We’ve received an email from a resident which in our view epitomises everything that is wrong with the Glen Eira City Council administration and, in particular, its penchant for secrecy and putting every single obstacle it can in the way of residents.
Here’s what happened.
- A resident went down to council offices and asked to see the Melbourne Transport Victoria submission on the Caulfield Village Development Plan.
- An officer finally came down with the submission and told the resident that photographs or copies were verboten.
- The resident, not to be put off, then started to transcribe the submission in full.
- The officer remained watching the resident write for at least ten minutes and was clearly bored out of his brain and inwardly fuming. He then called in an underling to continue with the surveillance.
What is so outrageous about this behaviour is:
- There is NOTHING, not a single word, in the Planning and Environment Act which precludes residents from taking a photo of a submission. The ‘embargo’ by council is simply another example of their determination to make things as difficult as they possibly can for residents. It is simply another ‘rule’ concocted by council to prevent widespread dissemination of a public document.
- It also illustrates the common council practice of ‘if it’s not stated in the legislation’ then we can’t do it. Or the reverse is also true – if it’s not stated in the legislation, we can do it’. It all depends on the situation and the objective – for example: the Local Law and the Meeting Procedures and attempts to dissent from the chair!
- Residents need to ask: how much did this officer surveillance cost ratepayers? How many dollars went down the drain when two employees stood around watching someone else write instead of getting on with the work they are paid (by us) to do?
Finally, here is the transcript as forwarded to us. All that has been left out are the reference numbers –
Received – 27th February 2014
Public Transport Victoria
Ref FQL
Rocky Camera
Coordinator Statutory Planning
Thank you for your letter dated 28/01/14 referring the Caulfield Village Development Plan to Public Transport Victoria. Please find Public Transport Victoria’s comments below.
While the accompanying Integrated Transport Plan (ITP) has made references to most items as outlined in Schedule 2 to the Property Development Zone PTV requires the following additional information to be able to conduct a proper assessment of the plan.
1/ Demonstrate how Station Street will accommodate the ‘Undivided Connector Road – B’ as detailed in the Public Transport Guidelines for Land Use and Development (i.e. a minimum 4.2 metres shared carriageway for both vehicles and bikes and a minimum 2.3 metres wide parking lane).
2/ Provide further information regarding the layout and location of the proposed bus stop at the intersection of Station Street and The Boulevard. Confirm that such bus stop would be funded by the development.
3/ Further detail on how existing tram services along Normanby Road and bus services along Station Street will be impacted by the proposed development (i.e. delays to journey time) including the intersection plans showing the proposed works, how they will accommodated within the road reserve and how they will operate.
4/ Further detail on the future planning for the Normanby Road / Smith Street tram stop (i.e. timing, planning location and design of a potential Superstop).
In addition, PTV does not support the introduction of a shared tram and traffic lane as suggested in Table 4.3 of the ITT on the Normanby Road/The Boulevard/Smith Street intersection. Introducing additional traffic to the existing tram right turn would cause travel time delays to the tram service. The intersection should be designed as not to detrimentally impact the current levels of tram operation.
The PTV would prefer that the Implementation Plan submitted with the Development Plan documents clearly sets out how each intersection across the development will be constructed and the timing for delivery detailed in an approved implementation plan.
Yours,
Richard McAliece
Manager
Land and Planning
24 / 2 / 2014
April 23, 2014 at 8:55 PM
Combining the Vic Roads and the MTV submissions shows how inept the Transport Plan is and how much is missing in spite of all the promises that the plans are in accordance with standards and regulations. These submissions prove otherwise and aren’t something that council wants too many people to realise when they will probably accept the development plan as it stands with maybe some minor and trivial adjustments.
I’d go even further and say that everything about transport has been a disaster. Nothing is stated about Caulfield Station and what’s going to happen when Monash builds. Nor is there anything about pedestrian and cyclist safety in trying to get to the main roads or the station. The entire history of this site is “contaminated” by vested interests that reach all the way up to state governments and down to local councils. It stinks.
April 23, 2014 at 9:04 PM
I foresee Cr Lipshutz making yet another public statement in defiance of Council’s Local Law, decrying the use of “verboten”, saying it is “beyond the pale” and deeply offensive to the constituency that he represents.
Council staff make shit up. If it’s a partial road closure by a developer without a permit: “they’re allowed to do that”. Want to inspect endorsed plans forming part of a Permit? “It’ll cost you $51.” Everything is “generally in accordance”, or “considered acceptable”, or “reasonable in the circumstances”. Doesn’t matter if it violates Council policy. After all, councillors don’t care much for their own policies.
It probably won’t change behaviour much, but when an officer make a dubious statement, it should be reasonable to ask them to put it in writing, clearly identifying the officer making the statement, and citing the relevant Act/Law/Regulation/Policy and clause being relied upon in making the contentious decision.
Council shouldn’t tolerate staff intimidating the public, but now that it has unofficially abandoned its Councillors’ Code of Conduct and Local Law, there isn’t much left to guide its behaviour.
April 23, 2014 at 11:05 PM
Glen Eira Council would provide a field day for any sociologist investigating the siege mentality of bureaucracies. He or she could then compare the mentality of those in charge with the mentality of most dictatorships feeling under threat and determined to preserve their usurped positions.
Besides the blatant distortion of various principles and legal traditions, incompetence means that much time, effort and money goes into major cover ups and keeping the barking dogs at bay. By this I also mean some silly councillors who still believe in transparency and giving residents a fair go. These are a dying breed and in Glen Eira close to extinction.
April 24, 2014 at 12:06 AM
Visiting council to see plans which we are always invited to do is like attending a chamber of horrors. It is usually quite amazing people come and go through many doors which bang and slam shut and the interested resident of course has plenty of time to wait… this happens even if no-one else is there. THEN there’s the statement from the inquiry desk clerks “not here’, must be over there, I’ll phone thru’ your request… then the doors bang and planning officers come and go every minute of two and oh the doors bang again…finally someone comes to fob you off “oh no but the file is over there’… the original place of inquiry and guess what… AT THAT COUNTER THEN THE WORDS “it’s time we closed the photocopy machine… end of day…maybe we could copy but $5 a SHEET’.. THE WHOLE EXERCISE USUALLY TAKES OVER AN HOUR WHEN IT COULD BE EXECUTED IN ten minutes. Hiding the facts (MODERATORS: phrase deleted) at 31 STATION STREET IS USUALLY ALWAYS THE REASON.!!!!!!!!
This whole affair just staggering… VIC. Roads rep. was mentally ill on his day at the PANEL HEARING AND IRONICALLY there’s Mr.. Rocky Camera, who is the planner in the “Whitehouse” (MODERATORS: rest of sentence deleted)! HE HAD BETTER CHANGE HIS NAME!!!!!!
Maybe the Ombudsman should be told