Wednesday, September 28, 2011

Flood Policy- what policy?

Council's across Australia have policies to guide us mere mortals when it comes to building or buying homes.

Policies to make sure that we dont haplessly build our new home on a flood plain- or at least build it high enough out if the water when the next flood comes that we or our possesions dont get washed away and become more of a hazard for emergency services.

Sounds logical and protectionist- and after the Queensland flash flooding that took the lives of some, you would think that people would be more inclined to follow the rules that Government bring in.

NOT in SHOALHAVEN LAND: all you have to do here is hire a consultant ( I call them The Fixits), make a presentation to Council advisinfg that Councils well educated and professional staff are wrong, maybe make a few phone calls to Councillors to stake your claim and hey presto- the magic wand of elected Councillors waves a big tick over your application and policy be dammed.

This was the scenario at a recent Council meeting were an applicant sought to subdivide a block and build a house in the Moona Moona Creek catchment. The current flood guide advisies that flood waters will reach 700mm and if Council follows the guidelines put out by the State Government this should be revised to 1.5meters.

Some areas of flood prone land can be developed with the floor level designed to be above the maximum flood level- but in this case Councillors ignored the expected flood levels to allow the dwelling and subdivsion to go ahead at the current level.

This might suit the current owners but as time goes on and owners change and climate change consequences start to unravel the occupants of this soon to be constructed house will be asking the same questions as those involved in the Queensland Flood Enquiry- why on earth did the planning authority allow this house to be built here!

The elected Council led on this occasion by Councillors Andrew Guile and Greg Watson, continue to make decsions against the flood plain planning guidelines a legacy of poor planning will be felt all across the City.

Its one thing to apply Liberal policy and be the friend of all- but its another altogether to mess with the lives of emergency service workers often volunteers, by planning so badly that everyone is at risk.

Wednesday, September 21, 2011

Shoalhaven City Council- The Dirt behind the Deputy Mayor deals

The last conversation I had with Gareth Ward- Liberal councillor at Shoalhaven was a telephone conversation in which Gareth said this.."Amanda, we have to do what ever we can to stop Greg Watson getting any power again- we worked so hard at the 2008 election to be rid of him as Mayor we cannot let him rise again". and  "I have had a binding caucus and will support fellow Liberal Andrew Guile as deputy". the reason behind my call to Gareth was to let him know that it was my intention to run as a candidate for Assistant Deputy or Deputy Mayor.

Why does the Deputy Mayor matter- well you get to represent the Mayor when he is unavailable at public meetings...Chair the Ordinary meeting in the absence of the Mayor and if needs be and probably the most powerful thing to use a casting vote to break a deadlock or tied vote. In the past the Deputy Mayor of the last year of a Council term has had a much better chance of winning the position of Mayor at the next election.

Mind you I have a double handicap in Shoalhaven land- firstly I'm a woman and the majority of my peers think I belong in the kitchen and second I'm a passionate Green.

Two weeks later the very same Gareth Ward and his Liberal and Christian Democrats team voted Councillor Greg Watson in as the assistant deputy mayor. The same Greg Watson who the Liberals made mince meat out of during the first year of this Council term- the same Greg Watson that they called for a probity review on- insinuating that his property deals as Mayor were corrupt. The same Greg Watson who was unmentionable because of the waste tender.

At the same time as they supported Greg Watson they rewarded their friends on their voting team with Brumerskji, Bennett and Soames all awarded Chairperson positions.

The deal was struck with Watson and his team voting for Guile as Deputy in exchange for the position of assistant and some extra chairperson positions also given to Watson. Ward and Guile will beg of that any deal was struck- but if the position was reversed a war of words and accusations would have erupted from their mouths as if they had been done the greatest disservice on the planet. Meanwhile their Teflon coated backs won't have any crap stick.

Brumerskji was in show off mode with the pastor of his church there to witness his antics. He laid into me and I had to demand the Mayor Paul Green pull him up over his behaviour and withdraw his comments.

Fergusson and Miller also coped the brunt of the Liberals brutal boot as all three of us were removed from all committees except for the ones that the Liberals thought had no value such as traffic.

It was a very interesting political game that was being played out- left to the end of the meeting so there were no witness's left in the gallery. The joining of the Shoalhaven Independents, Liberals and Christian Democrats in a show of power hungry misogyny.

Drunk on his success Andrew Guile treated staff as second rate citizens, positioned himself on all committees that he thought would be of the most benefit to his personal agenda such as the Southern Councils group, and generally threw his weight around.

But Ive seen it all before-punishment dished out to those who stick their heads up above the trench line...the only crime a desire to make sure that the community get the maximum say on issues... my only desire is that the rest of the community could witness this foul behaviour, and out these people for the real self interested individuals that they are.

