The Cessnock City Council's controversial proposal to permanently increase residential rates by nearly 40 per cent has been met with significant public resistance and a strikingly low level of formal feedback, according to a new report.
Low Engagement and Strong Opposition
Council officials dispatched 29,245 surveys to local households concerning the planned special rate variation. However, they received only 1,278 responses, representing a return rate of just 4.37 per cent. Of those who did respond, an overwhelming 82 per cent stated they did not support the proposed increase.
The council is seeking approval for a permanent one-year special variation of 39.9 per cent, inclusive of the standard rate peg, for the 2026-27 financial year. The elected council is scheduled to vote on whether to apply to the Independent Pricing and Regulatory Tribunal (IPART) for the increase on January 14, 2026.
Community concerns centred overwhelmingly on affordability and cost-of-living pressures. Residents also questioned the timing and sheer size of the proposed hike, while demanding the council continue to find efficiencies and contain its own costs.
Allegations of Bias and Social Media Campaign
The community engagement process has been mired in controversy, with accusations that the council's survey contained "biased" and "leading" questions. A report by economic experts Professor Joseph Drew and Professor Masato Miyazaki noted that some residents felt the survey design pressured a "moral argument" about burdening future generations with debt, rather than simply asking if they supported or opposed the rise.
Furthermore, a concerted social media campaign urged residents not to participate in the official survey. Posts advised people to contact IPART directly instead, claiming the survey was "cleverly designed to be proof you are informed." An online petition titled 'Stop Cessnock council's excessive 39.9 per cent rate hike proposal' has gathered close to 5,000 signatures.
Despite the opposition, the experts' report highlighted a notable shift among residents who sought more information. Of those who attended public information sessions and completed a follow-up survey, 77 per cent said they then supported the special variation. The report described this as an "astounding" result, given the highly politicised opposition.
Council's Position and Next Steps
The council has defended its engagement, stating it provided multiple avenues for feedback, including letterbox drops, social media, traditional media, and six public information sessions. In response to the feedback received, the council says it will:
- Strengthen hardship and payment assistance programs.
- Continue pursuing efficiency and cost-containment initiatives.
- Improve financial transparency and communication about how rate revenue is used.
Councillors will also vote on a separate recommendation to conduct a 12-month review into the "distributive equity" of the rate structure, addressing concerns about how the burden falls on lower-value properties, small businesses, and vulnerable groups.
The council maintains that without the special rate approval, it will face a structural funding deficit that will cripple its ability to maintain core services, renew critical infrastructure, and meet its financial obligations. If the council votes to proceed, the final decision will rest with IPART.
