FACEbook FIND

WOW

AND THE STORY GOES

WOULD YOU BELIVE THIS?

Now we know why the Launceston City Council abstained from voting with the 25 councils against Gutwein's takeover of Taswater. 

Gutwein and his gang of proponents has given Launceston's combined stormwater-sewerage systems to Infrastructure Tasmania and his plan is to take over TasWater and sewerage in order to bypass any problems blocking the UTas development at Inveresk. 

But Gutweins' Bill was defeated 10-4 in the Legislative Council. So this sneaky deal has now all blown up in their face. 

Any development application will still come under scrutiny as per any other planning regulations. 

LCC were prepared to sell out the ratepayers and take away Taswater dividends of $5.5m - $180 a year each ratepayer. 

LCC has been complicit in all these backdoor deals! Gutwein now plans to make it an election issue. 

Don't let them sell your asset. Say no to their shonky deals! Vote against any party or candidate who supports the Liberal Government on this issue. "Walk a crooked mile..."

There are a few questions stemming from this: 

• Why did Launceston City Council abstain when 25 councils voted to retain Taswater and only 2-3 Councils voted for Govt takeover? 
• Whose idea was it to hand the Launceston system over to Infrastructure Tasmania? 
• Why did Launceston City Council hand the system over. 
• Who ordered the handover? 
• Did the aldermen vote for it? 

 Infrastructure Tas is part of State Growth Dept.

D Bowen

East Launceston Oval: Time to get serious!!

CLICK HERE FOR THE EXAMINER STORY

FOR MORE SEE FACEbook https://www.facebook.com/friendsofeastlauncestonoval/

CLICK HERE: Plan for new kindergarten Traffic concerns raised by residents BY HOLLY MONERY

Now for some questions for the Minister!

1. WHY are you unwilling to talk with community members about the potential loss of an historic green space?
2. WHY when so many cities in the world are trying to create, nurture and maintain green space and East Launceston has less than most other suburbs in Launceston, are you trying to destroy it? 
3. WHY as Minister for Education have you allowed the number of out of area enrolments at East Launceston Primary School to burgeon beyond the capacity of the school? 
4. WHY has the Department of Education ignored ABS census data in its regional planning putting pressure on an old suburb with limited infrastructure and with a declining kinder/primary population? 
5. WHY does the DoE view its priorities as greater than those of the broader community? 
6. WHY should local residents bear the burden of poor enrolment management? 
7. WHY as Minister for Education don’t you look at re zoning the area and redistribute the number of children attending East Launceston Primary School? 
8. WHY has the DoE adopted a reactive rather than strategic approach to the application of public funds and should this and the enrolment policies of ELPS be a matter of further enquiry? 
9. WHY are you taking away a 100 year legacy of Community space (and our children’s playground) just to save a few dollars? 
10. WHY did you refuse the offer to purchase the property in Oxford Street adjourning the school? It’s use for extra classrooms would be supported by all and obviate the danger children will be exposed to in extending the school over the road? 
11.  WHY did you not purchase 70 Abbott Street when it came on the market in July, sold for $390,000 and adjoined the school? 
12.  WHY when 1-3 Chant Street, came on the market, didn’t you purchase that? It sits on approximately 1,278m2 of land, comprised of a large brick building (formerly a church, church hall, lecture/meeting room) with kitchen and amenities. It also had a tennis court. This all sold for a very modest sum. .
13. WHY when you are so intent on building on this valuable green space, that you own, is the land swap with the Parents and Friends still going ahead? 
14.  WHY does the DoE think it is acceptable to pursue a 'deal' that could potentially see a P & F incorporated body lose (conservative estimate) $100,000? 
15. WHY haven’t you stated your intention with the land once you acquire it? 
16. WHY won’t the DoE say what they will do with the existing pavilion until after a land swap occurs, is this open and transparent governance? 
17.  WHY it is necessary to build a 7 vehicle car park on the recreation ground when the current car park does not fill and staff park on the other side of Mary Street in Raymond Street? 
18. WHY do the teachers have to have a car park right outside their door of work, is it Policy?

