GE Governance
Archived Posts from this Category
September 23, 2014
Arrived At A Street Near You!
Posted by gleneira under Councillor Performance, GE Consultation/Communication, GE Governance, GE Planning, GE Service Performance[8] Comments
September 21, 2014
Why They Can’t Be Trusted!
Posted by gleneira under Councillor Performance, GE Council Meeting(s), GE Governance, GE Open Space, GE Planning, GE Service Performance[19] Comments
Please read the following extracts from Item 9.9 of the current agenda (open space levies) very, very carefully. We believe that it shows in spades:
- The total incompetence of this council, and
- Why they simply cannot be trusted
Continuation of the policy of 25 June 2013 could potentially undermine Amendment C120 in so far as it directs the expenditure of all funds on the provision and capital works improvements to new open space rather than also improving existing open space which will be used by the future population. Councillors have received an independent briefing in relation to this advice.
And the ‘recommendation’ –
Abandons the policy introduced before the 2014 Open Space Strategy entitled ‘Use of Public Open Spaces Contributions Policy’ dated 25 June 2013.
In case people have forgotten what this council policy promised we reiterate –
Council will only spend Public Open Space contributions it receives after 1 July 2013 to acquire and improve land to serve as additional public open space.1 (including the former Glen Huntly Reservoir)
Council will not spend Public Open Space contributions it receives after 1 July 2013 to improve land which is already public open space. (25th June, 2013)
With much fanfare, beating of the chest, and promise after promise, March 18th 2014 saw the following resolution (and promise) repeated –
Crs Pilling/Lipshutz
That Council;
- Delete the last sentence in section 8.3B of the Strategy “Funds will also need to held for upgrades to existing open space”.
- Adopt the Glen Eira Open Space Strategy.
- Confirm the existing Policy adopted on 25 June 2013 that “Council will only spend Public Open Space contributions to acquire and improve land to serve as additional public open space”.
So what does all this mean?
- You create a strategy, an amendment, and a policy and promise the earth only to discover innumerable errors later on! So instead of amending the strategy and policy, the solution is to renege on the promise made to residents!
- That the old system will prevail and that instead of using the accumulated levies exclusviely for the ACQUISITION OF NEW OPEN SPACE, council will redirect this money into more concrete plinths, more pavilion redevelopments and given their past record, a minimum of new open space. Note that only 2 house blocks in Packer Park have been added to open space in the last 14 years – and that occurred because of the huge public outcry. Council’s first option was to sell the bowling green for residential development!
- The total incompetence of those responsible for overseeing the open space strategy and the drafting of the amendment. How many more errors will be picked up after the fact before someone is held to account?
- Council resolutions, policies, strategies are all totally meaningless. Promises are made and then broken willy nilly.
- All credibility and faith in the competence of this council is shot to pieces.
September 19, 2014
The Great Unwashed Of Bentleigh, Carnegie……
Posted by gleneira under Councillor Performance, GE Council Meeting(s), GE Governance, GE Planning, GE Service Performance[13] Comments
We are becoming increasingly concerned over what, to all intents and purposes, appears to be the social divide that is occurring within the municipality. Whilst Bentleigh, Carnegie, and other areas are allowed to go to the dogs, certain areas appear to have the ‘protected species’ assigned to them – many being in Camden Ward!
The latest agenda features 2 applications that would seem to endorse this view. One is for a 5 storey building of 3 shops and 57 dwelllings in Neerim Road, Carnegie. It is zoned Mixed Use (ie no height limits) and located in the Murrumbeena Neighbourhood Centre. Officers recommended a permit and the waiving of 4 visitor car parking spots.
The second application is Hawthorn Road, North Caulfield. It is zoned Commercial (again no height limits) and is seeking a permit for 6 storeys, shops and 40 dwellings. Both applications are surrounded by other Commercial zones and the General Residential Zone. Yet, officers decided to reject this second application outright and to pass the Neerim Road one.
It should also be borne in mind that council’s approach is often to chop off one floor and a handful of apartments and hence grant approval. This hasn’t been done for the Hawthorn Road application. So whilst the application seems to meet all the planning scheme requirements in terms of zoning, height, and even ‘mass’ it doesn’t get the nod. Instead we find some remarkable statements that are applied to one site, which didn’t enter council’s consciousness on applications in other areas. For example: council now appears worried about setting a precedent! They are also concerned about drainage, when countless applications are passed in Carnegie resulting in basement car park flooding – and this is when this report contains an engineering recommendation that the developer pay for extra drainage. No such additions have appeared in the countless officer reports for these other areas!
