Charlotte Varcoe
KINGSTON District Council will consider a funding proposal from the state government this month regarding the future of its popular beach jetty.
Last week it was announced the council was successful in a proposed $2.8m funding for jetty repairs.
Under the funding agreement, councils were asked to match the funding amount while also extending the lease agreement for a minimum of 15 years.
Kingston Council received the second largest sum of money from the $10m cash injection after applying for the funding in 2023.
The Kingston jetty is one of 35 which is divested to councils with Kingston District Council being responsible for all repairs and maintenance under the lease agreement.
Council chief executive Ian Hart said a report was expected to be tabled at the next council meeting for elected members to consider with a firm decision yet to be made.
“This is not in our long term financial plan and so we would need to consider all of our budget to be able to say how we would afford to match that funding,” Mr Hart said.
“The thing that concerns me is it is a funding solution which essentially gives the jetty further longevity of about 10 years.”
He said the current funding did not make sense to him that it was considered a sustainable option and best practice in regards to asset management,
“There are other options available but they will cost more money and I think we will talk to council and then go back to the department to continue to explore other options about finding a long term solution,” Mr Hart said.
“The best solution for council is to get state and federal government funding with a small contribution from council to do a complete upgrade of the jetty which gives it a future prodding for maybe 50 years.”
He said this would be the “ultimate solution” for the community and those using the jetty yet if it was not available council would need to consider other options.
“There has been a survey done by the Local Government Association which showed very clearly that the jetty is one of the most loved jetties around the state,” he said.
“It is not only the heartbeat of our township for locals with all the socioeconomic and health benefits that come with it but for the many visitors who come in over the four days of Easter there was not a spare spot on the jetty to throw a line.”
Mr Hart said over the recent long weekend there were many visitors accessing the jetty, claiming he believed if it was lost it would have a severe impact.
“There has to be a way to preserve it and enhance it going forward,” he said.
“This proposal would also extend councils lease by 15 years and whether that is viable for council is dependent on the terms.
“At the moment the terms are basically the council is responsible for its ongoing maintenance and management and is a landlord-tenant scenario where if there is structural damage that should be on the asset manager.”
Mr Hart said the asset did not “sit with council” yet if it did he suspected it would make them unviable and unsustainable.
“We could not afford to be doing major work with it,” he said.
“The expectation from the state is that council should be matching funding for what is essentially upgrade work and the factual work is not reasonable.”
Currently, Mr Hart said the jetty’s main issues was its “poor state of repair”.
“It is an entity which is more than 140 years old and has had two or three rebuilds over its long history,” he said.
“It needs major upgrades to some of the sub-structures and pylons and other pieces of the jetty.”
He said a small amount of the upgrades could be cosmetic but in order to perform major structural repair it would be expensive.
“There were options identified in a business case to get the jetty to a point where, even if it is not the ultimate solution, it was about $15m and that is to get it to a place where it has a very long term future,” Mr Hart said.
“Council is yet to consider the proposal and I think without pre-empting council’s decision our position would be to work with the department and the minister around solutions and although this might be part of the puzzle short term, there needs to be a longer term strategy developed.”
Mr Hart said he acknowledged the state government considered the Kingston jetty and it was identified payment could be further invested in jetties around the state.
“It is a problem for small councils because we have a lot of things at the moment including coastal issues but the jetty is the lifeblood of our community,” he said.
Member for MacKillop Nick McBride said it was of high priority for the town to ensure the jetty was properly maintained.
“My understanding is if there are no repairs done then it will only be a matter of a couple of years before the jetty is closed fully to the public,” Mr McBride said.
“The Kingston District Council has a budget of roughly $5m and they have enormous pressure from everything from the Cape Jaffa marina and a septic wastewater scheme, to houses which are already in town, let alone the new developments,
“It will be up to the council to determine whether the Jetty offer is a good one or if it is just too far for them to reach.”
He said should there be more funds to come in the future he believed the council would welcome it.
“What I do know is that they value this jetty to an extremely high degree and they would love to keep it open but it is going to be a really tough task,” he said.