Leave your comments in the section provided below

Plan for new kindergarten Traffic concerns raised by residents BY HOLLY MONERY

Invermay Traffic

THE Invermay Traffic Investigation Report is due to be completed by the end of 2017 (The Examiner, November 14). 

It would seem the intersection of Lindsay and Goderich Streets which is adjacent to Charles Street Bridge is the worst performing intersection in Launceston, this is before any further development such as the Silo's complex and planned expansion in the area abounding Bunnings.

Will a similar study be initiated at the Tamar Bridge end of Lindsay Street? Not according to the City of Launceston Council at its meeting on November 21.

They intend to whack some traffic lights up and then hope that the area can cope with the 30,000-plus vehicle movements a day, this is before the UTAS campus is built, which will add another 15,000-plus.

Is the campus considered a poor cousin to an hotel development, it does seem that some intersections are more equal than others.

Ron Baines, Kings Meadows.

UPdate

UPward & ONward!!!

The Examiner And Launceston’s Hurtling Towards Oblivion

When the 'citizen's press' get going you find the answer to quite a few questions nobody seems to be, or seemed to have been, asking. Who was it who said "nobody is really paying attention, so …"?  An Alderman??  So, here's a selection of 'LETTERS TO THE EDITOR' that might just tell us something …. Well a thing or two anyway!!

Decisions, decisions

It could be argued that the City of Launceston has lost the plot.

All too often recently light-weight decisions, that should not have been made in the first place, are being revisited.

For example, the proposed relocation of St John Street's bus stop is being reworked.

And at the last meeting a car park at Inveresk was allocated to the university before a parking study was carried out, even though that study was on the council's work list, but at the time, was not started.

The pedestrian bridge was unanimously approved a few months back. At the time it was stated the original design was the only one that could meet all the design criteria.

Out of the blue two more designs were before the council. But only one could be voted on.

The preferred option was a lively design looking rather like the Batman Bridge. But it was ruled out because it was stated it would require another planning application taking some two weeks.

So the other option was approved, seven for, four against. Not convincing.

But what was the rush? Better to get it right? No, the debate was cut short by one alderman saying let's get it over with, make a decision now (I know – I was at the meeting).

Now in The Examiner (Monday, October 16) we read that the Brisbane Street Mall is to be redesigned.

That is after years of City Heart, public consultations and the current design documents already well underway, there is to be a myriad of improvements made including for events and activities, public art, shelter, security, and all to be attractive and inviting.

You could say just as well because it seems the original design must have been a real dud.

But this ad hoc decision making process is simply not good enough. Launceston needs consistent, logical, robust, intelligent decision making from its council.

Jim Dickenson, Launceston.

Invermay Should Be Abandoned

No matter who won the last Federal Election, blatant pork barrelling by both major parties, is the cause of the unfolding Invermay mess (Basil Fitch 27/10 refers).

We may never know what/whose agenda put the Lib/Labs up to it but we do know that tax and rate payers will pay for it! 

Due diligence, so called, has conveniently overlooked the inevitable seismic event; the best levees in the world are not immune. 

Launceston has an active  history of such events. Unfortunately LCC's independant risk management consultant is no longer with us but his legacy "..truth is beauty, beauty truth" remains.

Sincerely,  Ken Partridge (West Launceston)

Invermay abandoned

THE SES flood siren test on Thursday, October 5 brought back grim memories of 2016 flood on Invermay and Inveresk where evacuations, flood waters going through houses, ruining carpets, furniture, gardens, Inveresk Hotel closed for weeks along with Charles Street and Tamar Street bridges closed.

The tramsheds at proposed UTAS campus also affected with flood water.

The City of Launceston are responsible for all stormwater not TasWater.

It is incomprehensible, beggars belief and logic that mayor and aldermen, UTAS, Peter Gutwein, Liberal government, federal government would spend $260 million on a project knowing the 200 year history of 36 significant floods (SES) and numerous minor floods have occurred on a floodplain at Invermay and Inveresk.

