THERE’S every chance ratepayers will be put into a $200,000 hole following the collapse of software developer Urpla.
Council cannot be held responsible for the financial state of third-party suppliers.
In fact, it is unfortunate that an attempt to innovate, and to create a better way of processing development applications, has gone belly up. However, council should always be held responsible for the way it communicates with ratepayers.
When asked if council had paid money to Urpla, a statement from council refused to answer the question, stating only that it does not publicly discuss contractual matters.
It seems this one is a financial matter council would rather sweep under the carpet.
The amount of the contract is publicly available, and so too should the matter of whether the money has indeed been paid within 21 days of the job’s completion, as is a council policy welcomed by its suppliers.
What we do know is that the development application process has reverted to a system used prior to the collapse of its supplier.
Council insists the level of service has not waned, but there must be a level of disruption when switching from one system to another.
Stuff happens. We get it. But let’s not bury our heads in the sand when it does.
Ratepayers stand to lose $200,000
