Last council meeting featured the quarterly financial report. As per usual, it was accepted in glowing terms, especially by Lipshutz. We cannot help wondering however, whether councillors even read these reports, or if they do read them, whether they actually query any of the figures and statements. We wish to highlight the following figures which are buried within this report:
Packer Park concept plan – $370,000
Building Design Elsternwick CCC – $740,000
Surely even an architect of Frank Lloyd Wright’s calibre would not cost three quarters of a million dollars? But it gets even murkier. The budget of just several months ago contained this item – “Building Design and Community Consultation for Elsternwick Child Care Centre $250k”. We therefore ask:
• Why is consultation included together with ‘building design’ – consultation is a direct Council expense – it is not part of infrastructure’.
• Why in the space of 3 months has the expenditure on this item suddenly blown out by over half a million dollars?
• Has the budget figure been ‘understated’ in order to get passed and now, suddenly, the true cost may be emerging? Is this common practice for most items – especially GESAC?
We also draw readers’ attention to this one liner – “Funding of $371K for Bailey Reserve playground relocation (Council considered this relocation as part of the approval for the car parking extension for GESAC on 19 July 2011). Please note that the funding for this relocation is expected to be offset from savings on the GESAC construction expenditure.”
Apart from the sheer staggering cost of removing and relocating – with some additional play equipment – how can this in all conscience amount to such a figure? We also note the language (“expected”) and wonder whether some time down the track councillors, if they bother to question anything will simply be told – “oh sorry, this was only expected and sadly didn’t eventuate!”
There are numerous other items in this ‘report’ which are practically indecipherable – not because one needs an accounting degree to make head or tail out of the figures, but simply the lack of detail, the lack of explanation, and the overall ‘imprecision’ of what our money is being spent on. If councils are meant to be accountable to their communities, then clear, plain English statements are essential. But most importantly, councillors must read, question, and demand answers. Are they doing this we wonder?
Glen Eira Debates 
October 24, 2011 at 12:07 PM
If I’m reading this right we’ve got a $450,000 bill for the extension of the carpark and now another $371,000 for moving the playground to make way for the carpark. There’s also some trees to be chopped down and the cost for this hasn’t been revealed. By my figures this means we could be close to $830,000 just to correct something that wasn’t planned for properly in the first place. Then we’re expected to believe that this council is prudent and astute in how they spend money. Please pull the other leg!
October 24, 2011 at 1:14 PM
Just like the rubbery figures of gesac. Start off with 5 million and end up with 50 million plus.
October 24, 2011 at 1:42 PM
There are really only two councillors with any business acumen – Penhalluriack and Lobo. Penhalluriack is now personae non gratis and Lobo doesn’t open his mouth. So both are useless as overseers of this administration. The secret discussions probably go along these lines. Reports are presented to councillors. Half don’t care, the other half might ask some half baked questions and be fobbed up with the usual accounting gobbledygook and told not to worry since Swabey and co know exactly what they’re doing. End of story. It’s too hard, too onerous and probably beyond most of these councillors to dig deep and find out exactly which figures are dodgy and why.
October 24, 2011 at 2:15 PM
Right from the outset it was pretty obvious to many people that GESAC would need a pretty big carpark. It beggars belief that none of the Councillors asked what was going to happen. Developers are queing up at VCAT trying to reduce the number of car parks. I remember seeing an episode of “Yes Minister” and a similar stunt was pulled. This program must be compulsury viewing in the town hall.
October 24, 2011 at 10:24 PM
Every cent that is being spent on gesac needs to be itemised and accounted for. No information has been published except for figures that don’t add up. The pools steering committee is an absolute joke as far as transparency goes. What we’ve ended up with is a physical and financial monstrosity that has killed practically all open space and looks like it’s going to make us pay through the nose forever. We’re paying for this and have a right to know what is going on. I still can’t believe that this council has entered into higher purchase agreements unless things and money has really been loused up.
October 24, 2011 at 11:31 PM
At GESAC Planning Meetings councillors and their unskilled officers took no notice when ratepayers attended and told them of the car Parking deficiency.
For six hard ball courts then you would have ninety players, and five officials changing over every hour on the hour. This “oversight” and the consequent land grab form the East Bentleigh Park is quite disgusting. Always keep in mind this council is only interested in building constructions and it pays little or no heed to the fact that everyone needs exercise and open air for their daily intake of Vitamin D or persons will end of with osteo porosis!!!!!!!
October 25, 2011 at 9:39 AM
I guess the same person who did the costing of mulch shed ($160,000) did the costing of the playground relocation ($371,000).
Given that the land is free and the playground equipment is already there you gotta wonder about this cost. Admittedly, there could be a few enhancements to the playground equipment but I cannot see how 371,000 can be accurate.
I am also having difficulty understanding why Council in their discussion of extending the GESAC parking didn’t include the playground relocation cost in their analysis of whether to build a double storey car park or gobble up more parkland ground level parking
October 25, 2011 at 6:18 PM
The figures that are produced by Newton always needs to be taken with a huge tablespoon of salf in my view. It would be intriguing to learn exactly how much open space has been lost when we add up all the car park extensions, all the concreting that has gone on in the last 10 years – since these “developments” still count as open space. It would also be nice to know exactly the increased foot print of each new pavilion that has gone up or is in the pipelines. How much park land (open space) was lost as a result of the Caulfield Park, Princes Park, MckInnon, and next Centenary and Marlborough pavilions going up? Last, but certainly not least, is gesac itself – that ugly huge monstrosity that will remain a blight on the landscape for the next 50 years probably. If you haven’t seen it as yet take a drive and shake your head in horror.
October 25, 2011 at 9:06 PM
When your mates are the “independent” members of audit committee in Gibbs and McLean, financial governance is the least of your worries. Checks and balances are long gone in Glen Eira.