Click on the image to enlarge
At Launceston City Council’s 2010 Annual General Meeting on 6 December the city’s GM Robert Dobrzynski did offered up Powerpoint presentation where, essentially, he outlined his vision for the city’s and the administration of it.
Noteably, he made a commitment that was somewhat surprising in that he undertook to consult with the community regarding the preparation and approval of the city’s budgets and specifically for 2011/12. To those in attendance this was something new!
His buzz words were all to do with “community consultation, empowerment of the community, engaging with the community through steering committees/advisory groups/targeted resident groups/face to face meetings with existing groups”.
Yes this all sounded rather impressive and there was an air of optimism in the room. So much so that some of the questions some people in the room had at the ready were not asked. Given that what seemed to be Launceston City Council’s new found, and conciliatory, attitude towards ‘the ratepayers’ it seemed that asking ‘difficult questions’ would look a tad cherlish.
That was December 6 2010! However, looking back from now to then, there is little evidence of any this ‘promise’ being delivered upon. Sadly, what seems to have continued is the same kind and level of confrontation between the city’s administrators and ratepayers as has typically been the case in Launceston.
It is just possible that ratepayers’ anxieties that their concerns and consideration are as much outside the management loop as ever they were.
From the Tasmanian Ratepayers Association viewpoint, there certainly haven’t been any approaches made from LCC. What's more, the association’s submissions continue to be met with same level of contempt as ever. Recently this was evidenced in regard to the Lindsay Street Road corridor concept, where LCC officers and the LCC Flood Authority personnel were plain downright rude and offensive. Yes, this is the kind of consultation process that ratepayers' are all too familiar with.
Note the GM’s slide dealing with PLANNING REVIEW OF TRANSPORT OPTIONS, for instance. If we were now to think about that as hollow rhetoric we might well be excused. Interestingly, the Jan Geale report was due in January, but that month has already been and gone. If there were ever any benckmarks for performance indication, this might be one and one that raises the prospect that these things are as they say "discretionary".
The Examiner’s story, 11 February, regarding losses from city ‘’Attractions” is interesting, in that they are clearly not attractive enough!! Launceston’s hapless ratepayers keep on hearing about the bad news in dribs and drabs.
For instance, the further reductions in parking arrangements for Launceston Aquatic is further evidence that:
- Parking is not being required;
- There aren’t enough customers visiting the Centre; and
- All of the matters raised by the representors at the Aquatic Centre's Appeal Hearing concerning the sustainability issues relative to this project ... well it turns that they were on the button.
The fact that the the ratepayers' association was not allowed to present the expert opinion in documented evidence that the LCC figures for attendances couldn’t be achieved is worth remembering. It turns out that 'the experts' were correct and the figures just get worse and worse.
If there was an open journalistic review of Launceston City Council’s promises, its budgeting and its ability to achieve positive outcomes for its ratepayers, goodness knows what might come to light.
The Tasmanian Ratepayers Association has long argued that LCC doesn’t manage and conduct its business properly, and we have produced copious amounts of evidence and data to support this view.
The Commonwealth Government is presently seeking comment on a paper that Northern Tasmania’s councils could be consolidated under a national urban policy it is developing. A discussion paper released in December, says the policy aims to make Australia’s largest 18 cities “more productive, sustainable and livable”.
With a population of 105,445 in 2009, Launceston is ranked the 17th largest city in terms of population.
The paper says multiple councils in smaller regional cities like Wollongong and Newcastle and Launceston “present a major challenge to the effective management of cities”.
Minister Anthony Albanese said the final version of the policy would be a blueprint to reduce people’s dependency on cars, develop high quality public transport, reduce cities’ carbon footprint and improve urban planning.
What is LCC doing about responding to this opportunity ?
Launcestonians have heard nothing from LCC promoting public interest and awareness in contributing to this process. Perhaps there are people at Town Hall who have an interest in maintaining the status quo. What might they be worried about? Yet all the while Launceston is dealing with strategies, plans, bikeways, urban improvements, infrastructure upgrades, planning schemes, and so on and so on.
- Is the community being engaged in “community consultation Processes”?
- Is the community being “empowered”?
- Is LCC “engaging with the community through steering committees/advisory groups/targeted resident groups/face to face meetings with existing groups”?
We do not see the evidence.
So, we must say that we do not think so!
Petar Hill & Simber Albertson
No comments:
Post a Comment