RATEPAYER ALERT: LCC's Last Meeting for 2015

CLICK HERE TO GO TO THE AGENDA
Penalties for MANY Prizes for a FEW

I note that there are a number of issues on the LCC Agenda for Monday that the cynic could be forgiven for suspecting that they are being rushed through on the last meeting of the year. It's the very time  when people do not have the time or ability to scrutinize the activities of Council. 

The next meeting is not until 5 February 2016 and the interim silly season could well see all kinds consultancies etc come in for cutting an drying. 

A RUNNING THEME IS THE MANNER IN WHICH COUNCIL CONSULTS AND HOW ISSUES ARE RECORDED IN THEIR MINUTES, AND THE DILIGENCE (OR LACK THERE OF) IN HOW COUNCIL DEALS WITH QUESTIONS AND CONCERNS FROM RATEPAYERS. 

It is interesting that Questions on Notice Local Government (Meeting Procedures) Regulations 2015 

• Regulation 30 (A councillor, at least seven days before an ordinary Council Meeting or a Council Committee Meeting, may give written notice to the General Manager of a question in respect of which the councillor seeks an answer at that Meeting. An answer to a Question on Notice will be in writing.) But, Questions without Notice Local Government (Meeting Procedures) Regulations 2015 - Regulation 29 (Questions without Notice, and any answers to those questions, are not required to be recorded in the Minutes of the Meeting.) So the ratepayers are never going to even know if the latter type questions were ever asked but even if so, what the answers were!! 

Notable items on Monday’s Agenda are:-

• 5.1 City Heart Project Page 91. This contains some very interesting data on how and to whom Council consulted. The analysis is such that it is impossible to scrutinise the results. Lots of participants are recorded, but were they in favour of the final recommendations or not? What ideas or concepts were raised during this process that didn’t catch the imagination or gain support from LCC staff? The inference (but clearly not the case) is that the community overwhelmingly supports the final recommendations – that is seriously unlikely. 

• 6.1 Duck Reach Power Station lease negotiations Page 102 Why the secrecy? The issue of INCREASING the waterflow is being ignored. When will the details of the multiple discussions be divulged? 

• 18.1 Reimagining the Gorge Project Page 107 Council has hijacked this process and added in a conclusion about commercial development that did not arise from the consultation process. Also the JAC Group’s input has been allowed in even though it manipulated the public input and did not pass scrutiny like the rest of the process. Where is the Council’s Cataract Gorge Advisory Committee’s recommendation? 

•  18.2 Sale of the ‘Penny Royal “ carpark Page 114 What is the rush, because the status quo will be continuing until 2028? Importantly, this carpark is to be a free carpark for visitors to Penny Royal AND THE CATARACT GORGE RESERVE. If sold to Penny Royal, the visitors to CGR will be prevented from parking freely there. The Cataract Gorge Advisory Committee advised Council of its opposition to the sale proceeding, so why isn’t the advice there? The current status of the Council owned site is that it is leased to The JAC Group until 2028 for a sum of $10 per annum subject to a condition that the tenant is to maintain a free public car park available for use by any person attending the Penny Royal Complex or the Cataract Gorge. 

• 8.5 Kerbside Organics Page 125 It has taken council over 6 years to reach this conclusion, and of the many enthusiastic submissions from the public, nothing has really been heeded because Council has just gone on its merry way regardless. 

•  8.6 City Heart Traffic and Bus stops Even the police are objecting to the proposal for two-way streets, but to no avail, again only the council officers views matter even ‘though they imply significant public support this is similar to the conclusion drawn in item 15.1 above. Bus Stop Relocations 

1. The St John Street northbound bus stops between York and Brisbane Streets to be reduced from three to two spaces, relocated closer to York Street and redesigned to reflect the positive elements of the St John Street southbound bus stop being greater separation, wider general pedestrian area and shelters to support the separation. 
2.  The St John Street southbound bus stops between Brisbane and Paterson Streets be redesigned and upgraded. 
3. The York Street bus stop between St John and Charles Streets be redesigned and upgraded. The bus stop areas will be subject to detailed design and consultation with directly affected stakeholder(s)/groups. The shop and property owners in St John Street at the present locations want the north-bound bustops removed but their voices are being totally ignored. 
4. And there was a workshop on 7 December concerning the Rate Modelling Approach ........... but we don’t know any more.