Thus we have to ask:
- Are parts of Glen Eira being allowed to become part of the ‘great unwashed’?
- Is Camden Ward being accorded ‘privileges’ that other areas aren’t? If so, why?
Finally, we’ve uploaded the two zoning maps for these applications and ask residents to ponder the ‘differences’ which results in one application being granted a permit and the other one a rejection by planners. We also wish to state that we are NOT endorsing either application. We make no comment on the quality of the proposed plans. We are simply concentrating on the officer comments and the resulting recommendations.
September 18, 2014
Southwick: Today’s Hansard
Posted by gleneira under Caulfield Racecourse/C60, Councillor Performance, GE Governance, GE Open Space, GE Service Performance[8] Comments
Caulfield Racecourse Reserve
Mr SOUTHWICK (Caulfield)—The matter I raise is for the Minister for Environment and Climate Change, and the action I seek is that the minister adopt the recommendations outlined in the Victorian Auditor-General’s Office report entitled Management and Oversight of the Caulfield Racecourse Reserve.
The report outlines that the trust has not been an effective manager of the reserve and that insufficient attention has been paid to fulfilling the potential for community use of this reserve.
It is important to mention that Caulfield Racecourse is one of most prestigious racecourses in Australia. It brings significant revenue into the state through racing and events. It hosts significant racing events, including the Caulfield Cup and the Caulfield Guineas, and was a training home of the legendary Black Caviar. In addition to a racecourse, the 1949 Crown grant designated the land as being for two other purposes: for public recreation and as a park. It would be fair to say that, despite the efforts of many, the trust has failed to deliver on the recreation and open space benefits to our community, which the report highlights. Without elaborating on the failure by the Labor government to properly administer land swaps and to take up recommendations from previous reviews, we are now in a great position to finally implement a management plan by taking up these recommendation to the benefit of both racing and community use.
Members would have heard me advocate in this place for more community use of the 54 hectares of land. We have seen racecourses, such as Happy Valley Racecourse, also having strong sporting facilities and golf courses in the middle of their reserves. We are perfectly placed to do a similar thing at Caulfield. I place on the record acknowledgement of the efforts of the current Melbourne Racing Club administration, which has demonstrated a willingness to adopt a plan that incorporates better public use of the facility. In 2012 I worked with the club and the City of Glen Eira to deliver a $1.8 million upgrade of the centre, including barbecue and jogging facilities. That project was funded by the racing club to encourage community use of the reserve.
Despite having done all of that, as we have known and as this report highlights, the community does not fully utilise this space because it is hard to get to. Caulfield Racecourse Reserve is desperately calling out for an active space plan to bring people into the centre of the reserve. We could do this through proper community consultation, which this report also suggests. I thank the minister and the current Department of Environment and Primary Industries administration for their commitment to fixing the inherent problems in managing this reserve and the work they have done so far with the trust.
The recommendations of the report include more rigorous oversight of the Caulfield Racecourse Reserve; adopting a governance framework consistent with contemporary standards, determining the trust’s responsibilities, powers and obligations; a community engagement strategy that can identify the needs and will ultimately result in a land management strategic plan that contains a clear and measurable outcome for use of Crown land consistent with the grant; and the exploration of alternative management arrangements for the reserve so it can be better placed to meet the needs of the racing and local community into the future.
Ultimately we are looking for the best outcome for all—the best outcome for residents and the community while keeping in mind that it is a racecourse.
I call on the minister to adopt all of these recommendations in this report. This is a once in a lifetime opportunity to get things right in this unique and valuable space known as the Caulfield Racecourse Reserve. I will give the community my undertaking to continue to fight for better community benefit in this great space.
September 11, 2014
Our Councillors At Work – #2
Posted by gleneira under Councillor Performance, GE Governance, GE Planning, GE Service Performance[13] Comments
We’ve received a comment from a resident concerning the Penang Street application and think it deserves to be put up as a post for 2 reasons:
- So that residents may adjudge for themselves the kind of ‘representation’ they get from their elected members
- The total impotence of these councillors and the continual spin that is perpetrated – ie. continually passing the buck onto vcat, the state government, etc. Utter hogwash we say. It is councillors who accepted the new zones; it is councillors who have the power to alter it and it is councillors in the end who are continually failing their constituency in so many areas.
Here’s the comment.
