In the interests of presenting the truth, we will conclude with the following slideshow. Please note:
- the weeds
- the mould/fungii
- and the water logged and dead trees. We have plenty of photos of more dead trees. We estimate that each tree would have cost at least $50 given their size. More money literally down the drain!
- We have to ask: do these people really know what they are doing?
Glen Eira Debates 
July 30, 2012 at 11:08 PM
This is Tucker ward. Did Lobo, Magee and Hyams ever bother to come down and have a look at this devastation? Good job councillors! One person surely must have contacted them or rung up the service centre about this and they did bugger all.
July 30, 2012 at 11:48 PM
I’m as critical of Council as most but I don’t think this selective editing does your blog justice. I could wander around any municipal council with a camera and selectively post this stuff.
With all its faults Glen Eira has done some wonderful things in the park and gardens area. The ovals they have resurfaced with drought resistance grass and superior watering systems are the envy sporting groups in neighbouring municipalities. Bayside in particular.
Princes Park, Alnutt Park and Packer Park are but three parks that are wonderful recreation and sporting fields.
That isn’t to say there aren’t areas in need of work but some balance please. Not everything the council does warrants such negativity. Leave that to our countries resident clown Mr Abbott.
July 31, 2012 at 7:59 AM
Negativity is a legitimate political tactic. It is the duty of opposition to put an opposite point of view. Soon Abbott will become Prime Minister and it will be Bill Shortens turn to be negative. Well done Glen Eira. Drought proofing the sporting grounds could be seen as overkill. Not unlike the very expensive Tim Holding Water Park in Wonthaggi. Or maybe it should be the Steve Bracks Water Park. I remember him in the helicopter.
July 31, 2012 at 8:18 AM
The blog has every right to question what is happening and point out poor management and governance practices. If money is being needlessly squandered and fibs repeatedly told then the perpetrators must be held accountable. All the slides put up make a mockery of the answers to public questions. That’s the biggest sin that’s been exposed.
August 1, 2012 at 10:37 AM
“Negativity” is called for when public funds are wasted and replaced by incompetence and madness. You don’t plant trees that need dryness in areas that are water logged. Next you don’t spread mulch that is rotting and stinking over grass that is open space and people can walk and sit on. Then there’s the biggest balls-up – you don’t spend heaps on ripping up grass sods, replacing them with new, and then covering all this up with the disgusting mulch. That’s more than incompentence. That’s criminal waste.
August 1, 2012 at 5:13 PM
Colin,
There’s holding to account. Then there’s duplicity and blind negativity.
In Abbott’s case he’s a duplicitous dissembler. He calls others liars yet he’s raised that behaviour to an art form. I still vividly recall an interview with Tony Jones who queried a visit by Abbott to his lord and master Archbishop Pell before the election. Abbott flatly denied any such visit occurred. More than once. Until Jones produced date, time, and length of time spent with his lord and master. I still recall the look on Abbott’s face when his blatant barefaced lie was uncovered. Like a rabbit in a spotlight. The wheels were turning furiously as he thought whether to continue the lie of fess up. Eventually he fessed up.
Then there are the lies told by the government of which he was a key member. So many that is group of dissemblers had to divide them into core and non-core.
Holding to account is one thing. Blocking and dissembling for no other reason than base political advantage at great cost to the country you profess to love is quite another.
In relation to this thread, I could walk around any municipality with a camera and pick out spots that require attention. Just as I could pick out creditable things. I mentioned three parks that are a credit to our Council. And the renovation and resurfacing of parks which I know are the envy of sporting clubs in Bayside.
I’m not a fan of this Council and come election time I’ll be looking for alternatives to the incumbents. However, not everything the Council has done warrants criticism.
This blog does an outstanding job in holding this Council to account. On this occasion I don’t think it did itself credit.
August 1, 2012 at 7:20 PM
If we can step into this debate, some things need highlighting and summarising:
1. A bitumen path was already in existence along the trail. Certain sections could have been widened. The cost would have remained minimal. Say $30,000 to $40,000.
2. Council applied for a Commonwealth grant receiving $140,000 and putting in it is claimed $140,000 of ratepayer funds.
3. A yellow brick road was constructed. This meant raising the level of this path at least 4 inches in what is recognised as a flood plain. No drainage was done prior to this work starting. The result is that with the creation of this new path, most of the trail is now in flood whenever it rains.
4. Truck load after truck load of earth was brought in to try and ‘level’ out the edges alongside the pathway. How much did this cost?
