The New England Future Fund is one of the most significant governance decisions Armidale Regional Council has made in years. A public submission process is open now, and a post on social media is not the same thing as having your say.
Most people in Armidale have never heard of the New England Future Fund. That is about to change, particularly if you live near a wind farm or solar project, care about how Council spends public money, or have any interest in what the Draft Armidale City Centre Vitality Plan might be funded by.
Renewable energy companies building projects in and around the New England region are required, as part of their planning agreements, to pay contributions to Council. Rather than spending those contributions as they arrive, Council has established a Future Fund: the money gets invested, the capital is preserved for future generations, and only the annual earnings get spent on community benefit. That is genuinely good policy. The model is sound.
What is less sound is how the Fund is proposed to be governed. Council has published a draft Terms of Reference for the Future Fund Board of Guardians, and it is currently on public exhibition.
This is not a thumbs up or a thumbs down. It is a formal governance document that will determine how millions of dollars in community funds are managed for decades.
Your rates pay for roads, rubbish and water and maintenance of existing infrastructure. The Future Fund is different. It is not rates revenue and it is not for maintaining what already exists. It is an investment in infrastructure for the future, funded by the companies that are permanently changing the landscape of this region. How it is governed matters.
Why a formal submission matters
When Council puts something on public exhibition, it is required to consider the submissions it receives. That is a legal obligation under the Local Government Act. A post on social media, a reaction in the community Facebook group, a conversation at the markets, none of these carry the same weight. They are not on the record. They cannot be formally responded to. They cannot be cited in the Council report that determines what changes, if any, are made to the document.
A written submission goes on the public record. Council must consider it. If you raise a concern about a specific clause, Council must either address it or explain why it has not. You do not need to be a lawyer or a governance expert. A clear letter of a few paragraphs stating what you support and what you would like changed is a submission.
What is in the draft Terms of Reference
The draft establishes the Board of Guardians as the body that will govern the Fund’s investments. The compliance framework is sound and the requirement for members with investment expertise is appropriate. There are three things that deserve scrutiny.
The Mayor and the General Manager are voting members of the Board. The same people who will later decide how the Fund’s earnings are spent on community projects are also sitting on the body that governs the investments. There is no separation between those two roles, and good governance requires it.
There is no formal mechanism for community input into how the earnings are spent. The Board recommends a dividend. Council decides what to fund. The community is not consulted at any point.
All Board meetings are closed, and all Board information is confidential by default. No published fund balance, no public record of earnings, no visibility into what the dividend was spent on. A public benefit fund with no public transparency is not something the community should accept without question.
The City Centre Vitality Plan connection
Council also has the Draft Armidale City Centre Vitality Plan open for comment, and there has been a lot of commentary about it. The funding for that is noted as being from the Future Fund.
If Future Fund earnings flow into a city centre revitalisation project, that may be the right decision. But it should be made openly, with community input, and with full public visibility into how the funds move.
The draft Terms of Reference, as currently written, would allow it to happen without any of those things. A few targeted changes would fix that. A submission is how you request them.
How to make a submission
The draft is at yoursay.armidale.nsw.gov.au/draft-terms-of-reference-for-the-future-fund-board-of-guardians
Submissions close 5:00 PM Tuesday 14 July 2026.
The Future Fund will be here for decades. The governance decisions being made now will shape how it works, who benefits, and whether the community ever gets to know. The rules are still being written. A written submission is how you help write them.
I am writing this because Armidale is my chosen home. I want this community and its businesses to thrive, and I want to support the initiatives that will help our economy grow. The Future Fund, governed well, is one of them.
If you care about Armidale too, then you should care about this, and have your say by making a submission before they close on Tuesday.
Got something on your mind? Go on then, engage. Submit your opinion piece, letter to the editor, or Quick Word now.