Well, the mayor came to Penang Street to listen ( I use the term loosely) to residents’ concerns about the development at 2-4 Penang Street. He clearly has not read or has chosen to ignore this decision. Made it very clear that traffic considerations would not be taken into account. Just one in a long list of things he said were not Councils’ concern or responsibility (eg drainage which he admitted has not been upgraded to cope with another 2011 incident). Completely dismissive of any prospect of revisiting or even tweaking the current scheme to provide additional protection for residential amenity. Said at least three times that we should keep “the politicians” (ie state representatives and candidates) out of it, notwithstanding that he simultaneously played the powerless Council card (ie it is all the state government’s planning scheme). I have read some of the material on here and thought it must be an exaggeration. But we got the same routine I have read here about consultation in 2002 and 2010, outcomes could have been worse if had consulted, how council has protected us all from unlimited height, blah, blah. Just as well he has resigned from the Greens, there must be a lot of grassroots members regretting campaigning on his behalf. Riding a push bike to the meeting really isn’t enough. Very disappointed by it all – not that I expected his to agree – but his complete dismissiveness of the concerns of those who put him in power was very disheartening.
PS: The Planning Scheme MUST be reviewed every 4 years, and within one year of the acceptance of the Council Plan. The Glen Eira Planning Scheme was last reviewed in 2010, and the Council Plan was last voted on at the Council Meeting of 10th June 2014. Previously it has been voted on at the 11th June 2013 meeting. Throughout this period, no planning review has been undertaken in the public limelight; no documents tabled as to findings of any such (internal) review, and certainly no public consultation.
The consistent and bogus claim by Council that residents were very well informed as to housing policy (ie minimal change and housing diversity) and that ‘extensive consultation’ took place in 2010 is literally laughable. We’ve uploaded here the euphemistically entitled ‘Discussion Paper’ on the Planning Scheme Review of 2010. Readers need to ask themselves several basic questions:
- To what extent does this document actually INFORM residents?
- To what extend does this document whitewash all the central concerns (ie the totally biased representation of Structure Plans)
- Please note the list of ‘policies’ and it should be borne in mind that many of these ‘policies’ date back to neanderthal times and have not been ‘reviewed’ much less updated!
September 11, 2014
Our Councillors At Work!
Posted by gleneira under Councillor Performance, GE Governance[2] Comments
For the past 5 or 6 years residents have made it abundantly clear that their top priorities and dissatisfaction with council, as stated in the annual Community Satisfaction Surveys, revolve around three basic issues –
- Planning
- Traffic/parking
- Consultation
Without a Notice of Motion, the only way to get something onto the agenda is via a Request for a Report. So, how industrious, relevant, and conscientious have our elected representatives been in making sure that the above 3 issues are addressed and improvements made?
We’ve gone through this year’s listing of all Requests for Reports and find that of the 18 voted upon (with one being rejected) a mere 1 or 2 could in any way be seen as addressing the issues that residents have nominated as their priority. Mind you, this is not to say that we are against social housing, gay rights, etc. We simply cannot believe that councillors see these as the most important issues which continue to confront the municipality. So far this year, we’ve had reports on foxes and other vermin, sister cities overseas, and so forth. Really earth shattering issues! Even when something comes up that could be seen as important (such as minimum sizes for apartments) the officers’ reports invariably recommend a ‘do nothing’ approach and this is blithely accepted by councillors!
Surely it is time that councillors turned their minds to actually serving the community and demanding action on all those things they were elected to achieve instead of either playing politics and bagging Labor or the Libs, or actually doing something that will redress the inequities of the planning system and the chaos that is parking and traffic. When development applications take 5 minutes to decide, and discussion on requests for reports drag on interminably because of cheap point scoring, then there is something drastically wrong.
Below is a list of the reports voted upon – in no particular order. Combined, these surely make for some pathetic reading!
Federal Auditor-General Investigation
Crs Delahunty/Lobo
That the Glen Eira City Council file of relevant correspondence regarding the ‘Safer Streets Program’ be forwarded to the Federal Auditor-General Ian McPhee to assist his review.
Crs Okotel/Hyams
That a report is prepared that provides information on how Council supports community groups including information on:
- programs that encourage and strengthen existing community groups.
- approaches to encourage community groups to respond to emerging community interests and needs.”
Crs Lobo/Okotel
That a report be prepared on what help is available in Glen Eira to support and help those in our community suffering from alcohol and drug addictions.
Crs Delahunty/Lobo
That a report be prepared detailing the methods that other Victorian Councils, particularly the Greater Geelong City Council have sought to support and advocate for marriage equality for Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, Transgender and Intersex (GLBTI) people and how the City of Glen Eira may seek to do the same for the GLBTI people in our community.
