Council playing favourites, racing club claims
5 Dec 11 @ 02:33pm by James Twining

A RIFT has emerged between Moonee Valley’s racing club and council over the draft racecourse master plan, just weeks after the proposal was officially submitted.
The club says it was “excluded” from a public information session run by the council last Thursday night but that the rival Save Moonee Ponds residents’ group – campaigning against the club’s draft master plan and rezoning – was given a platform to slam the proposal at the meeting.
Club spokesman Brian O’Neil said the club was “perplexed” by SMP being given floor time at the information session, attended by more than 100 people.
“The (club) is extremely disappointed that council excluded it from (the) information meeting, yet gave a resident action group a 30-minute presentation and a seat at the head table from which to voice their opposition to our proposals,” Mr O’Neil said.
Council chief executive Neville Smith said the council was approached by SMP for support.
“Save Moonee Ponds is a newly formed community group,” he said.
“They are not a large profitable organisation like the Moonee Valley Racecourse.
“Save Moonee Ponds approached council for some support to help them raise awareness of their group and issues. We thought the best place to do that was when we were getting the community together for our information evenings.”
Mr Smith said the community meetings – another was held on Sunday – were to share information about the planning process and not to go into detail about what was proposed.
He said the racing club would “definitely” be involved in the formal consultation process, to start in the first half of 2012.
By way of further contrasts we’ve uploaded 2 presentations – one by the Moonee Valley Council and the other by the Save Moonee Ponds Group. Please note:
- The fact that this council features resident advocacy groups material on its official website
- The council’s ‘consultation’ will include online surveys, facebook pages, etc. (see their presentation)
Even these two simple things are a standout in comparison to the Glen Eira methods employed for the C60 and the Centre of the Racecourse debacle.
// Comments
Julie Vulin writes: Posted on 6 Dec 11 at 08:56am
-
Yes, SMP is not a large profitable organisation with deep pockets and endless resources such as MVRC. As YOU say, SMP is a community group. MVRC’s let the cat out of the bag – they are not under threat of going out of business, they’re greedy business people with no regard for the community of Moonee Valley. The community already know who MVRC is, now we need them to honestly and fully know what they propose to do to ruin it – that’s where grassroots SMP comes in to play. Mr. Browell, Mr. O’Neil, please come to the next community meeting, allow us to ask questions that you’ll give direct answers to, such as why are you being so contentious and not considering a reasonable development appropriate for a residential location not on a category 1 road!
- Annie Spilar writes: Posted on 5 Dec 11 at 08:01pm
-
Oh please MVRC… are you really serious? I mean, the MVRC ‘consulted’ the general public didn’t they? Oh no, that’s right, they just set up a room to view the proposal and didn’t offer any consultative process with the community. Hence, ‘Save Moonee Ponds’ was born. The last form of communication I had from MVRC was a letter basically saying, this is happening and if we don’t get what we want, we will move elsewhere. Again, I fail to see where the consultation is happening between MVRC and the residents. SMP is merely the name given to us, the residents, who are saddened and dismayed at what is happening to our community, rather than naming us all individually. Work with ‘us’ MVRC… so far, I have only seen you work against us.
- Sarah writes: Posted on 5 Dec 11 at 06:31pm
-
I am “perplexed” that the Moonee Valley Racing Club suddenly wants to be involved in community information sessions. The MVRC held their own information sessions, at which they presented their submission. They then promised further consultation with the community prior to their submission, which was never delivered. The MVRC had ample time and opportunity to consult with the community prior to making a submission, but they chose to ignore the concerns raised and plough ahead with their submission anyway. There is nothing wrong with getting the community debate going about the issues surrounding the masterplan. Council was perfectly justified in allowing the residents to get up and talk about their views in an organised manner. The discussion held by Save Moonee Ponds did not “slam” the proposal and was in fact positive about the prospects for development at the Moonee Valley Racecourse, including the long term survival of the club. The MVRC are feeling “excluded” because their proposal is largely unwanted by the community and they simply don’t like what they are hearing.
