GE Service Performance

Archived Posts from this Category

January 13, 2011

Time Stands Still in Glen Eira

Posted by gleneira under GE Governance, GE Kindergartens/Childcare, GE Planning, GE Service Performance
[3] Comments 

We thought it would be instructive to see how Glen Eira may have changed over the years – to discover whether processes, services, and governance practices have actually improved in the past 6 years. Our guide has been public and councillor questions dating mainly from 2004. We conclude that basically residents have the same concerns today as they did six years ago – childcare, aged care, openness and transparency, effective communication/consultation and planning issues. Reading these questions it is obvious that nothing much has changed in Glen Eira – except that public questions are no longer taken on notice. The quality of current answers however is another issue!! These questions provide a sad commentary on how little has actually been achieved.

“As Council has made a profit from selling of aged care facilities within the City and not actually increased places in the City, I ask what is being done with the profit and further what is being done to seek government funding in order to increase aged care facilities in the City?” (26th May, 2003)

“What are Council’s public policy objectives for child care and how do they achieve them?”(3rd May, 2004)

“The treatment of Childcare under the State Government’s new competitive neutrality policy requires the implementation of a public interest test prior to the application of CN pricing because of the inherent public policy issues associated with childcare.Can Council please explain why it has failed to undertake a public interest test prior to applying CN pricing policies to childcare services?” (3rd May, 2004) 

Cr Sapir referred to a public interest test and asked if one had been carried out and if so to what degree. She further asked; “what consultation process did Council take to advise parents that there was a proposed fee increase”? (24th May, 2004) 

“Why Minutes of Council Meetings are not available for distribution on request at the Caulfield Library? Should not that be part of standard policy of engagement of the community? Ready availability of such documents should add to the proper governance of the Council?” (24th May, 2004) 

“Can you please advise why did the Council cut down several 25 to 30 metre high trees on the corner of Jasmine and Birch without consultation with the near byresidents?” (9th Feb, 2004) 

“Since the Glen Eira Council has decided to stop subsidizing childcare centres with ratepayer income in the next financial year, will Glen Eira ratepayers see a reduction in rates as a result?” (22nd March, 2004) 

“Re Council Statement of Financial Performance to 29 February. Can you please reveal the source or sources of the above budget revenue of $954,000 from ‘other’sources in above budget? Have our drillers struck oil?” (22nd March, 2004) 

“How does Council justify that public questions that were asked in March 2003 have received a response on 6 April 2004 advising that the questions do not conform with Council’s public question time procedure. Please provide appropriate and specific explanations as this does not comply with acceptable time frames to me as by now I have given up on getting adequate answers from Council.” (13th April, 2004) 

“Why won’t Council undertake a ‘Public Interest Test” on childcare to assess community response?” (15th June, 2004) 

“The Community Plan that was passed this evening is supposed to provide a plan for the community to use as a means of measuring Council’s performance up to 2010. The indicators for 2010 however need further clarification. Which 3 park masterplans are intended for development? What does Council mean by consulting with the University? What are the character amendments that are to be adopted?Which community centre is to be built? What about the 3rd community centre? What are the implications of keeping rates to at least 10% below our 7 Benchmark Councils? These are but a few questions that need to be answered in a Community Plan that purports to be a vision for the future?” (15th June, 2004) 

“We would be most grateful if a meeting could be arranged with relevant councillors and staff (prior to the release of second round offers scheduled for 27th August), in order to discuss the Council’s enrolment policy which fails to give priority to the children currently attending ‘3 year old kinder’ and who wish to continue on with their pre-school education at the same kinder the following year?” (16th August, 2004) 

“As Cr Erlich has observed the report to tonight’s meeting is interesting but unless a measure of input is used together with output, it is largely meaningless from the point of view of effectiveness. Will Council consider reporting the appropriate ‘INPUT’ as well as ‘output’ in future service reports?” (6th September, 2004) 

 “Will the Council apply its generous concessions given to tennis clubs to childcare centres and if not could it please explain why the council’s policy that services used by a minority of the community should be cost neutral and not subsidized by ratepayers, applies to childcare centres but not tennis clubs?” (27th September, 2004) 

“The Agenda papers for Council Meeetings have for some time included public questions and answers. I note that the Agenda papers have, for the last 2-3 meetings, not included Public Questions and Answers. Can Council explain why this is so? Is there anything preventing Council from continuing with this practice?”(8th November, 2004) 

“Of all C type Amendments proceeded with a statutory process:1. How many have used the full statutory process of 6 steps? 2. How many use only 2 steps? 3. How many used broad community consultation prior to step 1 of the statutory process? and 4. How many used a public discussion paper as part of broad community consultation prior to step 1 of the statutory process?” (29th November, 2004) 

