Building Insurance too expensive for solo committees.

Last Tuesday we held a meeting of  Community hall and recreation reserve committees from across East Gippsland Shire  to challenge Council's decision to withdraw building insurance cover from facilities in 34 communities, effective 1 July 2025.

Representatives met in Sarsfield and online to coordinate their response to what they describe as a decision made without consultation that threatens the viability of vital community infrastructure.

Call to Action

The committees are maintaining pressure on Council to reverse the decision and address what they describe as significant disparity in Council support for volunteer-run community facilities across the Shire.

They warn that failure to act could have serious implications for the future of these community spaces, many of which are the only public infrastructure available in their localities.

At the time of writing, no detailed or satisfactory response to questions raised with Council had been received.

Community members are urged to contact their local councillors immediately to voice their concerns.

Community Halls in East Gippland are all on Government land “ Crown” land. Some of this Crown land is managed by the EGSC and they subcontract that job to individual Committes of Management ( CoM). The rest are on DEECA land and those Halls have CoM appointed by DEECA. They are all community facilities providing places to get together for and to build community connections through East Gippsland.

Until 30 June 2025 the EGSC recognised this community benefit and covered ALL the halls, including Sarsfield, in a bulk insurance arrangement. On about 21 July we received a letter with all other DEECA CoM that the EGSC was saving $57k by not insuring them.

So here we are:a new building coming and the quote we’ve had is about $14k a year to insure it.

Decision Made Without Consultation

Committees learned of the decision only after it was made, through letters and media reports announcing Council would save $57,000 annually.

"There was no consultation, no advance warning, and no opportunity for committees to discuss this decision with Council before it was made," said "We're now working to convince Council that the impacts are serious enough to warrant a review—with input from the affected committees. 

Insurance Costs Beyond Community Resources

Committees report that insurance quotes received far exceed their capacity to pay, with some determining they cannot afford appropriate cover. This leaves facilities vulnerable to damage or destruction, with no means of replacement or repair.

"For communities that have experienced natural disasters, we know how critical insurance is to recovery," said Cathy McLellan, Acting President, Sarsfield Community Association. "Not having insurance feels irresponsible when you're appointed to look after a facility for your community. While Council may save $57,000, the cost to communities far exceeds that."

While Committees are grateful for the support that Council will continue to provide, they warn that fundraising to cover insurance premiums—in addition to existing responsibilities—will be unsustainable for volunteer-run organisations.  These Committees are now to be further disadvantaged simply because they are not Council appointed Committees, because of historical circumstances that they can’t influence, even though the perform the same volunteer role in their communities on public land.

Why Council, Not State Government?

When asked why committees are appealing to Council rather than the Victorian Government, which owns the land, or DEECA Kate explained: "The Victorian Government provides the land and buildings but has little interest in whether these local halls remain viable for small communities. East Gippsland Shire Council has provided insurance cover for decades and should care about facilities that are important contributors to community wellbeing—facilities Council hasn't had to build, fund, or maintain."

“Right now, Council has left the Committees to work this insurance issue out by themselves with the Victorian Government, something Council itself has stated it has not been able to do – what hope would individual volunteer groups have?”