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.

 

 

 

 

Survey finds concerns

Hi, I found this article - Survey finds concerns, and thought you might like it http://www.examiner.com.au/story/4916250/survey-finds-concerns/

Chris Kenny "With apologies to a former Labor PM, we can observe that contemporary political controversies seem to have ensured every cockatoo in every pet shop has a view on Section 44 (i), Section 83 or Section 51 (xxvi) of the Constitution. .......... Whether debating the eligibility of the Deputy Prime Minister to sit in parliament, the authority of the government to fund a postal survey or the race powers and the push for indigenous recognition, the Constitution and its interpretation by the High Court are live ­issues. .......... On the whole, our rule book works remarkably well. A minimalist document, combining the strengths and lessons from the Westminster tradition and the American experience, it has proved to be wise and robust, a credit to the judgment and restraint of our founding fathers (yes, those much-maligned older white men must take the credit). .......... Even Section 44 (i) on disqualification for allegiance to a foreign power is perfectly fine in its intent; it is just that in the modern age it leaves the eligibility of our citizens exposed to the laws of foreign countries. Under a strict interpretation we could all be rendered ineligible to run for parliament in an instant: Kim Jong-un could proclaim a law bestowing citizenship of North Korea on all Australians and none of us would be eligible to contest the next election; a blessed relief for many. .......... Aside from that, the vexed issue of indigenous recognition and perhaps the trifling matter of whom we decree to be our head of state, there is not much of our Constitution you would want to change. Over-governed we might be, yet this amalgamation of six colonies in a federation, with local government subservient to state constitutions, does as good a job of melding the competing responsibilities as you might think plausible. .......... In other words, don’t blame the Constitution for our shambolic federal relations. Quite the opposite; the real problem is that all three levels of government seem intent on ignoring the rules and straying on to each other’s turf. .......... In the City of Fremantle as well as the Yarra and Darebin councils in Victoria, local governments have taken their eyes off rubbish collection and traffic management and decided to shift this ­nation’s national day. .......... Just a few years back, Marrickville Council in Sydney’s inner west passed a motion (subsequently overturned) to “boycott all goods made in Israel and any sporting, institutional academic, government or institutional cultural exchanges”. This is a level of government not even recognised in the national Constitution and it was meddling in foreign affairs. .......... We know “external affairs” is not the exclusive domain of local government. But could it perhaps fall to the states? On June 22 this year the South Australian state parliament passed a motion condemning settlement building by Israel and demanding Australia “recognise the State of Palestine”. .......... Here was a state deep in debt that has the highest unemployment rate in the land and can’t keep its lights on — South Australia, not the Palestinian territories — and it sought to dabble not just in foreign affairs, but in the most intractable international quandary of the modern age. Move over Bill Clinton, Yasser Arafat and Shimon Peres, Jay Weatherill coming through. .......... The audacity, pointlessness and ill-discipline of all this is beyond the comprehension of most of us, who might want the state government to deliver affordable power or open a new hospital within a year of its due date and a bull’s roar of its estimated cost. Many a mayor, premier, councillor or state MP, of course, will take an international trip to indulge in the “external affairs” of sister city relationships and the like. We understand the junket-led imperative and appreciate that little harm is done, other than to the financial forbearance of taxpayers and ratepayers. .......... But it was only a couple of years ago that the then NSW Liberal premier Mike Baird was urging Australia to adopt a higher refugee intake: seemingly immigration was not listed as an exclusive federal power under Section 51 either; actually it is. .......... Seemingly valuing his own virtue-signalling over a consistent national approach or a clear division of power, Baird doubled down by offering free TAFE courses and public transport discounts for asylum-seekers. No one seems to be happy to stick to their knitting any more. .......... In Victoria, Daniel Andrews’ Labor government has dabbled in treaties, establishing a working group to progress an agreement with indigenous Australians. The website recognises three big problems: getting the parties to agree; the limited powers of the state constitution; and the fact this is an area of federal responsibility means Victoria can only advocate, not deliver. You don’t say. So it transpires Victoria didn’t need a working group … it needed a federal government. And we ­already have one. The states have also overreached on climate policy. It wasn’t good enough for Canberra to sign up to the Kyoto and Paris agreements and mandate a renewable energy target: the states decided to set loftier goals. .......... Weatherill’s 50 per cent renewable target is the root cause of SA’s power woes and now ­Andrews is following that path in Victoria. The green crusade by the states, albeit based on a federal subsidy scheme, has created the national energy supply crisis. .......... The confounding of the federation cuts the other way too; thanks to the renewable energy target, Canberra has an ownership stake in the state-based energy dilemmas that were once for the states to sort. The federal government’s micro-intrusion is so complete that it is considering taking a stake in an existing coal-fired power station or building a new one, an area of public ownership most states have vacated. .......... Our founding fathers might be rolling in their graves; although, just to be clear, different cemeteries in various ways come under local, state and federal jurisdiction. .......... The overwhelming trend in federation has been the expansion of the federal sphere — the increasing tendency for Canberra bureaucrats and funds to seep into every crevice. Old notions of competitive federalism and states’ rights have been brushed aside. .......... The feds have inveigled their way into the funding arrangements of every school and hospital in this country, once clearly state responsibilities. Now every ribbon cutting at every school sees a crush of federal and state MPs claiming credit, while they endlessly pass the buck over problems. Canberra has also waded into disability services, adding another massive bureaucracy to the cost of helping some of our most vulnerable. .......... And just a few days ago we saw Malcolm Turnbull go into Sydney’s Martin Place to make an announcement about bollards. Sure, it was related to national security, but here was a federal policy on bollards: you won’t find that in Section 51. From opposition, Tony Abbott promised federation reform. He didn’t do much in government and the Prime Minister inherited the challenge before parking the white paper process last year and referring outstanding matters to a subgroup on financial relations under the Council of Australian Governments. It is now lost in a maze of jargon. .......... This is where the hard grind of federation reform is to be had: adjusting the horizontal fiscal equalisation that rewards indolent states with extra cash from better performing states; and working to reduce the vertical fiscal imbalance whereby states spend vast amounts of money raised by the federal government. .......... Until states are more responsible for their own revenue-raising and can rely on a fairer slice of the GST snared within their borders, the levels of acrimony will persist while accountability and efficiency won’t improve. The states need more responsibility, not less."