“Will Council put the proceeds from sale of Council land toward purchase of alternative open space in Glen Eira, & that purpose only.” (29th November, 2004) 

“The Minister for Planning announced that Councils may apply for a number of interim height controls to provide for greater certainty for residents & developers. Will Council take up on this initiative?” (29th November, 2004)

 

November 17, 2010

Logic 101 Council Style

Posted by gleneira under GE Service Performance
[6] Comments 

Moorabbin Leader, Nov.17th 2010

Fury over attack in park

Residents say their concerns over Memorial Park safety after dark are ignored

 McKINNON residents are outraged a man was attacked and robbed in Memorial Park after their calls for lighting to be installed in the park were ignored. The 27-year-old Malaysian man was assaulted by a group of men while he was walking through the park, at the corner of Wattle Grove and McKinnon Rd, about 12.45am on Saturday, November 6. One man punched the victim in the face, and when he fell to the ground two other men began kicking and punching him before stealing his backpack. 

Embona Taskforce Sgt Andrew Collison said police did not believe the assault was racially motivated. But the incident has appalled residents, who say they have asked Glen Eira Council for years to put lights in the park to improve safety. The park’s complete darkness provided a ‘‘haven for scumbags’’ resident Annie Morrell said.

‘‘This attack could have been prevented,’’ Ms Morrell said. ‘‘I rang the council and asked them to do something about it and I was brushed off. It’s ludicrous. Someone will be attacked again.’’ Kate Deneiffe said she wrote to the council four years ago asking for lighting be installed at the park. But director of community relations Paul Burke said one reason the council did not install security lighting in parks was because it could ‘‘encourage the very antisocial behaviour we all try to discourage’’.

‘‘Council is working with the Caulfield police on this matter and we will have regard for any suggestions that they may have.’’

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

 Costly artificial grass cheaper to keep, says council

 GLEN Eira Council has taken the unusual step of laying hundreds of metres of artificial grass on an Ormond roadside median strip. The median strip, between Tucker and East Boundary roads, separates a service lane from busy North Rd. Similar strips on the west side of North Rd are filled with concrete.  

Director of community relations Paul Burke would not reveal the cost of installing the synthetic grass, but Mary McKay from Easy Turf Melbourne said most companies would charge $ 65-$ 80 a square metre. This meant the cost of the median strip turf could have run to tens of thousands of dollars. Mr Burke said the council installed the turf because the narrow strip posed a ‘‘significant safety risk’’ to workers mowing and maintaining real grass. ‘‘(This) meant traffic management controls had to be put in place each time the strip was maintained. ‘‘While these controls protect the safety of the men and women in the work area, they can be a cause of frustration to busy motorists.’’ Mr Burke said the synthetic grass would be cheaper to maintain than real grass and ‘‘a further positive outcome was grass clippings that used to end up in the stormwater network no longer do so’’. 

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

With this logic, we can assume:

  • Safety of staff is valued more highly than safety of residents
  • Spending millions on sports lighting is more important that lighting for safety
 

November 12, 2010

Where The Money Goes: Part 2

Posted by gleneira under GE Planning, GE Service Performance
[10] Comments 

A previous post reported that in the space of 4 years, Glen Eira Council had spent AT LEAST $16,781,000 on sporting grounds, and facilities. Over the top, we asked? Especially when other services appear not to be getting their slice of the pie!

Just to confirm our suspicions that such a high level of spending for one (minority) sector of the population is not all that common, we cite what the Kingston Council has put out as a media release. The release was in response to criticism made by cricket clubs as to the poor upkeep of grounds and poor planning. In addressing these allegation, Kingston CEO Nevins wrote:

“…Council spends in excess of $1 million a year on sportsground maintenance which includes ground renovations and upkeep; mowing; irrigation system maintenance; water for irrigating sporting fields; cricket wicket renewals; and oval top dressing.

Over the last four years Council has also undertaken capital works on pavilions, cricket nets and wickets totalling $2.56 million as well as spent $120,000 on warm season grass conversions. Over the last three years we have invested more than $170,000 in pavilion maintenance, $120,000 on water management at Doug Denyer Reserve and provided more than $30,000 in community grants to cricket clubs.”

Such figures pall into insignificance when compared with Glen Eira. Yet, Kingston has a greater population, greater ‘open space’, more teams, and more sports grounds. Are they that negligent, indifferent, poor managers, or is it simply that they have decided that budgets need to be equally shared between all sectors of their community?

