Bridging the divide: residents petition council to open safety access

Fed up Toodyay resident Mick Bell is calling for Slaughterhouse bridge to reopen for  local and emergency vehicles and 150 have signed on to his petition.

By Rashelle Predovnik
July 2026

One hundred and fifty residents have signed up to a petition calling for Slaughterhouse Bridge to be reopened and allow local and emergency vehicles to pass.

The petition, presented to council this month, said the continuing closure of the bridge – impacted local residents by adding extra travelling time for attendance by lifesaving emergency vehicles.

 It also made it impossible for people who use mobility vehicles to safely get to town and it added extra time and fuel costs for locals to get to work or get children to school.

In May, ABC News reported the bridges closure forced residents to travel an extra 12km into town, through heavy haulage and gravel roads.

Those interviewed said the closure and extra 12km’s has impacted the quality of life of the 500 nearby residents.

Residents demand action

Lead petitioner Mick Bell said there had been no consultation with the affect residents.

“The community would appreciate some sort of communication with the shire because it has been deathly silent from their end,” he said.

“Hence the petition.”

Mr Bell said council just needed to get on with opening the bridge again for emergency vehicles and local traffic.

“They can find the money to pay two CEO’s at the moment and that wouldn’t have been in the Budget so find the money to get bridge open again.”

Shire says council is listening

Toodyay Shire president Mick McKeown said the original Slaughterhouse Bridge was destroyed in 1934 due to heavy rain that caused serious flooding in Toodyay.
He said the bridge was then replaced with the timber bridge that is now in place.

The president said the shire had been listening to the community concerns about the closure of Slaughterhouse Bridge.

“There were concerns raised by the ABC about access for emergency services being limited to West Toodyay because of the closure of the bridge.”

But he said emergency services vehicles had already lost access to Slaughterhouse Bridge as there was a weight limited to 3.5 tonnes.

“So, they had been accessing West Toodyay via either Picnic Hill Road off the Toodyay Bindi-Bindi Road or Toodyay West Road off Julimar Road,” he said.

“Travelling at the speed limit to access West Toodyay via these routes can take just a few minutes longer than by using Slaughterhouse Bridge.

Building a bridge

A spokesperson from the Department of Local Government Department said local governments were responsible for the maintenance of bridges on local government roads as well as the maintenance of its local road network. 

A Main Roads spokesperson said the Shire of Toodyay had successfully secured state funding in 2023-24, 2024-25, and 2025-26 to undertake design and development work on a replacement bridge.

According to Main Roads the Shire of Toodyay has received state funding over the past three financial years to progress the design and development of a replacement bridge.

“The shire successfully secured state funding in 2023/24, 2024/25, and 2025/26 to undertake design and development work on a replacement bridge.”

 In December 2025 the shire issued a statement advising residents council had endorsed a single-lane bridge with a footpath as the preferred option for the replacement of Slaughterhouse Bridge.

The shire said Main Roads WA (MRWA) would prepare a 50 per cent design for the single-lane bridge with footpath option, including updated cost estimates.

“This will then be presented to council for further consideration.

“Should council resolve to proceed, the shire will then be required to source applicable funding.”

A revised bridge plan

But this month, Cr McKeown said Main Roads was currently working on the 15 per cent design stage of the bridge design.

He said the 15 per cent design stage was a preliminary design stage that included investigation of feasible options and the suitability, general alignment, and basic structural configurations for the bridge.

   “Once the design reaches a point that costings can be confirmed, the shire will be able to prepare an application for special project funding for a new bridge.”

“The shire will then have to wait until the bridge design stage triggers an application request from the West Australian Local Government Grants Commission to apply for funding.

 “So, the shire must wait for approval from these two State Government departments before building a new bridge.”

   Cr Mc McKeown said the shire had also approached MRWA about the possibility of opening the bridge for pedestrian use.

“Last month MRWA approved that request and the shire is currently investigating what works are required to re-open the bridge as a pedestrian only bridge.”

   “This will require installation of barriers that restrict traffic on the bridge to pedestrians only.”

   “This work will commence in July and is expected to be completed by the end of July.”

 

Bridge blame game: Main Roads rejects

shire’s claims over closure

MAIN Roads WA (MRWA) has flatly rejected claims it was responsible for the closure of Slaughterhouse Bridge, saying it was the Shire of Toodyay who made that decision in 2025 despite having the option of repairing the bridge instead.

