One of the most important functions that any council has, especially in these ‘pro development’ times, is the power to refuse, or to grant a permit. We’ve previously pointed out how the Glen Eira delegations to officers in effect removes many powers from councillors (as a council) and redirects them to select officers.  We’ve also pointed out how this council differs fundamentally from the delegations and planning committee rules that other councils see fit to impose. But there’s worse! The very language that Glen Eira uses in its delegations is deliberately vague, obtuse, and hence allows subjective judgements rather than stringent and explicit policy to provide the framework for decision making. The end result can only be the further erosion of Council powers. We refer in particular to Section 61 (1)(a) of the Planning and Environment Act which covers delegates power to grant a permit. Glen Eira proposes the following ‘conditions and limitations’ –

“the exercise of this power is limited to the following circumstances:

i)               There has been no objections lodged; and

ii)             The application/amending plan is generally in compliance with existing policy or guidelines;

iii)           The application has not been referred to the Council or the Delegated Planning Committee (DPC) for determination

The power cannot be exercised where:

i)               an application is for use of land for a brothel; or

ii)             An application is for use of land for gaming machines; or

iii)           An application is for extension of time for tennis court illumination beyond 10,00pm; or

iv)            A proposal involves dwellings exceeding one level, except where the delegate is DCD, MTP or MStatP who may grant a permit allowing a double storey development.

The permit must not be inconsistent with a cultural heritage management plan under the Aboriginal Heritage Act 2006.”

Readers should take careful note of the above bolded and underlined words and phrases. Exactly what does ‘generally’ mean? If there are 10 conditions, will someone still get a permit if they only meet 5, or 6, or 7 of those conditions? Thus subjectivity on the part of the officer is enough it seems. As to the issue of double storey developments, compare the above with the Port Phillip version. Implicit in the latter’s delegation conditions is the acknowledgement that councillors will ACTUALLY KNOW about all applications – that they are informed. Can we say the same about the processes at work in Glen Eira? And of course, in Port Phillip and numerous other councils but NOT Glen Eira, there is the ubiquitous ‘councillor call in’ principle stated clearly again and again – “Decision to grant a permit where the application involves a two storey extension and a ‘line of sight’ principle is involved and the proposal does not meet the prescription but does, in the officers view, meet the performance approach set out in the Heritage Policy and unless a councillor requests that the application be determined by Council.”  

It’s really time that councillors took control of this council and fulfilled their fiduciary duties to the community.