CR PATTISON: Hello.
Good evening, everybody.
Thank you so much for coming along today and welcome to our March Council meeting.
I'm Mayor Liz Pattison and it's a pleasure to welcome members
of the community joining us tonight for our first off-site meeting
of the year here in Deans Marsh.
This meeting is also being live streamed, so a big welcome to those tuning
in online, and of course welcome to my fellow Councillors,
including Councillor Wellington, who will be joining us online
and you'll be able to see her on the screen over there.
Live captioning will accompany the live stream
of this meeting and we hope that this assists those
who may have hearing difficulties.
As we are off site tonight, we may experience technical issues,
including interruptions to the live stream.
If this happens, the meeting will still be recorded and posted
on Council's website tomorrow.
So it just means you might not be able to watch some parts of it live,
but it's definitely recorded and everyone in the community will be able
to see it.
It's really important that we do these meetings out in the community
and we have some great attendance here tonight.
So it's definitely worth the drive out, so thank you.
I would like to acknowledge that here in Deans Marsh at the Community Hall
we are gathered on Gadubanud country.
I pay my respects to Elders past, present and emerging.
The First Peoples have nurtured and protected these lands and waterways
for thousands of generations and I'm so grateful for the opportunity
to live and work in such a beautiful part of the world and Deans Marsh
is definitely a beautiful part of the world, so it's lovely
to be here too.
We also wish to acknowledge the traditional owners
of the lands on which each person is attending
and acknowledge any First Nations people who are viewing the meeting tonight or are
with us in person.
Before we get underway, I also wish to acknowledge the recent tragic loss
on local roads and on behalf of Council, I extend my deepest sympathies to
all those impacted.
In such a tight-knit community, it's likely many will be feeling the pain
and I encourage you to lean on family, friends and community as well
as the wide range of support services which are available for you to access.
So tonight is the first time we are meeting
at Deans Marsh for this Council term and as always,
there have been some really positive and engaging events across our community.
Firstly, on Sunday, 17 March the Deans Marsh Festival
and Market took place and Councillor Allen is going to talk more about this shortly
in his presentation.
We also had the Aireys Inlet Music Festival, which took place from 15
to 17 March.
It's a boutique music festival now in its 18th year and it was
over six venues across Aireys Inlet and featured a very diverse line-up
of performers.
The Great Ocean Road Mini Golf hosted the Push FReeZA Stage showcasing
the best developing bands from across our region.
And also on 16 March
- it was a really busy weekend
- the inaugural One Planet Festival was held at Torquay's Elephant Walk with lots
of people enjoying the nice family vibe and great conversations
between community groups, businesses, Council and community members on how
to live more sustainably.
There were stalls at the festival engaging community
and seeking feedback on Council's Draft Circular Economy Action
Plan.
And on that, there was also this great stall
from Painkalac Plastic and you could get earrings made
out of plastic that had been taken
- rubbish plastic, pollution from the Painkalac Creek which
they had been turned into earrings, so I got some lovely earrings there.
So that was pretty exciting.
I'm also really excited to be able to provide an update
on the Renewable Energy Action Plan.
As you may be aware, a community-led process
to develop a Renewable Energy Action Plan for Deans Marsh and District concluded
in December 23.
Informed by community workshops and surveys, the plan is comprised
of three phases, each to be implemented by community members.
The first phase will help residents obtain expert advice
on improving the energy efficiency of their homes.
The second phase will help residents understand products
and rebates available to electrify their homes and
to connect residents with trusted suppliers and installers.
The third phase will focus on more collaborative efforts
to achieve 100% renewable energy, including a sustainable firewood program
and improved energy security at a local emergency relief centre.
Congratulations to everyone involved and I look forward
to seeing the plan come to life.
And now to our agenda.
So Council meetings operate to our adopted Governance Rules,
which include the following procedures.
During the meeting, the mover of a motion or an amendment may speak
for a maximum of 5 minutes to open debate and then a further 2 minutes
to make a closing statement.
Any other Councillor, including the seconder, may speak
to a motion for no more than 3 minutes.
I ask that members of the gallery avoid using mobile phones
during the meeting as this can be distracting for Councillors
as well as other members of the gallery.
I also note that any unauthorised recording of the meeting is prohibited
under our Governance Rules.
However, you can access a copy of the official recording on our website
after the meeting, so there's plenty of ways you can look
at what's been discussed.
I'd now like to recite the pledge as a sign of our commitment:
"As Councillors, we carry out our responsibilities with diligence
and integrity and make fair decisions of lasting value for the wellbeing
of our community and environment."
Now we get into apologies.
Do we have any apologies for tonight's meeting?
No.
Confirmation of Minutes
- can I please have a mover and a seconder to confirm the minutes
of the Council meeting held on Tuesday, 27 February?
Thank you, Councillor Bodsworth, and seconded by Councillor Hodge.
All those in favour.
And the motion is carried unanimously.
Do we have any leave of absence requests?
No.
And now presentations.
Gary, did you want to do a presentation on Deans Marsh Festival.
CR ALLEN: Thank you, Mayor.
Just over a week ago, the Deans Marsh Festival,
in its 26th year, was held at this precinct.
It was a great day and yet again an example of how Deans
Marsh residents combine to support the work in their community.
On this day, the Deans Marsh CFA, the primary school
and the cricket club were beneficiaries of the fundraising
and I'm told the final figure is around the $10,000 mark that was raised
on the day for those three organisations.
Looking at the running sheet, I counted at least 30 names of community members
who were responsible for different aspects of the festival
and the highlights that I saw were the wood chop, the dog jumping,
tightrope walking, fete games, and the famous sheaf toss.
I'm pleased the shire supports the festival in the form
of a community grant from the Surf Coast Events Program
and I congratulate the organisers and the many volunteers.
Thank you, Mayor.
CR PATTISON: Thank you, Councillor Allen.
And we now have a submission from Councillor Gazzard.
CR GAZZARD: Thank you.
Thank you, Mayor.
I would just like to acknowledge the Paddle Out
that occurred at Torquay Cosy Corner on Saturday, run by Surfrider Foundation,
to stop seismic blasting locally in our Otway Basin.
It was such an amazing event.
There were so many local surfers and other ocean lovers who attended
and just the feeling of everyone coming together
to protect our natural environment was really very moving.
There was a beautiful welcome to country by Corrina
- local Wadawurrung leader Corrina Eccles as well as an acknowledgment
with Gunditjmara custodian Yaraan Couzens Bundle and they actually paddled out
with the coolamon on a surfboard floating for a floating smoking ceremony for wari,
sea country, and that's actually the first time
that that's been done since colonisation.
So seismic blasting drilling for oil in our backyard threatens so many species,
particularly the Koontapool, or the Southern Right Whale,
and many other species in the delicate ecosystems in our ocean.
This proposal is for one of the world's largest offshore drilling
stations with a huge area, 4.5 million hectares, under threat
by seismic blasting.
Seismic blasting can kill zooplankton over 1km away and damage the hearing
of marine animals, such as whales and dolphins, who rely
on their hearing for survival.
So I really commend Surfrider for organising the Paddle Out.
It was one of the biggest Paddle Outs
- they broke a record.
And if you'd like to support, you can go to Surfrider, their website.
There's a petition that you can sign, a citizens' protection declaration,
or write to your local MP.
Thank you.
CR PATTISON: Thank you, Councillor Gazzard.
I realised that I forgot to ask for a declaration of conflicts
of interest, so I'll just jump back in our agenda slightly.
If a Councillor or an officer has a conflict of interest,
they must declare it now and do so again just prior
to the item being discussed.