GOOD GOVERNANCE

WHAT ARE THE MAIN CHARACTERISTICS OF GOOD GOVERNANCE?

Good governance [in local government] has eight major characteristics

1. Good governance is accountable

Accountability is a fundamental requirement of good governance. Local government has an

obligation to report, to explain and to be answerable for the consequences of decisions it has

made on behalf of the community it represents and serves.

2. Good governance is transparent

People should be able to follow and understand the decision making process. This means that they are able to clearly see how and why a decision was made – what information, advice and consultation a council considered, and which legislative requirements (when relevant) a council followed.

3. Good governance is law-abiding

Decisions must be consistent with relevant legislation or common law, and be within the powers of local government. In Tasmania, the principal legislation for local government is the Local Government Act 1993 (the Act). There are two sets of regulations relating to the Act which you should consult: the Local Government (General) Regulations 2015 and the Local Government (Meeting Procedures) Regulations 2015. The section on Legislative Compliance provides details of other relevant legislation.

4. Good governance is responsive

Local government should always try to represent and serve the needs of the entire community while balancing competing interests in a timely, appropriate and responsive manner.

5. Good governance is equitable

A community’s wellbeing depends on all of its members feeling that their interests have been considered by their council in the decision making process. All groups, particularly the most vulnerable, should have opportunities to participate in the decision making process, and all groups should be treated equally by their council.

6. Good governance is participatory and inclusive

Anyone affected by, or interested in, a decision should have the opportunity to participate in the process for making that decision. Participation can happen in several ways – community members may be provided with information, asked for their opinion, given the opportunity to make recommendations or, in some cases, be part of the actual decision making process.

7. Good governance is effective and efficient

Local government should implement decisions and follow processes that make the best use of the available people, resources and time, to ensure the best possible results for their community.

8. Good governance is consensus oriented

Wherever possible, good governance involves taking into account the different views and interests in a municipality to reach a majority position on what is in the best interests of the whole community, and how it can be achieved.

CLICK HERE TO GO TO SOURCE

ENDNOTE It is just a pity that 'The Act' no longer guarantees "GOOD GOVERNANCE" by Tasmania's Councils. The principles are fine but the manner in which they are delivered, well look around us!!

A WAY FORWARD: Local Govt, 21st C and Tasmania

CLICK ON AN IMAGE TO ENLARGE

If we're truly looking for a better Local Govt. model for Tasmania there are some borders that are irrelevant and they must be removed if we to have a Local Govt model that fits the 21st Century understandings.

None of this is rocket science and you do not need to be a Rhodes Scholar to get your head around it. You simply need to be committed to 21st C standards of accountability and the changes that'll get us there.

Ald. Janie Finlay has posted the current map of Tasmanian Local Govt. jurisdictions on Facebook. So, if this looks it might be a run up to a tilt at the Mayors job, well it might be. However,  it does open up a front for a discussion!

When you ask what Local Govt. might look like in 10 years you to think change. What's really needed is a commitment to change, 21st C change and change well away from the status quo.  Firstly, that'd be change that delivers ACCOUNTABILITY. But, real change would leave so, so, so many elected representatives out of the loop because of the demonstrated current lack of accountability.

If we're actually interested in the future just look around us and be real about what is being contributed to a 21^st C future and we're almost through the second decade.

