Across Victoria, councils from Ararat to Wyndham have spoken out against the State Government’s decision to push the cost of the Emergency Services and Volunteers Fund (ESVF) onto local ratepayers.

Some councils have rightly pointed out that this levy is nothing more than a hidden state tax, dressed up and quietly tucked into our rates notices. They have also raised valid concerns about the administrative burden now unfairly placed on local government, with ratepayers left footing the bill not only for the levy itself, but also for the cost of its collection.

And yet, amid this chorus of resistance, the City of Port Phillip has remained conspicuously silent. When leaders like Stephen Jolly, Mayor of Yarra, stood up and publicly rejected becoming the State’s tax collector, where was our council?

Recently issued rates notices revealed Port Phillip ratepayers are being hit with massive increases in rates and charges including the new ESVF levy.  The new levy replaces the Fire Service Property Levy with a massive increase in cost for ratepayers, more than 50%.

Instead of publicly questioning the blatant cost shifting and hidden charges, Port Phillip meekly accepted its role as an agent of Treasury. While collecting the tax is a legal obligation as set by the State, the City of Port Phillip did not have to stay silent particularly when progressive and proactive Councils stood up for their constituents.

However, ratepayers are left wondering: what are the administrative costs of this process? How much of our money is spent on council staff processing, enforcing, and inevitably chasing unpaid levies on behalf of Spring Street?

The insult compounds when one considers what happens if you refuse to pay. We can assume debt collectors will be dispatched—by our own council—on behalf of a financially strapped State Government. Ratepayers, already groaning under the weight of rising charges, are now conscripted into a system where their own council acts as the enforcer of a tax they never agreed to.

So why the silence? Some argue it reflects Port Phillip’s political alignment. With councillors and senior officers tied closely to the ALP —some as ex-employees or card-carrying members — it seems rocking the boat risks their own career trajectories. But this alignment comes at a cost. Instead of advocating for residents and resisting hidden state taxes, Port Phillip has chosen loyalty to party politics over loyalty to its community.

At a time when household budgets are stretched thin, what the community needed was courage. Other councils showed it could be done—challenging the levy, demanding transparency, and pushing the State to fund its own responsibilities. The City of Port Phillip, however, chose silence. And silence, in this case, speaks volumes.