Geoff Smedley's letter (The Examiner, October 5) "Woes of Launceston" are so correct.

Basil Fitch, South Launceston.

Woes of Launceston

IT HAS been pointed out that the relocation of the National Auto Museum of Tasmania has not been thought through in a manner befitting its value to the city.

One can only imagine the consequences of permanent sand and worse still, cement dust, in copious amounts plaguing the exhibits. I really can't imagine a worse scenario to be put upon a display of valuable cars. 

Surely this situation must have been looked into before such decisions were made, or is it just another big blunder in the whole mishmash of flustered planning that is taking place in Launceston today?

To have cars constantly exposed to such harmful elements would be a huge detriment to the ability of featuring valuable vehicles, and cause great harm to the museum's ability of frequent exhibit change. 

Launceston looks like it's about to undergo a torrid time, particularly with the up-and-coming university fiasco and the great changes that will bring to an already chaotic traffic flow situation.

There are so many other unforeseen problems that it's quite scary looking at these straight off the cuff decision being pushed through by a few rather than the true needs of Launceston. I am truly concerned at the thoughtless so-called progress that is happening at this time.

One has to worry about the tears that will undoubtedly follow this decision that seems so far from the real needs our little city, which is begging for real basic and urgent items of need.

Geoff Smedley, Launceston.

Launceston Show

CONGRATULATIONS to Lucy Stone (Sunday Examiner, October 22), for some very creative "outside the box" ideas for a possible re-vamped Launceston Show concept.

As for a future venue – the "old" University of Tasmania Newnham complex?

Margaret Hosford, Windermere.

Central Bus Stops

WHAT A sensible suggestion from City of Launceston mayor Albert van Zetten to move the northbound bus stop near Civic Square and the Town Hall in St John Street.  

It is then adjacent to the library, post office and Civic Square, which, as the mayor points out, is ideal in many ways.  

This site is removed from shops and the negative impact waiting passengers can have on these businesses. 

The redeveloped Civic Square will provide children's play areas, seating and a peaceful place for those waiting for buses.

It is hoped council will carefully consider this matter.

Dick James, Launceston.

Political Privilege

I, AND the majority of the community seem to be sick to death of lies being trundled out by politicians in Australia.

I suggest that the long held practice of parliamentary privilege be abolished and all politicians be made accountable for the words they utter.

The practice of filming and recording of all sittings would then mean that politicians would need to be able to verify their statements or be held liable for any untruths or slander uttered in the name of politics.

To the public, hearing the truth for once would be a God send.

Ken Terry, Bridport.

Pedestrians

AN ARTICLE (The Examiner, October 4) mentioned the council would give away half the circular carpark at Inveresk was an interesting statement: "It will allow for greater pedestrian movement."

Presumably this is after the dozens of drivers have parked somewhere else and then magically transformed into pedestrians.

Ron Baines, Kings Meadows.

LCC's Recalcitrance In Regard To QVMAG's Governance

Review of Governance Practices - Queen Victoria Museum and Art Gallery Establishment of Working Group <<< Click on the link to read the full post

TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 21, 2010

The following information is on the Launceston City Councils website but there is no opportunity there to leave a comment, critique, observation, whatever. It is posted here to allow that and for easy access. The information for intending working group applicants is as follows:

"Proudly owned and operated by the Launceston City Council, the Queen Victoria Museum and Art Gallery (QVMAG) is the largest regional museum in Australia and is the arts, cultural and creative heartbeat of Tasmania.

The Council is undertaking a review of the governance arrangements of the QVMAG. Following the review, the Council will establish an appropriate contemporary governance model which addresses QVMAG's obligations to the Council, State Government and community.

The Council wishes to form a working group of appropriately qualified people to research, evaluate and make recommendations to Council regarding the appropriate governance arrangements for the QVMAG.

The Working Group's considerations are anticipated to include, but not be limited to, the following:

1) Calling for public submissions on relevant matters;

2) Interviews with key stakeholders relating to the QVMAG, such as employees, and Friends and Foundation members;

3) An assessment of the current governance arrangements;

4) Discussion of alternative governance models, including the relationship with the City Council; and

5) A recommended governance model for QVMAG.

