Glen Eira Debates

Printed below are extracts from the Municipal Association of Victoria’s (MAV) publication “Citizen to Councillor: A Guide for Prospective Councillors.” As previously requested, please feel free to assess each councillor against the following job specifications and give them a ranking out of 5  – either as an overall mark, or for each criterion. 

• Councillors guide the development of local policies, set service standards and priorities and monitor the performance of the organisation. Other responsibilities of councillors include determining the financial strategy and budget, allocating resources, and liaising with other levels of government, the private sector and non-government community groups. 
• A major task for councillors is to represent their constituents and advocate on their behalf on a wide range of issues.  
• Councillors, both individually and collectively, are accountable to their community. They have a responsibility to respond to requests for information, be prepared to explain the reasons for their own or the council’s actions, and defend council proposals.  
• The process of drawing up the Council Plan generally includes consultation with the community and enables councillors to influence the direction of the council.  
• Councillors contribute to the review of the council’s planning scheme including the Municipal Strategic Statement, and actively participate in the development of local planning policies to form a sound strategic basis for decision making.
• Councillors provide an invaluable link between the community and council. A council should consult and engage its community and, in so doing, reflect the aspirations of that community. 

We’ve received this comment from Streuth and decided to put it up as a full post.

Streuth Steven, Gee you do get yourself into a bother don’t you? You do want the truth but can you handle it? Here it is the way I see it. You don’t bother to communicate with people when they want you to communicate with them; you don’t respond to emails; you don’t respond to voice mail. You only pontificate on those things that you think people need to hear without listening to what they’ve got to say first of all.

And what do people complain about? That the council including administration and including each councillor do not listen to residents views. We wanted change, change in the culture of the council that has been around now for ten years. The opportunity was there at the time of the CEO appointment because the CEO creates, controls, and spreads the culture. At the reappointment time there was a choice. A clear choice between advertising for a change, or continuing along the same course for another 5 years. Instead we got a total compromise of extension for two years. A disaster for all involved. As a result we got a third municipal investigation. What a catastrophe!

Tell me how does a young whippersnapper like you become so arrogant? How can you even mutter the following words that the Herald Sun (Jan, 11th) picked up: “Glen Eira Council needed a new start, and what says new start better than a young face?” Hells bells Stevey boy, to be Mayor takes a lot more than a ‘young’ pimply face! Besides, you’re so sure of yourself aren’t you? So disdaining of others’ points of view? So who is the guilty party? Who is the culprit? You are Steven. You proposed the compromise! Everything then was stuffed up. Newton went to lawyers, and the bill to residents reached over $40,000 – at least!! Tell me Stevey, what would have been so wrong with advertising the position? Don’t tell me that there’s anything wrong with testing the waters out there? Perhaps Glen Eira might have got an absolute champion. But your decision to compromise was the start of everything. Newton fought like hell, and lawyers licked their chops. What a stuff up of gigantic proportions!

Now let’s get to real business. You complain about character assassination. I’m not talking about Mr. Steven Tang. He is an undoubtedly a nice guy, clever, articulate (if a little verbose). I’m talking about Cr. Tang – the Mayor, our leader, our saviour, our representative!! The checklist that was put up a few weeks back on this site is what I’m talking about. How do you reckon you go on that checklist Stevie? Do you really believe that as Mayor you have done justice to the majority of those criteria? Well, I had a really close look at this checklist and awarded you, as Mayor, the following scores –
Governance: 15/75 which equals 40%. A fail Steven. Why you ask? What have you done about leading and supporting councillors? And I love the bit about ‘inspiring’ others. You’ve inspired them all the way to the Municipal Inspector. Instead of ensuring ‘effective communication’ we’ve had one councillor resign under your watch and conflict between administration and councillors. Great stuff, great governance!

Next is chair of council. This is your only pass mark Stevie – 13/25 equalling a bare pass mark of 50%. Have you really promoted high standards of democracy and ‘internal governance’? Sorry mate, no way!

Then there’s ‘supporting the community’. Oh woe is us on this criteria – a dismal 12/30 which equals another fail at 40%. How can you advocate on behalf of the community’s needs, when you don’t even know what these needs are cos there’s never been any attempt on your part to really find out! As to community governance and enterprise, of course not. That would go against the grain of autonomous organisations beyond the ken of council.