The dispute stems from comments made by Toodyay Shire president Mick McKeown, who said residents should remember it was not the shire that ordered the closure but MRWA.

The shire president said in the 90 years the bridge had been in use, gradual deterioration of the wooden structure had resulted in its recent closure by MRWA.

He said the closure has been gradual with decreasing load limits being put in place by MRWA over the last few years.

But Main Roads has provided a markedly different account, saying the shire had been warned for years about the deteriorating condition of the 90-year-old timber bridge and was repeatedly advised repairs were needed.

A Main Roads spokesperson said the Shire of Toodyay did structural repairs to Slaughterhouse Bridge in 2011, 2016 and 2019 with funding support provided by the State Government.

“Main Roads advised the Shire of Toodyay about its concerns with the bridge’s condition following a five-yearly detailed inspection of the bridge in October and November 2021,” the spokesperson said.

 “Following a load assessment in March 2023, Main Roads advised the Shire of Toodyay to consider closing the bridge, restricting the load limit or undertake repairs.”

 The MRWA spokesperson said the shire chose to install temporary steel props and imposed a nine-tonne weight limit. 

“Regular inspections have been undertaken since September 2023 and in that time, Main Roads has requested the shire rectify the bridge props,” the spokesperson said.

“A further review in November 2025 led Main Roads to again advise the Shire of Toodyay to consider undertaking repairs or close the bridge.”

 “The shire chose to close the bridge.”

MRWA also disputed any suggestion it had prevented repairs, saying it did not receive any applications from the shire for funding to repair the bridge before it was closed.

On leave, on track? Question asked about a temporary CEO appointment

 

Deputy shire president, Shelley Dival congratulates newly appointed CEO Aaron Bowman in August 2024.
Pic supplied Facebook.

By Rashelle Predovnik
June 2026

Ratepayers have sought clarity about the status of Toodyay chief executive officer Aaron Bowman who has been absent from the shire for months while a temporary CEO continues to fill the role.

Counting the cost

Allan Henshaw, who served as shire president from 2001 to 2005, asked questions at the June council meeting, including the combined cost to ratepayers of paying for both the CEO and the temporary CEO.

In response, staff advised that employee salaries were confidential.

But August 2024 council minutes, that are publicly available online, confirm Mr Bowman’s total remuneration package was $245,496.

Last month, council appointed Alan Hart to be a temporary CEO from May 12, 2026 to May 12, 2027, during a special council meeting held on May 12.

In that meeting, council agreed to pay Mr Hart the cash component of Mr Bowmans salary package.

Shire President Mick McKeown said the appointment of a temporary CEO was required under council policy when a CEO was absent for an extended period.

Driving the Debate

Mr Henshaw also asked if the CEO still had the use of a company car paid for by the Shire of Toodyay.

Cr McKeown confirmed a shire-provided vehicle was part of Mr Bowman’s CEO remuneration package and that he would not discuss the personal affairs of an employee.

 Mr Henshaw told The Herald he asked questions because he wanted to find out what the situation was regarding the absence of the CEO and its effect on the shire.

“Ratepayers need to know what it’s costing us,” he said.

“I asked about the cost to ratepayers of effectively employing two CEO’s because no end date for Mr Bowman’s leave has been publicly announced.”

Mr Henshaw said he was not interested in the reasons for Mr Bowman’s leave, but rather the procedures and plans the shire had in place.

He said he wanted to know whether the arrangement was likely to be long-term, whether the shire could afford to continue paying both the CEO and a temporary CEO, and what succession plans existed if the situation was not resolved soon.

“All questions which can be answered without impinging on the CEO’s privacy,” he said.

A test of leadership

The former shire president said he was not impressed by the way the current shire president responded to his request for a public statement to be issued explaining why a temporary CEO had been appointed.

He said the shire’s failure to issue a public explanation was fuelling speculation and damaging public confidence in the council’s governance.

“I had to sit down in amazement after I asked the question about why the council was not keeping the public informed about the situation and the shire president’s response was to ask me how he should respond.

“Frankly, if the shire president doesn’t know how he should respond then perhaps he should be asking himself whether he ought to be in that chair.”

Seal of disapproval: former works boss challenges road project costs

WALGA President Karen Chappel presented a road safety award to the Shire of Toodyay in September 2023.  The award was accepted by Aldo Lamas,the shire’s coordinator for civil works and maintenance.

By Rashelle Predovnik

June 2026

The shire’s former civil works and maintenance coordinator has repeatedly questioned what he suspects may be a significant overspend on the Bindi Bindi Rd project due to poor project management and lack of council oversight.