Mark Bishop has said on Facebook "3 municipal councils statewide would still be too many given our population, but it might work on a statewide basis if the boundaries/ areas had the same population numbers with a 'handicap bonus' for extra land area managed." 

 Basil Fitch has said via Facebook, paraphrased, IF we're really serious we would be doing two things right now..... we'd be holding Councils to account ...... and we'd be working assiduously for a changed local Govt. model for Tasmania. ... However, Tasmania's hapless ratepayers are unlikely to see very much of anything that might be mistaken for change given Council bureaucracies self interest in maintaining the status quo and especially so with sections 62 and 65 in the Act remaining in place.

A great many Tasmanians seem to have lost faith with Tasmania's Local Govt. model. Some (many?) believe that it is broken and broken well beyond repair. All too many aldermen and councilors are unwilling to be held to account and are liable to have an allergic reaction if "accountability" is mentioned in their company.

Likewise, many among the operational cum management people seem to hold ratepayers in contempt the higher up the corporate ladder one goes. Along with them many of the elected representatives are with them spouting rhetoric like "we've been elected to make decisions". Well yes, but not in isolation.

How do we move forward? Well we do NOT attempt to patch up the Local Govt Act 1993 as it is it's outdatedness that has got us to where we are ... IN DEEPLY TROUBLING TIMES ... Think Huon, Glenorchy, Derwent Spring Bay, Southern Midlands, Launceston looming etc. etc...

Note: Edited from various sources on Facebook by Treva Alen

MERCURY: Talking Point: Give ‘em two years to do it right

TERRY AULICH, Mercury   September 7, 2017 12:05am

LOCAL Government Minister Peter Gutwein has seven hot potatoes in his hands and some of them are from a fire he lit.

And, if elected, a Labor government would face the same smouldering problem.

Both mainstream political parties must draw a line in the sand — southern councils must co-operate or be amalgamated.??

It is not just the dithering about the appalling Fragrance skyscraper or the ugly pylons across the face of the mountain that will carry the proposed cable car, it is the total lack of co-ordination between the local councils that leaves ratepayers on edge.

In the Greater Hobart region of about 250,000 people there are seven councils — Brisbane, with over a million people, has one, maybe two if you count Logan City.

Of those seven southern local councils, two have been suspended by the minister for being reduced to stalemates due to bickering and indecision.

Suspension of Glenorchy (population 45,000) and Huon (population 16,000) will cost their ratepayers more than $1 million in fees for the minister's inquiries and for the high salaries of the administrators he appointed.

Meanwhile, Kingborough (population 35,000) is experiencing serious financial difficulties and Derwent Valley (population 10,000) has been lending money to its own councillors.

Lest I be described as white, male and stale in the choice words of Hobart Lord Mayor Sue Hickey, Hobart City Council (population only 50,000 would you believe) also has its share of issues that need a good shake-up.

The war on graffiti as promised by the Lord Mayor seems to have petered out, the Carols by Candlelight fiasco has disappointed thousands, and the Battery Point walkway has been replaced by the gold-plated paving of Sandy Bay Rd, while Macquarie Point seems to be a deserted quandary for local government.

In a tourism-driven state, Hobart city's roads are badly marked, necessitating frequent last-minute driving changes, especially in the rain. Pity the one million tourists, many of whom must navigate the unreadable lines.

Clarence has yet to work out whether it actually wants to have a major sporting venue at Bellerive if the road signage and transport arrangements are anything to go by.

Then there is the Great Water Fiasco that has set Minister Gutwein against local government and TasWater.

My thesis is straightforward — from the date of the next election, the minister give southern councils a two-year deadline to plan for the future in three key areas.

The first is clearly defining where development areas are, so that the Greater Hobart area has growth that can be properly supported by water, sewage and transport infrastructure.

The second is to ensure there is agreement about the type of city we want Greater Hobart to be.

Let's take advantage of Hobart's spectacular scenery and intimate, low-rise historic building precincts.

Let's all enjoy river, mountain and heritage buildings and encourage sympathetic, low-rise construction of fixed maximum height so that everyone, including developers, know what is permitted.

This should then be backed up by an integrated transport system that services the growth areas and overcomes the transport issues that bedevil Hobart's peak hours.

By integration, I mean light rail supported by feeder buses and ferries, preferably electric powered.

This will not happen overnight but other cities are already going down that path. Sydney is trialling dial-up feeder buses so commuters do not need to drive their cars to mainline train stations.

An integrated transport system will guarantee work and business for local manufacturers led by companies like Incat.

Given that countries like Germany and France and car companies like Peugeot and Volvo are phasing out diesels, shouldn't we join the electricity race?

The third must is openness and honesty in approving projects that could possibly detract from Hobart's unique natural and built environment.

Many people choose to live in Hobart because it is one of the most beautiful and liveable cities in the world.