It is anticipated that the Working Group's recommendations will reflect both best practice in governance standard and the symbiotic relationship between the Launceston City Council and the QVMAG. .... AND still nothing has changed!  Go back and read the posts

CLICK HERE TO GO BACK AND READ ALL QVMAG POSTS OVER TIME

UPdate

Glenorchy And Amalgamations

GO TO: https://www.facebook.com/CitizensforGlenorchy/photos/a.1231708626905182.1073741827.297096220366432/1556571744418867/?type=3&theater

CLICK ON THE LINK ABOVE TO GO TO 
SOURCE AND BETTER READABILITY

Council Enterprises And Other Money Questions

Click Here: https://www.facebook.com/SMNews7120/photos/a.633644913492584.1073741828.633636030160139/725216997668708/?type=3&theater

Call for submissions to Tamar Estuary Management Taskforce

The City of Launceston has a lead role exploring future options for the city's combined system as part of the work being undertaken by the Tamar Estuary Management Taskforce.

 

The Council is working with Taswater and other experts to identify improvements that will benefit the health of the Tamar Estuary.

 

The Tamar Estuary Management Taskforce has been established by the State Government as part of the Launceston City Deal; a strategic partnership between all three tiers of government designed to guide the future of the city.

 

Submissions are currently open for individuals and organisations to help shape the future of the Tamar River Estuary.

 

To find out more, visit:http://www.stategrowth.tas.gov.au/h…/about_us/infrastructure

 

Letter to Select Committee on Regional Development and Decentralisation

11 October 2017

Committee Secretariat

Select Committee on Regional Development and Decentralisation

P.O. Box 6021

Parliament House

CANBERRA ACT 2600

By email to rdd.reps@aph.gov.au

Dear Select Committee Members,

Regrettably, we only learned of the Hearing conducted in Launceston on 10 October, from the local press report published today.

Accordingly, we wish to make a submission in writing to your Committee, based on concerns about Launceston projects that we referred to in an earlier submission dated August 2017, to the Committee inquiring into the Australian Government's Role in the Development of Cities (see copy of attached submission).

Whilst we appreciate that the Terms of Reference for your Select Committee are different, we never-the-less see some synergy in how officials allegedly representing the best interests of Launceston, have been promoting the Australian Government's support for funding huge capital works projects in this area, without consulting ordinary citizens and gaining their unequivocal support.

The Launceston community has many needs, and the public purse is justifiably limited. We are concerned that funds already agreed by the Australian Government have not been applied to capital works projects that would be of the highest rating and priority able to be given by our ordinary citizens.

Our citizens have simply not been properly consulted, and no argument undoubtedly already put to you by Launceston City Council, Launceston Chamber of Commerce, Tasmanian Property Council, State Government et al, that there has been consultation (unverified, anonymous social media traffic only) can be demonstrated.

We are particularly concerned that the future of the Australian Maritime College at Newnham in Launceston, once an independent and vibrant institution, now absorbed into the ownership of University of Tasmania so as to prop up their University accreditation, is not going to be sustainable and able to expand into the future. Already changes in the funding of the AMC by overseas shipping companies has significantly dropped, and the 'independent' commercial operation of AMC Search has been annihilated.

Unfortunately time and a shortage of resources prevent us from presenting a proper submission to your Select Committee, however we hope that from what we have been able to say, and from what we have already said to the other inquiry, you may be able to glean our sentiments in relation to your Terms of Reference.

Yours faithfully,

Lionel Morrell

President

Tasmanian Ratepayers Association Inc.

 
NOTE: Ratepayer who wish to receive a ocopy of the submission please indicate so in the comment section below.

NEWS ALERT: Colac Otway Shire Council voted to appoint Mr Dobrzynski as its acting CEO.

Copied from Colac Herald 

 http://www.colacherald.com.au/2017/08/acting-chief-appointed/

Acting chief appointed

A Staff Reporter, Friday, August 25th, 2017.Comments offContact the author

Robert Dobrzynski will be acting chief of Colac Otway Shire Council.

