We have commented previously that it would appear that many ‘straw votes’ are taken in secrecy, behind the closed doors of councillor assembly meetings. Whilst not formal ‘decisions’ as such, it is clear that much goes on in these meetings that need to be looked at a lot more closely. We have to wonder what kind of pressures are placed on recalcitrant councillors who refuse to adhere to the majority line? What kind of discourse actually occurs? Who runs the show in there? Is there even the possibility of bullying and harassment? And why, oh why, is the public performance in council chambers often so diametrically opposed to what we suspect might have been going on behind these closed doors? The perfect example we have to illustrate our case involves Cr. Magee.
Late last year Cr. Penhalluriack is recorded as stating that he has qualms regarding the nature, tone, and content of Council responses to public questions by Mr. Varvodic. His actual statement reads: ““I’m unhappy with all of the answers to Mr Varvodic with the exception of the one relating to Cr Esakoff. I don’t know what to do about it but I think that they are unnecessarily aggressive and I am just not happy about it”. (Council Minutes 14th December 2010). At the next council meeting (February 1st 2011) Mr. Varvodic directed his public questions to each councillor, asking them if they were in any way in agreement with Penhalluriack’s statement. The questions were taken on notice and answered at the following February 22nd Council meeting. Magee responded by stating: “Cr Magee said: “I stand by Council’s responses to all your public questions to date.”
Remarkably, this does not seem to be Magee’s general opinion in November 2010 when the FOI secured document of the Sports & Recreation Committee minutes record the following: “Councillor Magee stated that Nick Varvodic has cause to complain, and the situation has got out of hand with our answers and that we need to bring it back inline. We are the cause of the letters and we need to rectify the situation”.
How does this alleged statement by Magee just 3 months earlier tally with his endorsement of ALL COUNCIL RESPONSES to Mr. Varvodic. We simply ask:
- What pressures are brought to bear in councillor assemblies and by whom and to what purpose?
- How can the community believe anything that is uttered in the public arena when it is becoming increasingly obvious that public utterances may not accord with reality?
- When will councillors actually have the gumption to state their opinion honestly and in public? Democracy is after all founded on the rights of individuals to express an opinion and the council chamber must be the forum for genuine debate. Currently it resembles a theatre with carefully orchestrated arguments, voting patterns, motions, and pre-ordained decisions.
SO WHAT ARE THE SOLUTIONS? HOW CAN THIS COUNCIL MOVE FORWARD? WHAT SUGGESTIONS DO YOU, OUR READERS HAVE THAT WOULD ASSIST OUR COUNCILLORS TO ENSURE GOOD GOVERNANCE? WHAT DO YOU WANT THEM TO DO? We welcome all views!
Glen Eira Debates 
July 10, 2011 at 2:19 PM
How about being simply a decent human being and doing the right thing. This is not asking too much? Is it?
July 10, 2011 at 3:50 PM
Why doesn’t this Council tell Mr Varvodic to get lost. I object to a person continuously utilising scarce Council time week after week at a cost to all ratepayers. Give him the address of the Ombudsman and the Office of Local Government and tell him to report his allegations to them , or to get lost.
July 10, 2011 at 7:07 PM
Dear Anonymous,
I’d like to respond to you on behalf of our group.
Council has already told us to get lost.
But why should we get lost, we are not breaking any laws, our game has been going on for over 40 years at Caulfield Park, we don’t harm anyone, we accept anyone who turns up for a social game – including you if you decided too.
The Ombudsman and Local Government Inspectorate are well and truly aware of what is going on.
Unlike myself almost all of our group are ratepayers and those very few of us who no longer live in Glen Eira still pay in the form of Permits and Insurance, we are not freeloaders. Now if Council quickly put their hand out and accept out payments then I would think it’s fair and reasonable they accept our questions.
This is not rocket science, it’s quite basic, Mr Anonymous can you answer this please?
Our group and the Frisbee group essentially do the same thing, we play harmless sport at Caulfield Park. (And you can even disregard the fact that a Councillors son plays with them and they are mates with another Councillor when answering this)
Why do we require a Permit and Insurance and the Frisbee group does not?
Why do we have a threat against us saying if we play without a permit we will be fined?
Would you accept this if it was happening to you?
