1. Councillor Elect
Looks like Cheryl Forge is a shoe-in to be declared the new councillor following Whiteside’s resignation. We’ve done our sums and on preferences Forge is way ahead of the other candidates. With a long history as advocate for public access to the Caulfield Racecourse, and planning issues in general, the community anticipates some interesting times ahead.
2. Elsternwick 10 storey application
There’s a planning meeting organised for this high rise development in early August. For full details please see: http://elsternwickcommunity.wordpress.com
Glen Eira Debates 
August 11, 2010 at 8:44 PM
The MRC could have provided a balanced response to meet community concerns – the Queens Avenue Fence replacement and keeping parts of the reserve such as the Guineas area. Instead greed stepped in and they offered nothing. BIG mistake and now people such as Forge and Penhalluriak have made political careers out of it. And if the MRC still persists then state and federal political careers can be made from opposing the MRC greed.
August 12, 2010 at 9:32 AM
Many individuals use local government as their first stepping stone to a political career. currently there’s Pilling whose contesting as a green; there’s Lipshutz who tried, Staikos is still trying, Magee dabbles, and I’m sure that Tang sees himself as a future Menzies. Personally I don’t give a damn about their future aspirations. What matters is the here and now and how well these people represent their current local communities.
August 13, 2010 at 10:20 PM
If somebody has a talent for listening, absorbing complex information, making principled decisions, articulating reasons for a decision, and working hard for all, then I would encourage them to pursue a career in politics, to the highest level. In my dealings with the current Councillors they fall short. I certainly don’t miss ex-Cr Staikos, whose clumsiness in running one particular Planning Conference provoked a 10-minute tirade of abuse from attendees. At the time I had no clue why he was so pro-development. It was only his resignation in the wake of the Brimbank scandal that filled in the missing pieces. While the ALP may yet decide he epitomizes their values, I do hope its not in the electorate of Oakleigh.
August 11, 2010 at 11:02 PM
I’ve just had a look at the Elsternwick development blog where they cite the following letter that objectors received from council. It states in part…”The aim of the Planning Conference is to discuss details of the proposal and objections and to explore resolution of concerns at a forum which is more conducive to discussion than a formal Council meeting. The planning Conference is to be chaired by a Councillor and will involve Planning Officers. This is the only opportunity available for interested parties to verbally address their concerns to Council”.
I’ve got real concerns about the last sentence. If this application goes to council then objectors do have the right to speak to the application. Why then is this misleading information being given out to residents? Or is it already determined beforehand that this application will not go to council for decision?
August 12, 2010 at 12:56 PM
Hi Anonymous,
I did copy that text directly as it was written, and was also surprised to see that last sentence. However, I read it as the only opportunity to voice concerns before Council assessed the application – rather than during the application process itself. But perhaps I am being too optimistic in my interpretation!
August 12, 2010 at 2:06 PM
Precisely my point Elsternwick. There should not be any ambiguity for something as important as this. Residents should know their full rights up front. If this last sentence was merely inadvertent, then still not good enough.
August 12, 2010 at 3:29 PM
I wish I could be as optimistic as you seem to be about the prospect of Cheryl Forge on council. I am aware of her long-term interest in planning issues – but the following facts do not reflect well on her –
She only ran for council in 2008 because Cr Helen Whiteside asked her – Helen needed her preferences. I believe there is a term for this type of a candidate.
She had no expectation of winning – and so did little campaigning. She did print how-to-vote cards – which were handed out by Frank Pehalluriack’s people.
She received 566 votes – the lowest of any candidate – but this was enough to get Cr Whiteside ahead of Peter Blight for the 3rd elected position.
Each of the elected candidates (Penhalluriack, Whiteside, Lipshutz) and Cheryl Forge preferenced each other ahead of Peter Blight and his ticket. So Cheryl was party to maintaining the council status quo and keeping out candidates standing on a platform of residents right.
I’d suggest the best way for Cheryl to make a difference to council would be to stand aside and let one of the resident candidates take the position.
August 13, 2010 at 9:39 PM
At the last Council election I was also asked to run as a Stooge candidate by a current Councillor (one that hasn’t resigned). I refused, as if I chose to run it would be with serious intent to improve governance. I think it is unfair to judge Cheryl, or anybody else, about their contribution to Council until they have had a go. Established incumbents however should routinely have their performance examined, and have to demonstrate that they have indeed effectively represented the views of their Ward. I would myself likely support a resident candidate over, say, business-person whose policies are around boosting sales for their market segment.