Just a very brief report for now on tonight’s council meeting. As expected:
- The Centenary pavilion and amalgamation of the two car parks and removal of the trees and vegetation between the current carparks will go ahead. Cost of this new car park $600,000! Of course there were some crocodile tears as to how residents weren’t consulted and that council’s consultation process really must be ‘improved’.
- Monash Uni Amendment went through in about 2 minutes flat with no dissenting or even questioning voice
- Development applications went through practically unanimously with Hyams, Magee claiming that they didn’t like the application but planning law is planning law and so must be upheld!
- Friends of Caulfield Park got their extra money but were told again that they had to be ‘sustainable’ and that this payment was a mere once off. Funnily enough no-one thought to bring up the point of why a community group that is doing council’s work should be ‘sustainable’ in the first place? Esakoff voted against.
- Tree register was deferred and councillors wanted ‘more information’. Another report (pop up parks) was also sent back for ‘more information’. At last some movement on the station…….but only on ‘minor’ and/or relatively ‘trivial’ matters it seems.
- Delahunty at least got up and said that one of the responses to a public question was NOT ANSWERED and that she was putting in a councillor request that the resident’s question be provided with a full answer.
- There was also a Request for a Report on making audio and/or visual transmissions of council meetings. Burke apparently had suggested that the ‘difficulty’ with this might involve Heritage concerns for the building. He obviously has forgotten that he is in charge of the current audio recordings of council meetings. We wonder what ‘heritage’ damage would occur if these recordings were simply uploaded onto council’s website!
- No prizes for guessing who did not utter a word on the Caulfield Park conservatory item – Lipshutz and Esakoff. It was voted in unanimously to ‘restore’ and include public input.
We will present a detailed report on all of these items in the coming days and ask residents to pay careful attention to the quality and logical consistency of most of the arguments.
Glen Eira Debates 
September 24, 2013 at 10:55 PM
Ya gotta luv Newton’s luv affair with car parks. Another $600,000 for bugger all a few more car parking spots. On top of this spend money ripping out trees and planting tiny little saplings that will take another 20 years to match what’s there. Betyas that noones even done any research on whether or not there is a need for more car parking spots cos that doesn’t rate a mention anywhere. Jesus this must be the crappiest council in the country who think that ratepayers have got bottomless pockets. How about saving some money for a change and getting rid of Newton?
September 25, 2013 at 7:42 AM
What did our Green Councillors say about cutting down the trees for yet another carpark?
September 25, 2013 at 7:44 AM
Gotta also love Burke’s sudden concern for the heritage of the Town Hall when it comes to providing audio visuals of Council Meetings. Jeez, just to name two, the British Houses of Parliament and the US Capitol in Washington have them installed (recordings are readily available to the media and public). Both are far more historically significant (globally, nationally and locally) than Glen Eira Town Hall and, despite both presenting structural and heritage issues during the Audio/CCTV installation, they managed it.
The heritage argument raised by Burke simply doesn’t have a leg to stand on – like most things this Council buries in a quagmire of redtape (e.g. tree register) it’s eminently doable, all that’s missing is the will. If, after having time to think/research it, that’s the best Burke can come up with rest assured that both he and Council will vigorously argue it for purely self protective purposes. Burke’s comment is indicative of this Council’s (Councillors and the Administration) inability to conduct unbiased research and analysis of issues and present clear arguments both for and against before making decisions. It’s no wonder the Audio/CCTV won’t fly.
September 25, 2013 at 8:42 AM
Some clarification in order here. Burke did not actually state this in chamber. The gallery were told that he had at some point raised the issue – clearly previously.
September 25, 2013 at 11:29 AM
Doesn’t matter where it was said – argument is still spurious and end result will be still be a resounding NO
September 25, 2013 at 9:32 AM
Does anyone know the amount of ratepayer money that has been spent of carparks over the last few years?
September 25, 2013 at 10:01 AM
The figure is undoubtedly millions. However, given the vagueness of council’s budget processes, it is difficult to provide an accurate estimate. For example, this is what the 2011/12 Budget stated –
Car Park Renewal $285k
Car park upgrade $75k – Car Park Upgrade Design Program $74,750 (does this refer to the same item?)
Additional Car Parking Spaces and Secure Bicycle Storage $140k
Add onto this the unbudgeted expenses of GESAC and the $600,000+ for Princes Park car park, etc and the figure easily reaches millions.
September 25, 2013 at 10:07 AM
Nothing surprising about Piling! he follows where grains are thrown in front of him and cannot distinguish if the grains are with or without husk. The former comes with poison.
Magee is a good Spin Doctor, who has always personalised an issue with “I”
An author on how to play bingo. This site has spoken a lot about the integrity of Pilling who says one thing one fine day and does another on his gloomy day. Piling is considered to be a mentor to Sounness? What will Piling teach?