Colac Otway Shire Council will have a temporary chief executive after next week, with councillors appointing : to the role. CLICK HERE

Sue Wilkinson resigned as the council’s chief executive officer last month and councillors voted this week to appoint Mr Dobrzynski as the acting CEO.

Mr Dobrzynski will start as the acting CEO on September 4 with Ms Wilkinson’s last day on September 1.

The acting CEO has three decades of experience working in local government and has most recently worked as the CEO of Launceston City Council.

Mayor Chris Potter said Mr Dobrzynski had also previously served as CEO of the Moorabool Shire Council, Delatite Shire Council and West Wimmera Shire Council.

“The recruitment of a new permanent CEO is one of the most important tasks our council will undertake during our term,” Cr Potter said.

SEE http://www.colacherald.com.au/2014/06/colac-otway-councillors-appoint-new-ceo/

FOR CONTEXT 

CLICK HERE GO TO SOURCE

LETTER TO LAUNCESTONIANS ALL

Dea All,

FYI. On the agenda for the Launceston City Council meeting on Monday 2 October is an item to give UTAS 5 more parcels of land at Inveresk. 

This includes land currently used for car parking in front of the QV museum and other nearby tenants of the precinct. At this stage it appears that Danny Gibson is the only alderman who is opposed to this handover. 

There is likely to be a community reaction to this agenda item possibly with members of the public attending the meeting. 

Our information is that it requires all aldermen to vote in favour of this type of motion. 

If only one alderman votes against it, the motion fails. Given the intimidation he was subjected to by the mayor after the renaming of York Park stadium last year, Alderman Gibson will need lots of support to withstand the pressure he will be under.

Meanwhile, on the same day at 4 pm, UTAS is holding a meeting at Newnham campus for staff, ostensibly for staff to be informed and give feedback on the so-called community consultation they claim to have carried out a few weeks ago.

SOCIAL MEDIA: When the press fails and put up barriers we always have Social Media

Go to: https://www.facebook.com/search/posts/?q=citizens%20for%20glenorchy%20inc

Two investigations into Glenorchy City Council to be finalised over next month

SIMEON THOMAS-WILSON, Urban Affairs Reporter, Mercury September 22, 2017 12:00am

As the Board of Inquiry finalises its long-awaited report into the council, an investigation by Auditor-General Rod Whitehead into the procurement of goods and services by the council is also set to be tabled next month.

Local Government Minister Peter Gutwein revealed in July that the state's public-sector watchdog was investigating tendering issues at the council.

This coincided with his announcement of plans to resuspend Glenorchy aldermen when their initial six-month suspension expired in August.

The investigation by the Tasmanian Audit Office begun after the aldermen were first suspended by Mr Gutwein in February this year.

Although it has not been listed in the office's annual plan of work, Mr Whitehead is able to conduct investigations outside that plan.

The Mercury understands it initially focused on the council's tendering process with CT Management group, of which former Victorian premier Jeff Kennett is a director.

Multiple sources have told the Mercury that the Auditor-General's investigation has now been broadened to look at other Glenorchy business contracts. Mr Whitehead has declined to comment on the investigation.

Earlier this month, following Chief Justice Blow's dismissal of Supreme Court action by the council's general manager Peter Brooks, Mr Gutwein said he expected to make a final decision on the fate of the council within two months.

The final report of the Board of Inquiry's findings is yet to be completed but board member Barry Easther said the board was hoping to finish it shortly.

"We are working towards finalising the report as soon as we can," he said.

The inquiry has stretched out to nearly two years following numerous Supreme Court challenges.

Mr Brooks is able to appeal Chief Justice Blow's verdict but Mr Easther said he was unaware of any challenges to date. "I'm just aware of the reasons that the Chief Justice gave for his decision," he said.

"All we are focusing on is the report."

NOTE: This investiogation could most likely be reported in and applied to many councils in the State. The Local Govt./ model keeps on delivering less than satisfactory outcomes for ratepayers and generally this can be attributed to a cavalier attitude towards accountability. Often accountability is regarded as discretionary with contentious decision making being hidden behind a veil of secrecy and assertions of "commercial-in-confidence" behind closed doors.