Do any Councillors or officers have any conflicts of interest they would like
to raise?
No?
We'll skip back down to submissions.
We don't have any submissions for tonight's meeting.
And then we move on to public questions.
Members of the public who wish to ask a question to Council are able
to submit their written questions in accordance
with Council's Governance Rules and we have four community members
who have submitted questions and we have a total of six to address.
So our first question is from Dean Hurlston, who's the President
of Council Watch, and it's regarding waste enforcement costs
and actions.
Given that Dean is not in attendance, I'll read out his question: "What amount
of waste enforcement costs in the current financial year 2023/24 has Council
included in its waste levies charged to residents?"
As this is a very operational matter, I'll pass it to our CEO to respond.
MS ROBYN SEYMOUR: Thanks, Dean.
Can you hear me?
Is that alright?
A bit closer?
Thanks, Dean, for your question.
Enforcement is one of the duties undertaken
by our Litter Prevention Officer and the proportion
of the officer's costs related to enforcement is about $37,000.
This amount is recovered through our waste services charge.
CR PATTISON: And the second question: "What amount
of revenue has Council included in the current financial year 2023/24
from waste enforcement actions and has that revenue been offset
in the waste levy or applied to Council's general revenue streams?
MS ROBYN SEYMOUR: Yes
- so the forecast revenue through the Litter Prevention Officer work
around their enforcement, we think the revenue will be about $5,770.
This doesn't become part of our general revenue.
It offsets the cost that 37,000 proportion of the Litter Prevention Officer's salary.
CR PATTISON: Thank you.
Our next question is from Madeleine McCarney.
Madeleine, are you here and would you like to ask your own question?
You're welcome to come up to the microphone.
MADELEINE McCARNEY: I have to find my question.
CR PATTISON: We've got a copy of it if you can't find it.
MADELEINE McCARNEY: Firstly, thank you
- CR PATTISON: If you do want, you can sit up at the microphone,
although we can hear you fine.
MADELEINE McCARNEY: Can everyone hear me?
SPEAKER: It's more for the recording.
CR PATTISON: Oh, sorry, for the recording actually we do need you
to do it at the microphone so the people online
can hear you.
MADELEINE McCARNEY: How is that?
Can you hear me through the microphone?
CR PATTISON: No, I think you'll need to sit down, sorry.
MADELEINE McCARNEY: I need to sit down.
CR PATTISON: Sorry, I know it's extremely formal, but it's
- MADELEINE McCARNEY: Now I feel like I'm at an inquiry.
CR PATTISON: It's needed for the
- MS ROBYN SEYMOUR: Please don't feel like that.
MADELEINE McCARNEY: And firstly, thank you all for coming.
It's a real treat to have you in our patch.
So this is in relation to the Deans Marsh Community Hub, which is
on the agenda.
I noted in the Brand Architects final report that the proposed new community hub
in their report could be used as an Emergency Relief Centre
in the future.
This was referenced on page 5 and 11 of their report and it's on page 28 and 36
of the Council agenda.
Can Council please confirm that the new community hub can be used
as an Emergency Relief Centre as soon as it is opened?
It just seemed a bit ambiguous the wording
CR PATTISON: Thanks, Madeleine.
And given that, as you mentioned, it's something that the Councillors
will be making a decision on shortly, I'll pass this question to the CEO
to respond.
MS ROBYN SEYMOUR: Madeleine, thank you for your question and for clarifying that.
You're right, it does sound a bit ambiguous.
We have said "could"
deliberately and it could be used as an Emergency Relief Centre.
The next phase of the project, should Council support the concept design
being considered tonight, is the detailed design phase.
So as part of the detailed design phase, we'd be looking
to ensure that the building was designed so that it could have that as part
of its function, if that makes sense.
So that's why it's "could"
rather than "will".
We'll be building it in as part of the detailed design phase.
But it's probably also important just to be clear
around what the Emergency Relief Centre is, as opposed to a Bushfire Place
of Last Resort.
So it wouldn't be a Bushfire Place of Last Resort, but the intention would be
that it would be an ERC and would be a place where people could
come to get information and their basic needs met
if they've been evacuated and can't return home.
But the Bushfire Place of Last Resort, as you would know even better than me,
that isn't here.
It's the carpark of the former Martians Cafe
and the reason why here is a problem is really the cypress trees.
So building a new hub or even this building is not appropriate because
of those cypress trees that surround this precinct.
MADELEINE McCARNEY: I'm still not clear on why it only could be
an Emergency Relief Centre, as opposed to that would be the objective
with the new hub.
MS ROBYN SEYMOUR: Yes.
So I guess it's the intention that we would work towards that, but we'd want
to make sure that through the detailed design, which
is the next phase that we'd be working with community on,
we are ensuring that we are doing that detailed design
to ensure that it meets community needs, which is likely, I would have thought,
to be an ERC as part of that and that's the only reason.
It's not that there isn't an intention.
It's just that we need to do that work together as a next phase
to ensure that it is and there's certain materials that
you have to then build the building with in order to meet the requirements
of an ERC.
MADELEINE McCARNEY: Okay.
Thank you.
CR PATTISON: Thanks for your question, Madeleine.
Our next question is from Deb Rhode around the circular economy Deans Marsh
Hall.
Deb, would you like to read your question?
DEB RHODE: No.
CR PATTISON: Will you read your question for us, please?
I can read it for you if you'd rather.
DEB RHODE: Hi.
I was on the PSG, which is that it, yes, steering group for the project,
the hall community project.
That's what my question is about.
You know, I just want to say in front of everyone here that that process was
absolutely torturous for me and traumatising.
I was an outsider, in my view, because I didn't necessarily
and I still kind of don't want the hall demolished.
I understand there are limits with that and that it's a community decision,
but one of the things I banged on about at the restart was
- oh, is that me?
CR PATTISON: No, no, it was just one of the chairs on the floor.
DEB RHODE: Sorry, okay
- was the idea of embodied energy and the idea that to take something away
and replace it with a whole new build, to push something over bulldozer
and take it to the tip I found highly offensive
and it just so happens that you guys, I understand, have made a commitment
to the Burra Charter, which has a whole lot of stuff in it
about embodied energy, and also the new circular economy document
seems to make a whole lot of the same statements.
So while I felt very much like I was talking
to a wall 18 months ago, it seems like that wall has got a little door
in it now and I'm wondering how the Council intend
to ensure that this project actually is imbued
with the values that are being espoused around climate emergencies, you know,
embodied energy and resources and recycling and so on and so on.
So yes.
CR PATTISON: Thanks for your question, Deb, and I'll pass that on to our CEO.
MS ROBYN SEYMOUR: Thank you, Deb.
So for those who don't know what the Burra Charter is about,
just to kind of
- before I answer your question, I might just make sure everyone
understands what it is.
So the Burra Charter advocates for a cautious approach to change
- I can't speak tonight
- and really what it's advocating for is do as much as is necessary to care
for the place and to make it usable, but otherwise change it as little
as possible so that its cultural significance is retained.
That's really the intention of the Burra Charter.
So in relation to this building and the proposal that's being considered
tonight, I guess the fundamental part of that is that the condition
of this building and the amount of work that's required
to retain it effectively means that we'd need to rebuild it anyway
and there's been a huge amount of work that's been done
within this community to really look at what is needed now and into the future
to suit the needs of this community.
And I guess as part of the consideration of the future, potential future building,
there was a really keen interest in looking to retain some of the features
of this building, like the roof, the design of the roof
- DEB RHODE: I think we've skewed off my vocal point, so I'm just going
to sort of drift us back.
