In less than 48 hours the electorate will be voting. The calls for change have been loud and clear from many candidates. We sincerely hope that the new council will signal the beginning of a new era – one of respect for the community and processes of governance that are scrupulously fair, transparent and accountable. The acid test for all councillors will come in the first few months. Residents will then have the opportunity to gauge whether they have been sold empty promises or whether words will finally be matched with action.
We set out below what we believe must eventuate in order for real and lasting change to occur. These are not prioritised in any special order – apart from the first item regarding Meeting Procedures. We welcome your comments and any additions you might like to make to this list of ‘must do’s’.
THE LOCAL LAW AND MEETING PROCEDURES
The entire Local Law needs immediate and speedy amendment. It must include:
- Notices of motion
- Rescission provisions
- Dissenting from Chair
- Councillor questions without notice
- Rights of reply without notice
- Agendas to be set in consultation with Mayor and one other councillor
- Advisory committees incorporated into meeting procedures with full agendas and minutes published
- All advisory committees (apart from Audit) to have community representation and to be open to the public
- Officer reports tabled at advisory committee meetings to be included in minutes of such meetings
- Public questions at start of council meetings
- Current ‘harassment’ provision removed from public question exclusion criteria
- Residents provided with 20 minutes to ask verbal questions of individual councillor, officer, or Council without notice at each Council Meeting
- Removal of Clause 326 (‘organised’ sporting groups)
- Petitions to be submitted by ward councillors and vetted by ward councillors. Once accepted then obligatory that the petition is forwarded on to relevant department for further action and responded to within the next 2 ordinary council meetings.
- Guidelines/policy created to limit the overuse of ‘confidentiality’ ( ie. secrecy)
DELEGATIONS
How and what authority is delegated to officers requires careful consideration. We suggest:
- Councillor ‘call-in’ for all planning applications (ie. if one councillor decides that the decision should be made by council rather than officers, then this application will go to a full council meeting)
- Planning applications to automatically go to council when 5 objections are submitted
- Sporting allocations to be decided by Council resolution
PLANNING & MISCELLANEOUS
- The development of structure plans for major activity centres
- Creation of Parking Precinct Plans for all Housing Diversity Areas
- Insistence on removal of training from Caulfield Racecourse in accordance with 2009 agreement
- Revamping, with full consultation, Local Area Traffic Management Plans and adherence to those plans
- Reworking of the Community Plan that fully incorporates and addresses resident concerns
- Tendering decisions to be tabled at council and to include selection criteria, officers responsible, final grades for each tender
- Website that includes capital works program including information on: progress, cost to council, grants from government, projected completion date and final completion date
- Delegated planning committee reports to feature in every council meeting and to include ‘user satisfaction surveys’
- Audio/video recordings of council meetings to be placed on the web, or available to residents upon request
- Revamping of Audit Committee including advertising of external membership for all incumbents
- No councillor to serve more than 2 consecutive years on Audit Committee
- Councillors be provided with ‘portfolios’ as part of their responsibility
- Councillors decision to have their email accounts treated as confidential to be strictly enforced
- Officers to be named in all reports (ie authors, and who is ultimately responsible)
- Immediate full review of the Planning Scheme and updating of all policy documents. This is to be done with intensive, full community consultation and the establishment of a resident/councillor/officer working party which will report fully and regularly to Council
- Publication of grant applications – their success and/or failure
- Regular ward meetings and/or the establishment of Village Committees. Council to respond promptly and fully to issues raised
- No development which increases or intensifies dwellings per lot to be issued with residential parking permits anywhere in the municipality
- Cost benefit analysis to accompany all Officer reports for major projects
- Maximum open space levies for all developments in municipality
- Revenue from above to be used to only acquire open space
- All councillor Requests for Report to be tabled at ordinary Council Meetings
Councillor/Staff Code of Conduct
- The Staff Code of Conduct be publicly available on website
- Staff/councillor conflict to automatically go to mediation as first step
- Removal of ‘gagging’ strictures in the Councillor Code of Conduct
This is a long list but essentially all these ‘reforms’ deal with governance and transparency. That has been the root cause of the ills which have plagued this council for over a decade. The final point we wish to make is that we also believe it is imperative that the CEO position be advertised and that ALL councillors be part of the selection process. What do you think?
Glen Eira Debates 
October 25, 2012 at 4:27 PM
A good catalogue of governance issues that desperately need sorting out. Whether or not any new councillors have the courage and the will to see these reforms through will be a fascinating council watch period. Even more fascinating will be the response and pressures that Newton will undoubtedly bring to bear on these “newbies”. I wish them well as I’m sure many residents do too. Reform on countless fronts is long overdue.