In the end Stevie boy, you might be a bright spark at Uni, but as a Mayor there’s a lot left to be desired. Let’s call a spade a shovel shall we and state that in your reign things have only gone from bad to worse. Oh by the way if you doubt any of my marks then just ask – I’ve got plenty of arguments to put forward that will conclusively prove my judgements.
Of course your failure is in actual fact not just your failure but the team’s failure – that is, the nine councillors and the CEO. I do not believe that it was you that lead to this behaviour, although I said it was your fault, I do not believe it was only you. A mentor, much more experienced than you, much more politically minded and getting much more out of being a Councillor than you. And that person is of course the powerbroker and ‘kingmaker’ – Cr Lipshutz. As the saying goes, with a ‘mentor’ like this, who needs enemies.

We received the following comment from someone calling themselves ‘Steven’. We presume it comes from Steven Tang and hence are reproducing it as a full post.

I do not usually worry about the comments of a blogsite, which is prone to making wild accusations, prone to fundamental errors of fact* and prone to putting a negative slant on any Council decision**.

However, I write in response to what I view as character assassination of the worst kind.

Despite having an allegation of conflict of interest fully investigated and determined by the Municipal Inspector some posters to this blogsite have felt that it is ok to make wild accusations against my character.

In response to these spurious allegations:

1. I have a general belief that the parks of Glen Eira are there for people to use and Council should do its best to ensure they are suitable to support a diversity of recreational interests.
2. I have been found by an independent umpire to have no relevant connection to a “frisbee group”.
3. The allegation is that I know a person or people in the group and further more that they are my friends.
4. I accept that I know people that have been named to me as being part of this group. I have not spoken to anyone in this “frisbee group” prior to, during or after any game of Frisbee about their status.
5. I personally have many friends who live, work or play in Glen Eira. I have known many of them prior to being elected to Council and I have met many more as a Councillor. Councillors should be part of the community and it is unavoidable that they will be friends with many residents, ratepayers or groups.
6. If I wasn’t the subject of such a vitriolic campaign against my character I would not have to give intimate details of how well I do or do not know individuals in the Glen Eira community. The fact is, however, that I have spoken to a handful of people who have identified themselves on this blogsite more than I have spoken to people who have been said to me to be part of this “frisbee group”.
7. A poster to this blogsite is being less than forthright in his campaign against my character. The poster has previously made complaints to me and to the Council about “Indians” playing cricket, Russians playing soccer and other groups of soccer players. These groups appear to be in the same position as the “frisbee group”, but you do not hear about them because it doesn’t fit the narrative.
8. Whilst I accept that the Caulfield Park Social Soccer group has had issues with the law, I do not believe there is widespread concern that people are using the parks. The permit and allocation system provides the security of exclusive use for any group that has an allocation at that time. I strongly encourage any group that wants to compete in a regular organised game to enter the permit and allocation system. It works for the thousands of residents and ratepayers that play and train for the hundreds of active Glen Eira-based teams each and every week.
9. Again it does not fit the Caulfield Park Social Soccer Club narrative of persecution to acknowledge that the local law has been used to respond to a complaint that one of the above-mentioned groups have been interfering with the allocation of a local junior sporting club.
10. The local law is no different to these comparison clauses,

Stonnington:

Use of Council Reserves
517 A person must not, without a Permit, in or on any Council Reserve:
(a) pitch, erect or occupy any tent, marquee or temporary shelter;
(b) light any Fire or allow any Fire to remain alight unless in a fireplace
provided by Council;
(c) hold any circus, carnival, fair, event, commercial or promotional
activity;
(d) conduct or celebrate any wedding;
(e) erect, fix or place any advertisement;
(f) conduct or attend any rally, procession, demonstration or other
public gathering;
(g) conduct, participate or prepare for any competitive game or sport;

Monash
Activities Prohibited in Reserves
18. In a reserve, a person must not:
18.1 unless that person is a player, official or competitor in or at a sporting
match or gathering, enter upon or remain on an area set aside as a playing
ground during the course of a sporting match or gathering;
18.8 play, engage in or practise any game or sport, whether or not in
accordance with a permit issued under this Local Law, in a manner that is:
18.8.1 dangerous to any other person in the reserve; or
18.8.2 likely to interfere with the reasonable use or enjoyment of the
reserve by any other person; or

5 penalty units

Activities which may be permitted in Reserves
19. In a reserve, a person must not, without a permit,
19.4 play, organise, practise or engage in any organised competitive sport or
game;