 

November 11, 2010

Your Rates At Work!

Posted by gleneira under GE Service Performance
[2] Comments 

 

 

November 5, 2010

Where the Money Goes

Posted by gleneira under GE Service Performance
[9] Comments 

2006

Joyce Park –  $1,069,000

Princes Park Pavilion – $1,972,000

Caulfield Park – design – $258,000

Bricker Pavilion – $1,782,000

 2007

Marlborough St. Reserve – $235,000

Swimming pools manager – $260,000

Caulfield Pavilion – $3,833,000

Caulfield Landscaping – $1,773,000

Murrumbeena Reserve –   $539,000 

2008 – 2010

Princes Park – Sussex Rd. Carpark – $400,000

Sportsground Lighting – $1,500,000

Duncan McKinnon – $700,000

King George Reserve – $250,000

Koornang Park – $292,000

GESAC – water slides – $568,000

Packer Park – $450,000

Princes Park oval – $600,000

Victory Park Oval – $300,000

GRAND TOTAL  –    $16,781,000.

 

September 7, 2010

Too Many ‘Fat Cats’?

Posted by gleneira under GE Service Performance
[5] Comments 

In the 1998 Walsh report there is this comment:

“In total there are 11 positions at ‘Senior Officer’ level (defined in the Act as packages of more than $70,000 p.a.). Glen Eira’s five neighbouring councils have an average 20 ‘Senior Officer’ positions, one of them as high as 28.”

That was 12 years ago and the population of Glen Eira stood at roughly 118,000. Andrew Newton was Director of Corporate Management then and Jeff Akehurst was Director of City Development. Both have moved up! With Margaret Douglas’ sudden resignation, Newton became CEO. What impact has this had on Glen Eira?

We’ve done some research and discovered some fascinating facts and figures. Our sources are the 2006 census figures, and the 2008/9 Annual Reports from neighbouring, benchmarking Councils. The only variation is that the figure for senior staff for Port Phillip is even more current – ie. 30th June, 2010 – since they’ve already released their draft Annual Report.

The table we’ve subsequently drawn up reveals several major findings:

  • Glen Eira has the highest number of ‘fat cats’ sitting on over $200,000 p.a. compared to the figures released by the other councils. It also has 30 individuals sitting on over $100,00 p.a.

In a time of economic downturn, where most organisations have ‘rationalised’ their staff and wages, Glen Eira appears to have bucked this trend.

  Glen Eira Stonnington Boroondara Monash Kingston Bayside PortPhillip
Size(sq.k) 38.7 26 60 82 91 36 20.62
Pop. 123,000 90,000 153,000 172,000 133,000 94,000 97,000
Officers over $200,000 5 ZILCH ZILCH 1 ZILCH ZILCH 1 IN 2010

So, do we have too many ‘fat cats’? Are residents getting ‘value for money’? More on this in the coming days!

 

August 20, 2010

Seeking an Accountable Council

Posted by gleneira under GE Service Performance
Comments Off on Seeking an Accountable Council 

Annual and quarterly reports presented by Council are glowing endorsements of how well this council’s operations function. We are proudly told that phone calls are not only answered in nanoseconds, but that they are ‘resolved’ at first point of call. Wonderful stuff! What we’re not told is exactly how many satisfied customers are out there; nor how many of their issues are resolved to their complete satisfaction. Put simply, we and probably the majority of councillors in the majority of cases, never actually get to find out what residents might be complaining, or congratulating Council about.

We intend to resolve this question. Over the past month we have received a number of comments (not published) that can only be called ‘complaints’. They range from complaints about service delivery, to graffiti, to perceived waste of ratepayers money. We believe that the community has a right to know exactly what residents like and dislike and how well their concerns are being attended to. Hence we’ve decided to set up what we’ve called ‘Residents’ Corner’. A link is provided on the left hand side of the webpage under the heading of ‘Why We’re Here’. All that needs to be done is to click the link (‘Residents’ Corner’) and you may enter your complaint, praise, commentary – either anonymously if you so desire, or you may leave your name. We will then ensure that these comments are passed onto councillors. It then becomes their duty to ensure that not only are your issues seen to and fixed, but that the systems within which they operate are improved and accountable.

We no longer want to be told time and time again that residents are enraptured with how their money is spent. We want cold, hard, evidence that things can, and should be improved. So, we ask readers to alert their friends, neighbours, relatives and let us really know what you think about Glen Eira and its mandate to serve the people. ‘Residents’ Corner’ will thus be a public and accessible archive of Glen Eira’s failings and successes.

 

« Previous Page