All Councillors voted on the main motion covering this Package, but due to a declaration of interest, Crs Dawkins and McKenzie withdrew from discussion on Point 7 of the Package. The introduction of the grants part of the package was generally welcomed by the Community.
The lengthy application form clearly stated that the closing date was 2 pm on 30 April. People who met the criteria for the grants began working on their applications, meeting the criteria, preparing costings, quotes etc - after all, they were under the impression that they had 4 weeks to do that considerable work.
But this was NOT the case. Within three working days, it was a different story. Applications for the larger $7,000 grant closed, without warning, without waiting until 30 April to receive all applications and to assess them properly.
According to Mayor Van Zetten on the Council's FaceBook on 7 April "We are unfortunately having to hit the pause on accepting any more applications" for the $7000 grants. That meant that a large number of business owners were left high and dry, feeling cheated and angry.
Is this how the council treats its small business owners? Is this the council's view of accountability? Some people have already received their grants, so why hasn't a list been been published in the media of the successful applicants?
Who decided on which applicants got the money? Who takes responsibility for declaring applications should close weeks early and without warning - the Mayor, the councillors, the senior officers? See the comments and questions asked by L'ton Concerned Citizens at https://lcc63.blogspot.com/ "
Against the background that this $650,000 is money provided by the city's ratepayers and residents a lot of questions need to be asked to put these grants in context.
This money is not the Council's money and it didn't fall out of the sky, it was hard won by ratepayers!
So, to the questions:
• Who made the decision about who would get a grant in order to recommend their payment to the elected representatives?
• What information did the applicants provide and where is that information documented?
• What business case were the applicants required to present in order to be eligible for consideration?
• Who are successful applicants and what class of business do they operate?
• When will ratepayers and the unsuccessful applicants discover who got what for what?
• What guarantees does Council have that the money provided will be used for the purpose for which it was provided?
• When are the recipients' due to report to Council that they have fulfilled their obligation to use the money for the purpose for which it was provided and on what evidence?
• When will Council report to ratepayers on the success or otherwise of this initiative and in accord with what criteria?
• Which Councillors are prepared to unreservedly endorse this process as an appropriate use of ratepayer's funds under the current circumstance?
COMMENT: Now compare and contrast what the City of Launceston has done with a whole lot of contention and warped administration in evidence. Once the SPEAK UP questions are answered there are many more arising that will need dealing with eventually.
Both the West Tamar Council and Meander Valley Council have approved measures to support ratepayers in their municipalities during the coronavirus pandemic. .
The West Tamar Council unanimously approved it's Community Care and Recovery Package.
Both councils approved the adoption of a financial hardship policy to support individuals struggling due to the coronavirus.
The hardship policy can postpone rate payments, remit rates or remit late rate payments or penalty interest.
The postponement of rates would be paid back after a period of time either in full or in parts. .
Remission of rates, according to the policy, would only be considered for "the most serious and exceptional of financial hardship cases."
Residents of both municipalities need proof of sufficient hardship to be eligible for the policy.
Residents can apply for the West Tamar's policy online or print and submit a form at wtc.tas.gov.au, call 6383 6350 or 6323 9300 for assistance.
The West Tamar's package also approved the fast tracking of a number of small capital projects for this and next financial year valued at $2 million.
Coronavirus: All the latest updates on COVID-19 for Tasmania
According General Manager Rolf Vos' report, the fast-tracking of said projects will assist by providing op
Projects to be fast-tracked include $264,000 worth of road resealing works, $20,000 of work on Kelso foreshore floodgates improvements and $60,500 on shaft sealing works at the Beaconsfield Mine and Heritage Centre.
Certain commercial and recreational properties will not be charged rates until September 30. .
Doctors and supermarkets, among other businesses, are excluded from the remission.
CLICK HERE TO LINK TO THE EXAMINER STORY
No comments:
Post a Comment