For the second time in a row a resident’s public question has been edited. Vital information that clarifies the circumstances is thus being with-held, resulting in answers that are anything but accurate and reflecting what actually happened. The full question was:
Please find below two public questions for this week’s Council meeting (4 September 2012).
Please publish each public question in the Minutes in full. Please refrain from editing my public questions.
Public Question 1
I refer to my earlier public question I posed directly to Mr Lipshutz for Council meeting 14 August 2012.
To recap, a group of Rowan Street Elsternwick residents met with Councillor Lipshutz on Monday 4 June 2012 regarding Council’s decision to install 2 hr parking restrictions in the street based on only 8 of the total 15 properties responding to Council’s consultation.
Councillor Lipshutz in his reply to the public question at the 14 August Council meeting indicated that he had advised the residents group that Council Transport Planning department was to hold off implementation for a month. The installation was completed on 25 July to the absolute shock & amazement of the residents.
However, Councillor Lipshutz, we must beg to differ, following our meeting with you on 4 June or in subsequent exchange of emails, you gave NO INDICATION of a timeframe what so ever. In fact we the residents kept you informed frequently via email of progress we were making in collecting all 15 residents survey responses. In fact out last email to you on 13 July 2012 indicated that we had collected all but 2 responses – at that stage the majority of respondents had indicated clearly that they were NOT IN FAVOUR of the restrictions.
Councillor Lipshutz, our question to you is: When and how (via email/letter?) did you inform the residents group of the one month timeframe?
COUNCIL’S VERSION AND RESPONSE –
Councillor Lipshutz, our question to you is: When and how (via email/letter?) did you inform the residents group of the one month timeframe?”
Cr Lipshutz responded to your Public Question at the Council Meeting. He said:
“ There was no so called residents group but rather there was a meeting with two residents of which you were one. As you will recall, following a questionnaire by Council, there were more non responses than responses and of the responses there was a majority that did not oppose parking restrictions being imposed. You may also recall that I advised you that if you wished to halt Council imposing those parking restrictions it would be necessary for you to move with alacrity in providing Council with evidence that a clear majority of residents opposed those restrictions. You undertook to do so and I accordingly requested that Council withhold action.
Council acceded to my request and initially there was no time frame discussed as it was my understanding that inasmuch as you were being proactive in obtaining responses there would be little delay.
I am informed that a period of 6 weeks ensued without the foreshadowed responses and accordingly Council thereupon proceeded. This took place at a time when I was on leave from Council and overseas.
The arrangement to withhold action was never open ended one and given that you did not comply with your end of the arrangement Council was not prepared to wait indefinitely. The ball was very much in your court to demonstrate that a clear majority of residents opposed the implementation of parking restrictions and it was not for Council to wait indefinitely.”
SOME OF THE OTHER QUESTIONS & ANSWERS
“Please outline Council’s current parking restrictions enforcement strategy for Elsternwick. Please also provide statistics and data (i.e. frequency of inspection by date by name of street/road by result of enforcement activity (i.e. parking fine issued and amount or no parking fine) of Council parking restrictions enforcement activity in Elsternwick for 2011-12 & 2012-13 to date.”
The Mayor read Council’s response. He said:
“Council enforces parking restrictions uniformly across the municipality. The fundamentals applying to enforcement include:-
Ensuring residential streets in proximity of shopping centres are balancing the parking demands of residents, shoppers and shop keepers alike.
Placing an emphasis on safety related offences in general.
Placing an emphasis on school crossings and drop off/pick up around schools.
Ensuring a turnover of customer car parking aimed at improving the economic viability of shopping centres.
The specific statistical data you requested is not available in the form you have requested it.”
+++++++++++++++++
“Has Glen Eira City Council received a claim against it for a sum of $4.2M for incompleted payments to GESAC’s contractors or does Glen Eira City Council feel so aggrieved by the work undertaken by it’s contractor that it has withheld over 10% of the money it owes?”
The Mayor read Council’s response. He said:
“Agenda Item 9.20 in this Meeting is the Finance Report to the end of July 2012.
That Report states that Council had paid $36.99m against the contract awarded for $41.2m. The Report also states that the contractor had applied for adjudication under the Security of Payment Act. The application was for $4.2m. It would not be correct to say that the application involved either “incomplete payments” or “withholding money Council owes”.
The adjudication has been completed. As at today, Council has paid $39.99m against the construction contract that was let for $41.2m. The contract provides for processes to determine matters in dispute. These include claims which would result in deductions in Council’s favour as well as claims which would result in additional payments. Those processes are underway. Each monthly Finance report will include the status of expenditure under the contract at that time.
GESAC continues to cover all its operating costs and make a contribution towards the costs of borrowings.
++++++++++++++++++++++
“I notice that the Crs Forge and Penhalluriack have erected a billboard pledging zero rate increases. I ask Cr Forge what services and capital works she intends to cut in order to achieve this outcome, and whether she has in fact previously voted in favour of rate rises. If Cr Forge is unable to answer this question at the council meeting, I ask how can she justify making such a public pledge without knowing how it will be achieved.”
Cr Forge responded to your Public Question at the Council Meeting. She said:
“There are many avenues that Council can reduce expenditure which would contribute to limiting additional rate increases. A good start would be to reduce new staff hirings and to rationalise staff replacement of those who leave.
There is also a cost saving to be had by deferring capital works and infrastructure programs. eg. Item 9.15 of tonight’s Agenda where Council spent approx. $750.00 on the Murrumbeena Park Play Space. We have to balance what is spent on ‘essentials’, viv a vis what would be ‘nice’ or ‘prestigious to have!
