Election packs will soon be arriving in letter boxes and residents will be casting their votes. We therefore ask everyone to carefully consider the document we have uploaded HERE. It is a long document but a very important one since it records, in chronological order, how each of these remaining 8 incumbents voted on planning applications throughout their 4 years on council.
Residents have been assailed with comments in the Candidate Statements as to how these councillors will ‘protect neighbourhood character’ (Esakoff); how they will ‘ensure development is fair’(Sounness); how they will oppose ‘inappropriate development’ (Ho, Hyams, Okotel,Lobo). Then there are the few for whom planning does not even rate a mention (Pilling, Magee) or we get the minimalist claims of Delahunty (‘I’ve extended the heritage overlay to protect Camden Ward’s oldest buildings).
When planning for the past decade has been in the forefront of community angst such statements deserve to be scrutinised and evaluated. Have these incumbents really practiced what they now preach? What consideration over the past 4 years have they really given to opposing inappropriate development? What evidence is there to support their claims that they give a damn about neighbourhood character? Because surely, if they did, then much could have been done since November 2012 to address the woeful planning scheme and ensure that developers do not have such an easy time of it. And if they really and truly cared about ‘overdevelopment’ then the zones and their schedules would have been much more ‘neighbourhood friendly’.
The document we’ve uploaded contains the following:
- All councillor decisions on planning (except for a couple on child care applications)
- Who voted for what and who moved and seconded motions
- The officer recommendations and then councillors’ decision
- Where VCAT has become involved we also cite some of the member’s comments (please note that there are some VCAT cases pending from the later decisions)
- We also highlight again the fact that on EVERY SINGLE OCCASION that these councillors lopped off a storey or two, or reduced the number of apartments and the developer went to VCAT, the developer won! Not because VCAT is woeful, but because for 4 long years these councillors have refused to accept the fact that the fault lies largely with them and with the planning scheme. Please also remember that it has taken the Minister’s intervention to even get this council to review its incompetent and out of date planning scheme!
- Thus for all the talk and crocodile tears shed by councillors in the past 4 years, their voting record belies their professed concern. Appraising the voting patterns, the most consistent councillor in voting against development is Lobo – and even he is inconsistent!
- The only conclusion that can be drawn from this data is that Glen Eira’s councillors have failed residents completely and ALL MUST FALL ON THEIR RECORD! We urge residents to ensure that they can no longer have any say in what buildings go up in Glen Eira!
Here’s another link to the document
Glen Eira Debates 
September 28, 2016 at 11:23 PM
A great effort in providing this historical record. It shows up all these councillor lies and how each of them have been supportive of handing our streets over to developers. They have achieved an absolute zero for the community and for sensible and responsible planning. Not one of them deserves to be returned on the basis of this voting record.
September 29, 2016 at 1:58 AM
G E Debates Thank you so much for all the hard work in making this information so readily available and easy to understand.
Certainly all councillors have supported the destruction of our streets and neighbourhood character. Yhoughtless destruction without proper studies of consequent conjestion. Ms Essakoff has moved so many pro-development motions in the time.
Met with this at Carnegie tonight when attending library to hear about women in the Salvation Army. I had to walk 500 metres from my car.
The 36 restaurants all in use and as we remenber our clever councillors waived parking requirements in the application for 100 seat restaurants as in the case of no. 96 and many others. so the area is unworkable day and night.
Council even has the gall to levee shopkeepers for “advertising” carried out on their behalf without consultation! Is this fee towards the salary of the staff member who tells us to shop local? She has no solution we would if we could!
One mourns the loss of the second last butcher shop on account of all the parking by restaurant attendees. He says that the unit dwellers who have a different cultural background do not use butcher shops as I noted when I visited the cafes on council campaigning..
May have to travel to Oakleigh to buy fresh foods rather than supermarkets.
Thank you GECC for your contribution in successfully causing us to travel five kilometres for basic food requirements.
September 29, 2016 at 6:44 AM
Phenomenal summary highlighting that all Councillors should hang their heads in absolute shame through hypocrisy or incompetence or both. In the absence of an appropriate planning framework, this shows that the decisions made at Council are meaningless and merely just part of the facade to support developers.
October 1, 2016 at 3:26 PM
Who supports developers and when did the new zones come into force which government was in control? Who was the Mayor for the second term? What did the liberal Councillor/s with the help of Greens (who proved they are against sustainability and green environment) do to tear our green suburbs to go to bed with the liberal Councillors. Like the Federal and State government of Victoria, the fcuking Greens held the parliament by the balls. Do you believe voting the Greens candidate and the existing Green Councillors in Glen Eira will protect our leafy suburbs. The next are developments where the Greens live in the suburbs of Glen Eira. Think, why did Pilling get the Mayoralty twice and his left kick Souness got the Deputy Mayor? Why did Magee get the Mayor position? Any idea?7
September 29, 2016 at 8:26 AM
What happens if you add planning scheme decisions as well, etc. is it still consistent?