October 25, 2012 at 5:00 PM
I don’t trust recording of meetings. It’s way too easy to edit them. Meetings of Council and committee meetings should be streamed live. It’s the most significant change that could be made in terms of openness and accountability.
October 25, 2012 at 5:31 PM
Good luck with all that. In betting terms, 100 to 1.
October 25, 2012 at 6:20 PM
My suggestions
advertise properly in the local papers and not just a tiny ad in the age
minutes should include who voted for what
let residents ask any question they like of developers without being shut up
punish any planning permit infringements
help resident objectors more at vcat and before going to vcat
get councillors and officers to answer emails promptly
October 25, 2012 at 6:38 PM
Anon 3, in offering odds of 100:1, is an optimist. Anyway change should be gradual, at a pace that people and councillors can cope with. Forty-odd years after it was published, Alvin Toffler’s book “Future Shock” is still relevant.
In terms of the changes I would like to see made to improve governance, I’d probably target accountability initially. The text of all speeches made for or against a motion should be published in the Minutes, so we can see what questions or issues were raised in response in council officer reports, what matters were considered material, whether a councillor dared express an opinion, and how they voted. In the case of delegated powers, there should be a register of the decisions made by officers under those powers, along with a summary of evidence considered and process by which the eventual decision is reached. There is simply a lack of transparency about council decision-making currently, especially around planning applications. If developers are not compelled to comply with their Planning Permits, then at least document the reasons why. If developers have been given secret permission by council officers to build without a Planning Permit, then document who and why.
Next up for reform I’d nominate the metrics chosen and reporting made in response to the Best Value Principles requirement. Glen Eira doesn’t take the principles seriously, and refuses to establish metrics for the more controversial issues affecting our municipality. Its an unfunny joke if the target is “review something” and success criteria is “review completed”.
I have frequently criticised the excessive use of secrecy by Council and its CEO. In future, Minutes of meetings should comply with LGA and publish a synopsis of the material considered by Council when closed to the public in reaching their decisions. That should, if done with integrity, restore some balance so that we’re not subjected to ridiculous assertions without substantiation post-fact. And yes Margaret, I *do* have the reappointment of the CEO in mind.
Some of the changes above I’m sure are with the current Council and personalities in mind. For all I know they may not be necessary in the future, but there is a chance most of the incumbents are returned. One thing I am dubious about is the public asking questions without notice. A quality answer should require proper research. I do however criticise Council for publishing responses to public questions that fail to answer the core questions and that are designed to mislead the wider public.
October 25, 2012 at 7:25 PM
Public questions without notice aren’t a problem. If it’s a technical question then it can always be taken on notice and answered at the next meeting. The same goes for councillor questions of officers or each other. Take this away and you’ve got what we’ve got now. People can’t get up at council and talk to councillors, ask questions, and councillors are continually stymied and muzzled.
October 25, 2012 at 8:27 PM
There would be no point in asking a councillor a question at a meeting because they probably would not have an answer. No point at all.
October 25, 2012 at 9:17 PM
And aint that a shame. If that is your expectation then it reflects more on you, your expectations and Coucncillors than it does of residents. Admittedly some questions would require research but who the hell would accept no answer, no get back to you or when the researched answer comes, in a timely fashion, it is discussed in an open and objective fashion.
I note this Council (along with some other Councils) is pushing to be enshrined in the constitution as the third tier of govt – aint gonna happen as long as your attitude and exprectations prevail .
October 25, 2012 at 8:39 PM
Don’t you have to disclose that you are a candidate Reprobate??
October 25, 2012 at 9:01 PM
Excellent list and comments. I’d like to see a defined approach to the ‘fiduciary duty’ of Councillors, Directors including CEO, and senior managers. Such roles and responsibilities is to fulfill the principles of Local Government as defined by ALGA
“Local Governments are elected to represent their communities, to be a
responsible and accountable sphere of democratic governance; to be a focus for community identity and civic spirit; to provide appropriate services to meet community needs in an efficient and effective manner; and to facilitate and coordinate local efforts and resources in pursuit of community needs.”
To do it properly requires trust, ethics, moral values and selflessness on the part of Council and staff. That will be the day.
October 25, 2012 at 9:41 PM
For all those naysayers, we’re repeating part of an earlier post pinched from the Mayne Report on how other councils deal with public questions. Please carefully note that unlike Glen Eira, many of these councils permit verbal and unscripted questions and that these may be addressed to both councillors and officers. The latter is totally verboten in Glen Eira!