And he is yet to get a complete response to his questions.

Aldo Lamas is concerned the shire applied a seal on section of the road that didn’t need it, which could cost ratepayers anywhere between $350,000 to $700,000 depending on what seals were applied.

Paving the way to overspending?

Mr Lamas told The Herald the first section was completed in the 2023-24 financial year, which included a primer seal and two-coat hot seal (14mm aggregate for the first coat and 10mm aggregate for the second coat).

The second section, which is less than a year old, received a 5mm chip seal as a temporary preservation treatment due to delays in the sealing works.

This was then followed by a primer and two-coat hot seal using 10mm aggregate for the first coat and 7mm aggregate for the second coat.

“Technically, this results in three coats of seal within a short period, and now additional coats are being applied to various sections of the road,” he said.

“In my opinion this is not required, as the road surface is in excellent condition with no visible defects.

“A seal of this type would normally have an expected service life of 10–15 years before renewal or resealing is necessary.”

Mr Lamas’ said he also believed there were several other roads in far greater need of sealing, which were not completed in the 2024-25 financial year due to the lack of Road to Recovery funding.

Including Hoddywell Rd, Salt Valley Rd, Beejoording Rd, Davies Rd and Phillips Rd.

A roadblock to answers

Mr Lamas questions on the project span back to August 2024 when he was a community representative on the Works Advisory Committee.

He joined that committee because he believed his technical expertise would help ensure infrastructure projects were properly scrutinised on behalf of ratepayers.

But in December 2024 CEO Aaron Bowman wrote to advise Mr Lamas council had resolved to disband the committee.

“We believe that the types of questions being asked at the committee level are best responded to via normal business correspondence, rather than through a committee or working group,” he said.

“This approach will allow us to address your queries more efficiently.”

But three months later Mr Lamas was told he was sending in too many questions, which had become a matter of significant concern regarding the volume and nature of his enquiries and service requests.

In a letter dated March 18, 2025, Mr Bowman said the disproportionate volume was placing an undue strain on the shire’s limited resources.

He said it also impacted on the shire’s ability to serve the broader community effectively.

But Mr Lamas said as a resident and a ratepayer, he was entitled to ask questions and he challenged Mr Bowman’s claims the number of questions he asked was excessive.

Due to his technical background Mr Lamas worked at a high level of detail and asked questions he believed were necessary to understand projects, costs, risks and decision-making process.

He told The Herald he had asked between four to five questions a month. 

He said his questions had piled up because they were simply not being responded to by staff, even though they had been taken as questions on notice at council meetings held in September, October and December.

 He said his questions and the responses given at council meetings were also not included in the council minutes, despite this being a requirement under the Act.

He said if his questions been answered in a timely manner, it would have led to less follow up questions.

The road ahead lacks detail

In May 2025 Mr Bowman thanked Mr Lamas for his correspondence and said the shire would not be providing further comment in relation the matters raised in his letter.

But Mr Lamas has continued to ask anywhere between two – 10 questions at the shire’s monthly council meetings and responses taken on notice last month about the road seal were included in the agenda of the June council meeting.

The response said the final seal was included in the 2025-26 mid-year budget review and was approved and funded by Main Roads WA (MRWA) as part of the Regional Road Group funding program,” the response said.

“This is to complete the section of road.”

In response to The Heralds query asking Main Roads if they funded the works a spokesperson said Bindi Bindi Rd was under the care and control of the Shire of Toodyay.

Mr Lamas had also asked who made the decision to carry out these works and who approved them from the shire, as they did not appear to be included in this year’s capital works program.

But those question were not answered in the shire’s response.

Mr Lamas said up until the 2024-25 financial year, the budget was presented clearly, allowing ratepayers to easily identify funding sources and municipal expenditure.

But, in the current budget, this level of detail was no longer visible, and the relevant table appears to have been removed, making it difficult to understand how funds were being allocated.

 

Come dance with me: council edition

By Rashelle Predovnik
May 2026

OPINION

There was a time when council meetings were built around the radical notion that the public might actually ask questions.

Now, thanks to the ever-evolving choreography of rule changes, attending a council meeting in the Shire of Toodyay feels less like civic engagement and more like auditioning for a low-budget ballroom competition where nobody knows the steps and the judges keep changing the rules halfway through the song.

Welcome to Come Dance With Me – the newest interpretive performance from the shire president and the Committee for Controlled Movement.