In regard to your question whether voted in favour of rate increases? Yes, I have in the year 2010 – 2011, to help with the costs of financing the GESAC development. I was not on Council when the GESAC development was approved.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++
“My question relates to usage of the multi-purpose courts at GESAC and is in 2 parts: 1. It is clear to the casual observer when visiting GESAC that the courts are not utilised for significant periods of time during the weekend, therefore please advise what proportion of the hours allocated for use by the Warriors Basketball Club from Friday to Sunday are actually being utilised; 2. Given that the initial allocation was for only 12 months, how & when will interested parties be advised of the process to apply for allocations following expiry of the initial allocation.”
The Mayor read Council’s response. He said:
“The indoor courts at GESAC are multi-use. They cater for netball, basketball, indoor soccer, other sports, all-abilities programs, gym classes and more. The courts are not only for basketball.
GESAC opened at short notice. The builder advised of Practical Completion on 3 May 2012 and GESAC opened to the public on 7 May 2012.
Most sports played in the indoor stadium are team sports which are played in Seasons. As it was, GESAC opened mid-season. The agreements with sports recognised that full utilisation would arise from the start of the Season after GESAC opened.
On 15 May 2012, Councillors were advised:
“Opening at short notice has been fine for individuals Opening at short notice has not been fine for Seasonal activities. Many Clubs and teams have commitments at other venues. Seasonal activities will get fully underway from the start of the next Season(s). This is true of all Seasonal sports. GESAC is arranging casual hire of the courts. ”
No Club has breached its allocation agreement. GESAC is covering all its operating costs.
The Warriors Basketball Club is operating in accordance with the Expression of Interest (EOI) accepted by Council. The Warriors are currently utilising the facility against the following allocation
Fridays the facility is used between 6.30pm – 10 pm against the allocation of 6pm – 11pm. This is subject to game allocations from the Victorian Junior Basketball League as Friday night is primarily for representative basketball games.
Saturdays the facility is used between 9am – 6.30pm against the allocation of 8am – 7pm
Sundays the facility is used between 9am – 10pm against the allocation of 9am – 11pm
In these allocated periods, the Warriors are currently utilising 57.5 hours a week against the allocation of 88.5 hours. This equates to around 2 courts being in use at all times on average and has been growing since the facility opened.
As President of the McKinnon Basketball Association, you would know that the representative basketball season is currently in its finals period. Due to this it should be noted that representative squad training and representative games which make up a large proportion of the court use on Friday nights and Sunday morning and afternoons are currently greatly reduced.
In relation to part 2 of your question, all sports will be operating in new Seasons from October 2012 (or earlier). Council will be reviewing allocations after the Council has had the opportunity to properly assess the utilisation rates in the new seasons and learn from the experience of the start up phase at GESAC.
September 7, 2012 at 2:34 PM
I’m reading these answers and trying very hard not to guffaw at the stupidity of the comments. First, about Gesac and there’s some important admissions in this that are unbelievable. Councillors were “advised” only on the 15 May. That’s a week after the place opened. The expressions of interest and the contract with the warriors was signed, sealed and delivered months and months before. Surely but surely numbers, court use, programming would have been known at this stage. No excuses about seasons and so on will cover up the fact that this administration had absolutely not idea what it was doing and that they certainly didn’t factor in all of these variables. The statement about learning from experience is even more damning. You are supposed to have top line people running this project. It’s costing millions and they still have to “learn”. That tells me once more that they haven’t got a clue; there was no proper planning and the whole allocation business has fallen flat on its face thanks to Burke. More revealing is how little councillors are told. If it’s taken to the 15th May to let them in on the picture, then everyone’s in real trouble.
Next there’s the safe facing answer from Lipshutz. Maybe not as arrogant as normal but it’s still the residents fault and not his. His hands are always clean. Bottom line is that one the wheels have been set in motion no resident or even silly old councillor is going to stop, delay, or change anything. That’s the culture of the place thanks to the dictators who run it.
September 7, 2012 at 2:41 PM
Lipshutz’s answer is typical of the man’s arrogance and pathetic attitude to residents. He didn’t tell the resident’s on the month’s timeline until after the event, so therefore it’s the residents fault for not being pro-active in meeting a deadline that they knew nothing about.
Good going Michael!!!! Not only is this not an election winning move but it also ranks up there with the Frisbee Affair.
September 7, 2012 at 4:56 PM
I was under the illusion that we are now living in a technological age and that at the press of a button data would come tumbling forth in any shape or form that one’s heart desires. Clearly not so in Glen Eira. Whenever people ask for statistics they either aren’t collected, or aren’t available in “the form requested”. Amazing – particularly so in the light of budget figures where squillions are spent on computer systems, upgrades, and probably training. I don’t buy the excuses for one minute. My version of the truth is that it would be really embarrassing for this administration to release the true figures on what is being asked or the other alternative is that they really don’t want to keep these figures if they are that incriminating.
September 8, 2012 at 12:32 PM
Agree, agree with all above comments.
Most imprtantly the lack of figures collected is a BASIC for any good business management organisation – but not for this antiquated council which HIDES behind these sort of responses.
Can I havethe huge rates that I have to pay this council, back please!!!
I’ll find some other organisation that can do this job (proper business data/stats collection & analysis& at a press of a button!
Every other organisation, private & public is in the 21st Century-apparently the Glen Eira Council & administrators live in the the dark ages!
C’mon council elections- IT TIME FOR A BIG BROOM!