15 minutes of oral questions are permitted before the formal commencement of each council meeting with a limit of 3 minutes per resident. It can extended to 30 minutes if councillors approve. (Banyule)
unscripted oral public questions are permitted for up to 30 minutes during the formal meeting at the start after councillors have reported back on their activities. It is therefore reported in the minutes (Darebin)
Ordinary Council meetings include a Public Question Time segment at the beginning which provides an opportunity for individuals to have their say and discuss issues of interest to them. It is therefore reported in the minutes (Moreland)
Ordinary Council meetings include a Public Question Time segment at the beginning after confirmation of minutes, which provides an opportunity for individuals to have their say and discuss issues of interest to them. It is therefore reported in the minutes, (Nillumbik)
Ordinary Council meetings include a Public Question Time segment at item 6 before general business, which provides an opportunity for individuals to have their say and discuss issues of interest to them. It is therefore reported in the minutes, (Yarra)
Ordinary Council meetings include a Public Question Time segment at the beginning of the meeting, which provides an opportunity for individuals to have their say. It is therefore reported in the minutes, (Ballarat)
A Public Question Time is held at the beginning of each Ordinary Meeting where questions with and without notice are addressed. A maximum of three questions will be permitted per resident per meeting. It is therefore reported in the minutes, (Frankston)
The public question time is held at the start of the meeting as close as practical to 6:00pm. A maximum of 30 minutes has been provided for registered and unregistered questions. It is therefore reported in the minutes, (Bendigo)
are very open and members of the public are encouraged to email the mayor anytime. Unscripted public questions are permitted during the formal meeting at 8pm always. It is therefore reported in the minutes (Kingston)
question time is the second order of business at every Ordinary Meeting, to enable the general public to submit questions to Councillors or members of Council staff. Up to fifteen minutes will be allowed for the answering of all questions (Maroondah)
From 6pm to 6.45pm, there is public forum and question time, and covers listed presentations, issues raised by citizens and questions without notice, (Moonee Valley)
unscripted public questions are permitted during the formal meeting at the beginning. It is therefore reported in the minutes, (Stonnington)
October 25, 2012 at 10:20 PM
One thing that is not included in the above is the selection of the Mayor. The last 3 mayors have done nothing to progress governance in this council.
They’ve set it back years. New blood is needed.
October 25, 2012 at 10:30 PM
This would be revolutionary if it happened in Glen Eira.
For not only does it serve a practical purpose but also a symbolic one – it says that the council welcomes engagement with its community.
I have previously suggested that the least council could do would be to give those who ask public questions a right of response – which might be used simply to say they are satisfied with councils’ answer or to ask a supplementary question. One of the problems with public questions at present is that there are limitations in terms of what sort of questions can be asked but no obligations for the council to properly respond to the question. So often we find public questions fobbed off with a non-answer. And this is the way they want it. No transparency, no respect for community views and no accountability.
October 25, 2012 at 10:49 PM
Your last sentence Glen Huntly applies to everything, not only public questions. I like the list provided by the blog because it captures what people were saying at the community forums and what needs to change. Planning is an unmitigated disaster at present. Councillors are left out in the cold and I’d bet that most of them don’t even know what’s happening and which applications have been rubber stamped by Akehurst and his men. The planning conferences are run by lackeys most of the time and Lipshutz tries his darndest to shut people up. That has to change too. Then there’s the good ol debacle about structure plans and Newton’s refusal to go down that path. Once you’ve got structure plans they’re visible to everyone and hard and fast rules are laid down that have to be applied by planning departments. Without them you can just about do anything you like. There are no rules or policies. It’s nirvana for developers and all the power rests with the planning department to say yes or no to an application. Introduce only some of these reforms which are all about transparency and hence the enemy of Newton and Lipshutz, and the dictatorship is defunct. We’re in for some very interesting times I dare say.
October 26, 2012 at 2:55 PM
Re Structure Plans: There are *no* rules when it comes to making decisions about applications for planning permits. For all the talk about the Government’s new zones designed to help developers increase their profits, zones are just a part of planning schemes, and neither Council nor VCAT have to apply the provisions of a planning scheme. The legal requirement is for Council and VCAT to consider/take into account relevant planning schemes [PAEA s60, s84B]. A Council or Member has the freedom to reject any policy element that they don’t like. A common trick is for council officers and VCAT to refer vaguely to state policy without actually identifying which policy and which elements of that policy they are relying on in support of the decision they want.
My personal reasons for supporting Structure Plans is that there is a lot more to planning than just building envelope; that documents from DPCD to assist with the preparation of Structure Plans identify some of these additional issues; and that these issues have in the past been universally ignored by both Council and VCAT. Structure Plans help with accountability, widely recognised as missing in Glen Eira.
I also don’t ever again want to hear Cr Lipshutz talk about VCAT when speaking in favour of a planning application. VCAT has no role, legal or ethical, in influencing Council’s decisions. It is a major flaw of the system that VCAT cannot be held accountable for its decisions, but Council isn’t helping when it fails to leverage all available tools to spell out clearly and precisely the outcomes it is seeking, and how change is going to be managed to get there fairly.