July 10, 2011 at 4:02 PM
The crux of all Glen Eira’s problems as I see them revolve around proper governance. There’s clearly divisions in this council as there has always been under Newton. I’d like to see councillors finally give up on their little pantomines and for once stand up and really represent the people who voted them in. I don’t care how the votes go in the end, but I do care that the processes are out in the open and clear to everyone. I can live with the fact that something I favour doesn’t get passed if I have confidence that councillors are voted in accord with what the majority of people say they want. That’s democracy in my view. But it all relies on making sure that the people are really consulted – and this doesn’t happen. My recommendations therefore are (1) insist on proper advertising of everything, and proper consultation processes that at a minimum involve at least 4 methods (2) publish all submissions and emails (3) have residents on all advisory committees as people have already said (4) make minutes of all meetings not just about decisions but how those decisions were arrived at (5) publish agenda items not on a Friday that gives people very little time to read and think, but give us at least a week’s notice (6) have public questions first off, and not at the end after decisions have already been taken on issues (7) change the local law in so many places that I won’t even begin on this here (8) be accountable by insisting that all officers’ reports are fair dinkum and ask questions out in publuc when you don’t know or understand something. If councillors don’t follow what’s happening then how is the public expected to?
There’s much more that I could list, but for starters this is probably enough.
July 10, 2011 at 6:31 PM
We elect Councillors to make decisions for us. I don’t expect to be asked (in your words consulted) everytime a decision is made. Where did you get the idea that politicians should consult. That is up to them. This process normally involves telling people in advance what they are going to do. Rarely do the public get any changes up. That is the way it works. There are a few lost souls wondering around with the belief that “consultation” and democracy are linked. We have elections and toss them out if we don’t like what they do. That is how it works. If Esakoff stands for re-election I bet she will get re-elected with a record number of votes. People like her. The idea of having residents committees is never going to happen unless they bring a level of expertise to Council that is otherwise not there. Democracy means represenitive government and not unelected people making decisions. There are 100,000 people in Glen Eira that don’t read this blog and are quite happy with the way the Council runs. This tells me that you are out of step with the vast number of people. Good luck with your list.
July 10, 2011 at 8:08 PM
You’ve answered your own question Realist. We elect people to make decisions “FOR US”. That means, and the Local Government Act enforces this, that decisions are to be made in line with community views. Unless there is proper consultation then councillors have no idea what these views might be. No one expects every single decision to go out to the community, but there is certainly an obligation on these 9 people to consult over budget priorities, community plans, major developments like the C60 and other issues. If you think that the consultation has been adequate on these then I’d say you’re living in cuckoo land. Even more important of course is that once there has been consultation is whether or not these 9 people decide to listen and actually act on what the community says it believes is important.
You also mention “unelected people making decisions”. That’s part of the problem with Glen Eira. Too many decisions are made by the administrators (not in the sense of putting up their hands and voting) but in far more subtle ways.
July 10, 2011 at 8:45 PM
The LGA provides for people to make comments on some decisions like the budget. There is no law that says the have to do anything else but listen. Get over this good goverance rubbish you and others keep rolling out. Most of this was a product of the Labor State government. The LGA needs an upgrade. They got tossed out because people were fed up. I suggest you join a blog that talks about the City of Moreland or Darebin.
C60 started around 1997. That is 14 tears ago. It has been part of the Glen Eira Planning scheme siince around 2003. The council has had 100 of hours of consultation about the the development of the land north of then race track. I am happy with the Council. I don’t think that you are part of the “US”, Like I said if there is an election I bet Esakoff would be easily re-elected. You can add in Tang and Lipshutz, Hyams and especially Pilling . The community will have their say. I don’t live in cuckoo land. I live in a real world. Esakoff was part of a sacked council and has since been re-elected twice and on her third term as mayor. can’t you get it that people like her. She is well liked an seen as a good community leader. She makes decisions taking into account the whole city and the future not just a handful of people in one street.
you don’t read the Age and drive a Subaru do you?
July 10, 2011 at 9:04 PM
There’s stacks of things that the Local Government Act doesn’t say, but that doesn’t mean that councils can’t do things. Plenty of other councils at least try to ensure that they’re in touch with community values and provide enough opportunity for people to actually make their voices heard. But not here. Your comments on the C60 and so called consultation are also way off. Who was consulted exactly? The MRC? As for re-election, well perhaps I’m an optimist and believe that this lot are so on the nose of so many people that they will be struggling to get re-elected. Esakoff may be “nice” but she’s a pawn. Her value lies in her casting vote. I guarantee that she will never be mayor again. And FYI, I do read The Age and drive a Mazda – is that okay with you? I also read other blogs and the rising antipathy towards councils in general, but none of these others have had the shocking record of this council.