Crs Hyams/Lipshutz
That a report be prepared on the likely effects on Glen Eira of rate rises being capped at the CPI, as the State Opposition has announced it intends to do should it win government.
Crs Magee/Hyams
That a report be prepared on:
(1) The possibility of Council acquiring the vacant land at 846-848 Centre Road, Bentleigh East directly adjacent to the Centre Road Kindergarten.
(2) The potential impact to families in Glen Eira of a change in funding of Kindergarten hours in the recently released Abbott budget.
(3) The projected need for Kindergarten places in Glen Eira in the next 10 years including an estimate of which areas of the municipality this need will fall in.
(4) An assessment of potential expansion sites within the municipality and the potential to forward plan for these expansions.
Crs Sounness/Delahunty
That a report be prepared on the mechanisms available to Council to improve the provision of affordable and accessible social housing.
Crs Lipshutz/Hyams
That a report be prepared on the benefits of whatsoever kind (if any) in establishing and maintain sister city relationships. The report should identify any obligations and costs that may be incurred by the Glen Eira City Council in establishing and maintaining such relationships.
Crs Lobo/Sounness
That a report be prepared on the potential to establish a sister city relationship with a city in mainland China given that in the Indian/Pacific Century Australia sits astride both the Indian and Pacific Oceans and given that China is a major importer of Australian primary products compared to any other countries. (motion lost)
Crs Okotel/Lipshutz
That a report be prepared addressing;
- The impact of violence against women upon the community in Glen Eira, and
- How Council can improve its responses to addressing violence against women.
Crs Delahunty/Magee
That a report be prepared to council with information on the proposed privatisation of the Alfred Health provided aged care facilities in Caulfield. The report to specifically note the number of public beds currently provided by the state funded facilities and the potential impact on the Council’s aged care facilities of the privatisation.
Crs Sounness/Hyams
That the City of Glen Eira request the Executive of the Metropolitan Transport Forum (MTF) to reverse it’s decision to exclude the Victorian Greens from participating in the Super Forum at the Melbourne Town Hall on 14 August 2014.
Crs Sounness/Okotel
That a report be prepared on the statistics and trends in observed off leash dog walking occurring outside declared dog off leash walking areas.
Crs Okotel/Esakoff
That a report be prepared detailing:
(a) What measures Council takes to address dumped rubbish in “hot spots” within high density areas; and
(b) What measures Council can take to address dumped rubbish more efficiently and effectively in existing and new anticipated hot spot areas including additional costs associated with these measures if any.
Crs Okotel/Magee
That a report be prepared that explores:
(a) Minimum floor space requirements for dwellings in other jurisdictions including internationally and what benefit or detriment is created by these requirements;
(b) How minimum floor space requirements could be beneficial for Glen Eira in the case that such requirements are adopted by the Victorian state; and
(c) How Glen Eira Council could advocate for state-wide minimum floor space requirements such as through a planning amendment.
(d) The report by the City of Melbourne on its Unit developments and liveability as it may apply to the City of Glen Eira.
Crs Delahunty/Lobo
That a report be prepared to determine what role if any the Valuer General could play in determining the land valuation for the Crown Land at Caulfield Racecourse Reserve currently leased to the Melbourne Racing Club. I request that the report contain any previous information or correspondence received by Council or by individual Councillors if known, from the Valuer General about the subject land. I request that the report advise on the methods to engage the Valuer General, the Trustees, the State Government and the MRC so that further lease negotiations are held in full knowledge of the value of the land. The report be presented to the next Council Meeting.
Crs Hyams/Magee
That a report be prepared on the extent to which vermin, including foxes and Indian Myna birds, are causing problems in Glen Eira and what Council can do to deal with these problems.
Cr Sounness/Okotel
That a request be prepared on the general health of the aboreal environment in Glen Eira to discuss the general health of park trees the possible need for tree irrigation or watering practices and the strategic implications of the long term climate projection made by the Bureau of Meteorology.
September 9, 2014
Coming To A Street Near You – #2
Posted by gleneira under Councillor Performance, GE Governance, GE Planning, GE Service Performance[11] Comments
We urge all residents to have a very close look at the zoning map presented below.
It illustrates completely the utter incompetence, indifference, and shoddy planning processes that exemplify this administration and its councillors – the latter who are supposed to set policy, oversee strategic direction and most importantly, represent their constituents when they make decisions. Instead, residents are now paying the price for such shoddy planning and the egos that were so determined to be first cab off the rank when it came to introducing the new zones – without consultation we repeat!