3 penalty units

11. There is no exact science in applying these laws, but Council needs to be mindful of the conditions of the ground and the risk that the ground will not be suitable for ongoing use if its surfaces are not protected to some extent.
12. The local law has been particularly useful when AFL football clubs run drills, including the dragging of weights, in Glen Eira parks.
13. The permit and allocation system and the rotation of the use of grounds allowed Council to provide the maximum use of sporting grounds in recent years, whilst other grounds elsewhere had been cited as either closed or not suitable for some sporting associations to allow match play.
14. People have a right to question and debate Council policy, but on this occasion the ongoing character assassination goes beyond the pale. I had thought that the finding of the independent umpire would be enough to put this issue to bed, however, I was mistaken. Some posters to this blogsite will clearly create a narrative to suit their purposes without regard for findings such as these. If you wish mere friendship to be the test of Councillor conflicts, elect Councillors with no connection the Glen Eira community.
15. I err on the side of maximising the use of our parks. This requires a balance between encouraging general use of the sporting grounds and protecting the grounds for those clubs who provide an outlet for so many in the community to engage in competitive sport. My gut feeling is that the current balance is appropriate.

*see for example – Glen Eira and Planning: Always the Odd Man Out – so called development levy compares a Developer Contributions Plan Overlay at Glen Eira with other Councils’ Public Open Space Contribution. NB: Glen Eira’s Public Open Space Contribution Schedule is contained in the same location as the comparison Councils, Schedule to Clause 52.01.

**There has been a highly selective comparison of planning outcomes outside of Glen Eira. There is a suggestion that part of the reason Glen Eira is developing the way it is is due to a lack of fight at VCAT. I do not believe any metropolitan Council is immune to losing arguments at VCAT about appropriate built form. Glen Eira sends representatives it believes can best represent the Council’s position, there are no guaranteed results. Similar scale developments have recently been heard in http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/vic/VCAT/2010/1454.html and http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/vic/VCAT/2010/1526.html.

Several years ago the Victorian Local Governance Association (VLGA) produced a publication entitled ‘The Role of the Mayor: A VLGA Checklist.’ Listed below are some of the qualities considered vital in those individuals undertaking the role of Mayor.

 We ask any interested reader to assess Tang against these criteria – remembering of course that he is now in his SECOND term as Mayor, and has previously been Deputy Mayor. Please provide a grading of 0 to 5 against any (or all) of the following, or if preferred, an overall grade. 

Governance

• to provide a source of leadership for Council and Community
• to provide a symbol of democracy to the community
• to lead, inspire and support the team of elected Councillors
• to be a source of inspiration for Council staff and the community
• to ensure effective communication and respectful relationships among Councillors
• to ensure effective communication and respectful relationships between Councillors and Administration
• to ensure there is effective communication between Council and the CEO in pursuit of Council’s goals
• to promote the interests of the local government and the community
• to maintain political stability and community credibility of Council
• to generate community cohesion and inclusiveness
• to model high standards of behaviour and practice
• to project values and standards into the community
• to govern for all members of the community
• to articulate collective aspirations of the community and promote collective endeavour
• to defend the interests of the community and the local government of the community  

Chair of Council

• to preside efficiently, firmly and fairly over Council meetings
• to promote high standards of democratic governance and internal governance
• to guide meetings to ensure respectful conduct at all times
• to facilitate participation and inclusion of all Councillors
• to exercise the casting vote where a Council vote is tied  

Supporting the Community  

• to advocate on behalf of community programs, needs and wellbeing
• to attend community functions on a fair and equitable basis
• to be knowledgeable about community programs and activities
• to promote community development
• to strengthen community governance and enterprise
• to strengthen communities against external threats 

As of 1.40pm on Thursday afternoon, our post revealing the shenanigans over ‘(un)authorised sporting activities’ and council’s failure to act for years and years, has now received the most correspondence and views in our short history. So in response to this public outcry we again put up those questions which must be answered:

We ask, and demand answers to:

1. What role have both Lipshutz and Tang played in this whole affair?
2. What role has the administration played in not enforcing the law?
3. Who makes decisions on policy in this council?
4. Where is the ‘transparency’ that the Municipal Inspector demanded? Why are decisions continually made behind closed doors?
5. Why was Lobo’s ‘request for a report’ defeated 8 to 1? Who is hiding what?
6. Does this council believe that through its non-action that it is serving the principles of ‘equal justice’ to all?

PS: One tiny update: As of 1.58 pm our stats for September read: 7, 348 hits.

Below are two items from this week’s Caulfield and Moorabbin Leader newspapers. Readers are urged to compare and contrast the comments by the Bayside councillor versus the comments by Lipshutz. Draw your own conclusions.

 Church plan cut to size
Fears remain high for impact on area

SCALING back a ‘‘ monstrous’’ development in Elsternwick has done little to quell residents’ fears of traffic and congestion chaos.

