CAR PARK EXPENDITURE ... What is it up to now?

It is said that already $1Million has already been spent and there is some speculation that overall it could be $2Million. Who knows?

Apparently the Councillors  do not know. 

WHO DOES KNOW?

Whatever  has been spent thus far is RATEPAYERS MONEY and ratepayers should be able to find out what is being spent in their name.

Interesting consideration regarding Town Hall money management ... For every $1Million lost, overspent, spent without an outcome, is roughly THREE YEARS SALARY for the GM or known at Town Hall the the CEO. 

Ratepayers need to be concerned! 

 

Why is Council Pushing a $90 Million Carpark Development NOW?

 

DEVELOPMENT?

An artist's impression of the Launceston Creative Precinct.

Site still not secured for $90m Creative Precinct, more than 10 months after it was announced 

Isobel Cootes

The old Birchall car park has not been purchased more than 10 months after the $90 million Launceston Creative Precinct was announced for the site, with a legal battle still ongoing to secure it. .................................. A caveat [Why & what for?] was placed on the property in February due to a legal battle underway between the two companies, with developer Creative Holdings yet to strike a deal with Car Parks Super, the owner of the old Birchalls car park at 41-43 Paterson Street. [Is the City of Launceston involved? If so how?].................................. The City of Launceston council is attached [How and why?] to the creative precinct via its proposal to relocate the St John Street bus interchange, and to redevelop the Birchalls building, which it purchased last year for $8.8 million. [Why was it purchase and for what purpose?] .................................. The council could compulsory acquire the site but mayor Albert van Zetten did not answer if it would or had plans to. [When will he or Council tell ratepayers what and why here?].................................. "Acquisition of the property is ongoing through a legal process. The council is currently awaiting the outcome of this process," he said. [What process and who are the parties involved] .................................. "The council has legal agreements with this company [Which company?] to facilitate the construction of a bus interchange on the site, post-acquisition." [What is holding this up? Is it being held up?]  .................................. The bus interchange must be completed by the end of 2022 as a condition of the council receiving a $10 million drought grant under the Building Better Regions Fund. [Is this a realistic expectation?] The council also received a $6 million no interest loan from the state government for the project. .................................. The state government could also compulsory acquire the site but State Growth Minister Michael Ferguson did not answer if it would intervene. [Why would the State Govt get involved?] .................................. "The government is currently in caretaker mode and understands the property remains subject to a contract for sale between Car Parks Super and Creative Property Holdings. The state is not a party to this contract," he said. [When was any of this deliberated upon in open council? Are the 'workshops' council holds behind closed doors either legal or ethical?] .................................. "Through the Office of the Coordinator-General we have continued to engage with the Launceston city council, Creative Property Holdings and their financiers in relation to the Creative Precinct proposal, including a planned bus terminal. "We remain enthusiastic of the potential of the proposal to transform Launceston and Northern Tasmania." [Why is this land actually needed for a bus interchange given the range of design and planning alternatives available?]

FOR CLARITY: 

The land being discussed here is NOT Birchalls Carpark and it is NOT a component of the acquisition of Birchalls property. 

It is in fact the "Parterson Central Car Park" and it has been known as that for 20 years.

APRIL 28 WHAT IS HOPED FOR POST STATE ELECTION

City of Launceston council

The new governance structure and $209m redevelopment of University of Tasmania Stadium [Can Launceston ratepayers ACTUALLY afford this and is it on their priority list?] heads the City of Launceston council's funding priorities, alongside a $2.5m upgrade of the Princess Theatre, $1m in new drainage and lighting for the Birch Avenue soccer ground, $3m for CBD traffic flow improvements and $3.1m upgrades to the NTCA Ground. [Where is the bus interchange needed and who asked the community and when?]

Launceston acting mayor Danny Gibson said the council had a clear line of sight over which projects it believed were key for the community for some time. [REALLY?]

"This council's priority projects will realise genuine benefits to a large number of people in our community - from sporting clubs, those in our arts and cultural sectors and motorists who frequent the CBD," he said. [REALLY?]

"And if they are picked up by the parties during this election campaign, they will also help boost our local economy significantly, not just in the short term but over coming years as well." [REALLY?]

Tandra Vale April 29

KEEP PLANNING LOCAL

Dear candidates, 

I am writing to you on behalf of Heritage Protection Society (Tasmania) Incorporated [HPST] to ask you to defend the rights of Tasmanians to have a say in their Tasmanian planning system. 

For the reasons outlined below, we are asking you to respond to us to commit to keeping planning within Local Councils, commit to allowing the current implementation of the Tasmanian Planning Scheme to run its course and commit to maintaining a robust planning appeals tribunal, and in particular, to refuse the proposal for security for cost orders. 