MS ROBYN SEYMOUR: Do you want me to come back
to the circular economy piece and the
- DEB RHODE: My focus is more around sustainability
and creating a poster child for, you know, what a sustainable building
that incorporates recycled materials, yes.
So it was more in that
- there's some of that addressed in the Burra Charter
as well and it was more that part of it that actually interested me.
MS ROBYN SEYMOUR: Okay, sure, yes.
So as part of the circular
- our circular economy objective includes an 80% diversion of material
from landfill and so that would be part of the commitment
of replacing this building and as part of that we'd be seeking
to reuse material wherever possible in the building and
through any other community uses that might be
- that parts of the building could be used through.
We'll also be seeking a GreenStar accreditation as part
of the proposed new building and that includes a range
of circular economy targets and objectives as part of that GreenStar accreditation.
So we would be seeking to achieve that.
We'd also be applying our Environmentally Sustainable Council Facilities Policy
and that considers elements such as water, waste, biodiversity, emissions,
passive solar, design, exposed thermal mass, natural daylight
and ventilation as part of those designs.
So we are very
- as part of any future building, we would be looking
to see how we would manage all of those things
and this building doesn't meet any of those standards.
CR PATTISON: Thanks for your question, Deb.
DEB RHODE: Thanks.
CR PATTISON: Our next question is from Melissa Tinney, from Modewarre,
regarding duck shooting.
You are here, great.
MELISSA TINNEY: Hello, everyone, and thanks so much for your time tonight.
Question 1, closure of Brown Swamp and Lake Modewarre to duck shooting
in 2024.
That's the main question there and I'd also like to
- to the Mayor and Councillors here today, I'm representing the landholders, Friends
of Lake Modewarre, and concerned local community
of Brown Swamp and Lake Modewarre.
Firstly, in relation to Brown Swamp, which is governed, to my understanding,
by Parks Victoria, I have lived bordering brown Swamp
for 26 years now.
In that time when there is water in the swamp duck shooting has
- the third Saturday of March, ends June, early June, mid-June.
My home is approximately 80 metres from the shooters where they're allowed
on the water's edge to shoot and my livestock when grazing are
approximately 20 metres away from shooters.
It is a frightening experience, believe me, to wake up in the early hours
of the morning to gunfire.
It's extremely traumatising for neighbours' families,
which include two families at the moment with young children of 5 years and under.
The effects on livestock and the neighbouring properties' farms
is also damaging and traumatising for the stock surrounding Brown Swamp
along with the people.
It can cause a lot of mental health problems
within the family talking about gunfire, why they're shooting,
why they're so close, they won't hurt us, they're all friendly, but it rings out.
And I just take this time because it's so lovely and quiet here.
If in this peace you can imagine fire shots 40 metres away ringing
out while you're having tea, it is very disturbing and it does
- look, it puts the wind up you, basically.
I've no problem with duck shooters.
Shooting of any allowed species of ducks is fine, I don't have a problem,
but now it's not understandable for young families, any families,
elderly people to be living so close to shooting
and it really needs to be changed.
The explosions of continuing gunfire throughout the day for
over a month can cause an impact on families and livestock.
Brown Swamp and Lake Modewarre is a precious wetland
of inhabitants for wildlife, not only including ducks but echidnas,
swans, spoonbills, protected birds, endangered frogs and native
and endangered vegetation.
We would like to ask for Council approval today
to work towards Brown Swamp and Lake Modewarre to be reclassified
to flora and fauna reserve, where duck shooting is prohibited
at the moment.
Importantly, we ask that Council move a motion of support to close Brown Swamp
and Lake Modewarre to duck shooting for 2024.
Thank you so much for your time today.
Thank you.
CR PATTISON: Thank you, Melissa, for coming here and talking to us
and explaining so clearly your concerns.
It's really important to understand where you're coming from
and what you've explained really resonates to understand what that is.
As you've already identified, Council is not the land manager
of either Brown Swamp or Lake Modewarre.
Brown Swamp and its surrounding land is a farming zone and for this to change,
the land manager would need to undertake a reclassification process,
which in this case is Parks Victoria for Brown Swamp and the Department
of Environment and Climate Action for Lake Modewarre.
The timing of the duck hunting season and the decision as
to which wetlands are open to hunters is decided
by the Game Management Authority and you probably already know a lot
of these details.
MELISSA TINNEY: Yes.
CR PATTISON: Council does not have an adopted position on duck hunting
and it's not included in our current advocacy priorities,
although other environmental initiatives, as was raised in the presentations
- we do have a stance on other environmental issues,
such as seismic blasting and the like.
In relation to changes to duck hunting, we encourage you to advocate directly
to the Victorian Government, which is the responsible authority.
So whilst we can't address the issue tonight, there
is an option where an individual Councillor can put forward a Notice
of Motion for Councillors to consider at a future Council meeting, and so I
think it's great you've raised your concerns with us and that's something
that could be considered at a future Council meeting.
MELISSA TINNEY: Thank you so much.
Can I just also, just to let you know, that amongst all the wildlife
at Brown Swamp in particular where I live Parks Victoria
has always had it since I've been there, 26 years.
They gave up land, Parks Victoria, and gave it to the Council because
they didn't want to care for the 20 acres as such,
where the kangaroos used to live, the wedge-tailed eagles used to nest,
echidnas.
So when the duck shooters come in now, the kangaroos take off and jump, oh, 200,
250 metres over my property and jump across the road and get hit by cars
and there's people's lives at stake here as well.
It's not just kangaroos dying.
A lot of people get injured.
Cars get absolutely wiped off.
And there's a lot of wildlife there, not just ducks, and it's come
to a point I think in life that you should be able
to enjoy what surrounds you and not have to deal with shooting.
And duck hunters are fine, they're really respectful,
but they still shoot and, yes, it's a bit of a problem.
CR PATTISON: Thanks for your question.
MELISSA TINNEY: Thank you so much.
CR PATTISON: Thank you.
You've got your hand up, Councillor Wellington?
CR WELLINGTON: Yes, I just wanted to ask a question on that, if I could.
I went out to the site at Brown Swamp and Lake Modewarre last week with a couple
of other Councillors and really the notion of people tolerating this,
especially children tolerating the shooting that's occurring out there,
or that will occur out there very shortly when duck hunting season starts, it's just
- it's just outrageous in my view.
We didn't have time to get a Notice of Motion in because we've got a 10-day
limit on it and even an urgent Notice of Motion for this Council requires
an officer report, so we only saw this on Friday.
CR PATTISON: Thank you, Councillor Wellington.
Did you have a question?
CR WELLINGTON: I'm just wondering
- I'm wondering if there's any opportunity for officers to form a view, officers
to form a view about whether they have concerns about this
without forming a final view from Council and can they enact to the minister?
CR PATTISON: I think, Councillor Wellington, this
is something that we can consider at a later date.
We're currently in public question time and we do have some other questions.
But it's an important point that you've raised and something that we can take back
and consider at Council.
So thank you for raising that.
CR WELLINGTON: If you wouldn't mind, Mayor Pattison, if I can just say that
by the time we get to consider it as a Council, duck season will be finished
and those people will have had to put up with a really intrusive and unreasonable
- CR PATTISON: Okay.
It's not something that we can consider at this current Council meeting,
but thank you for raising your concern.
We have another question from James Morton and Deans Marsh.
Would you like to come forward and read out your question?
JAMES MORTON: Thank you, Councillors, for coming to Deans Marsh.
As Madeleine says, it's a real treat to host you here.
