Did Council’s Debt Woes Drive Secret Sale of Pony Club Land?

Just days after the secret sale of public land by Hawkesbury City Council to a pet food manufacturer became public, calls for land to be rezoned for industrial use have already begun. The $5 million approved sale of the bush block, which was conducted in secret, without public tender or community consultation, has sparked outrage, particularly as the land is rich in biodiversity and is home to the Woodlands Park Pony Club and has been for 40 years.

Hawkesbury Council is burdened by significant debt, including but not limited to, a $35.1 million loan for a botched sewer repair project in Windsor and a $16.5 million dollar loan for infrastructure in the Vineyard Development area. In a confidential session last week, the Liberal-Labor alliance of councillors voted to green-light the sale of the block at 295 Sackville Road, Wilberforce to pet food company, Hypro Investments Pty Ltd. This decision was made despite the Council, just two months earlier, deeming the block inappropriate for the location of the new Hawkesbury fire control centre, citing the land’s high biodiversity value.

Adding to the controversy, the newly formed Hawkesbury Business Group, chaired by Hypro Investments founder John Camilleri, is already advocating for Hawkesbury land to be rezoned for industrial use. The current RU1 zoning restricts industrial activities, but a change in zoning could significantly increase the land’s value. Without any rezoning local real estate agents said the $5 million price tag is significantly higher than the current market for such a block. Hypro currently operates from the industrial estate which sits adjacent to the pony club block.

Jeff Ferrara, Secretary of the Hawkesbury Business Group, defended the sale in an email to the HP, arguing that it could help the Council reduce its debt while promoting economic growth through job creation. “The Hawkesbury Business Group encourages Council to consider the rezoning and sale of other suitable areas of operational land – this would simultaneously provide Council a method to pay down debt while boosting productivity in the region through job creation,” Ferrara said. 

Ferrara also said that the dealings about the land sale “were conducted independently between Hypro Investments and Hawkesbury Council, with no input or influence from the Hawkesbury Business Group.” He added that on February 9, 2024, Hypro began discussions with the Council’s Property Manager. and one week later, on February 14, Hypro Investments submitted an offer to purchase the property. On August 1, Hypro accepted the Council’s counter-offer for the land.

HCC refused to answer questions about the sale, citing confidentiality. The HP also sent questions to re-contesting councillors, Liberal’s Sarah McMahon, Jill Reardon, Paul Veigel, Independent, Les Sheather and Labor’s Amanda Kotlash who voted to sell the land. The HP has yet to receive a response. You can read the questions below.

The sale has left the Woodlands Park Pony Club homeless, once its lease runs out, raising serious concerns about the Council’s priorities and public trust. The club, a vital part of the Hawkesbury’s equestrian community, was not informed of the sale until it was listed in the Council business papers.  

Local residents took to social media to express their outrage. Melinda Strachan voiced her concerns about the impact on local youth, saying, “Taking away recreational grounds for children and forcing them back inside on their devices. What a great move.” Another resident, Tabatha Hunt, criticised the decision’s broader implications, stating, “Forcing horse people further west to open up acres for development.” Cassandra Chiarelli urged the community to take action, declaring, “Surely this couldn’t go through! The Woodlands Park Pony Club (and agricultural land/activities) are an important part of the community. We need to inundate the council with objections to let them know it’s not okay.”

Environmental advocates have also expressed alarm, pointing out that the land is home to threatened species and serves as a critical wildlife corridor. Richie Benson commented on the sale’s ecological impact, stating, “This site is home to several plant communities which are Threatened Ecological Communities (TEC’s). Within these plant communities, there are three threatened species which require our full protection and preservation.” He further emphasised the importance of the land as a wildlife corridor, a critical factor in maintaining biodiversity in the area.

Councillor Nathan Zamprogno, who opposed the sale, supported a successful rescission motion bought by Green’s Councillor Danielle Wheeler for the matter revisited by the newly elected council in October. Zamprogno urged residents to elect representatives who will prioritise transparency and community interests over secretive deals that benefit private entities. “I signed the rescission motion to have the matter brought back to the new council in October. If you want this turned around, elect a different Council,” Zamprogno stated.

The situation has left others questioning Council’s growing disregard for the cultural and economic contributions of the equestrian community. Mel Jacobs wrote on Facebook,  “Such an important place for local riders young and old to come together. Council is very out of touch with just how big and important horse activities are in their own government area that has one of the highest numbers of horses per capita.”

As development pressures mount in the region, public lands traditionally used for sports and recreation and the natural environment are increasingly at risk, pushing long-established clubs like Woodlands out in favour of commercial interests. 

The Woodlands Park Pony Club, determined not to close its doors despite this setback, is seeking urgent discussions with the Council regarding the future of their lease. “We appreciate all the community interest,” Keddie said, “Our club does require new grounds and WILL NOT be closing down.”

Questions unanswered:

1: Given that the item on the agenda had a public portion and a confidential portion, why did you choose to move the entire debate into confidential when there was a public expectation that this would be debated openly? 

2: Wouldn’t council’s divestment of a significant asset normally be the subject of extensive consultation and then either a public auction or tender? Why was this deemed inappropriate in this case? 

3: Would it be ethical to take nearly $6 million from a potential purchaser knowing they would unlikely realise that value through a rezoning?

 4: If the same land was deemed inappropriate for the location of the new fire control centre, why do you believe that it would be appropriate for a dog food manufacturer to use the same land to extend their factory?