It is still undecided whether Gunnedah's councillors will receive superannuation payments.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
A submission asking for superannuation contributions was made to the Office of Local Government after discussions at the March ordinary council meeting, but there has still been no news.
The lack of notification was brought up at the last meeting after Local Government Super (LGS) advised there was "currently no requirement for superannuation contributions on councillor and mayoral fees".
As it stands, councils are not required to make superannuation payments to their councillors because they are deemed elected officials, and not employees.
Cr Ann Luke cited at the March meeting that it was "a very low hourly rate for the time and effort that we actually do put into local government".
READ ALSO:
Cr Murray O'Keefe said this week the point he and his fellow councillors were trying to make was that elected officials had a large workload.
He also said getting super would attract more locals to try-out for a position as a councillor in future elections.
"If you make the task and role more attractive, you open the door for more locals to seek the role," he said.
Gunnedah Shire Council's acting corporate and community services director, Tim Muldoon, said at the September meeting he had "forwarded additional correspondence to Office of Local Government to seek a response to the submission".
Councillors also voted at the March meeting to support the Country Mayors Association in requesting that automatically made payments to their super go instead towards "essential recovery" for destroyed and homeless communities.
This two-year moratorium on an increase in payments into the NSW Local Government Defined Benefits Scheme was knocked back by the LGS.
They said there was "no scope to reduce contribution levels at this time and resolved to maintain the funding requirements as previously advised in relation to the NSW Local Government Defined Benefits Scheme".
"Primarily, this decision was based on the current financial position of the fund due to a combination of employer contributions and investment returns exceeding their benchmarks," Mr Muldoon said.