My question is the Council are considering the approval
of the Deans Marsh Community Hub Facility Development Plan at tonight's meeting.
As owners, my wife and I are owners of the only remaining hospitality
and retail business in the 100-year-old, 100-plus-year-old
commercial trading precinct that is the centre of Deans Marsh.
So we think we have a somewhat unique insight into the viability of this project
and the viability of the town moving forward.
We moved to this town in 2009 and we've observed a steady decline
in commercial activity in the town and this has also coincided
with a reduction in school student numbers.
To give you a perspective, when our children first went
to the school, there were over 60 children.
They're struggling to meet the threshold of around about 40 children at the moment.
So that's a pretty significant decline that we've observed.
You'll also see, if you look at the census data,
that there's been an increase in the average age
of the town's population from 40 to 47 from that period in around about 2010
to the current period.
From a demographics perspective, any demographic expert will tell you that
is a huge shift in demographics for this town.
So put simply, the town is ageing, commercial activity is declining,
and we feel that the Council needs to prioritise investment
in building town population and economic activity ahead
of the $8 million that you're proposing to invest in a hall facility.
The hall facility is great and it will aid the community moving forward,
but if population continues to decline, then that's not a really wise investment.
So before
- so I guess, yes, before you commit to that large community development,
you know, we really fear that the town might end up
like Barwon Downs.
Barwon Downs isn't in your shire, but I'm sure people do drive
through there.
You'll see that it used to have a school, it used to have a store, it used
to have lots of sporting teams.
If Deans Marsh continues on that path, there will be no school, there
will be no sporting teams, there will be no store and we
will just become a pass-through on the way to Lorne.
So my question is that will Council commit to funding an economic development study
for Deans Marsh?
As part of this community hub redevelopment,
we feel that the Council needs to go down the path
of an economic development study so that we can ensure the long-term viability
of the town, retain the school, the great community that we have,
the culture, the sporting clubs and ultimately restore the commercial
precinct that is slowly dying.
CR PATTISON: Thanks for your question.
I'll pass that one to our CEO.
MS ROBYN SEYMOUR: Thank you for your question.
I might pass it to our GM of Placemaking & Environment to talk about
in terms of that strategy, but one of the things that is worth mentioning
is I was actually looking at the projections for population
for Deans Marsh just earlier today and you might be pleased to hear that yes,
there is
- the projections show an ageing population , but also a growth in the younger age
group.
So the projections for zero to 9-year-olds by 4041 is that there will be 71, compared
to 53 in 2024.
So it is showing a modest but still a growth in young people
in Deans Marsh in coming years.
But in relation to your specific question of an economic development strategy,
I might pass it to our General Manager of Placemaking & Environment.
MR CHRIS PIKE: Thanks, Robyn.
Thanks, James.
I think you'll acknowledge we need a little bit of time
to contemplate this one.
JAMES MORTON: Sure.
MR CHRIS PIKE: And it's a big issue that you raise and, you know,
I appreciate that kind of unique perspective that you offer being
here on the ground and seeing change over time.
And we're
- that matter of
- you know, whilst I acknowledge you talk about as economic development,
we're talking about the viability of smaller towns
and it's an issue that's surfacing to different extents each in unique ways
but in other towns too, typically kind of wrapped up in the housing crisis issue,
where people are struggling to find places to live that are affordable
and that undermining the viability of organisations that rely
on volunteers in the schools and so on, particularly against that backdrop
of an ageing population, which is a societal trend too.
I had a quick look at the MaDCAP plan from a couple of years ago too just
to kind of see if I could see the signs of these issues there being discussed
as kind of a
- I think you're putting sort of an existential crisis for the town,
you know, and I could see the references to that in there.
Specifically to your question, so we aren't taking a town-by-town
approach to viability.
We don't have a program where we are undertaking reports to look
at each individual town and all of the different dimensions that go
to that question of their viability and in terms of a commitment for Council
to do that, I'm not in a position to make that commitment.
You're certainly making the issue clear to the Councillors assembled here.
What I can speak to is that Council's work tends to take place
across the shire.
So we're busy in that affordable housing space.
We have that growth forecast that Robyn touched on for Deans Marsh
and we've got a role of the planning authority
to support appropriate development taking place and there are processes that
we're involved in trying to influence at the state level that have a local
impact.
So there's something like the small second dwelling provisions
that are quite new that we'd anticipate will see development occurring
in towns that are landlocked and it will be really interesting
to see how that impacts places like Deans Marsh and other towns and
whether that brings additional population in.
And then
- and I'll try not to go on too long
- there's the work that we do in the economic development space, where we tend
to work at a plan or strategy level across the shire.
The one in the Hinterland is the Hinterland Strategy.
We've got a big focus on supporting things like events to try
to draw that economic activity in and we're really mindful that the engine
room of the economy and Surf Coast, whilst tourism is really important,
it's actually small businesses based in people's homes,
which aren't always visible.
Now, I appreciate you're in a position where you see that there's a trickle down
into commercial activity at your business.
You're best placed to comment on that.
We do have
- I've got various teams in my portfolio that includes our
Economic Development team.
Part of their remit is to work with individual businesses or those
who are considering prospective businesses to see if there's a role that we can play
to get those up and to get those started.
So if there's something specifically to your business, I'm really happy
to connect you in with our staff.
But to close the loop back to your original question, our work tends
to take place at a level across the shire, sometimes manifesting
in particular local initiatives, but right now we don't have that kind
of program of developing the reports that you've flagged, yes,
so that's not something that's on the horizon for us.
JAMES MORTON: It's disappointing because we've tried to engage
with Council.
We've had discussions directly with the Mayor that resulted
in one meeting with Council employees six months ago
- six to nine months ago, actually
- which resulted really in nothing in terms of ongoing engagement with us.
And I would question while you're looking at a forecast, you know, in terms
of population growth, what we're seeing is the reality on the ground and a lot
of that population data might have been on the basis of a boom of people moving
to the Surf Coast Shire during COVID and what we're actually seeing now
is that people are moving back closer to Geelong
and those people that are coming in are, unfortunately, aged probably
over 47 or 50 who have sold up their expensive houses in Melbourne
and are moving to the country.
So, you know, to that end
- to that end
- the trend is continuing and so that's why we're encouraging the Council to actually,
you know, invest some time to actually get to understand what's happening
on the ground and not rely on, you know, broad forecast data.
You need to help the town.
CR PATTISON: Thanks, Dean, for raising that issue with us.
JAMES MORTON: It's James.
CR PATTISON: James, sorry.
Sorry.
Names is not my forte, but I do appreciate you raising it.
Thank you.
So there's a wide variety of issues that have been raised
in question time and we will definitely take these back
and reflect upon them.
So thank you.
JENNIFER BANTOW: Madam Mayor, I ask your indulgence
if I may ask a short question.
CR PATTISON: Could you
- you can.
We have a few more minutes.
Given that we've had no time to consider the question,
you can ask the question.
However, we may not be able to answer it.
So you're welcome
- yes, so you'll need to take a seat and you can ask the question,
but whether or not we can answer it, we may just have to take it on notice.
JENNIFER BANTOW: I understand.
Thank you.
My name is Jennifer Bantow.
I'm an Honorary Life Member of the National Trust and here
as a volunteer.
I've been here for now several years, coming here to try to save this hall.
As a former mechanic's institute and free library,
a place where compulsory education started in regional towns in these sorts
of buildings, it's lovely to be inside this beautiful historic interior.
I know the outside needs a lot of maintenance, but that can be done.
We have had an architect from the National Trust look
at this building and he feels that it is salvageable.
The blocks underneath need attention, but it can be saved.