The map focuses on the McKinnon Neighbourhood Centre. We would like residents to ponder the following and then ask the creators of this scheme, and especially the Mayor of the time (Hyams) who was party to the secret ‘negotiations’, to justify and answer the following:
- The total inconsistency. If promimity to railway stations is the stated criteria, then why are some streets (ie Hawthorn Grove) zoned minimal change when they are one street away from rail, and other streets that are up to four blocks away are zoned GRZ?
- If the argument is that there is a nearby park, then surely it would have made more sense that medium/higher density dwellings go into areas that are served by open space given the planning scheme’s failure to cater for open space requirements in the GRZ and RGZ schedules and council’s appalling record in acquiring open space?
- How was this zoning drawn up? Is it concentric, rectangular, or more of a pin the tail on the donkey exercise? Did any officer, or councillor ever walk along these streets and get a ‘feel’ for the neighbourhood? Why can one side of a very, very narrow street (Murrary Road) be designated as minimal change and the opposite side of the street deemed to be general residential zone?
- Why should the 12th house in a street be earmarked as suitable for 3 storey development and the 13th house be plonked into neighbourhood residential zone?
- Why can other councils undertake exhaustive reviews of their Housing Strategies PRIOR to introducing their zones and Glen Eira hasn’t touched theirs since 2000?
- How can Hyams and others keep repeating the inane mantra that there was no consultation because the outcomes would have been worse! This argument alone is the most damning indictment of all councillors and the administration. Not only does it reek of arrogance but displays a total disdain for all aspects of democratic process and transparency.
September 8, 2014
Elections & Penang Street!
Posted by gleneira under Councillor Performance, GE Governance, GE Planning, GE Service Performance[14] Comments
Liberal MP accused of breaking party ranks over ‘inappropriate’ development
MP Elizabeth Miller says she is merely supporting her local constituents. Photo: Michael Clayton-Jones
A Liberal MP has been accused of breaking party ranks after she opposed a proposed development that sits within new state government residential zones.
Bentleigh MP Elizabeth Miller wrote to Glen Eira City Council on behalf of residents last month to raise concerns about a three-storey block of units planned for a quiet residential street in McKinnon.
She labelled the proposed 24-unit development on Penang Street “inappropriate”, saying it would “drastically alter the streetscape” and its height was a concern.
“It will also drastically change the local demographic and cause a shift away from a family-friendly area to apartment-style living,” she said in her planning objection,
“I urge you to consider protecting this family-friendly neighbourhood.”
Glen Eira was the first municipality to implement the new residential zones, which the government says are designed to create clarity about where development should take place and which areas are protected.
About 30 local residents have lodged objections, including some at a nearby retirement village who fear it will exacerbate traffic congestion and make it harder to get around the neighbourhood.
Ms Miller said last August that the changes would protect residents’ backyards and would be “welcomed by the many families who’ve spoken to me about protecting local streetscapes”.
Former premier Ted Baillieu’s mother-in-law Joan Jubb, who has a billboard spruiking Labor candidate for Bentleigh Nick Staikos in her front yard, lives on the same street as the proposed development and fears it will destroy local amenity and create traffic issues.
Ms Jubb blames the proposed development on the new zones, which allow a maximum building height of three storeys or 10.5 metres in her street.
“The planning zones have allowed people to develop such a monstrosity,” she said.
Robyn Morgan, who lives next door to the proposed units, is spearheading a community campaign against the development, which, if approved, will demolish two single-storey weatherboard houses from the 1920s.
She said Ms Miller’s objection contradicted the Liberal Party’s own policy.
“It’s inappropriate for a small residential street. If we allows this sort of development to go ahead, it will destroy local neighbourhoods. We will lose all our afternoon sun,” Ms Morgan said.
Opposition planning spokesman Brian Tee said the new zones were “taking a wrecking ball” to suburbs. He said Ms Miller had broken party ranks by criticising a development that had been put forward in compliance with the new zones. “Denis Napthine should take the advice of his own MPs, who are breaking ranks to end this destruction.”
Ms Miller denied she had defied the party line. She said she had been overwhelmed with residents opposed to the development and had simply taken up their concerns with the council.
“I believe residents’ concerns are warranted, so I have written to council. It’s an inappropriate development for the area,” she said.
She said she was happy with the new residential zones.
