Politics blurs the benefits of renewables

MEDIA RELEASE FROM AMANDA FINDLEY

In a bid to address Shoalhaven City Councils rising electricity costs Greens Clr Amanda Findley put forward an ambitious motion that would have placed Council well in front should grant funding for renewable energy schemes become available. Instead of celebrating good sense Clr Findley has criticised her Councillor colleagues as ‘dinosaurs’ unable to accept change.
Clr Findley called for  the preparation of a report that would look at energy systems available to Council, their payback periods and a cost benefit analysis.
 “ I’m shocked that the conservative Councillors don’t believe that reducing Councils electricity costs is ‘Core Business’- electricity costs us a small fortune and Councillors have an obligation to look at every means available at keeping that cost down’ she said.
 In bringing forward the proposal for the investigation in renewable energy options Clr Findley said “it would put Council on the front foot to receive Federal Funding from the Carbon Tax and lived up to community expectations’.
“ In some ways I’m not surprised the conservatives slammed the idea- even though it makes good economic sense- for they use any opportunity they find to try and invalidate Climate Change’.
During consultation for the Community Strategic Plan – Shoalhaven residents declared loud and clear that they wanted their Council to react to Climate change implications and to be part of low carbon economy.
 “ By supporting the renewable energy industry we show confidence in and boost a new sector of our economy that can go ahead in leaps and bounds” said Clr Findley.
 “the motion would have advanced Council in buffering against rising electricity costs- but instead we saw politicking for the sake of it and no real consideration for the long term.”

 Copy of the motion put to Council.
A report be prepared for Council addressing the following.
1)Council investigate opportunities for a significant investment into alternative energy generation systems including but not limited to co or tri-generation
2)That the significant investment should address a minimum of ½ the required power needs of Council’s total energy requirements.
 3)A cost benefit analysis including but not limited to the payback period of the investment, the life time of the equipment and projected savings.
4) Any development services implications
 5)Funding opportunities either internally or externally.
6) Council approach the University of Wollongong to carry out the investigation and should they refuse a further report be brought to Council on how it can be advanced.
  Background
During Councils budget deliberations over the last 4 years electricity prices have continued to rise. This trend will continue into the future. Shoal water are making a significant investment in buffering the costs of electricity by installing alternative energy technologies. Shoalhaven Council can continue to be an early adopter of new technologies and buffer itself for rising electricity costs by investing in renewable technologies. Council has a significant amount of strategic funds that could possibly be accessed to pay for such a project with energy ‘savings’ being the loan repayments. This proposal satisfies Objective 2.3  Community Strategic Plan, A COMMUNITY THAT SEEKS TO REDUCE GLOBAL WARMING IMPACTS AND INCREASE OUR ABILITY TO ADAPT TO THE EFF ECTS AND IMPACTS OF CLIMATE CHANGE 

So Much Happening, So little time to report

Council has been pretty intense over the last few months, the tension over the creation of a new major planning document (LEP) has been boiling over on all fronts.

Community representation to the meetings has been strong and those that attend the meetings should be commended for their stamina.

There have been in depth deputations made to the meetings and it is quite obvious that citizens of the Shoalhaven care deeply for the area they live in and do huge amounts of research to back up the positions they present- often quoting from higher order government documents.

A lot of the time it's easy to say that the community reps are better prepared than the majority of Councillors- self included on occasions were the necessary preparation time just wasn't available between meetings.

At the recent Ordinary meeting of Council to ratify committee decisions things came to a steaming head when in the heat of the moment I accused Councillors of doing favours for mates, a comment I was made to withdraw and apologise for.

My frustration with the process came to this head when I believed that inconsistent practices and process were being applied.

Three separate applications were made to up zone land in the Little Forest locality, another submission had been made outlining to Councillors the rigorous consultation that had taken place during the early 2000's and why further upzonings should not be supported.

The position that didn't support the upzonings was not presented to Council but buried away in a submissions folder which took some time to locate the document ( it still hasn't been presented to council).

Two of the applicants didn't receive a look in at all- and their justification for up zoning was just as valid as Mr Hancock's. So you get the picture on my outburst- why favour one and not the others when the rationale is the same i.e. 'looks like a good idea at the time'.

These types of decisions are all over the making of this new plan- there is no balancing of the environmental needs of our area, but blatant attempts to overrun previous consultations ( Such as the urban lands review)

Here's how the South Coast Register covered this aspect of the story.

MP’s brother-in-law gets the nod


25 Apr, 2012 07:00 AM

PLANS to rezone part of a farm along Little Forest Road have been slammed as “absolute, arrant nonsense” during discussions on draft LEP provisions at last week’s Shoalhaven City Council meeting.

Cr John Fergusson slammed the proposal to allow three one-hectare blocks on the farm, submitted on behalf of property owner John Hancock.
“There is no strategic justification for this,” Cr Fergusson said.
“We are going to end up with a total disaster of an LEP.”Cr Fergusson accused his council colleagues of “totally emasculating the LEP process”.
Cr Amanda Findley said the application, and the support it obtained on the council floor, “stinks of mates doing favours for mates,” because Mr Hancock was the brother-in-law of South Coast MP Shelley Hancock.
Cr Greg Watson said the claim was “outrageous”.Cr Andrew Guile said the application had merits and to claim otherwise was “character assassination”.“This is definitely in keeping with everything else that is happening there,” Cr Guile said. While he had earlier championed retaining and protecting valuable farming land, Cr Robert Miller said the land proposed for subdivision did not fit the bill. “It’s not a viable agricultural property now,” he said, adding it was the sort of property that should be considered for large rural residential lots.A staff report to the special development committee meeting that considered the application recommended against the application because it was inconsistent with the South Coast Regional Strategy.
It also noted the block was beside other rural residential blocks created through a spot rezoning at the H Ranch in 2002. The rezoning was supported, with Crs Robert Miller, Andrew Guile, Nigel Soames, Greg Watson and David Bennett voting in favour, and John Fergusson, Bohdan Brumerskyj, Amanda Findley and Paul Green against.