We’ve uploaded several pages from a secret report by Charter Keck Cramer. The report was obviously commissioned well before July 2013 (the date the report was completed). The report is courtesy of the Department and its objective was to use GLEN EIRA AS A MODEL for the introduction of the new zones. Thus Council was well and truly up to its eyeballs in secret meetings with Guy, and the department in order to be the ‘first’ council in the state to introduce the new residential zones.
What is significant in the following pages (obtained under FOI) is:
- The emphases on state revenue via property tax and stamp duty
- Job creation for the construction industry, and
- Housing supply
There is not one word in this analysis regarding impact on existing neighbourhoods or the deterioration of residential amenity. No mention of required infrastructure; no mention of open space and no concern about transparency and community consultation. Even more astounding is that Glen Eira claimed to have 85 years worth of development potential and 89 years worth once the commercial areas were included! Notes of meetings between the parties reveals that ALL COUNCILLORS were in favour of the introduction of the horrendous zones.
The crucial questions here are:
- Were all councillors provided with a copy of this report? If so, what questions did they ask? If not all councillors were provided with the report, then why not?
- Exactly what were councillors told about the secret meetings between Guy, Newton, Akehurst and Hyams?
- What role did the Liberals on Council (ie Hyams, Lipshutz, Esakoff, Okotel, ‘Pilling’) have in endorsing this secrecy and collusion with Matthew Guy and his bureaucrats?
As we have repeatedly stated, there is no excuse for responses to public questions being lies. There is no excuse for the failure to inform the community as to what is about to happen. There is no excuse for appalling planning and definitely no excuse for failure to implement planning controls for the past decade. All current councillors are responsible for these failures and the damage they have caused to countless residents.
Glen Eira Debates 
October 12, 2016 at 6:51 PM
When the new zones came out the Minister advised by letter, that he had rezoned both the Alma Club and ABC Site into GRZ. Yet when the zones were introduced Council claimed they knew nothing about them.
While the Alma Club issue was underway, the redevelopment of the ABC only emerged late last year.
The ABC site is another example of Council’s reactive planning. They have had years to implement overlays yet they have done nothing. They prefer to leave it up to the developer to decide what he wants rather than consider residents and their amenity by guiding the development by implementing changes in the planning scheme.
They did the same with the Caulfield Village, the Alma Club, Virginia Park and now the ABC development site.
October 12, 2016 at 7:54 PM
It is absolutely clear that Hyams’ loyalty lies with the liberal party and there is every likelihood that the report was kept under lock and key similar to the QC report which hopefully will be released under FOI.
October 12, 2016 at 8:49 PM
I received my ballot paper in the mail today and I was keen to read the candidates statement before I voted the deserving candidates. When I came across the statement made by a CADE Anne Marie, I thought I liked it until I read the last part “I believe the two other candidates that most deserves your consideration are Jamie Hams and Philip De’Ath. Wake up Cade and read the disaster caused by Hyams. Your ignorance is not an excuse. It appears you are put up to stand for elections is for Hyams to take your preferences like he did for Donna Elliott in 2012 council elections.
October 12, 2016 at 10:00 PM
There are some people making cold hard cash out of Glen Eira’s planning debacle. For some all’s fair in war and business. Residents move over the cash steamroller is only a street or two away.
October 13, 2016 at 8:15 AM
Last evening some people were heard saying Maggee who reapplied for labor membership was rejected. Is there any truth in this.
October 13, 2016 at 11:32 AM
He wants to have another crack at the mayors job. Under the ALP rules other councillors that are ALP members would be forced to support him. He is anticipating the candidates that are union employees will be successful. In fact he doesn’t have a chance since he swapped prefs with h the Libs .
October 13, 2016 at 10:48 AM
All about money and how much Guy and councils would get.
October 13, 2016 at 12:32 PM
Interesting that DELWP, the renamed-DTPLI, thought the report was exempt from FOI as its release would be “contrary to the public interest”. Presumably it has now unleashed a “substantial adverse effect on the economy of Victoria”. Since it also claims some documents to be exempt under client legal privilege, I have to wonder what the “pending or contemplated litigation” was since it states that was the dominant purpose for obtaining advice. So much for integrity, when it knows full well it was trying to change the Planning Scheme without public scrutiny and wanted to know if it could do it under the circumstances where it didn’t have a Council resolution.
As we subsequently know, Matthew Guy lied to Parliament in his justification for exercising his powers under S20(4). It is also clear a cabal of Glen Eira councillors and staff collaborated with him without delegated authority to do so. The same bozos screwed up C60 too. Compare what is being built with the Panel report. Or the removal of planning conditions intended to protect amenity so as to boost MRC profits. Or the failure to comply with ResCode. And we’re expected to believe the removal of height limits from one precinct was unintended when the Incorporate Plan was unilaterally modified. Matthew Guy on behalf of Lib/Nat coalition reluctantly had to reinstate them after a community protest.
GECC can say what it likes, but after years of chronic misbehaviour I don’t trust any current councillor.
October 13, 2016 at 1:29 PM
There are some bad to the general public.
Have a read on the biggest rotten egg “Serving Our community” Wonder what is meant by that. I thought we have over 108 communities. Another observation on candidates’ statement (similar to 2012 elections) “Why are you on the Council if you cannot help the residents” Is getting residential zones approved directly by Mr Guy without public consultation – helping the residents????
October 13, 2016 at 2:59 PM
Another reason to vote for change and get new councillors. The present councillors will always shut the door on residents. We vote them in but we don’t have a voice. This is our chance to have real consultation. Vote for change on Glen Eira Council.
October 13, 2016 at 3:34 PM
Yes new councillors will be great, howeverm we must attend council meetings to try and ensure they are not bullied as other aspirants have been and then forced to join the group an vote with the crowd.
October 13, 2016 at 5:25 PM
I really do hope the old Council is swept out and I have voted to that end.
Sadly, that was my wish at the last election but all got re-elected and I expect to be disappointed once again.
Ultimately you get what you elect and most of the residents don’t give a stuff.
October 13, 2016 at 10:55 PM
Time residents woke up.
It’s no good complaining when an application next door to you comes up, too late the horse has bolted. The time for action was when Council was setting the planning rules that said that four stories next door to you was allowed.
It ain’t easy to get this Council to listen to you and that’s why things need to change. If residents can’t be bothered to make sure they vote for the best then they’ll get the worst and that will more of the same.
October 13, 2016 at 11:36 PM
There is no value in disappointment, work harder next time, the hardest workers will prevail
October 14, 2016 at 10:10 PM
Sounds good Anon but there’s little more the average punter can do than talk to the people you come across and vote according to your own impressions of the Council.
It’s almost impossible to convince people who really don’t give a stuff to take a serious interest. As the last few Council outcomes have shown.
October 14, 2016 at 12:31 PM
Everyone knows the main culprits who have kicked the rear side of our residents who were elected by residents!
The only reason that there are so many candidates for 9 Councillor positions is to ensure the favouritism to the party they belong to must be stopped. Esakooff’s pattern of voting is obvious although she can shout from the top of a mountain and say she is an “independent” and if it is true, her husband Jack (who reads this blog) has no influence over her baloney decision? There are many people who have not voted and therefore a line or two on each new candidate and those who are seeking to be Re-elected based on the responses heard in three open forums held by GE will help those who are undecided.
Let us keep the back door wide open from where the ROT brought in their own agenda and then bolt the door. New candidates,beware of those who will be trying to contaminate you. So be aware of sweet talkers.Stop the ROT and the so called “Experience counts”
is nothing but a lot of Baloney.