The music begins at public question time as ratepayers step up to the microphone ready to perform.

But don’t expect to ad-lib.

This is not a freestyle event.

This is the ‘two-step’.

Two questions only: then sit down.

Next partner please.

The rhythm is elegant in its inefficiency.

One resident rises, approaches the microphone, asks two carefully rationed questions, then shuffles away while the next resident takes their turn crossing the dancefloor.

By the time each partner change is complete, precious minutes have danced away.

In Toodyay, only 15 minutes is allowed for public question time – which sounds generous until you realise half of it is spent watching people rotate on and off the microphone like disappointed contestants on Dancing With The Stars: Local Government Edition.

It’s a masterclass in movement without momentum.

Meanwhile, journalists trying to ask questions by email are left standing outside the ballroom pressing their faces against the glass.

Three separate media enquiries of mine were emailed in beforehand.

None were answered.

None even made it onto the dance card.

Apparently, accountability now requires physical attendance at a council meeting because nothing says ‘transparent governance’ quite like forcing residents and journalists to queue at a microphone for the privilege of very limited interaction.

The rules themselves seem to pirouette constantly.

Procedures change.

Formats shift.

Footwork evolves.

Residents arrive having learned last month’s routine only to discover council has moved on to a new dance.

There is something strangely poetic about travelling to a council meeting because it is now the only place questions will be answered.

Unsurprisingly, the unanswered questions – piling up over four weeks – become an ever-growing troupe of dancers waiting in the wings.

But the 15-minute stage is too small and in the end, almost nobody makes it onto the floor long enough to dance all the questions they came to ask.

By the time my turn arrived, I managed two questions before the music faded and the curtain fell.

No encore.

No follow-up.

Just a polite nod from the ballroom stage manager and the unmistakable feeling that the purpose of the dance was never communication at all — merely choreography.

Perhaps next month council can simplify things further.

Maybe residents could communicate entirely through interpretive movement.

One spin for ‘yes’.

Two spins for ‘question taken on notice’.

And a slow waltz toward the exit for anyone hoping for genuine engagement and their questions answered.

Bodies risk being dug up as shire loses the plot

Burial blunders, and grave mix ups have been unearthed in a report to council urging
action to deal with what has become a serious operational risk.

By Rashelle Predovnik
May 2026

An explosive report has dug into systemic problems at the Toodyay Cemetery revealing grave sites in older sections of the cemetery are not properly pegged, making plots hard to identify, and judgement calls on where to dig are being made on limited information.

The report to council revealed decades of poor mapping, missing pegs and unreliable records have created a serious operational risk for the shire.

Unworkable maps and poor records 

 The cemetery holds generations of Toodyay’s history, with graves dating back to some of the district’s earliest settlers.

But shire staff are struggling with unworkable maps and poor records that don’t give them confidence they are identifying the correct grave or reserved grave.

 The report to council said a loss of experienced staff who have taken corporate knowledge with them has left replacement staff relying on Excel spreadsheets and deficient records.

The report said the shire’s cemetery operations was being managed with inadequate tools, and insufficient site controls.

 “Historical records and physical inspections confirm that earlier sections of the cemetery were never systematically pegged, and many existing pegs no longer correspond reliably with actual burial sites due to erosion, movement, or loss.”

 The report identified critical compliance risks to the shire, including the need to identify the right plots of land so people were buried in correct locations.

“Historical information also indicates diverse burial locations with varying heritage considerations and land conditions, reinforcing the need for reliable on-ground controls,” the report said.

 “A review of the shire’s cemetery operations has identified significant shortcomings in site control, accurate plot identification, and the tools used to manage burials, reservations, and the cemetery’s spatial layout.”

A risk of graves being disturbed 

The report also warned there was an extremely high chance existing graves could be disturbed if burials were allowed to continue while plots were not properly pegged, as the exact location of older graves were not always clearly recorded.

 It also warned the shire could face reputational damage, conflict with grieving families and possible legal consequences if the problems were not addressed.

The report estimated about $300,000 may ultimately be needed for ground penetration testing, professional surveying, re-pegging of graves and the creation of a modern GIS-based digital cemetery map.

Shires votes to take action

Council voted to suspend new cemetery plot reservations while major issues with mapping, grave identification and site accuracy were investigated.

   The decision means no new plots can be reserved until testing, surveying, re-pegging and updated mapping of the cemetery are completed.