Glen Eira councillors voted to allow Contour Consultants to develop t he site at 233-247 Glenhuntly Rd and the historic church at 12 Ripon Grove.

The original plan for a three-to 10-storey building with seven shops and 130 apartments was reduced to eight storeys and 95 apartments at last Tuesday’s council meeting.

Plans to convert the church into 21 apartments were reduced to 18.

Elsternwick resident Kirsten Wright said she was disappointed.

‘‘It’s still too high,’’ Ms Wright said. ‘‘It will still dominate the area and the impact on traffic and public transport will still be huge.’’ The plans have drawn 80 objections and 20 letters of support, while they have been dubbed a ‘‘planning fiasco’’ in an online community forum, Glen Eira Debates.

Many residents also fear overcrowding, loss of privacy, and the building blocking views and sunlight (‘‘Living in high anxiety,’’ Leader, September 6). Mayor Steven Tang and Cr Oscar Lobo voted against the amendment, both wanting to reduce the building’s height further.

Cr Michael Lipshutz said the State Government had indicated Elsternwick was a high diversity housing area, with its proximity to public transport.

‘‘ Having council reject it or knock it back will no doubt create clapping in the public gallery,’’ he said.

‘‘But they’ll not be happy when VCAT comes along and says take it as it was.’’

Contour Consultants did not respond to our calls before deadline.

********************************************************************************************

‘Biggest ever’ battle hots up

BAYSIDE Council will spend up to $100,000 fighting a proposal for a massive development on Cheltenham’s border at the state planning tribunal. Around 120 residents packed the council chambers last Tuesday to oppose the area’s biggest-ever proposed development. The plan to build nearly 500 dwellings, with 900 car spaces, a medical centre, and serviced hotel on a five-block Bay Rd site attracted 1103 objections and one letter of support.

Developer Magnus Floden took the application to the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal after the council did not make a decision within the prescribed time.

Councillor Alex del Porto said the application’s huge size, complexity and number of objections made it virtually impossible to process within the allocated 60 days. Councillor James Long said the council needed to fight the $200 million-plus plan with all its might. ‘‘(The developers’) legal counsel will fight this as if it was a war because profit is the motive,’’ he said.

Developer Mr Floden did not return the Leader’s phone calls.

We’ve decided to embark on an occasional series – a performance appraisal of each councillor. We believe that the community deserves some feedback as to how each individual is doing and whether those we voted for are in actual fact fulfilling their obligations to the community. As always we invite comments as to the accuracy (or inaccuracy) of our evaluation. First cab off the rank is Lipshutz.

Hubris: Lipshutz takes the honours of being the only councillor who is prepared to publically insult, demean, and attack other councillors and/or members of the public. There are numerous instances, including we’re informed, Tuesday night’s meeting where he described a comment by Cr. Lobo as ‘nonsense’ followed by another more vitriolic serve later on in the night. Then there’s also some bitter, past attacks on Whiteside, Mary Walsh, and who knows how many others. Perhaps we should remind readers that in Greek tragedy the meaning of hubris is: “an excess of ambition, pride, etc, ultimately causing the transgressor’s ruin.”

Community representation: over the years on planning issues, Lipshutz has been a staunch supporter of the mantra ‘it could have been a lot worse’. That is: we’re screwed by VCAT, the State government, so only we know best how to protect you people. We’ll allow 8 storeys instead of 10!!! More alarming however, has been the repeated stabs at members of the community who have had the persistence, courage, and passion to object to inappropriate developments at VCAT.  Instead of supporting such endeavours, Lipshutz has instead castigated objectors, claiming that their intervention has only made matters worse. As a lawyer, this stance is highly suspect. We would like to point out to readers, the following statement by Alan Goldberg, QC: “it is a fundamental principle of a democratic society that citizen with complaints, particularly against government, should have the right and opportunity of recourse to the courts and tribunals established to resolve their disputes without pressure being brought upon them to refrain from having recourse to the judicial process”.  From past comments it would appear that Lipshutz has forgotten this fundamental tenet of our system.

At council meetings, Lipshutz (and other councillors) readily avail themselves of their supposed ‘right’ under Councillors ‘Right of Reply’. Some councillors use this agenda item to attack members of the public, without giving those members of the public their own right of reply. Lipshutz, who is a lawyer, would know that this could never happen in a real court of law, where both parties have equal rights, and where unbiased Judges enforce those rights.  At present it appears that Glen Eira has one law for councillors, and another (inferior) law for the public.  Perhaps  the lawyers on council should take a refresher course on jurisprudence and the law of torts?

What is your mark out of ten for Lipshutz?