1. Commit to keep Planning within Local Councils HPST agrees with the 60+ organisations that comprises Planning Matters Tasmania, that a fundamental but unstated intention of the Liberal Government’s planning changes is likely to be to remove planning from local councils with more centralised control and less local community voices. 

This issue is as big, if not even bigger, than amalgamation. We want to keep planning local. - Commit to keeping planning within local councils – keep planning local. 

There may be problems with how councils make planning decisions but these can and are being addressed without resorting to such a dramatic and undemocratic change. 

Councils can represent their ratepayers and their community voices; they have local knowledge, understand local character and infrastructure needs. 

A planning panel in Launceston or Hobart may not make the best planning decisions about the northwest coast for example. 

 2. Commit to allowing the current implementation of the Tasmanian Planning Scheme (TPS) to run its course HPST understands that the Land Use Planning and Approvals Amendment (Tasmanian Planning Scheme Modification) Bill 2020 allows for the fast tracking of the implementation of some components of the TPS putting the places that you love at risk. 

This Bill is likely to be debated in the first Parliamentary session after the state election. Please reject/amend this Bill for the following reasons: 

• The Gutwein Government looks to be fast tracking components of each Council’s Local Provisions Schedule (LPS), the critical final step in the implementation of the TPS. This would result in less community input on local character and greater ministerial power. The current process should be allowed to run its course. 

•  A new process will also circumvent public input on substantial modifications of a draft LPS. Proponents of developments like Cambria Green could use this process to obtain new zoning to allow for their development without any community input. 

• These changes sadly represent a broken promise made by Peter Gutwein who committed to giving the community a real say in protecting local character through the LPS process. 

• These changes will also make the planning system more complex, confusing and uncertain resulting in poorer planning outcomes for the community and developers. 

3. Commit to maintaining a robust planning appeals tribunal.  Do you know that the Draft Tasmanian Civil and Administrative Tribunal Amendments Bill will threaten your rights to appeal developments (or appeal planning decisions/approvals) undermining our democracy?

This Bill is likely to be debated in the first Parliamentary session after the state election. Please reject/amend this Bill for the following reasons: 

• Please oppose the Gutwein Governments proposed changes to the planning appeals process, in particular, to refuse the proposal for security for cost orders. This is nothing more than applying a gag to ordinary citizens and community groups and will make it prohibitively expensive for the average person or community group to appeal developments. 

•  Please commit to a robust planning appeals tribunal, which is fundamental to a healthy democracy – appeal rights ensure that the community has a say over its future. Ensure that a proper compulsory mediation system is implemented before a matter is referred to a Full Hearing so as to better ensure that affordable and fair outcomes occur. 

Together with the new Major Projects planning assessment process, the above proposed changes will fundamentally undermine community engagement in the planning system; impact our quality of life, our heritage, natural environment, and democracy. 

Tasmania already has Major Projects legislation that has NEVER been utilised, and so why is there now any justification to create it all over again. Too much is being concealed behind a phoney justification for the State to make concessions with fast tracking of projects and approvals because of promoted excuses that the Coronavirus “crises” has justified this. 

We see no evidence that there is any justification to give up our democratic rights as a community or to hand more exclusive powers over to megalomaniac ministers. 

Thank you for considering this request and we look forward to your reply. 

Yours sincerely, 

Lionel Morrell 

President of Heritage Protection Society ((Tasmania) Incorporated 41 High Street East Launceston Tasmania, 7250, Australia 

This email was sent by Lionel Morrell as President of Heritage Protection Society (Tasmania) Incorporated   email address (li82303@bigpond.net.au) 

How much do Tasmanian councils spend on consultants?

 How much do Tasmanian councils spend on consultants?  .... Isobel Cootes 

RTI: The expenditure of Northern councils in Tasmania on consultants. Northern Tasmanian councils have spent more than $9.1 million on consultants in the past five financial years. Consultants are used by councils to: 

• complete work when they do not have the expertise on staff,;
• do not have the required resource capacity; or 
• where a level of independence is required for a particular service;
• such as an assessment of development applications lodged by the council itself. 

The Examiner used Right to Information requests to find out what each council was spending on consultants and on what. 