TALK FESTS ON THE TAMAR

Click on image to enlarge

http://www.examiner.com.au/story/4832273/river-taskforce-holds-its-first-meeting/?cs=12

The Tamar Estuary Management Taskforce held its first meeting on Thursday – where its priority tasks were outlined.

Last month representatives for the taskforce were announced, and Treasurer Peter Gutwein called for a solution to the river’s quality to be tabled within six months.

“I took the opportunity to thank members for their participation and I look forward to the advice that comes from their deliberations,” Mr Gutwein said after the group’s first meeting on Thursday.

 The group will develop a River Health Action Plan during the coming financial year.

The key tasks in order of priority will be to: 

- Advise by on how best to mitigate the effect of Launceston’s combined sewerage and stormwater system

- Recommend priority investments and actions

- Propose future ongoing governance arrangements for the estuary.

Infrastructure Tasmania executive Allan Garcia will chair the group.

He will be joined by: 

• General manager, Launceston City Council  [NB Maypr van Zetten's absence]
• Northern Midlands councillor Leisa Gordon 
• George Town Council mayor Bridget Archer 
• West Tamar Council mayor Christine Holmdahl 
• Meander Valley Council mayor Craig Perkins
• Launceston Flood Authority general manager Andrew Fullard
• NRM North executive Rosanna Coombes
• West Tamar Council general manager Rolph Vos
• Environment Protection Authority deputy secretary Martin Read.

Mr Gutwein said it was envisaged the taskforce will establish working groups that will engage the expertise of organisations such as Hydro, TasWater, the TFGA, Launceston City Council infrastructure division, and utilise independent expertise where required.

“I also expect that the TEMT will provide an opportunity for the community to have input into the deliberations of the taskforce,” he said. 

END

COMMENT: I would seem that since settlement Launcestonians have been treating The Tamar in much the same way as the colonisers treated The Tames. Likewise all anyone wants to do is talk about what  they are 'gunna-do'. All the time the river gets dirtier and dirtier and elected representatives and the hired help of all complexions keep on looking the other way as their stipends grow ... so there we have it seems!!

LINKS

Media Release: Time to Tackle Tamar Troubles

TasWater 'not invited' to join Tamar Estuary Management Taskforce

Talking Point: TasWater plan a masterclass in weasel words

The Tamar Estuary Management Taskforce to meet for the first time in July

Launceston mayor and Treasurer Peter Gutwein to talk about Tamar River

The Tamar Estuary Management Taskforce to meet for the first time in July

Alderman Emma Williams to ask City of Launceston to support  Tamar River solution.

Launceston's Dirty Tamar

"Separating Launceston's combined sewerage network at a 'cost of hundreds of millions of dollars' is not likely to significantly improve the health of the Tamar River, a TasWater senior engineer believes.

The river is subject to about 1000 sewerage outflows each year thanks to the city's unique combined sewer system – the second oldest in Australia to Sydney.

Consisting of one pipe for sewerage and stormwater, some of Launceston's brick-barrelled network dates back to the 1870s.

It works [??] by catching stormwater and sewerage in one pipe before pumping it to a treatment plant. 

In heavy rainfall the pipe can overflow, discharging raw sewage and stormwater into the river to prevent localised flooding.

Separating the system has long been mooted as a fix to faeces flowing into the river.

But TasWater treatment asset performance senior engineer Cameron Jessup said the entity's modelling showed splitting the network might not provide a value for money. 

"Work done to date doesn't suggest separation will give the best environmental outcomes," he said.

"The issues with separation was it was going to be very costly compared to the other upgrade options."

TasWater studies found the combined system contributed about 5 per cent of sediment load in the river, about 1 per cent of its nutrient load and 30 per cent of its pathogen. 

"The work we've done to date doesn't suggest a separated system is going to be a silver bullet," Mr Jessup said.

"You weren't going to see a marked reduction in solids load, you will see some reduction in that pathogen load – it's not going to be as significant as people expect."