So relating to this hall, which is 140 years old now,
has Council sufficiently considered the possibility of incorporating this
into the new community hub so that old and new can happily co-exist?
This is something we have to learn in this country, I think,
that we can have both.
So the needs of the various components of the community hub can still be new,
some aspects of it, but retain this beautiful place.
So if it is to be a community decision, which has been said tonight, is it
- how do we assess what is a community decision?
Should there be a vote taken is my question.
Thank you.
CR PATTISON: Thanks for your question and I think a lot of your comments
around the old and the new, et cetera, has been covered in our response
to Deb's question earlier tonight and as you can see from our agenda, the matter
is being considered at the Council meeting and as elected members of your community,
Councillors will be taking a vote on the agenda papers that are
in the report.
But thank you so much for sharing your perspective.
I appreciate it.
JENNIFER BANTOW: Thank you for allowing me to address the Council meeting.
Thank you.
RICHARD DI NATALE: Can I speak, with Council's indulgence?
CR PATTISON: Certainly.
I think this will be the last, though, I'll just make that clear,
because we allocate about half an hour and we're now 45 minutes.
RICHARD DI NATALE: No, I appreciate that and I really appreciate the opportunity
to speak.
CR PATTISON: And once again, we'll answer it as best we can, yes.
RICHARD DI NATALE: Richard Di Natale, a 20-year resident of Deans Marsh.
I suppose I wasn't planning on speaking tonight.
Firstly, thank you very much for attending this evening.
It's great to see our local representatives engage
with the community in the way that you have.
I think it's a great initiative and I think universally we're grateful
to have you here.
I'm only speaking because I'm really keen for Council
to (inaudible) a legitimate view around the
- particularly around the hall and along with many members of the community,
I've been involved with this project.
I was involved very early on.
I would take a different view to the view that I think James expressed.
I think often economic development follows appropriate infrastructure in communities
and as a parent of two young children, both of whom are educated at the school,
knowing other families who are considering a move to a community like this,
having that sort of infrastructure, infrastructure where children are able
to come to a child centre where there are opportunities
for younger children to engage together in a really healthy
and nurturing environment, where the creative members
of our community can gather in spaces in the various
- like it's just such an incredible community, the music, the art,
the contributions that people make, to have a space to gather around and
to connect with each other, as now the father
of two teenage young boys, a place where they can get off the bus, come, hang out,
sit in front of a computer, play a game of table tennis, a game of billiards,
a place where we know they're going to be safe and welcome.
I just wanted to really highlight to you that I'm someone, along
with many others in the community, who see this as a really important piece
of a community infrastructure and I'm really sad that we might have
to lose this hall, so I don't want to present a view that this is a zero-cost
decision.
I mean, I know this hall has very special memories
for many people.
I think what you're hearing, though, is from largely
- and I don't mean this to sound disrespectful, but a lot
of the older members of the community have memories
in this hall, but for those people with younger families who want
to make new memories, we love the idea of being able to incorporate the really
important aspects of this hall into a new building that's partly created
by members of this community.
We've got agroforestry, people who are engaged in that,
and the opportunity to really put some of our own community
into a new building excites us, to have a kitchen where we can come
together and cook.
There are a lot of growers in this area.
So I suppose my
- what I wanted to do, and it's a comment rather than a question,
was just to leave you with a slightly different view,
and I would argue a view that's representative of many members
of this community, that we're very excited by the project,
we welcome the Council's commitment, their engagement,
and we hope that ultimately this can be something that brings this community
together rather than divides it.
Thanks.
CR PATTISON: Thank you.
I think given, as you said, that was more of a comment, so I might just leave it
at that.
Alrighty.
Well, once again, I appreciate everybody's time
in putting forward their questions and coming and listening to each other
and being respectful in doing that.
So thank you for that.
We now move on to the next components of our agenda.
So we don't have any petitions for this meeting
and we don't have any Notice of Motions and so we move on
to the more formal part of the meeting, which is our reports.
So our first report is the one that most of you are probably here for, which
is the Deans Marsh Community Hub Facility Development Plan.
The purpose of this report is for Council to consider the Deans Marsh Community Hub
Facility Development Plan.
We have a recommendation before us and do I have a mover of a motion?
Councillor Allen?
CR ALLEN: As per the recommendation.
CR PATTISON: And do I have a seconder?
Councillor Bodsworth.
Councillor Allen, would you like to speak?
CR ALLEN: Thank you, Mayor.
Mayor, my natural
- CR SCHONFELDER: Mayor
- excuse me, Mayor, I did have an amendment that I wanted
to present for this item.
CR PATTISON: Would you like to put that forward as an amendment?
CR SCHONFELDER: I would like to put that forward, but I also would like
to state that I foreshadow an alternative motion if this item is defeated tonight.
CR PATTISON: Okay.
So we'll just wait for Governance to put up the amendment.
So given that Councillor Schonfelder has raised his amendment prior to any debate,
once we have familiarised ourselves with the amendment, it will be a question
to the mover and the seconder as to if they wish to accept this amendment.
Can you read it?
I can read it to you, yes.
I'll read it out now.
So the amendment
- so the motion is as per what was in the report,
but I'll read the whole lot because perhaps the community aren't
familiar.
So the motion is "that Council adopts the Deans Marsh
Community Facility Development Plan as attached in the report,
receives a report by 31 July 2026 detailing options
for the future development of the facility if sufficient external funding has not
been successfully sourced to deliver stage 1".
And the amendment that is being proposed is "does not commence the implementation
of this resolution until a Circular Economy Action Plan
is adopted by Council and subsequently implements this
resolution in accordance with the requirements of that action plan"
So we'll just give Councillors a couple of minutes to consider the implications
on what this means.
CR SCHONFELDER: Mayor, I did have a question I wanted to ask.
CR PATTISON: I think let's just do one thing at a time.
So we'll first let our mover and seconder consider that
and then we can move through the other items.
CR HODGE: Sorry to be a pain.
Could you read out the amendment?
CR PATTISON: I'll read the amendment one more time,
"does not commence the implementation of this resolution
until a Circular Economy Action Plan is adopted by Council
and subsequently implements this resolution in accordance
with the requirements of that action plan"
CR HODGE: Thank you.
CR PATTISON: Councillor Allen, do you accept this amendment?
CR ALLEN: No, Mayor.
CR PATTISON: No.
Councillor Bodsworth?
CR BODSWORTH: No, Mayor.
CR PATTISON: No.
Based on that, we will now put this
- this amendment will now go to the vote for the Councillors to vote on.
Councillor Schonfelder, you have an opportunity to speak
to your amendment.
CR BARKER: You need a seconder.
CR PATTISON: Oh, sorry, yes.
Do I have a seconder for your
- sorry, I should have done that earlier.
Apologies.
Thank you, Councillor Barker, for identifying that.
Do we have a seconder for Councillor Schonfelder's amendment?
CR WELLINGTON: I second it for the purposes of debate.
CR PATTISON: Thank you, Councillor Wellington.
Councillor Schonfelder, would you like to speak?
CR SCHONFELDER: Yes, please.
I'd like to thank Councillor Wellington for seconding the amendment and I'd like
to also commend her for promoting debate on Council,
which is very much appreciated by members of the community.
Tonight we did have a question asked about environmental impacts
of the demolition of the hall, which I believe are quite significant
and I think it's well worth us considering as a Council.
So that's why I am moving this amendment because Council is currently undertaking
a review of the circular economy and working on an action plan which
is so important.
