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.