The catchment area of the Tamar's tributary, South Esk, makes up about one-sixth of Tasmania's land mass. 

Forestry, farms and industrial pollution contributes to the quality of flow into the river.

"It's very difficult to put our hopes on one activity to significantly alter what's going on in the receiving environment," Mr Jessup said. 

"Spending hundreds of millions of dollars on separation doesn't seem to represent great value to our customers." 

Mr Jessup said Launceston's combined system was able to capture and treat the first rainfall flush, which pushes road contaminants and sediment into drains.

Under a separated system the stormwater would flow untreated into the river."

COMMENT

Well, well, I'm no engineer but I have watched the pointless separation of Trevallyn's stormwater from the sewer. The result is just as Hayden Johnson reports in The Examiner, Trevallyn's stormwater is sent speedily to the river gathering up all kinds of crap on its journey.

A lot of money, a lot of money, was spent by ratepayers "getting ready to hand it over to TASwater" and absolutely pointlessly. It remains an expensive and unfunny joke that nobody wants to talk about.

However, there were contractors who did very nicely out of the project and at the time more than the odd resident made that observation. Likewise, more recently on Bald Hill Rd – see http://baldhillroad7250.blogspot.com.au/ – spurious, and expensive, stormwater mismanagement has been undertaken by Launceston City Council and no amount of pleading with Mayor van Zetten and Robert Dobrzynski could influence the inept decision making.

You see under SECTION 65 the GM could determine anyone he liked to be an "expert" and delegate authority to whoever he liked under SECTION 62 of the Act.

As for Mayor van Zetten he was quite simply disinclined to intervene in the ratepayers' interest albeit that there were indications that West Tamar Council was prepared to entertain cost sharing. Along with his disinclination to amalgamate on terms suitable to adjoining jurisdictions, if his calls for 'resource sharing' seem hollow there seems to be quite a bit of evidence about that might lead you to think such things.

If The Tamar is to ever be dealt with in the way it needs to be Launceston's overblown council operation needs to be removed from the equation.

However, handing ownership of TASwater to the State Govt. is no way to go either!!

Rather TASwater needs to be corporatised as a Community Cooperative with the State's ratepayer directly holding shares. Tasmanian Govt. and Launceston's Councils over hundreds of years have looked the other way as The Tamar degraded!

It's time for a new approach!!

Ray Norman

Tidey bids farewell to City of Launceston

Tidey bids farewell to City of Launceston

http://www.examiner.com.au/story/4922614/tidey-bids-farewell-to-city-of-launceston/

 

"After more than 30 years of service at the City of Launceston the director of corporate services and acting general manager Michael Tidey has announced his retirement.

 

Mr Tidey has held the position of director of corporate services at the council since the mid-1990s but his career with the City of Launceston began in the 1980s as a management accountant.

​Launceston Mayor Albert van Zetten said one of Mr Tidey's chief responsibilities was overseeing the balancing of the council's budget each year.

"The process for developing the budget each year is a detailed and challenging one," Ald van Zetten said.

"It is obviously crucial that you have someone at the helm of that process who is extremely capable and efficient, and who can lead the organisation through the opportunities and challenges that come with allocating ratepayer's dollars in the best interests of the community."

RELATED STORIES:

• City of Launceston general manager Robert Dobrzynski retires
• City of Launceston appoints Michael Stretton as new general manager
• City of Launceston general manager Robert Dobrzynski delays retirement until October

Mr Tidey also oversaw the myriad changes in information and communication technology systems since the mid-1980s, the evolution of the council's corporate strategy, and the way the council interacts with its customers.

"He has accumulated a huge amount of corporate knowledge in his 32 years with the council, and is a greatly respected member of our executive team," Ald van Zetten said.

"He is highly regarded by council staff for his ability to translate complex financial matters into simple language, and for his broad knowledge of local government and the operations of the City of Launceston."

The recruitment process for a new director of corporate services has already begun.

Mr Tidey will retire shortly after Michael Stretton commences as the council's general manager in October.