I know, Mayor, that recently this week British Columbia
have had their records broken with a heat wave and I know
at the moment we're not quite in drought, but we're possibly heading into a drought
and October was the driest October in Victoria in recorded history,
so the environmental concerns are so important.
As far as the hall is concerned, reblocking the hall, I'd be interested
to know the actual emissions used to construct the hall as far as the timber
and the quality of the building materials that exist within the hall because
in my mind
- I'm not an engineer, but I've seen a lot worse halls.
I've travelled throughout Victoria extensively
in another role and the hall actually is quite impressive, in my opinion.
I know that the local community here, one of the other questioners who asked
- Melanie I believe her name is, talked to me when I arrived tonight
about having the sustaining and working, so that's part of the circular economy
and that's something we really should embrace
and I think it would be really welcomed by the community this amendment
to this item.
Thank you, Mayor.
CR PATTISON: Thank you.
Councillor Wellington, would you like to speak to the amendment?
CR WELLINGTON: I might reserve my right for the moment, thanks.
CR PATTISON: Would any other Councillors like to speak to this amendment?
Councillor Allen?
CR ALLEN: Thanks, Mayor.
Look, my understanding of what a circular economy is all about
is that it's about the reuse of resources, but fundamental to a circular economy has
at its core sustainability and environmentally sympathetic production
, which is what the CEO referred to in her answer to the question
and I think Mr Di Natale was referring to in his statement,
and I believe that the project steering group has fundamentally taken these two
core principles into the design of the building.
And as to the reuse of resources, well, there's nothing to say that the resources
from this hall won't be reused.
In fact, we would encourage people in the community
to take resources and reuse them, which again is part of the core
of the circular economy.
Thank you.
CR PATTISON: Thank you.
Do any other Councillors wish to speak to this amendment?
Councillor Bodsworth?
CR BODSWORTH: Thanks, Mayor.
I thank Councillor Schonfelder for proposing the amendment
and I do support it in principle, but I agree with Councillor Allen
and when I speak to the item on the agenda in a minute, I'll be running
through a few thoughts relating to reuse of materials.
The reason I don't support the amendment is because I don't
- I see it as a very important proposal and issue, but I don't see it as central
to the recommendation.
So it really boils down to that for me.
CR PATTISON: Any other Councillors?
Councillor Gazzard?
CR GAZZARD: Yes, I agree that our Circular Economy Action
Plan is an important part in renewal and reusing and repairing things.
I don't know that it's applicable so much
- I've just been looking through it now.
I don't think it would necessarily change anything and given the extent
of repairs needed, there's going to be carbon emissions
from repairing or rebuilding a new facility.
There will be some carbon emissions no matter what.
So it is a comparison of longevity and sort of future use I think.
It's a good point that you raise, but I don't want it
to delay us making a decision.
CR PATTISON: Councillor Wellington, would you like to speak to the amendment?
CR WELLINGTON: Yes, thank you.
Can I just see the amendment again, please?
CR PATTISON: Can we get that on the screen, Governance, please?
CR WELLINGTON: Thank you.
I do believe that there are really significant issues to be thought about
in terms of knocking down a heritage building,
demolishing a heritage building, and replacing it when we've been
the custodians of that heritage building in particular,
but just more generally that's to me a failure really
of heritage protection.
But I'm not sure
- I think any Circular Economy Action Plan adopted by the Council I don't believe
will impact an individual decision such as these.
I think there will be a range of initiatives that will, you know,
show that we're committed to reuse and recycling, but in terms
of hard policy about well, we don't demolish a heritage building,
it will all be about individual issues relating
to those buildings.
And I'm also concerned that there needs to be a future determined
for this site and this development and, you know, to hold off further I think
is going to be harmful to the potential retrievability
of the hall at any point, but also to the community's kind of confidence
in what's happening.
So I don't think I can support this even though I seconded it for the purposes
of debate.
I don't support it.
CR PATTISON: Thank you.
We now put the motion to the vote.
There's no right of reply on an amendment, Councillor Schonfelder.
We now put the motion to the vote.
All those in favour
- sorry, all those in favour.
And all those opposed.
And Councillor Wellington, have you
- you were opposed?
CR WELLINGTON: I'm opposed.
CR PATTISON: Just to clarify.
There was a bit of a delay with the screen.
Thank you.
So that amendment lapses and we will now move back
to the substantive motion.
Councillor Allen, would you like to speak?
CR ALLEN: Thank you, Mayor.
My natural instinct is to support the retention
of township character and heritage.
On this occasion, four major factors have persuaded me
to act against my natural instinct: firstly, the reality
of the problem that the Deans Marsh community faces.
The Deans Marsh precinct has a Heritage Overlay H046, that
of local significance.
The hall, part of the precinct, moved to the current site in 1921.
It has seen changes to its structure due to extensions
and annexes built in the 1950s, 60s, 70s and 80s and additions made
by the Surf Coast Shire some 24 years ago.
The harsh reality, and it has taken me some time
to accept this, is that the additions and altered state
of the building have significantly diminished its historical architectural
value.
The importance of a built structure to a community comes from the quality
of its architecture, both inspirational and functional.
The current hall has been diminished in both of these aspects over time.
I do have a special feeling when being in this hall, but we should be reminded
that a local protection overlay does not cover the internal features.
The important design features that make this room unique have, I believe,
been cleverly woven into the proposed design.
A stage is included and the highly valued curtain
will be returned to the facility and those special items that can be
retained will be included in the new building.
What makes the wrench for many in the community so difficult
is the evolved social value of the hub and particularly this hall.
Over a century this facility has met the needs of the Deans Marsh community
as a space of meetings, dancing, theatre, dinners, child care, a safe space
and a distribution centre.
Its life covers a world depression, a world war, and a refuge in times
of natural disasters.
That history will never be lost and the social value of this place
will continue to be evolved by future generations.
To enable the hub to continue and expand its social value,
it must be fit for the future needs of its community.
The proposed project will do this as it is the people who will continue
to develop its social values in ways that we cannot imagine.
Our challenge is to build it to meet these needs.
The reality is to retain the hall is to rebuild it.
The consulting engineer's building condition report lists many observed
issues, including, but not exclusively, to poor site and perimeter drainage,
roof damage, poor sub-floor clearance and ventilation, stump failure
and inadequate wall and roof bracing.
If the proposed alterations to restore the original building
and any retained additions relate to more than 50% of the volume
of the original building, then the entire building must be brought
into conformity with Regulation 233 of the Building Code.
Our expert advice is that this option is not feasible and even if it were,
it would not provide a facility fit for purpose for the needs
of this community now and into the future.
The second major influence upon my decision are the views
of the majority of the Deans Marsh community.
Over the past two years, 508 interactions have been received
from members of the community through surveys, a listening post,
community meetings and workshops, online submissions,
reference groups and in-person meetings by request,
and I thank the Councillors for arranging
- the officers for arranging those meetings.
My understanding from the report and from my interactions with the community
is that a significant majority support the rebuild.
I must acknowledge that I have over this time listened
to the passionate minority of people in the community who wish
to retain and refurbish the hall.
They will be disappointed by my decision and even more so if the motion is carried.
Councillors, I believe that it is our responsibility
to respect the majority view as channelled through the project steering group
and the consultation that I have just articulated.
Thirdly, the financial position.
Regrettably, last year we did not have the financial capacity to add to the
over $2 million allocated from the asset renewal reserve to proceed
with the project.
CR PATTISON: Councillor Allen, given this is such an important issue
for our community, I'm happy for Governance
to put an additional 2 minutes on the clock so that Councillor Allen can
finish his speech.
CR ALLEN: Thank you, Mayor, I appreciate that.