   Council also backed a temporary ‘connection to Toodyay’ policy that will prioritise long-term residents, former residents, people with family already buried in Toodyay and those with strong historic or community ties to the district.

   Council also directed the CEO to contact people who already hold reserved plots to let them know their plots can’t be guaranteed, and a temporary policy will prioritise burials for people with strong ties to Toodyay.

   Council approved up to $50,000 from the Asset Development Reserve for preliminary investigations and consultant quotations.

   The motion passed 3-2, with councillors McKeown, Dival and Mills voting in favour, while councillors Prater and Van der Heyden voted against.

   Councillors opposed to the motion said they were uncomfortable making decisions about suspending burials and spending money without first having clearer information about which areas of the cemetery were compliant and what the actual costs would be.

   Council also resolved to discuss the cemetery issues outlined in the report at a future workshop.

 

UPDATE: 

Dead wrong: Council forced to dig up

cemetery decision

By Rashelle Predovnik
June 2026

Grave mistakes have come back to haunt council after it was revealed a decision last month was incorrectly recorded as passed, when it actually failed to get the required number of votes needed to pass.

Last month, The Herald reported burial blunders and grave mix ups had been unearthed in a report to council urging action to deal with what has become a serious operational risk for the Shire of Toodyay.

The report dug into systemic problems at the Toodyay Cemetery revealing grave sites in older sections of the cemetery were not properly pegged, making plots hard to identify.

Council moved to fix the problem by directing the chief executive officer to contact people who already held reserved plots to let them know their plots couldn’t be guaranteed.

Council supported a temporary policy that would prioritise burials for people with strong ties to Toodyay.

Council also decided to pull $50,000 from a reserve fund to do some preliminary investigations.

But the motion required an absolute majority vote, which means it needed the support of at least four councillors to pass.

Instead, the motion was recorded last month as carried 3-2 so council was asked to amend the April 2 council minutes to record the motion as lost.

The Toodyay Cemetery issue has still not been properly laid to rest as council amended the minutes but did not say when this item will come back to council for a decision

The $400,000 footbridge you can’t run or cycle on

 

 

Harriet, Darci and Will with mums Nikki and Laura on the Newcastle Footbridge.

By Rashelle Predovnik
April 2026

Council will discuss funding options  to fix the town’s ageing Newcastle Footbridge, which will now only be allowed to be used for walking.

Council voted to reopen the bridge to pedestrians, with no e-bikes, scooters, cycling or any other means of transport allowed.

The April report to council said there needed to be a long-term financial commitment from council to keep the bridge open and extend its life by 20 plus years through maintenance.

Council doesn’t support a rate hike for a special bridge fund

The report proposed setting up a special reserve fund to repair and maintain the bridge from an extra two percent rate increase.

“It is recommended the shire begins reserving two percent of rates annually into a ring-fenced reserve account.”

But The Herald queried the lack of other funding options presented to councillors – as the report focused solely on an additional two per cent rate increase as a solution.

The Herald asked why the report did not include other options such as seeking grants or external funding, establishing a reserve without increasing rates, or reprioritising existing spending within the current budget.

The funding proposal comes as council moves to reopen the footbridge to pedestrians only, subject to insurance requirements and the installation of signage warning of trip hazards.

Opening the bridge welcomed but more information requested

The move to open the Newcastle foot bridge was welcomed by a Newcastle Park parkrun member who made a statement at the council meeting.

“We are excited and supportive of the officer’s recommendation for option one, reopening the footbridge with appropriate signage and progressing decking replacement through the 2026-2027 budget.”

But local mum Laura told The Herald the community wanted more information about the cost of the bridge and why it was closed.

“We were not told how much the bridge was costing to keep open and it just shut one day,” she said.

“If they’re saying it cost ‘X amount’ to fix the bridge then give us a break down of the cost and justify the spending.”

Budget?  We’ll cross that bridge later 

While the two per cent increase, to be put into a reserve fund, was recommended by officers, council did not adopt this proposal.

Instead, council voted to proceed with a full bridge decking replacement, estimated at $270,000, to be funded through the annual budget.

Council also supported a staged approach to the repairs needed.

This included structural works – estimated at $120,000 to $150,000 – within five years.

Rather than introducing a rate rise, council unanimously agreed to consider the funding implications as part of the 2026–27 annual budget process.

It remains unclear whether a special reserve fund will be established as part of those discussions.

