Burdekin Shire Council 2019/20 Budget – At a Glance

BURDEKIN SHIRE COUNCIL 2019/20 BUDGET – AT A GLANCE

Burdekin Shire Council today handed down its budget for the 2019/2020 financial year. Snapshot of budget is attached for your information.

Have highlighted a number of relevant points from full budget document.

• Category A – Residential general rate cents in the dollar has increased from $0.01478 to $0.01645 an increase of 11.30%
• Category D – Sugar Cane general rate cents in the dollar has decreased from $0.03984 to $0.03700 a decrease of 7.13%
• Estimated Operating Surplus for 2018/2019 year – $2,782,963 (98.28% above original budget)
• Estimated Net Result for 2018/2019 year – $5,643,529 (24.06% above original budget)
• Projected Operating Surplus for 2019/2020 year – $422,515
• Projected Net Result for 2019/2020 year – $6,298,123
• Interest on outstanding rates and charges – 9% compound interest charged on daily rests
• Ratepayers who meet the criteria for financial hardship and satisfactorily complete a mutually agreed payment plan will be eligible for reimbursement of 50% of interest charges.

Les Elphinstone
Manager / Company Secretary

thumbnail of BSC BUDGET SUMMARY

“Reminder – LBW Triennial Elections – Nominations are Open

“REMINDER – LBW TRIENNIAL ELECTIONS – NOMINATIONS ARE OPEN

A reminder to members that LBW has called nominations for four persons eligible to be elected as Directors of Lower Burdekin Water. Two (2) directors are to be nominated and elected from ratepayers in each of the (2) two divisions by ratepayers of Lower Burdekin Water for a three (3) year term. The nomination period is drawing to a close with only one week to go.

Since the inception of the North and South Burdekin Water Boards in 1965 and 1966 respectively, growers have always had seats at the table helping shape the direction and management of groundwater recharge and water distribution in the Burdekin Delta. LBW invite ratepayer growers to nominate for a position on the Board and participate in the management of groundwater in the Delta. The nomination documentation is available on LBW’s website http://lowerburdekinwater.com.au/resource-library/documents/ and LBW staff are available to assist ratepayers with their nomination paperwork if required.”

HORT360

HORT360

It has recently come to my attention the abovementioned web page which is specifically designed as a best management practice program for the horticultural industry. Whilst most content is not relevant to the sugar industry one area that I found to be of interest is Hort360’s “Workplace Safety” section which highlights and reiterates what has been published previously on KCGO web page that as an employer, growers have a legal responsibility and ultimately liability for the health and safety of workers, contractors and contractors employees under WHS Legislation.
There is a wealth of information available from this site that can be utilised or adapted for sugar cane growing. I would encourage members to become familiar with its content and utilise/adapt what you deem to be appropriate for your business.

For more information CLICK HERE

Les Elphinstone

KCGO Manager

NQ Dry Tropics Project – Connecting Burdekin Cane Farmers to their Local Wetlands

NQ DRY TROPICS PROJECT – CONNECTING BURDEKIN CANE FARMERS TO THEIR LOCAL WETLANDS

Monitoring the quality and volume of water running off-farm provides important data that can help growers make important business decisions. The link bellow highlights how two Burdekin growers, Francisco Frank Mugica and Andrew Cross used the information they received to make changes that boosted their bottom line while minimising environmental impacts on local wetlands. Frank and Andrew are involved in our Connecting Burdekin Cane Farmers to their Local Wetlands project, funded by Queensland Environment Department.

For further information in relation to this project click below:

http://www.nqdrytropics.com.au/projects/waterways-wetlands-and-coasts-program/connecting-burdekin-cane-farmers-to-their-local-wetlands-2016-2019/

Environmental Protection (Great Barrier Reef Protection Measures) and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2019

Environmental Protection (Great Barrier Reef Protection Measures) and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2019

Dear Members,

Copy of email forwarded today to the Premier, Ministers & all current members of Queensland Parliament is set out below including email listing.

KCGO encourages members to take a stand and individually voice their opposition to proposed amendments to the Environmental Protection (Great Barrier Reef Protection Measures) and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2019 by copying and pasting the email body and forward to any or all politicians from the list below.

If you have any queries or require assistance, please do not hesitate to contact the KCGO office.

“Dear Premier,

Despite a series of public consultations which were well represented by a broad spectrum of agricultural industries, it is disappointing to note this important sector’s view point was largely ignored by the Innovation, Tourism Development and Environment Committee, with the committee recommending the Environmental Protection (Great Barrier Reef Protection Measures) and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2019 be passed unchanged.

Sources such as the 2017 Scientific Consensus Statement and evidence/recommendations contained within have been utilised in part to determine policy objectives to be introduced by the Bill. This statement has been prepared by a ‘panel of scientists with expertise in GBR water quality science and management’. These scientists ‘have reviewed and synthesised the significant advances in scientific knowledge of water quality issues in the Great Barrier Reef’ via a combination of qualitative, semi-quantitative assessments and Paddock to Reef Integrated Monitoring, Modelling and Reporting Program.

This leads to the question what are the quality assurance processes in place for environmental/marine science compared to that applied by other areas of science eg. medical and pharmaceuticals? “The Peer review system is known to be biased, unjust, unaccountable, incomplete, easily fixed, often insulting, usually ignorant, occasionally foolish and frequently wrong.” Horton 2000. read more