- John Westwood writes: Posted on 5 Dec 11 at 05:49pm
-
Making no satisfactory concessions to the community, apart from an extra exit, it’s outrageous that MVRC thinks that those who are trying to represent the community are being shown favours, unreasonably so, when Moonee Ponds will be affected by 20 years of dirt and noise in such a hostile development. New residents living in the MVRC development will have their open space reduced to 1/2 a meter, according to Sunday’s Forum at The Clocktower. So where are the children going to play? Go to school? Or, for that matter, get there? Thankyou Mr. Neville Smith for pointing out Save Moonee Ponds does not stand to make any profit in trying to spare homes, the neighbourhood, schools, infrastructure, amenity, heritage and the environment. Instead of complaining, why don’t they try negotiating a proposal the community can live with.
December 8, 2011 at 3:53 PM
The owners of this blog should be commended for the research they do and provide to residents. This latest example on an issue which is really close to home for me because of my sister’s distress over the C60 and the whole saga, makes me realise how other councils treat people and how Glen Eira deserves condemning again and again. With the c60 all the consultation was at the beck and call of the MRC. There was no initiative shown by the council. There was no information forthcoming to residents. They all caved in, with the exception of Penhalluriack and Forge to their owners – the MRC. It’s then good to read that other councils do have different principles and priorities where they put their residents first and not last.
December 8, 2011 at 9:16 PM
Funny how this other council can look at environment and social amenity through independent reports. Heritage is another one as well as the consultation method itself. It boils down to the same old story – if you really care and want to do something you can. Glen Eira and the gang don’t give a stuff about what people want or need. They’re lead by the nose by Newton and the MRC.
December 8, 2011 at 4:31 PM
The odd thing in all of this is the MVRC actually own the land whereas the MRC do not. The triangular land that is used solely by the MRC as a tabaret carpark is actually crown land owned by the people. Crs Pilling, Lipshutz, Esakoff and Hyams approved it to be developed by the MRC into a 20 storey tower. These Councillors would also have the public believe that they completed a great deal with the MRC by allowing some sporting equipment in the centre of the racecourse! What a pathetic Council we live in where the community is always last and administration would rather support any developer over a local resident.
December 8, 2011 at 6:40 PM
I’m very impressed with the Moonee Valley Council’s approach to its consultation especially the listing of all the “independent” reviews and reports it will sanction as well as the fact sheets, plus the use of its website to inform as well as answer questions. When I think back to what Glen Eira provided in terms of information and engaging its community there is no comparison at all. Glen Eira’s involvement was negligible as was its review processes and legal representation. But this is now an old complaint. The difference is that the c60 is about to impact in such a horrendous way on residents and is the biggest issue that this council has had to deal with. That they’ve failed, and failed dismally, is obvious.
December 8, 2011 at 6:57 PM
If you need a laugh (and don’t we all) just try and walk from Monash Uni to the student accommodation flats in Neerim Rd. The Council has installed all these barriers along Queens Avenue that just force the students onto the road. I almost hit one of them on my way home from work. This is a big compo claim just waiting to happen.
December 8, 2011 at 7:59 PM
I guess a footpath costs more than a fence and the overgrown vegetation will hide all the victims.
December 8, 2011 at 9:05 PM
Frank is the one to blame for the fences – he said Queens Rd was unsafe to walk. What else could Newton do? Stop blaming the administration and look for the real one who should be blamed.
December 8, 2011 at 9:59 PM
Actually Anon I don’t know where you get your info from but Frank has actively campaigned for the replacement of the fences (put up during WW2 in the interests of national security as the Racecourse became an army base).
The real culprits are the MRC and Council. The MRC wants the fences to remain because it costs money to replace them and they hide the fact that the cost will quadruple when the fences are removed and their inadequate drainage works installed as they built up the racecourse are revealed. Council wants the status quo to remain because they don’t want to have to spend $’s needed for the GESAC sinkhole to be diverted.
December 9, 2011 at 11:09 AM
interesting to see that a new fence has gone up at Caulfield Racecourse! It is in Queens Avenue near the corner of Normandy Rd. It is between the exit to the car park and the road so you have to walk out onto the road if you were walking along nature strip on Queens Avenue. If this was the MRC fair play to them for stamping there authority the people of Glen Eira!
December 9, 2011 at 11:33 AM
There is also a new fence on the corner of Queens Ave and Neerim Rd. This one has to be seen to be believed. It forces pedestrians onto the road so that vehicles turning left from Neerim Rd onto Queens Avenue has to dodge around the pedestrians. How could this have been approved by Traffic management? A disaster just waiting to happen!