Audit committee steps up scrutiny

By Rashelle Predovnik
April 2026

The Audit and Risk Committee (ARIC) has stepped up its scrutiny of the Shire of Toodyay’s governance and finances calling for more meetings and more oversight – in a move that prompted pushback from the chief executive officer.

Under the Local Government Act, ARIC is responsible for the oversight of risk management, internal controls, financial management and compliance.

The committee’s decision to step up its oversight follows the 2024–25 audit’s financial management report, which identified major issues that have persisted across four audits.

Auditors found $242,521 had been mistakenly been paid twice, no monthly bank reconciliations were done for almost an entire financial year and the risk of fraud had increased.

Endorsing an annual work plan and new reporting process

ARIC held a special meeting on March 17 at the shire’s council chambers on Fiennes St to endorse an annual work plan and a new reporting process.

ARIC’s report outlined a plan that included monthly meetings instead of quarterly, and it substantially increased the reporting requirements for finance, governance, risk and operations.

The committee said regular monthly meetings would better help them to detect issues early, monitor trends or intervene before risks escalated.

ARIC also asked for an operational overview summary to inform the committee about key activities and significant incidents that resulted in compliance breaches, reputational harm or the need for corrective action.

A reconciliation status report was also requested, including bank accounts, GST and asset registers to help the committee look at the integrity of the financial records.

ARIC also asked the shire’s CEO Aaron Bowman to provide a formal written statement of assurance each quarter on the effectiveness of the organisations processes and to identify any issues that warranted ARIC’s attention.

Shire CEO flags concerns

In response, Mr Bowman described the discussions ARIC had as ‘secret, behind closed doors meetings’ and discussions that did not promote transparency as he was not told before the special audit meeting that ARIC wanted a more detailed work plan.

Mr Bowman also raised governance concerns, saying the committee’s role was to review reports from the CEO and make recommendations to council.

He said the CEO was responsible for administration, staffing, systems and reporting.

He added that any extra reporting requests would need to be assessed for practicality, staffing and legal requirements before going to council for approval.

Moving to monthly meetings and endorsing a complex reporting schedule would also impose significant workload increases and administrative demands, Mr Bowman said.

ARIC defends its proposed reporting framework

In a statement, ARIC chair Natalie Mills said members meeting to discuss priorities and what reporting was required for proper oversight was not ‘non-compliant’ behaviour — it was the committee simply doing their job.

She said the committee had a responsibility under the Act to decide the information, reporting and assurance it needed to fulfil its statutory functions.

“To meet this obligation, ARIC must establish a structured and predictable reporting framework that ensures it receives the information necessary to monitor financial controls, compliance, risk management and organisational performance throughout the year.”

“The proposed reporting framework sets out a suite of standing reports, delivered at defined intervals to ensure ARIC receives timely, evidence-based information that supports informed decision making and effective oversight.”

ARIC also noted that it had requested the required reports from the CEO in accordance with the committee’s charter and statutory functions.

Mrs Mills said if the reports required by the framework could not be produced, that could pose a serious risk to the shire.

“Identifying such risks is one of the reasons why this committee exists.”

Members of the audit committee unanimously voted to support the annual work plan and to hold monthly meetings at the special audit meeting held last month.

Uniform rate plan sparks backlash from rural property owners

By Rashelle Predovnik
April 2026

Morangup residents have fired up against a council decision to create a uniform rate in the dollar, warning it will drive up costs for rural property owners and potentially deliver a bigger-than-expected financial blow when rates are finalised.

The modelling in the report to council that supported the uniform rate pushed GRV rural residential rates up by five percent and UV rural rates up 21 percent.

But critics of the move are bracing for a bigger hit when rates are finalised, as the percentages in the council report were based on last year’s lower rate setting.

This means the projected increases outlined in the report could end up even higher if this year’s rates are set above last year’s levels.

Uniform rates benefits some more than others

Council voted to change the method of rating from July 1 this year moving from differential rates to a uniform rate in the dollar for properties valued using Gross Rental Value (GRV) and Unimproved Value (UV) at its March meeting.

The uniform rate won’t significantly change the shire’s total rate revenue, which will stay about the same according to the report to council.

But it will have a big effect on many household budgets.

The report to council showed the biggest changes affected two groups: 410 properties in the UV General category saw their rates drop by 58 percent, whereas 198 UV Rural properties saw their rates jump up 21 percent.

The biggest category (1,055 ‘GRV Rural Residential’ properties) had a five percent increase.

Whereas 626 GRV Residential properties saw their rates fall by four percent.