5. A guard was on duty at night guarding the concrete pathway. How much did this cost?
6. Hundreds and hundreds of metres of turf that had finally taken were ripped up and replaced with sods. How much did this cost?
7. Truck load after truck load of stinking “commercial” mulch was brought in and laid across most of the previously planted sods. How much did this cost?
8. Residents complained bitterly about the stench and the removal of open space. Vast areas of the trail are now totally unuseable.
9. Wooden logs featured as bulwarks, and seating, along the length of the trail. These have now mostly been removed and replaced with concrete plinthing. The budget announced $100,000 for ‘development’. Not bad for concrete!
10. Numerous trees were planted in the middle of this mulch. Many have now died because they are not suitable to the environment they were planted in.How much did this cost?
11. Council’s corporate memory should have told them that land owners were finally exercising their legal title to land. This has been going on for 15 years or so. Council simply put the new path onto PRIVATE property. They were incredibly fortunate that this was ‘gifted’ to them by the owner so that the path could still be used safely. There is another owner about to extend his fenceline. Council may not be so fortunate this time around and either have to pay compensation or (re)move part of the path so that it is not on private property or so close to private property that it does not infringe on the path. How much will this cost?
12. Fencelines all along the trail now have rotting planks as a result of the continual waterlogged state of the area whenever it rains. Council is legally obligated to pay half for these fences. If owners decide to rip down their entire fences, how much will this cost ratepayers?
We do not believe this is “negativity”. The only “negative” to be found in all of this is the bungled job done by this council to the detriment of all those residents who use this path and who do not believe that their rates have been spent wisely, economically and to the betterment of the neighbourhood. There is absolutely no excuse for any of the above. We would not be surprised if the final cost of all this was well over half a million dollars!
July 31, 2012 at 11:29 AM
I have never met a Liberal prepared to praise Abbott.Autonomy you are 100% correct. I walked through Princess Park yesterday.What a fantastic asset for our Municipality.
July 31, 2012 at 4:24 PM
Now go take a look at the Elster Creek Trail
August 1, 2012 at 2:14 PM
You haven’t met me. You need to get out a bit more.
August 1, 2012 at 10:07 PM
Guess who lives opposite Princes Park?????? No wonder it looks good … it would seem that a foryiune has been spent on it in the last few years. Does Glenb Eira have any figures for that?
Did all councillors vote in favour of improvements to princes Park????
August 2, 2012 at 12:01 PM
Everyone is so brave under the cover of anonimity.
“One person surely must have contacted them or rung up the service centre about this and they did bugger all”
Great attitude!! Perhaps everyone has taken this stance!!
August 6, 2012 at 10:47 PM
A friend sent me this link a few days ago and swears by it as a reputable and credible source – http://www.ladybug.uconn.edu/factsheets/tp_05_mulchbasics.html
I have to say that what this council has been doing with its mulch and the way it is applied goes against the principles outlined by the article. I wouldn’t be surprised then if these council employees, contractors and their council or contractor supervisors had absolutely no interest or no idea of best practice in this area.
General Tips for Applying Mulches
Do not place mulch directly against plant crowns or tree bases. Mulch placed directly in contact with stems or tree trunks may retain excess moisture around the base of the plant that can favor the development of diseases like crown rot. Mulch piled around plants may also serve as lodging for bark and stem eating rodents.
Mulch applied too thickly can cause problems. A wood-derived mulch may undergo high temperature decomposition causing it to dry out. The mulch may then be colonized by fungi that create water repellent conditions throughout the mulch. Water is unable to penetrate the mulch and reach the soil and plants fail to receive adequate moisture. Mulching too deeply can also cause the soil to remain continuously wet contributing to root and stem rot problems in addition to depriving plants of needed oxygen. Apply a mulch layer no more than 1 to 3 inches thick.
Thoroughly water newly installed wood or bark mulches. Many good quality mulches are stored in large piles that reach high temperatures. When the mulch is spread or bagged, the high-temperature tolerant microorganisms that inhabit the mulch die as the mulch cools. If the mulch is allowed to dry out or remain dry, nuisance fungi can colonize the mulch and create a water-repellent surface.
Add a source of nitrogen to garden soils before applying wood-derived mulches. Soil microorganisms that decompose organic materials such as wood-based mulches are effective competitors for limited soil nitrogen. This may cause temporary nitrogen deficiencies especially in annual and perennial plants. Yellowing of leaves often indicates a nitrogen deficiency. Lightly incorporate a source of nitrogen such as bloodmeal, urea or a high nitrogen lawn fertilizer before applying mulch.