Just four of the ten infrastructure projects promised under the $98 million WestInvest scheme for the Hawkesbury will be delivered in full, as funding shortfalls force major cuts, delays, or outright cancellations.

Despite grand architectural drawings and assurances from elected representatives, it has now become clear that the funds allocated under the scheme, announced by the NSW Liberal Government in 2023, were never sufficient to build the projects as originally depicted. Hawkesbury City Council has confirmed that initial cost estimates were "substantially less" than what is now required, in part due to soaring construction and material costs.

Councillor Nathan Zamprogno said the way these projects were sold to the community was misleading. “The last State election was fought with our elected representatives standing next to large photos of these architecturally lavish, fully-featured facilities. You’d have to say there’s an element of false advertising if now we’re being told that very few of them can be delivered as they were depicted.”

Of the ten projects, the four that remain fully funded and on track for completion include Fernadell Park sports and community facilities in Pitt Town, Woodbury Reserve, the Kurrajong to Kurmond Cycleway, and upgrades to Turnbull Oval in North Richmond. A council spokesperson said Woodbury Reserve was the most progressed, with the Pump Track completed in August 2024. The tender process for Fernadell Park’s amenities and landscape construction closed in February 2025, with work expected to commence in autumn, weather permitting.

However, the remaining six projects - including the much-anticipated new indoor pool at Richmond, upgrades to the Oasis Aquatic and Fitness Centre, North Richmond Community Precinct, Tamplin Field in Hobartville, and the Shared Path Cycleway over Rickabys Creek - face severe funding shortfalls. Council has acknowledged that these projects are now subject to further analysis, potential reductions in scope, or alternative funding solutions, all of which require state government approval.

Zamprogno criticised the failure to account for cost inflation over the multi-year timeline of these projects. “Over the multi-year timeframes that these projects come to fruition, cost-inflation was absolutely something that should have been anticipated and factored in,” he said. “No one wants these to be cancelled or downsized, but in the context of Council’s broader financial situation, it irks that the State Government has created this problem only to blame Council for the disappointment.”

Council now faces difficult decisions: whether to scale down projects, abandon some entirely to reallocate funds, or seek additional borrowing to deliver the infrastructure as originally promised. The extent of the funding gap has not been publicly disclosed, though it is believed to be in the tens of millions of dollars. The Hawkesbury Post has lodged a Government Information Public Access (GIPA) request to obtain details of the shortfall after Council refused to disclose the figures voluntarily.

Compounding the issue, each completed facility will bring ongoing maintenance costs that were never accounted for within the WestInvest grant, further straining Council’s already fragile financial position. Hawkesbury Councillor Mary Lyons-Buckett has long been critical of such projects failing to budget for longterm maintenance of facilities. Even before these projects, Council faced a $163 million infrastructure maintenance deficit over the next nine years, meaning additional rate increases may soon be required.

“These were facilities that the community were promised,” Zamprogno said. “Now, instead of seeing these grand designs come to life, we’re left with a significantly diminished set of projects and the ongoing issue of how maintenance on any community projects will be funded.”

In response to questions from the Hawkesbury Post, a Council spokesperson stated that extensive cost management strategies had been implemented, including collaboration with designers and quantity surveyors to find savings. “Initial cost estimates, based on conceptual designs, used at the time funding was applied for, were substantially less than what is now required to deliver these projects... The shortfall is simply due to construction and material costs increasing substantially.”

While Council maintains it is seeking additional funding and exploring ways to keep projects alive, it is clear that residents will not receive the infrastructure they were promised when the scheme was announced.