Northern Midlands Council  ............................ The Northern Midlands Council spent the most, with a total of $3,405,266 on consultants from 2016 to 2020.  ............................ Two Right to Information requests were lodged after the first did not break down the information into each financial year. ............................ It did provide the number of consultants used in the past five financial years, at 19 consultants. I........................... The second RTI, asking for clarification on the financial years, the financial year costs and a break down of the costs, was refused by the council. ............................ The reason given for the refusal by the council's corporate services manager Maree Bricknell was it would "substantially" and "unreasonably" divert council resources from other important work. ........................... However, its annual reports each year said it spent:  In 2016: $722,916 In 2017: $666,222 In 2018: $578,219 In 2019: $638,587 In 2020: $799,282 

City of Launceston council ... The City of Launceston council has spent $2,743,946 on consultants in the past five financial years. It spent: In 2015-16: $484,051 In 2016-17: $496,813 In 2017-18: $768,316 In 2018-19: $315,066 In 2019-20: $679,700 The information was released at the council's March 11 meeting after The Examiner had asked repeatedly for the information.  ............................ The council's chief executive officer Michael Stretton said it developed the consultancy register due to increasing public interest.  ............................ "The council has decided to report the consultancy register to the public in the interests of achieving greater transparency and clarity in respect to the level of expenditure on consultants each year," he said. ............................ "The register identified that the council spent between 0.28 per cent and 0.71 per cent of its total annual expenditure on consultancies in the last five years."

Break O'Day Council............................The Break O'Day Council has spent $1,020,237 on consultants in the past five financial years. Its expenditure on external consultants has reduced over the period, with its highest expenditure on planning consultants at $356,953. ............................ Another big expenditure was the cost of engineers at $142,553 to undertake specialist work including monitoring and inspecting road and bridge infrastructure and modelling for specific projects. ............................ It spent: In 2015-16: $235,151 In 2016-17: $298,326 In 2017-18: $182,484 In 2018-19: $129,091 In 2019-20: $175,185 ............................A council spokesperson said the expenditure was due to undertaking projects related to infrastructure, ranging from roads to building the municipality's mountain bike trail network. ............................ They said tourism and community engagement also led to external help............................. "We deliver these projects to a high standard and do not always have the in-house expertise or manpower available to enable delivery within the expected timeframes, hence the reason external engagement of resources is required," the spokesperson said............................. "Council has seen a huge increase in development applications received in recent years and due to our location does struggle to recruit suitably qualified staff to meet the demand and [in] particular dealing with peaks and troughs in demand."  

George Town Council .....The George Town Council has spent $537,520.13 on consultants in the past five financial years.  ............................ The majority of costs occurred due to recruitment, engineering inspections, reports and strategies for the municipality.  ............................ It spent: In 2015-16: $55,035.04 In 2016-17: $98,296.30 In 2017-18: $103,232.45 In 2018-19: $90,690.61 In 2019-20: $190,265.73 

Flinders Council... Flinders Council has spent $401,260.99 on consultants in the past five financial years............................. The majority of funds were spent on plans and reports for the Flinders Island Airport, the municipality's planning scheme, waste management, flooding reports and other reviews. ............................ A council spokesperson said all of the expenditure was due to not having the expertise needed at the council. ............................ It spent: In 2015-16: $68,527,32 In 2016-17: $103,148.14 In 2017-18: $89,250.51 In 2018-19: $129,695.25 In 2019-20: $10,639.77  

Meander Valley Council ... The Meander Valley Council spent $380,771.04 on consultants in the past five financial years. ............................ The majority of costs occurred due to plans, valuations, reports/studies, zoning and strategies for the municipality. ............................ It spent: In 2015-16: $67,438.09 In 2016-17: $70,647 In 2017-18: $72,951.58 In 2018-19: $95,487.39 In 2019-20: $74,276.98 

West Tamar Council ...The West Tamar Council spent $243,097.18 on consultants in the past five financial years............................. Over the period it used 18 consultants, with the majority of costs associated with the Beauty Point Foreshore Project, planning, reviews of structure plans, landslide reports and energy consumption reductions. ...............It spent: In 2015-16: $34,300 In 2016-17: $27,790 In 2017-18: $30,531.15 In 2018-19: $123,944.03 In 2019-20: $26,532 

Dorset Council .... The Dorset Council spent $285,862.53 on consultants in the past five financial years. Isobel CootesIsobel Cootes ............................ The council's corporate service director John Marik said the large increase in 2017-18 was due to a municipal road condition assessment and revaluation conducted every five years............................. He said the council was extremely cost conscious and until COVID-19 had consistently run an adjusted underlying surplus, on average, of $1.94 million.  ............................ "For a small council that type of result is unheard of within Tasmanian councils, and likely within councils nationally," he said. ............................ "Part of this is ensuring council maximises inhouse knowledge and very sporadically utilises consultants only where there are gaps in council knowledge."  ............................ It spent: In 2015-16: $50,189.27 In 2016-17: $35,710 In 2017/18: $131,942.70 In 2018-19: $28,471.70 In 2019-20: $39,548.85 

Glamorgan Spring Bay ... Council The Glamorgan Spring Bay Council has spent $82,713.83 on consultants in the past five financial years. ............................ The majority of funding went towards planning, engineering reports, design work and field assessments. I ............................ It spent: In 2015-16: $37,513.68 In 2016-17: $1072.73 In 2017-18: $1750 In 2018-19: $500 In 2019-20: $31,378.82