If I wanted a city like Singapore, I would live in Singapore.

Greater Hobart is growing precisely because it is liveable and beautiful.

That is why so many Hobartians are concerned that, in the name of progress, there is a culture developing of wink and nudge when it comes to planning things like cable cars across the face of the mountain or massive high-rise buildings overshadowing Sullivans Cove or the university moving into the city.

In the interest of openness, I wrote to all Hobart aldermen about their views on the mammoth Fragrance building proposed for Sullivans Cove.

All but the Lord Mayor and Marti Zucco responded with a considered answer. Enough said? Perhaps they were too busy arguing about the Taste of Tasmania's future direction.

The minister needs to set a deadline for local government to draw up plans for a regional planning scheme, integrated transport system and rules for development in sensitive areas. At the heart of his demand has to be co-operation.

For example, the Taste of Tasmania is an example of a regional festival supported primarily by the ratepayers of the Hobart City Council.

Does that mean no ratepayer of Kingborough, Clarence or Glenorchy attends or enjoys this premier event or that tourists do not come to the Taste?

The minister could test the water by asking other councils to contribute to the Taste as the first practical step toward this regional co-operation.

In all other matters, he should give them two years and financial resources to help them agree on an overall policy and an implantation plan with timetables.

He should also back off from interference through any overriding powers he seems to be seeking.

At the end of two years, it is job well done or amalgamation.

Terry Aulich is a former Labor state minister and senator for Tasmania. He was also a Latrobe councillor.

NOTES: It's about time local governance in Tasmania was taken much more seriously than it has been. As the state's economy reconfigures itself the old model – the Local Govt. Act 1993!! – needs to be put aside and a new one constructed in consultation with ratepayers and residents – and sooner rather than later.

Also, for a population of just over half a million, and stagnant, and ageing, it needs to be realised that wherewithal – intellectual, fiscal, technological, etc. – to maintain 29 stand-alone local government operations is just not there. Plus, there are much better ways to spend the $2Billion currently spent on behalf of ratepayers and residents.

The current Act grants General Managers way too much powers under SECTIONS 65 & 62 and when taken to their extreme, and they are increasingly, renders the elected representative functionally redundant. All too often this means that the elected representative's allowances are simply 'attendance money' or at the very worst, 'compliance money'.

The model is broken and seriously so! Tasmania needs to abandon it an construct a 'fit-for-purpose' 21^st Century version. That cannot, indeed should not, happen and whatever form it takes needs to be something that's achieved beyond politics with residents, ratepayers and taxpayer participating in the process in a meaningful way.

Let's have a three-year transition period to convert the redundant into the relevant!!

Section 62: http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/viewdoc/au/legis/tas/consol_act/lga1993182/s62.html

Section 65: https://www.legislation.tas.gov.au/view/html/inforce/current/act-1993-095#GS65@EN

TASwater Ownership Inquiry PLEASE CIRCULATE

-- 

Mayor votes to censure himself

             

Article about Southern Midlands Council Mayor.

                       

Mayor votes to censure himself

  At last week's Southern Midlands Council meeting, the Mayor Tony Bisdee voted with his fellow c  ouncillors in favour of a motion calling his conduct totally unacceptable.

  

Cr Bisdee formally apologised to the council and the community and acknowledged his actions were unacceptable.

His apology reads:

"In recognition of the unanimous decision carried by the Southern Midlands Council this morning I make this personal and formal apology today to my fellow councillors, the Southern Midlands Council staff, ratepayers and residents of the Southern Midlands Council for my recent indiscretions and actions regarding my recent court convictions for traffic offences.

"This was an inappropriate and unacceptable action on my behalf and I acknowledge it has reflected poorly upon the good community and public reputation of the Southern Midlands Council as a highly regarded Local Government Council.

"I also acknowledge that my unacceptable actions have severely impacted upon my fellow councillors and all those associated with the Southern Midlands Council and for this I apologise again.

"There is no valid or reasonable explanation for my actions other than to say that I unconditionally accept responsibility for these actions and accept the penalties imposed through the court process.

"I will ensure that these circumstances will not arise or eventuate at any time in the future."

He added that there was no valid or reasonable explanation for his actions.

Councillor Don Fish said he would have preferred a no-confidence motion but did not believe there was enough support.

He also believed the Mayor should have resigned but there was no mechanism to force this outcome.

"We have no power over the Mayor," he said.

"Whatever we do or say, we can't force him to resign. It's all over and done, now we just have to carry on."

Cr Bob Campbell told ABC Radio that at a workshop meeting the day prior to the council meeting, the general manager 'virtually gagged' councillors speaking up about the Mayor at the upcoming council meeting.

No councillors or officers made any comments about Cr Fish's motion against the Mayor. There was a strange silence during this portion of the meeting.