A call for accurate data

But the figures modelled in the report to council were from last year and they will be outdated when council ratifies its new budget and sets its rates for the 2026-2027 financial year.

This means, the small decreases modelled in the March report to council could disappear and small increases could spike if council sets a rate this year higher than last year’s 2.2 percent.

The neighbouring shires of York, Chittering and Victoria Plains have a uniform rate structure.

Whereas Northam and Goomalling still use the differential rating model and so did Toodyay before the change last month.

In a statement the shire said this change will make rates fairer, clearer, and easier to understand, and it will help ensure long term compliance with rating laws.

“This isn’t about raising more money — it’s about simplifying the system and improving transparency,” the shire said in a statement.

“Slight reductions or modest increases may appear on individual rates notices, depending on your property type and valuation.”

But the actual percentage increases and decreases for this year are yet to be released.

The Toodyay Herald asked the shire to confirm that the figures to be advertised for public comment in May will be based on the final 2026–27 budget and updated modelling, rather than last year’s figures presented in the March report to council.

So the community could make informed submissions.

The Herald did not receive a response to its questions before we went to press.

The opportunity to have a say

A statement on a Morangup community website slammed the decision to hit Morangup residents with a rate hike — while Toodyay town residents rates went down — as divisive.

Although the shire said the change was not about raising more money, Morangup residents are being warned to brace for the first of many rate rises if council proceeds with its plans to flatten the system.

“The March decision is the method change — the reshuffling of who pays more and who pays less,” it said.

“It does not necessarily include whatever broader increase the shire may later apply through the 2026/27 budget.”

Morangup residents opposing the uniform model said they were not reacting to one isolated tweak.

They were reacting to a pattern over time of rising costs, town-centric assumptions, heavy shire spending programs, weak outer-locality voice, and now a council decision that shifted more of the rating burden onto rural residential, while giving town residential a reduction.

The unform rating model will be put out for public comment next month.

The proposal will be advertised for 21 days, seeking community feedback so the community can have their say.

Costs climbing

 

 

Toodyay Hardware and Farm Supplies store manager Jeff Hudson.

By Rashelle Predovnik
April 2026

The diesel shortage is starting to bite in Toodyay, with a local hardware store warning rising fuel costs, big price hikes on products made from oil-based plastic and disrupted deliveries could soon push up prices for residents and farmers.
Toodyay Hardware and Farm Supplies owner Damien said the flow-on effects were already being felt across its supply chain, with freight costs skyrocketing in the past few weeks.
He said the current diesel shortage was driving up costs and cutting down deliveries.
“Our freight supplier charges us a fuel levy on top of the standard pallet cost and at the end of February, this was a comfortable 17 percent,” he said.
“Today, it’s sitting at 60 percent and with seeding starting, I can only expect it to climb higher.”

Trying to keep the costs down

To combat the rising costs, some suppliers have added extra delivery fees and freight companies have scaled back deliveries to manage higher costs.
Damien said to date the business has done what it can to absorb these extra costs.
“But if this drags on past April, we may have no choice but to start raising prices.”
Damien said the fuel shortage was also causing price hikes on some PVC pipes and plastic fittings.
Simply because a huge portion of the oil used to make plastic resin comes from the exact same supply chain as the oil used to produce our fuel.
“It’s all connected.”
He said several suppliers had warned of price increases between 20 percent and 50 percent on certain products.
Despite this, several major suppliers have also indicated they do not plan immediate increases.

 A hit for farmers

Shadow Minister for Agriculture Lachlan Hunter MLA said the crisis was now hitting agriculture hard, with devastating consequences for farmers heading into one of the most critical periods of the year.
“Without diesel, tractors stop, seed stays in the shed and next year’s harvest is put at risk.”
Mr Hunter said without urgent action, the fuel crisis will quickly become a full-blown food crisis.
“When diesel does not reach the people who produce and move our food, the cost does not disappear, it lands squarely on the kitchen tables of Western Australian families,” he said.
“This is how a fuel crisis becomes a food price crisis, with higher freight costs, disrupted supply and more pressure on families already struggling with the cost of living.”

Taking steps to help

In response, the State Government has activated emergency powers to take control of fuel supply data and direct deliveries to the regions most in need.
Fuel for agriculture is being prioritised, to ensure seeding can go ahead in hard-hit communities.
Road train limits have also been relaxed to move more diesel and petrol into regional areas faster.
A taskforce led by Deputy Premier Rita Saffioti is working with regional suppliers, including Great Southern Fuels, and the Federal Government to find new ways to get fuel into affected areas.
The measures come after widespread reports of fuel shortages across regional WA.
For now, Toodyay residents are being urged to brace for slower deliveries and the possibility of higher prices if the fuel squeeze continues.

