Glen Eira Debates

Presented below are a sequence of events relating to the sale of land at Nina and Niki Crts., Bentleigh. Once again this episode would appear to raise serious questions as to the governance practices of this council and the role of both administrators and councillors. As always, we invite councillors to present their point of view if they believe that our facts are inaccurate.

In chronological order, this is what transpired:

• Council minutes of 24^th February, 2009 record a request for a report moved by Magee and  seconded by Staikos –

That a report be prepared on the former drainage site between Nina Court and South Road in Bentleigh East. In particular the report should concentrate on the possibilities of this drainage site becoming a pocket park.

The MOTION was put and CARRIED unanimously.

• On June 9^th, 2009 council officers tabled a report with the stated purpose of ““The removal of ‘drainage reserve status’ of the land in preparation for the sale”. The report notes that attempts to sell the land had been ongoing since 2005 and that since “the proposal is facilitating the disposal of land not required by Council, the planning scheme requires a condition to be included on the permit that states that the additional lots must be consolidated with abutting land within 2 years of the date of issue of this permit.”  
• On June 30^th, 2009 officers again tabled a report, ostensibly responding to the Magee/Staikos request for a report. It’s purpose however was titled: “To review whether to proceed with the sale of a former reserve adjacent to Nina Court, Bentleigh East “. For the most part, the report outlines past history, the fact that there is ‘unsociable behaviour’ on this strip of land; that  it is not under ‘good visual surveillance’, etc. etc. but the crunch paragraph is – “In 2005 Council resolved not to proceed with the sale as the offers received were well below market value and did not accord with Council Policy. Council’s resolution also called for officers to pursue further negotiations.” Further justification is given with – “The subject land is smaller than many pocket parks. It is also narrow and poorly located. Accordingly it has very restricted recreational potential resulting in limited benefits for the community that larger parks provide. Due to the site’s size there is little opportunity to provide valuable informal recreation opportunities such as play spaces, areas to play informal ball games, or fly a kite.” The final clincher is ‘There is little merit in establishing this former reserve as a pocket park so close to other parks” AND “The land will be able to be put to better use by adjoining property owners” and council pocketing more dollars! Conclusion? “In officers’ opinion, the land is not suitable for public open space on grounds of safety and the best solution would be for it to be incorporated into surrounding properties with the proceeds used for higher priority open space projects.” 

Magee and Staikos (to their credit) then moved the following motion which was passed unanimously. 

That Council:(i) Not proceed with the sale of the former reserve between Nina Court and South Road, Bentleigh East, (ii) Retain the land for use as open space, and (iii) Notify affected owners and occupiers of Council’s decision. 

• On February 17^th, 2010 the Leader carried council’s advertisements announcing the sale of the land to two residents for the price of $21,500 and 31,500 – a grand total of $54,000 (http://www.gleneira.vic.gov.au/Files/Notice_of_intention_to_sell_land.pdf)
• On October 12^th, 2010 (item 9.9) was presented. The recommendation was: “To seek Council’s consent for the sale of a former drainage reserve abutting 13 Nina Court and 16 Niki Court Bentleigh East.” This was accepted unanimously after being moved by Hyams and Pilling. 

WHAT THE HELL IS GOING ON? 

1. Council’s resolution of 30^th June, 2009 not to proceed with the sale HAS NOT BEEN RESCINDED.
2. What happened between June 30^th and February 17^th when the advertisement went into the Leader. Who made this decision? When was it made? And why is nothing presented in council chambers as to the deliberations and rationale for this decision? Or is this simply another example of decision making behind closed doors?
3. Why in the October 12^th report is the price mentioned only $45,000, when in the advertisement we have the grand total of $54,000 (see:http://www.gleneira.vic.gov.au/Files/Notice_of_intention_to_sell_land.pdf)
4. How can councillors unaminously vote for sale when in June 2009 they voted against sale – unanimously? A case of amnesia – especially by Magee? Not one word was spoken – not a whimper from anyone. So, we ask, do councillors actually bother to read what is in front of them? Does anyone think that this backflip should not be explained – especially when we are continually assailed with the message that open space in Glen Eira is miniscule?
5. And why, when one looks at these documents, do the names keep changing all the time? We have Nina Crt, Niki Crt., Nepean Highway, all tossed about. Is this just camouflage?
6. And finally, as authors of such reports, what role has the administration played in all this? What obfuscation has there been? From our standpoint it seems that the intention to sell the land is longstanding, so regardless of what councillors want, we’ll steam roll through our own agenda.
7. As per usual, we maintain that governance – in terms of transparency and accountability – are once again the victims in this highly questionable sequence of events. 

As Pauline Hansen used to say – ‘Puhleeese EXPLAIN’!!!!!!! At the very least residents deserve to know how in the space of 7 months a unanimous decision NOT to sell land is mysteriously overturned without explanation, without clear transparency in open council and nobody says boo!! Simply not good enough!