Council & Business
24 April, 2026
Intention to keep all transfer stations open alluded to by local councillors
Central Goldfields Shire councillors almost guaranteed all transfer stations would remain open, but withdrew the motion before a decision could be made, during April’s council meeting.
Central Goldfields Shire councillors almost guaranteed all transfer stations would remain open, but withdrew the motion before a decision could be made, during April’s “unusual” council meeting.
Councillor Gerard Murphy’s urgent business sought to keep all transfer stations open “as they are now” and make the necessary financial adjustments to the Draft Budget 2026/27.
Currently the draft budget proposes closing the Bealiba, Dunolly, and Talbot transfer stations to help reverse a projected $11 million shortfall.
The threat to three-quarters of the shire’s transfer stations has proven controversial, with 332 submissions, two petitions totalling 799 signatures, and multiple community meetings held in opposition.
“It is our responsibility as councillors to listen to our community and residents, and each of us have been made deeply aware of the concern of these closures,” Cr Murphy said.
“I believe this has left us as councillors in no doubt how our community feels on this matter and why.”
Cr Murphy said he wanted to give the community “consistency” by confirming early the transfer stations would remain open.
Councillors are expected to vote on the final budget at the May council meeting.
“This motion is saying they’re staying open and we’ll deal with it in our financials,” he said.
Although council CEO Peter Harriott said this was “way beyond” the scope of urgent business, mayor Ben Green disagreed.
“In my view, the proposal does make threshold,” Cr Green said.
In addition to confirming all transfer stations would remain open, Cr Murphy proposed ending the community consultation period ahead of next week’s in-person hearing.
“We wish to spare submitters the inconvenience and possible stress of presentations to council,” he said.
However, Mr Harriott said the motion was poor governance.
“In my experience and my understanding, this is not good governance and we should follow the process you’ve already resolved to do,” he said.
“I haven’t had the chance to check the legality of any of this to see whether it stacks up. There’s certainly some uncertainty in the resolution and how it’s intended to be delivered.”
Councillor Grace La Vella agreed.
“I know exactly where you’re coming from, and I think I’ve articulated that to you previously, but I think we really do need for the sake of good governance to go through the proper process,” she said.
Despite Cr Green’s support that the motion was good governance, Cr Murphy eventually withdrew it.
“When you’re forced into a corner you’ve got to come out and make a decision. I said what I have to say, the community knows what I have to say, I’ll take that off the books right now. It’s finished,” he said.
Although the motion didn’t last it did reveal new insight into councillors’ views on the closures.
Cr La Vella said she suspected the community knew “our” before correcting herself to “the” view on the transfer station closures.
She later spoke directly to the community.
“I don’t believe they know what we’re saying here. We are supporting the community in my view I can see it around the table otherwise you would not have brought that up. We’ve just got to have faith, community and we’ve got to go through the process. You just need to have faith in us, the council,” she said.
However, not everyone in the community was there to hear it.
Local David Hendrickson, who plans to hold a protest at the May council meeting, walked out of the meeting.
“Expect a huge crowd at the next meeting — very loud as well,” he said after the motion was withdrawn.
Cr Murphy’s unsuccessful effort echoes Cr La Vella’s from the March council meeting.
She attempted to amend the draft budget, effectively deferring the waste transfer station closures until the next year, but found it was too late.
What remains unclear is how the proposed closures are included in the draft budget, which is created collaboratively between councillors and council officers, given the former’s apparent opposition.
Mr Harriott said the first briefing with councillors “seriously considering” the budget was around July and August.
The budget was informed by council’s strategic documents, including their 10-year financial plan, which highlighted their ongoing deficit and low cash balance.
To address these issues, Mr Harriott said council need “to put rubber on the road” by adopting a budget.
“This is all to do with the fact for years and years we’ve been doing this,” he said referring to the increasing deficit.
“Now we’re not doing that we’re going to put this place back into surplus.
“That does not come unless you have some difficult decisions made and that’s what we’re seeing — some difficult decisions being made.”