High-stakes hearing

Tony Maddox was flanked by supporters: Central Wheatbelt MLA Lachlan Hunter and former Pastoralists and Graziers Association of WA president Tony Seabrook at the Supreme Court.

By Rashelle Predovnik
March 2026

The strain of a court case that has ramifications for property owners across the state was visible on Tony Maddox’s face when he prepared to step into the Supreme Court last month with his supporters.
High profile barrister and former state Attorney General Christian Porter is representing the Toodyay farmer in the Supreme Court where Mr Maddox is launching an appeal after being charged for breaching a new rule in the Aboriginal Heritage Act he said no one was told about.
He is appealing against – what he says was a flawed process – that found him guilty of breaching the Act when he built a concrete crossing on his property.
He is also pinning his case on a section of the Aboriginal Heritage Act that protects people who did not know – and could not have reasonably known – about changes to the Act that makes their land a protected site.
The marathon hearing went for the whole day before the judge asked both parties to come back again with more information and a future hearing date is yet to be set.

Supporters back a fight they say needs to be won  

To date, Mr Maddox’s legal costs amount to more than $140,000 and the public have been generous with their donations to his fighting fund.
If Mr Maddox’s appeal is unsuccessful he will consider taking his fight to the High Court.
Supporters who fronted up to court last month included Toodyay residents who have been supporting him every step of the way.
He was also flanked by Central Wheatbelt MLA Lachlan Hunter and former Pastoralists and Graziers Association (PGA) president Tony Seabrook who are standing alongside him in a fight they say needs to be won.
Mr Hunter said he was standing with Mr Maddox to support fair, common sense protections for WA landowners.
He said the fight was one that should concern every single landowner and every single primary producer in the state.
The amendment to the Aboriginal Heritage Act that captured Mr Maddox was added in November 2023.
Mr Hunter said if Mr Maddox could be convicted under these laws, without even knowing those laws applied to his land, then everyone should be concerned.
“It’s a basic principle,” he said.
“If it’s your land, you should have the right
to manage it with clarity and confidence.”
Mr Hunter said the state’s cultural heritage laws were causing confusion and uncertainty
across regional communities.
Mr Seabrook said Mr Maddox was a brave man.
“Tony said, if he pleads guilty – he pleads guilty for every single landholder in Western Australia who has a gully on their farm and might have built a crossing,” Mr Seabrook said.
“So you can have a piece of freehold land, with a title that says its freehold land, they
[the Department of Planning Lands and Heritage (DPLH) have drawn a line on it and they haven’t even told you about it.”

The Maddox case sparks calls for state laws to change

Western Australia’s peak agricultural bodies are now demanding the State Government makes immediate changes to the law to ensure existing and new Aboriginal heritage sites are shown on the Certificate of Title for all properties.
The call has come in response to the Mr Maddox’s appeal in the Supreme Court.
WA Farmers President Steve McGuire said the DPLH register of Aboriginal Heritage had  more than 15,000 entries, many of which were on private property.
“The Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Committee (ACHC) meets every two weeks and regularly adds new sites to the register without notifying property owners that they have a new encumbrance on their land,” Mr McGuire said.
“What we learned from the Tony Maddox case is that the DPLH doesn’t always write
to property owners when their land is being considered for a new site, doesn’t publish the
agenda or minutes of the ACHC and doesn’t notify anyone when a new site is declared.
“The fact is, there are many property owners who simply don’t know it is illegal to do
a number of things on their land because they’ve never been told it is a declared site.”
Mr Seabrook said the laws needed to change.
“Right now it is an offence if your dog or livestock enters the boundary of a registered
site – even if it’s on your property,” he said.
“Other regulations say you need ministerial approval to disturb the surface of the ground,
dig a hole, cut your grass or remove any part of a tree that you own, even if it’s dead.
Mr Seabrook said the Tony Maddox case proved having a registered site on your land
was a liability.
“It is astonishing that someone can buy land in WA and not be forewarned that the property comes with the encumbrance of containing a registered Aboriginal heritage
site,” he said.
“The government must ensure registered sites appear on the Certificate of Title so
buyers can understand the risks of the property they are considering.”

1 2 3 … 35