Residents have largely criticised council’s staffing numbers as “excessive”, particularly in management, and argued the council should tighten its belt rather than asking residents to tighten theirs.

It is not the first time the council has talked of such an application, having previously failed in an attempt.

Council estimates there is a $3 million shortfall in funding every year due to annual rate pegging by the Independent Pricing and Regulatory Tribunal (IPART).

This is despite savings it has made in things like retiring underused picnic areas and toilets, increasing workforce capacity through technology, job redesign and training, streamlining organisational structure, and exploring opportunities to share resources with neighbouring councils.

It says that if things are left as they are, services and facilities will drop.

Assets, such as community halls, roads and public facilities will deteriorate.

The SRV, council says, is one option to address the shortfall. The other options, according to council’s general manager, are to reduce services or service levels, or allow infrastructure to continue to deteriorate. No other options were provided.

Council says it if is to apply for an SRV, it will be required to argue need, as well as provide evidence of productivity improvements and cost containment strategies realised in past years.

It will need to prioritise works, re-do its long term financial plans to show SRV and business as usual scenarios and undertake extensive community consultation which demonstrates that residents are aware of the proposal.

All this in just over four months.

One can only hope that council demonstrates well its needs to residents, to help them understand why it wants to charge them more.

And if the community disagrees, it needs to be listened to.

Because any increased costs to ratepayers, particularly pensioners who are already struggling to keep their heads above water, will impact hard.