July 10, 2011 at 10:08 PM
I’m not sure where your evidence for Esakoff being popular comes from. As a relatively new resident of Glen Eira I am surprised by such a claim – I started out with an open mind. However, as I become increasing involved with local community, sporting and church groups I am alarmed at the extent of comments made on her lack of leadership, fence sitting and the number of residents who play the game of count “our margie’s picture” in the Glen Eira News. With substantial consternation, I note that the comment that she is “too busy” to comment on the biggest private development in Glen Eira’s history (i.e. C60) tends to support the adverse comments I am hearing. As one of the minority that approved C60 and being the sitting mayor surely a comment was to be reasonably expected.
As for the 100,000 that don’t read this blog, I’d urge you to look at the number of hits on this website. Sure a lot of people don’t read it but a lot do – 95% of the blogs are well reasoned arguments of an alternative point of view. Something which I don’t believe has happened before. I suspect that the views expressed and the acitivity on this blog (which grows daily) indicates that you and Council (Councillors and the Admin) are the one’s out of step.
July 10, 2011 at 7:29 PM
“There are 100,000 people in Glen Eira that don’t read this blog and are quite happy with the way the Council runs”
And what factual evidence do you base this on, How do you know this, have you done a door knock? There might infact be 100,000 people who are totally fed up with this council too?
July 10, 2011 at 8:55 PM
Yeh, maybe you are right but I bet you are not. Most of the current Councillors would be re-elected. You try asking people if they are happy. The grass is mowed, the rubbish is collected the Council nursing homes are well run. Kids are being inoculated, the seniors programs and home help all work. I could go on. You try the door knocking bit. I don’t have to as I know I am right.
July 10, 2011 at 9:19 PM
Rates keep rising, costs keep going through the roof, kids can’t get a place in kindergartens, developments on every street, services below par. Keep this up and there’ll be a riot cos the hip pocket nerve is the most sensitive organ in the body politic. I could also go on and on so just to mention a few more little items of note – floods and lousy drainage cleaning programs, graffiti, endless and needless ripping up of footpaths so that everyone is inconvenienced, lack of open space, traffic congestion where side streets become major routes, no parking anywhere, etc. etc. etc. This sure makes for a heap of happy campers.
July 10, 2011 at 9:42 PM
I understand that kindgartens are not a function og local government. So cross that off your list. I don’t expect my rate to go toward looking after someone elses kids. All the other issues you list are not bought on because of the Council. They don’t encourage graffiti or control the number of cars. The Council can’t control people breeding or imigration. The rain we had this year exceeded the design parameters of the drainage system. The cost of installing network for a one in 200 year flood would be prohibitive. The blokes that designed that are long gone. It is very sad that a few families were very affected and lost their homes. At least tonight I learnt that I will get some extra money from the carbon tax so I can leave my central heating on all day even when I am not home so the place is warm when I come home. I am glad the Council is not so loose with our money.
July 10, 2011 at 9:55 PM
A real shame that the Auditor General doesn’t happen to agree with you. How’s this for setting the record straight on council responsibilities?
“Under the Local Government Act 1989, local councils have primary responsibility to
plan and provide services for the local community which include maternal and child
health and kindergarten services. This includes estimating demand for services and the
resources and infrastructure needed to meet the demand”
July 11, 2011 at 9:34 AM
Not true about kindergartens. That is a State gov responsibility. Your interpretation of the Act is wrong. Maternal and infant care yes.
You should be living in Port Philip where they have a car load of socialist running the show.
July 10, 2011 at 11:33 PM
“Silents doesn’t mean consent” and I might and content either.
I my experience Esakoff is a poor councillor, after years in office she has learned very little. She is a light weight that bows to the CEO every demand.
Did someone say GE home care runs well, only a person with no actual experience in aged care in GE could make that stupid statement.
Believe me GE is so far behind in the delivery in aged care, that many people go to neighbouring councils for services or to seek help. Because those councils know how hopeless GE is, they take pity and sometimes give services.
I know for years Bayside received funding to provide services to GE residents because GE wouldn’t take the money offered. Of course it was all done under the table between Bayside and DHS. GE is in the stone age when it comes to aged services. And they like it that way.
I remember having a discussion with a GE councillor (now retired) she firmly believed that there was no poverty in GE. She was well liked and popular, but as thick as a brick.