CR SCHONFELDER: Mayor, I just had a point of order which I wanted to ask you about.
Councillor Allen said the majority of the community support the demolition
and rebuilding of the hall.
To my knowledge, there's no
- there's been no voting or no
- I can't see how
- CR PATTISON: Councillor Schonfelder, that's not a point of order.
We'll consider with Councillor Allen's speech.
CR ALLEN: Thank you.
Much to the dismay of all in the community,
we reallocated these funds to the Winchelsea Pool Redevelopment
Project, which was ready to proceed with these funds providing a significant
boost, a project that, when completed, will add amenity
to those in the Deans Marsh district who use that facility.
This motion approves the allocation of $2.64 million from asset renewal
as leverage over a two-year period to allow the officers
to seek the additional funds required to proceed with stage 1 in a two-stage
process to develop the hall.
If this motion fails tonight, the plan for the hall would not be investment ready
, restricting the ability of the officers to source additional funding
with the $2.64 million of asset renewal funding being diminished
over time for the maintenance of the current hall for its current use.
Lastly, the future.
The hall and precinct as proposed will, in my view, meet the future needs
of the community as it was designed in conjunction with the community.
Deans Marsh and district will see small but important population growth
in both the younger and the ageing demographic.
They will build over time the social capital
and the future heritage of the hall and precinct.
If we were to retain and refurbish, required funds will be used
to construct a smaller facility which will not service the aspirations
of the community, as articulated through the project steering group.
Councillors, I urge you to support the motion.
Thank you.
CR PATTISON: Thank you, Councillor Allen.
CR SCHONFELDER: Mayor, I have a question.
CR PATTISON: Sorry, you can't ask questions while the mover
and seconder are speaking, but you're welcome
to ask your question once Councillor Bodsworth has spoken.
Councillor Bodsworth?
CR BODSWORTH: Thank you, Mayor.
So like Councillor Allen, I reluctantly support the replacement
of the old building with the new one.
It is very poignant sitting here in this wonderful old hall speaking
about its future like this and it's very moving to be here
and it's great to be here with you all and thank you for hosting us.
Full reconstruction of a building that would not meet
functional and performance requirements doesn't make
sense to me.
I appreciate how challenging and taxing this process has been
for those involved and I thank you for your involvement,
despite how challenging it's been for you.
The proposed scale and scope make sense to me, but in my opinion,
the style needs work.
In the pack, the renders, for example, showing glossy plaza space, hard edges,
and a sense of sterility and soullessness trouble me.
I note on the subject of scale that the proposed new building is
about one third bigger than the existing building in its footprint.
I don't see those as reasons not to proceed.
I see those style issues as issues to address as we move forward.
And I'd just like to elaborate on a few of my thoughts in that regard.
So that might include reusing existing elements for their original purpose.
We've talked about the stage curtain, the magnificent stage curtain,
and other salvageable building elements.
It could include repurposing elements in new ways
- for example, floorboards as interior wall linings or picture frames
or furniture or boards of the new stage.
Use salvage and story telling to reflect both the historic building
and historic social heritage in the new building and surrounds,
ensure that building and landscape design and heritage interpretation go hand
in hand, linking design with local stories
- for example, we have a proud Otway timber heritage,
we have an existing world-leading status in farm forestry and a local arboretum.
Those things point to the use of timber
- for example, in interior linings, timber cladding,
potentially charred timber cladding or timber claddings that meet bushfire
codes attack levels, furniture, evoking that story and a sense
of warmth and tradition.
Surrounding landscape and gardens can be powerful too,
moving water out of marshy soils, interacting with the building,
providing summer shade, winter sun, providing food, supporting nature,
aiding bushfire resilience, and providing outdoor rooms.
I hope that we can aim to combine a multidiscipline design team
and local expertise and passion.
I hope we can aim for a high level of local ownership in the design brief.
I'd make salvage a critical requirement in this project if it proceeds.
Can I have 20 seconds, Mayor?
CR PATTISON: Sure.
CR BODSWORTH: In my opinion, the cypresses on the north side have to go.
I say that with regard to bushfire resilience and also access
- solar access for passive solar design, if not also photovoltaic.
The opportunities to create a new hub that works on systems principles,
functional, socially supportive, high performing,
environmentally sustainable, long lasting, flexible and adaptable,
but also flavoured by local, social and built heritage and the eclectic
and curious character of the contemporary and evolving Deans Marsh district.
I'll leave it there, thank you.
CR PATTISON: Thank you, Councillor Bodsworth.
CR SCHONFELDER: Mayor, I'm allowed to ask my question now?
CR PATTISON: Yes, you are, yes, certainly.
CR SCHONFELDER: Thank you.
My question is what is the current cost of this redevelopment,
including the demolition of the hall, and is it correct that restoration
of the hall is actually cheaper
- a cheaper option?
Has reblocking of the hall been estimated and quoted?
That's the first part of the question.
I do have a second question.
Do you want me to ask the second question as well?
CR PATTISON: I think we'll pass that question on to the CEO
and then we can address the others.
MS ROBYN SEYMOUR: Councillor Schonfelder, I draw your attention to point 7
of the report, which talks about the cost of the new facility,
the full facility estimated at $8.41 million or if we staged it,
stage 1 being $6.89 million.
And in point
- where is that point that I saw before?
In point 5 it talks about if we were rebuilding the hall, the way it
is currently configured the estimate is $4.482 million in point 5
of the report.
In terms of the maintenance costs to restump and meet all the requirements
that were identified through the structural kind of review,
I don't have a costing of that with me, I'm not sure if the GM
of Placemaking & Environment does, but it would be very significant and also,
as Councillor Allen talked about in his debate,
when you trigger the 50% change, then effectively you have
to bring everything up to code, which is why we've said the amount
of work combined with meeting code we'd have
to rebuild the building.
I don't know if the GM of Placemaking & Environment wanted
to add to that.
MR CHRIS PIKE: Nothing to add to that.
CR PATTISON: It's not actually a point that we get questions from the community.
SPEAKER: May I make a comment?
CR PATTISON: No.
That happened at the beginning and now it's a meeting for Councillors.
SPEAKER: (Inaudible).
CR PATTISON: Yes.
Sorry, it's just the process of our Governance Rules.
You had a second question, Councillor Schonfelder?
CR SCHONFELDER: My second question is on page 22 of the Council agenda it has
the Councillors that have attended briefings and my name
is not mentioned there.
A Councillor's name is mentioned twice.
And part of the second question is asking about the mental health impacts
of this redevelopment.
I'm very concerned about people's mental health,
particularly coming out of the pandemic, and I am very worried
about the fact that it's been asserted that the majority of the community are
in favour of this redevelopment.
CR ALLEN: Oh, point of order, Mayor, get to the question.
CR SCHONFELDER: And furthermore
- CR PATTISON: Yes, Councillor Schonfelder, can you please get to your question?
CR SCHONFELDER: My question is is the Council concerned
about mental health impacts in this small wonderful community and,
secondly, in relation to ageist comments that older people are
interested in retaining the hall when I am the third or fourth youngest person here.
CR PATTISON: Okay, thanks.
We'll pass that question on to our CEO.
MS ROBYN SEYMOUR: Councillor Schonfelder, I might start with the first question,
which relates to people's mental health.
CR SCHONFELDER: I'm sorry to interrupt you,
but my first point was that I was not included on page 22.
Was that done deliberately, CEO, or not?
MS ROBYN SEYMOUR: Councillor Schonfelder, that's an administrative error
and we're apologetic of that, as I messaged you this afternoon
about that, and we will amend through the minutes
and clarify that you attended all the briefings and we apologise
for that administrative error.