September 29, 2016 at 10:51 AM
Pretty much so. There have been scores of amendments to rezone Industrial land or those with Commercial 2 zoning, to either Mixed Use or Commercial 1, thus making them eligible for residential apartments. Only those that had tremendous opposition, such as the Virginia Estate, were rejected unanimously – that story has yet to be played out to completion. Even in ordinary planning applications, there is a direct correlation between the number of objectors and how councillors voted. For all their disclaimers as to playing the “populist” game, the evidence shows otherwise in this regard. Then of course we’ve had refusals to go to planning panels by Hyams, Lipshutz, Esakoff and Pilling on Frogmore – despite the fact that a petition of over 1000 signatures was tabled – thus denying residents their opportunity to present their views, their evidence and to have a fair hearing. Jewish Care got its nursing home and a historic building and significant trees were demolished entirely.
September 29, 2016 at 8:50 AM
Very good exposé on this short memoried mob of fobber
I do admit no-one is perfect, and being a councillors is fraught with problems. However consistency is important for credibility in a levels of social interaction.
When someone keeps score on how they vote they all fall into a bucket of their own dibble and drown.
Their voting records says it all, there is no need for debate here
September 29, 2016 at 11:34 AM
My thanks to for the work that’s been done. I’ve printed off a copy and am showing my friends and neighbours what these people have done.
September 29, 2016 at 1:00 PM
The cat is well and truly out of the bag with this summary. I will certainly be distributing also. The question is why are they all so keen to get back in again?
September 29, 2016 at 2:06 PM
Ditto. Everyone should know what they’ve done and how little they’ve achieved.
September 29, 2016 at 3:25 PM
Great expose indeed. Such concerned souls voting for hundreds and hundreds of boxes. No difference between the libs and labs and greens. The perfect argument here why we need 9 new independent councillors and a system that stops their lies and secret deals.
September 29, 2016 at 5:46 PM
I’d say that less than 10% of all of these permits have been given to land in shopping centres. Most are in surrounding streets and that’s the crime of the zones. They have not given a single thought to what happens to people or what happens when you get development after development in the same street so that’s its devestated. It’s sh*t planning and irresponsible leadership by the councillors. They are useless and only good for greedy developers.
September 29, 2016 at 8:41 PM
Whole lot is gung ho for development and to hell with what the community wants.
September 29, 2016 at 11:03 PM
The list says it all. What a circus. Residents don’t matter. There are a lot of people living in Glen Eira who have suffered by having their quality of life destroyed. Forced to sell their homes because of inappropriate development. As can be seen Councillors have to take responsibility for their decisions. Lobo is the only Councillor to acknowledge what they did or didn’t do was a mistake. We can see It happening in Glen Eira every day. Don’t blame VCAT when you have the opportunity to write a policy that will curtail rampant greedy developers creating slums of the future. Vote all incumbents out.
September 30, 2016 at 5:08 AM
After the 2012 elections I did ask what each councillor’s personal definition of “inappropriate development” was, and what changes each councillor wanted to make to the Planning Scheme. I didn’t get what I asked for and instead got a groupspeak response: “councillors regard as inappropriate any development that does not comply with the relevant planning law as we assess it”. No councillor identified any changes they wanted to make to the Scheme.
It has been pointed out many times before here that there is very little “law” involved in planning decisions. Mostly the Act specifies processes—decisions are left up to decision-makers, theoretically based on matters contained in Planning Schemes. With no guidance from Council via its Planning Scheme, VCAT has great freedom to set aside Council decisions.
Council did attempt to blame State Government and VCAT for outcomes, and yet we have rarely seen from Council any documentary evidence showing clearly the Planning Minister refusing something that Council asked for. We instead get told, without evidence, that the Minister is unlikely to approve something so no point asking.
September 30, 2016 at 10:05 AM
Recently, Council has disclosed two instances of the Planning Minister refusing Council’s requests.
The first was Council requesting the Planning Minister to change the planning legislation. The Minister’s response was for Glen Eira Council to update their antiquated planning scheme by implementing the suite of planning tools (eg. structure plans, overlays) the other Councils had introduced long ago.
The second Council requesting the Planning Minister to grant a further exemption from community consultation on the planning scheme. Instead the Minister ordered Council to comply the 1987 Planning & Environment Act and undertake overdue community consultation (hence the recent planning scheme review).
Kinda says it all doesn’t it.
September 30, 2016 at 12:46 PM
I see Pilling has used the Greens colouring in his brochure. Presumably to get the vote of the gullible or ambivalent.
September 30, 2016 at 3:16 PM
Noticed that too. Quite deceptive.
September 30, 2016 at 3:51 PM
yes, everyone want to be Green, with Pilling those stupid green circles on his leaflets is the closest Jamie Hyams will ever let him get to being green, and for Pilling that’s good enough
October 1, 2016 at 9:32 AM
I reckon Pilling is standing as a stooge for the Greens (it’s why they let him put the green dots on). Lack lustre posters shop posters, hardly any posters in yards (vs. Esakoff’s millions) and minimal door knocking.
Still preferencing Green Clare Davey might not be a bad option as she’s a traffic management engineer with experience at the Council level. About time we had someone with traffic experience standing as a Councillor and call the crap the outsourced traffic dept. puts out for what it is.
October 3, 2016 at 3:10 PM
I would have to agree
October 8, 2016 at 8:23 PM
We should keep political parties out of the council elections, as they have other vested interests.
September 30, 2016 at 6:21 PM
Lipshutz Delahunty Sounness Esakoff Pilling Okotel Hyams Lobo Magee. These are the ones that turned Glen Eira into a developer’s paradise. They have to go.