MEDIA RELEASE
March 29 2011
March 29 2011
The Launceston City Council has unveiled a new method to make it easier for residents to participate in the decision-making around key projects in the Council area.
The Your Voice. Your Launceston. website is an easy, safe and convenient way for the community to contribute ideas and opinions about key projects. There are many ways to participate via the website, including completing surveys, sending in submissions and contributing to online discussions. The site can be accessed at www.yourvoiceyourlaunceston.tas.gov.au
Launceston City Council General Manager Robert Dobrzynski said "I encourage all residents to check out the Your Voice. Your Launceston website and have their say. The Council values residents' involvement and input into key projects and wants to provide as many opportunities as possible for people to join in."
Registration is required for people wanting to participate and post their own comments in the online discussions forums, but anyone can download the project materials and read the
forum discussions. Registration is quick and easy, allowing people to sign up and contribute
anonymously by creating their own username.
Privacy is protected because the registration and online discussion forums are moderated by an independent organisation.
The first project to utilise this form of community consultation is the Launceston Public Spaces and Public Life report prepared by the world renowned urban design firm, Gehl Architects. Residents are invited to download and read the report and to join in the online discussion forum that has been established at www.yourvoiceyourlaunceston.com.au/public-spaces.
The Launceston Public Spaces and Public Life comment period will be open until 29 April 2011.
Mr Dobrzynski said "Your Voice. Your Launceston. is one of several ways the Council invites community participation. It will complement information available from the Council's website and Community Update Packs and supports other consultation forums, such as the Residents' Panel, community meetings and surveys.
"We are conscious that different people engage in different ways and Your Voice. Your Launceston. is another forum that the Council believes many people will find convenient and accessible. It is anticipated that there will be a number of projects put on this website for community consultation."
The Your Voice. Your Launceston. website is an easy, safe and convenient way for the community to contribute ideas and opinions about key projects. There are many ways to participate via the website, including completing surveys, sending in submissions and contributing to online discussions. The site can be accessed at www.yourvoiceyourlaunceston.tas.gov.au
Launceston City Council General Manager Robert Dobrzynski said "I encourage all residents to check out the Your Voice. Your Launceston website and have their say. The Council values residents' involvement and input into key projects and wants to provide as many opportunities as possible for people to join in."
Registration is required for people wanting to participate and post their own comments in the online discussions forums, but anyone can download the project materials and read the
forum discussions. Registration is quick and easy, allowing people to sign up and contribute
anonymously by creating their own username.
Privacy is protected because the registration and online discussion forums are moderated by an independent organisation.
The first project to utilise this form of community consultation is the Launceston Public Spaces and Public Life report prepared by the world renowned urban design firm, Gehl Architects. Residents are invited to download and read the report and to join in the online discussion forum that has been established at www.yourvoiceyourlaunceston.com.au/public-spaces.
The Launceston Public Spaces and Public Life comment period will be open until 29 April 2011.
Mr Dobrzynski said "Your Voice. Your Launceston. is one of several ways the Council invites community participation. It will complement information available from the Council's website and Community Update Packs and supports other consultation forums, such as the Residents' Panel, community meetings and surveys.
"We are conscious that different people engage in different ways and Your Voice. Your Launceston. is another forum that the Council believes many people will find convenient and accessible. It is anticipated that there will be a number of projects put on this website for community consultation."
6 comments:
The real question is why do we need to pay the Aldermen, particularly the Mayor, all that money for watching the GM do his stuff?
The Aldermen cost us nearly $1 million per year, with all the staffing, benefits, travel and building costs.
Why not get rid of them and just give the GM and incentive for results.
It would save us heaps and cut down on the useless column inches describing what the Aldermen have done (e.g. meet, talk, write stuff, smile for the cameras etc)
I totally respect people having a view and a say.To put on here that it costs $1 million a year for aldermen is at best mischievious and at worst misleading. An aldermanic salary is around $30,000a year[ x 12 aldermen is $360,000 per year] The Deputy has a loading of approximately $15,000 on top of that and the Mayor has a loading of approximately $ 60,000 on top of that.That adds up to $435,000 a year.Im not sure what building costs we receive as quoted by " Sam Tythe" - the aldermen share 2 modestly sized offices that have 3 computers in them.We have a fractional office assistant who works 4 hours a day for 5 days a week.I do all my own letter writing and office work at home.As far as travel if we travel round the city we pay for this.If we have to go to a LGAT mtg we can share a vehiucle and be reimbursed for petrol. There is only 2 of those in Hobart a year. Any travel round the city we pay for. Get your facts right .
Thanks for that Rob, you've just unwittingly confirmed that Sam's $1million was not that far out. On costs for any business are typically about double the salary bill. For an operation like the council my guess is that double would be conservative. Therefore as near as dam it we have the million Sam estimated. If this is wrong and somebody actually knows what the on costs actually are let's have them and put an end to this silly debate uninformed by credible facts as it is. I'm sorry that was a very silly request in an election year.
Cheers "Skippy"- theres no secret to our salaries. Theres no secrets-I think it may be available from LGAT as councils of certain sizes have the same sort of payscale.I guess with any organisation such as a council one can always look at oncosts[ Im not sure if theres an established formula to know what they are] - but I do see red when people have the view we are on exhorbitant incomes ...the $30,000 approx is pre tax so it then has a fair bit whacked out of it in tax.I personally spend a bit on producing a quarterly newsletter that I design and print and pay for myself so Id think between that and mailouts I might spend $3000 on letting people know what Im doing and asking them about what they need help with or about issues they need a hand with- we dont get the lavish printing allowances that state and federal polllies get- if we do a newsletter we pay ourselves personally.
I just should also add the terminology is "allowance" as opposed to "salary"-LGAT would have all the details-its very clear.
Hello again Rob, I think that you've missed the point that was being made. You did at least from my vantage point. I do not think the complaint was that aldermen were getting too much money. Except for the mayor I think everyone know that you don't get that much. I read the complaint as there seemed no point in paying for the same thing twice. Like half a million in salaries for alderman and a quarter of a million PLUS in the general manager's salary for the same job. I do see that they are SUPPOSED to be different jobs but at the moment at least it looks like he wants to do both jobs for the price of one. The aldermen are looking more and more like they are redundant. NOT having aldermen would save ratepayers half a million and not necessarily the on costs so long as the general manager does both jobs. That is decide on what should happen and why and then go on to do the job. It would be a huge saving to reatepayers since the general manager seems to think he can manage both. There is one problem though the general manager will need to work out how he could be accountable to ratepayers in the way aldermen are. That's the only flaw in the argument I can see so far. It could work so long as the general manager didn't stuff up. Then what?
Post a Comment