So what do you think of this kind of behaviour?

Is it acceptable that Australian politics is driven by self interest?

Do you think the community cares?

Post me you comments.

Wednesday, September 14, 2011

Ulladulla Civic Centre /Library / Tourism Centre- what is it that Councillors Just dont get?



Last nights Resources and Reserves Committee tried to address the elephant in the room of the Civic Centre redevelopment budget.

Council recently had a meeting with community reps and the architect to discuss further plans for the space and what seemed to be emerging is that if Council took the cheap option i.e. $5.1 million we would be getting a far inferior product than if actually lashing out and doing the job properly for around $8million.

So the committee asked the architect to go away and bring us back costings on the $5mill model and the $8 mill model to facilitate better decision making.

Councillors have a habit of plucking unrelated figures out of the air and saying that's what we will spend on the project rather than having a project fully scoped and knowing what the real spend should be.

Examples;

Ullaldulla Harbour Walkway $1 million- well what will that get us- know body knows even today!

Shoalhaven Entertainment Centre $24 million- needed a $2.4 million renovation for toilets within the first 5 years plus additional funding to finish of the landscaping.

There are lots of cost effective reasons why we should look at improving the civic centre /library/ tourism centre all in one go-but one of the main reasons that I brought it up on the first place was that council gets contributions for the library from developers- and the library money could be leveraged to make a better project overall!.

I think there is room for compromise in this project that will have excellent outcomes for all three areas (I'm not including the senior citzs area as is it is pretty good) lets face it Ulladulla and surrounding areas which the library services has grown immensely since the library was first created. Modern libraries are not just about dusty books, they are places for people to meet, places for children to learn a passion for learning, researching for family history, Internet hot spots for small business people or travellers, a place to share skills not just a place where people are always whispering and the library shushing you.

Here are some of the comments made by Councillors;

Councillor Proudfoot, I don't support spending any more money than what is already in the budget- this project was never about new library space but about air conditioning and a kitchen. I warned everyone that this project would get bigger once the community are involved

Councillor Brumerskyji: Books are a thing of the past, everyone will have kindles and ipads just look at how that technology has exploded.

Councillor Watson: We should make it $8 million and pare back on the library- this project has been hi jacked by the library lobbyists and the extra space is a luxury that is not needed.

It seems to me that these Councillors are blinded by their own circumstances and just because they don't use the facilities doesn't mean that others don't. Just ask the mums with pre schoolers who enjoy the big book corner. The older people who can access magazines that aren't affordable in their weekly budget. The researchers of family history who support one another learning about computers and history in one go. or the school kid who needs help with a school report or assignment.

As a community we can stand by and watch our public buildings and services be run into the ground and create the very destiny that some councillors see( which then would give them a good business case to sell the land for private development).

Or

We can redevelop our building well and have something for everyone a real community hub in the centre of town a vibrant place where people want to be, get information, be entertained, enjoy an exhibition the options are endless and there is a classic example at Albury which boasts an award winning Library Museum which is always a hive of activity when I have visited.


Albury's award wining Library Museum pic by John Gollings

Bawley Point vs Crown Castle Communications Round 2

Image Courtesy of Crown Castle.
Earlier in the year Crown Castle Communications put forward a proposal to build a 50-60m lattice telecommunications tower on the ANU owned land a Kioloa.

The community were mostly outraged with such a large ugly development with over 100 residents making their opinions known to Council. Through out the process it was evident that residents would like their phone coverage improved but not at any cost and the cost to coastal visual amenity was high with this proposal.

What the company failed to learn from that exercise that the Kioloa / Bawley Point community want to be consulted and included in the process not locked out and treated like Country hicks who can be walked all over.

Now Crown Castle have come back for round two- this time they have invoked the State Environment Planning Policy b(SEPP) for Infrastructure- which basically allows for a 50 m tower to be built in a rural zoning as complying development meaning the first time the community heard of it was when it went onto Councils website approved by a private certifier.

The SEPP Infrastructure for NSW is one of those dodgy bits of planning law that allows things to be built without notification and in my opinion is a recipe for disaster and build mistrust in the community when it comes to governance around development.

If Crown Castle had simply learnt it lesson and spent some time with the people of Bawley Point / Kioloa Im sure they could have worked together as they have done in the past to find a constructive solution to the problem which could have resulted in some monopoles rather than a hideous lattice tower.

Right now the community are angry over this corporation basically bullying its way in with whatever means it sees fit. The process is all wrong and needs to be part of the overhaul of the State Planning regulations that are currently under review.

Shelter to Close it doors as letter requesting more rentals goes out.

Salt Care - follow link to see their services  I received the sad news that our local homeless shelter needs to close it's doors on Sund...