the things we use such as power, water, fuel, and building and roading materials.

It also covers the cost of financing any debt interest the council carries and depreciation, which is the money we have to set aside to replace infrastructure at the end of its life.

You can look at it like a household. For big purchases such as your house or your car you can take out a loan or mortgage and pay it back over time.

Ongoing costs such as food, electricity, fuel, and any maintenance, as well as interest on those loans, you have to pay for at the time you incur them.

As it is not prudent to taken on debt to cover day-to-day running expenses, the main options to handle increasing costs is to increase rates, reduce the amount we spend on providing those services, or charge more fees for services.

Council staff are also undertaking a major project to cut operational spending by reducing waste, bringing more work in-house instead of contracting it out, and cutting out non-priority projects.

For the first three years of this LTP Council will be running at a deficit. To get the council books back in surplus, we need to reduce the gap between how much the council spends and how much we charge ratepayers, and we need your feedback as to how quickly we should close that gap.

How fast should we balance our budget, reduce our deficit, and pay off debt?

The options

Our preferred option is option 2.

Option 1 - Faster
Summary of Option
No improvements to levels of service and operations, deficit eliminated Year 1, depreciation fully funded from Year 2, lower debt costs, higher rate rises.
What this option will look like

Pros:

  • The deficit is gone in Year One, and Council books are back in shape more quickly.
  • Debt starts to get repaid earlier.
  • Lower long-term debt costs.
  • Higher debt headroom for unexpected events and disaster preparedness.
  • Potential to increase levels of service from Year 2 onwards if not running at a deficit.
  • Depreciation fully funded from Year 2 onwards.

Cons:

  • No increases to levels of service.
  • All extra income goes towards funding depreciation and servicing debt, not improving services.
  • Higher than forecast rate rises.
Impacts
Effect on rates: 21.6% increase year 1
  • Net deficit Year 1: Nil
  • Net surplus for 10 years: $86.9m
  • Depreciation funded: 84% Year1; 100% Year 2;
  • Unfunded depreciation over plan: $5.5 million
  • Net Debt peak: $396m
Option 2 - As Planned
Summary of Option
No improvements to levels of service and operations, higher debt costs, moderate average rates rises.
What this option will look like

Pros:

  • The deficit is eliminated within Year 4 of this plan.
  • Levels of service and maintenance are kept at a reasonable level.
  • Rates rises in line with forecast.
  • Still reasonable debt headroom for disaster preparedness.

Cons:

  • Debt repayment is delayed, and interest costs are increased.
  • No improvements to levels of service and maintenance.
  • No increases in the amount we do for the extra income, such as extending pool and library opening times or response times for service requests.
  • Same levels of maintenance on water and roads meaning no improvements on road conditions and water pipe renewals.
  • Depreciation not fully funded until Year 4.
Impacts
Effect on rates: 15% increase year 1
  • Net deficit Year 1: $4.6m
  • Net surplus for 10 years: $61.8m
  • Depreciation funded: 71% Year1; 100% Year 4
  • Net Debt peak: $412m
Option 3 - Slower
Summary of Option
Significantly reduced levels of service and operations, significantly higher debt costs, lower
average rates rises.
What this option will look like

Pros:

  • Rates rises lower than forecast.

Cons:

  • Council runs at deficit for until Year 9 of this plan.
  • Significant cuts to levels of service and maintenance for core services and community facilities.
  • Higher likelihood of asset failures, increased operational costs resulting in increased rates in  future years.
  • Depreciation not fully funded until Year 8;
  • Unfunded depreciation over plan: $71 million
  • Debt increases to over $520m by year 10
  • Debt cap breached (highest at 2.94)
Impacts
Effect on rates: 9% increase years 1,2,3
  • Net deficit Year 1: $8.7m
  • Net deficit for 10 years: $70.3m
  • Depreciation funded: 59% Year 1; 100% Year 8
  • Net debt peak: $520m

Preferred Option

1

Option 1 - Faster

2

Option 2 - As Planned

3

Option 3 - Slower

Summary of Option

No improvements to levels of service and operations, deficit eliminated Year 1, depreciation fully funded from Year 2, lower debt costs, higher rate rises.

No improvements to levels of service and operations, higher debt costs, moderate average rates rises.

Significantly reduced levels of service and operations, significantly higher debt costs, lower
average rates rises.

What this option will look like

Pros:

  • The deficit is gone in Year One, and Council books are back in shape more quickly.
  • Debt starts to get repaid earlier.
  • Lower long-term debt costs.
  • Higher debt headroom for unexpected events and disaster preparedness.
  • Potential to increase levels of service from Year 2 onwards if not running at a deficit.
  • Depreciation fully funded from Year 2 onwards.

Cons:

  • No increases to levels of service.
  • All extra income goes towards funding depreciation and servicing debt, not improving services.
  • Higher than forecast rate rises.

Pros:

  • The deficit is eliminated within Year 4 of this plan.
  • Levels of service and maintenance are kept at a reasonable level.
  • Rates rises in line with forecast.
  • Still reasonable debt headroom for disaster preparedness.

Cons:

  • Debt repayment is delayed, and interest costs are increased.
  • No improvements to levels of service and maintenance.
  • No increases in the amount we do for the extra income, such as extending pool and library opening times or response times for service requests.
  • Same levels of maintenance on water and roads meaning no improvements on road conditions and water pipe renewals.
  • Depreciation not fully funded until Year 4.

Pros:

  • Rates rises lower than forecast.

Cons:

  • Council runs at deficit for until Year 9 of this plan.
  • Significant cuts to levels of service and maintenance for core services and community facilities.
  • Higher likelihood of asset failures, increased operational costs resulting in increased rates in  future years.
  • Depreciation not fully funded until Year 8;
  • Unfunded depreciation over plan: $71 million
  • Debt increases to over $520m by year 10
  • Debt cap breached (highest at 2.94)

Impacts

Effect on rates: 21.6% increase year 1
  • Net deficit Year 1: Nil
  • Net surplus for 10 years: $86.9m
  • Depreciation funded: 84% Year1; 100% Year 2;
  • Unfunded depreciation over plan: $5.5 million
  • Net Debt peak: $396m

Effect on rates: 15% increase year 1
  • Net deficit Year 1: $4.6m
  • Net surplus for 10 years: $61.8m
  • Depreciation funded: 71% Year1; 100% Year 4
  • Net Debt peak: $412m

Effect on rates: 9% increase years 1,2,3
  • Net deficit Year 1: $8.7m
  • Net deficit for 10 years: $70.3m
  • Depreciation funded: 59% Year 1; 100% Year 8
  • Net debt peak: $520m