Planning Minister Matthew Guy said the new zones had given residents greater protection against inappropriate developments. He said under the previous system, the area had no mandatory height limits. “You could put a 50-storey building in the previous zone.”
Mr Guy said Ms Miller was being a good local member by lodging the objection and the new zones were working well.
September 4, 2014
Coming To A Street Near You!
Posted by gleneira under Councillor Performance, GE Council Meeting(s), GE Governance, GE Planning, GE Service Performance[29] Comments
If you happen to live in a street that is now zoned as Residential Growth Zone or General Residential Zone, then you might consider doing what countless Glen Eira residents have already started doing – getting the hell out of the municipality before the area really goes to the dogs and making some money in the process. We now know of 6 instances where owners are getting together and selling their properties as one lot. This trend will no doubt continue – especially when people start realising that their streets and their neighbourhoods are about to be over-run with inappropriate development thanks to Council’s welcome arms approach to development and their unwillingness to undertake current and proper strategic planning.
A perfect example of the insanity of this planning scheme can be seen by what is happening in Penang St. McKinnon which has now inconceivably been given the green light for 3 storey developments. Two properties at 2 and 4 Penang St were bought by the same developer and there is now an application for a 3 storey, 24 apartment, and of course, a reduction in visitor car parking. The combined land equals roughly 1360 square metres. However, that’s not the end of the stor(e)y.
Penang is a quiet residential street consisting of only 9 dwellings and several which front Jasper Road. Many of these nine dwellings are single storeys and the double storeys add their own character to the street as the photos below will show. We cannot see any rhyme or reason why such as street has been placed in this zone, in contrast to say Wattle Avenue which has been left as minimal change, yet consists of several scruffy looking blocks of flats and units. As one commentator on this site has asked – no one from council could possibly be living in Wattle Avenue could they? In terms of another 24 apartments and growth in the surrounding streets, then Penang is the perfect setting for the latest rat run as drivers try to avoid the lights at the corner of Jasper and Mckinnon. Needless to say, there is no parking plan overlay for this Neighbourhood Centre!
To make matters worse, the houses at 2 and 4 Penang St. are ‘classical’ and with their demolition this will now create the precedent for more triple storeys in the street and surrounding areas. Here’s what will be lost and replaced with box like dwellings no doubt – the slums of the future!
Some of the other houses in the street look like this!
We remind readers that Council has:
- Introduced these zones in secret & without consultation
- Council has never stated what is the optimum population for Glen Eira
- No Housing Strategy review has been done since the late 1990’s
- A one size fits all approach based on antiquated data is unacceptable.
We urge all readers to inform themselves of what zoning they fall under and to protest and protest at whatever application comes in that they believe will threaten their amenity, lifestyle and environment. Remember, amendments may be made, but they can also be tossed out – especially with a new set of councillors who actually give a damn about what’s happening to neighbourhoods all through the municipality!
September 3, 2014
Getting Our Priorities Right!
Posted by gleneira under Councillor Performance, GE Council Meeting(s), GE Governance, GE Planning, GE Service Performance[6] Comments
When one considers that planning applications have the power to impact dramatically on people’s lives, the least that councillors could do is to actually consider and debate the merits of the case. Instead, what invariably happens in chamber is that councillors merely regurgitate the officer’s reports (verbatim at times), possibly make some minor amendments and the whole matter, from start to finish, takes approximately 5 minutes – if even that long! People’s lives, their amenity, surely deserve more than 5 minutes of weasel words?
By way of contrast, slapping themselves on the back about the moving of the Toy Library to a council owned building takes around 12 minutes and ten years of community pleading! Requests for reports, turn into marathons of political grandstanding, constant contradictions, and a focus on ‘feel good’ issues that many would argue are beyond council’s control. These requests take close to half an hour of argey bargey and political point-scoring.
Of course no information is provided to residents on:
- What happened at the VCAT ‘mediation’ over the Caulfield Village Development
- No explanation as to why the Duncan Mackinnon pavilion will not be completed until half way through next year
- No insight into whether the Duncan Mackinnon pavilion is over budget
In short, all the important issues, are downplayed, given short shrift, or the code of silence descends. That is the incontrovertible message that these councillors send to residents. The priority for this Council and its councillors is to continually slap themselves on the back and state again and again how wonderful they are.
PS: The triple block of land in McKinnon Road (1112 square metres and zoned GRZ) was sold today for $3.61 million! At that price, residents can look forward to plenty more chicken coops so that the developer can recoup his outlay!
Glen Eira Debates 