It is definitely not a deliberate action against you.
CR SCHONFELDER: I would hope not.
CR PATTISON: Councillor Schonfelder, can you allow the CEO
to finish her response, please?
MS ROBYN SEYMOUR: The second part of your question relating
to people's mental health, obviously we care deeply
about our communities and we do not want to put people's mental health at risk.
Actually, the intention of the work that was being led
by the community was really to look at what kind
of a facility do the community need and want into the future.
It was not in any way with any intention of having an impact
on people's mental health.
Your third question
- what was your third
- can you clarify your third question?
CR PATTISON: It was with regards to age.
MS ROBYN SEYMOUR: Oh, age.
We're not trying to be ageist through this report at all.
We are trying to look at how we ensure that we have a facility
that is fit for purpose to meet the needs of this community,
the Deans Marsh community, now and into the future and looking
at the demographics, which is from the very young to the very old,
and ensuring that it is fit for purpose and part of the focus
of the work that was done by the community was looking at all
of the elements that we should build into a facility to make sure it is fit
for purpose to meet the entire needs of the community.
CR PATTISON: Thank you, our CEO.
Unfortunately, we have just lost connection
and I did note that Councillor Wellington had her hand up for a question.
We'll continue with the debate.
We did let Councillor Wellington know that there may be some technical issues
with her
- oh, she is still online on another computer.
Can we get the audio?
We'll move on to the next person speaking.
CR WELLINGTON: I just had a question.
CR PATTISON: You're there.
Okay, we can hear you.
Sorry, Councillor Wellington, you'd just gone off the main screen.
So yes, please ask your question.
CR WELLINGTON: I just had a question about the cost and I did ask this question
and got a response I didn't quite understand, but there's no GST included
in that $8.4 million cost estimate.
Is GST to be added to that or do we not
- are we not responsible for GST in this redevelopment?
CR PATTISON: I'll pass that question to our CEO, thank you,
Councillor Wellington.
MS ROBYN SEYMOUR: So we're exempt from paying GST, Councillor Wellington.
CR WELLINGTON: Thank you.
Okay.
CR PATTISON: Thank you.
Would any other Councillors like to speak to this motion?
Councillor Barker?
CR BARKER: There's two questions.
What qualifications do the individuals who assessed the building structure have?
CR PATTISON: Sure.
CEO?
MS ROBYN SEYMOUR: Thank you, Councillor Barker.
I'll pass that on to our GM of Placemaking & Environment.
MR CHRIS PIKE: Through you, Mayor, thanks for the question.
I can't talk to the qualifications of the individuals,
but the company was a structural engineering company.
CR PATTISON: Did you have a second question?
CR BARKER: And how independent are they of Council?
MR CHRIS PIKE: So through you, Mayor, so they're a separate entity
to Council and so they were engaged by Council to provide a service,
but they are a separate entity to the Council.
CR BARKER: Thanks.
CR PATTISON: Thank you.
Did you want to speak to the motion?
CR BARKER: Yes.
If this motion passes, it will set a few things in motion.
One, it will demolish a much-loved iconic building that could be repaired.
Two, it will cost around $20,000 per person who is likely to use it,
a cost 10 times more than the $50 million Torquay Pool
project.
It will be reliant on state or federal taxpayers
to cover the gap that we can't afford.
I'm not convinced that every effort has been made to account
for the broad community desires as has been expressed today.
If it comes in at a much lower cost and doesn't externalise the cost
to people who not only will never use the facility,
but have likely never heard of Deans Marsh, then I might be tempted
to support this project.
Additionally, I don't think enough weight has been given
to strategy 11 of our Council plan, which seeks to protect heritage
and township character.
I understand there is strong community support
for the building to be repaired at roughly half the cost
of a knockdown and rebuild, which also has strong support.
If there are regulatory hurdles, as has been mentioned before, to a repair
of the building, perhaps we need to advocate for an exemption
to this regulation.
I'm concerned that pursuing the demolition and rebuild option will be one that
is not affordable and could leave the community worse
off should we not receive the funding we hope to get.
Acknowledging the community concerns from James around economic conditions
in Deans Marsh, I would warn of seeking government support.
Any government support will be slow, less than desired and come
at a significant cost to the community.
I would strongly encourage locals to identify key points
of difference in the region and activate and market them to people
outside the area.
Through the voluntary action of people who are putting their
own resources into pursuits and can profit from these actions, I see this
as the best way to widespread prosperity of Deans Marsh.
If the knockdown and rebuild option is selected, it will be in part due
to modifications done in the past that are not structurally compliant.
These regulations will have played a significant part
to this decision and will result in a higher cost of rebuild.
Next time someone is advocating for a regulation that feels good,
just know that it will come to the cost of the community.
I care about how every dollar of ratepayers' money is spent and
if you share my compassion, I invite you to join me in opposing the motion
as it stands.
CR PATTISON: Thank you, Councillor Barker.
Any other Councillors?
Councillor Stapleton?
CR STAPLETON: Thank you, Mayor.
So as I was preparing for this item today, I found myself wishing that I had more
time.
This is a really difficult decision and one that I have thought a lot about
over the past two years.
But two years is a long time, so in reality it's not that I need more
time and the Deans Marsh community does not need more time.
What we all need is a decision by Council and these are times that I personally find
it really difficult to be a local Councillor.
As resident Libby Stapleton, I quite like the old hall
and its simple character, but as one of your local Councillors,
I have an obligation to make a decision that I believe
is in the best interests of the whole community, not just based
on what I like and what I think.
That includes making decisions that are hard and taking
into consideration all the information and evidence that's been presented to us
and being clear about the best use of ratepayer funds.
If this motion is not supported tonight, what would that look
like in a practical sense for the Deans Marsh community?
We could defer if we reasonably believed that we didn't have all the information
we need to make a decision, but I don't think that's the case.
If we do not endorse the plan, the project will not be eligible for external funding.
We could reject the motion and start afresh, but
is it really feasible to go back to the community for more consultation
when officers have been doing that for the past two years?
That would also require more funding.
Does it make sense to spend $4.4 million to rebuild the same hall?
I don't think so.
At the moment we have $2.6 million from our asset renewal reserve allocated
to the Deans Marsh Hall.
Is it sensible to use this money to continue repairing a building that
is not going to meet the needs of this community for
at least the next few decades?
I believe we've reached a point where that is not the best use of available funds.
If we see a future where Deans Marsh needs a functioning, safe
and welcoming community hall, that $2.6 million is critical to be used
as leverage for additional funding from State or Federal Government so
that Council can build a fit-for-purpose facility that provides the critical
services and functions that this local community
needs.
I understand that not everyone loves the concept design for the new hall,
but most feedback we've seen is supportive and I believe that if funding
is successful, there will be an opportunity for more input
into the detailed design.
There is so much potential to deliver a really amazing and much-loved
facility for this community.
I do sympathise with those in Deans Marsh who are passionately
wanting to preserve the old hall, but I also understand the merits
and the need of using funds to build something for future generations.
It is people and community who create history
and memories and I'm hopeful that whatever this
facility looks like in the future, the residents of Deans Marsh will continue
to build on the character and identity that has been created
in this hall and that the next generation will come to love and
to value their community hall for many decades to come also.
Thanks.
CR PATTISON: Thank you.
Would any
- Councillor Wellington, would you like to speak to the motion?
CR WELLINGTON: Thanks very much.
Can I just ask a question before I start?
CR PATTISON: Sure.
CR WELLINGTON: I've either read or been told that there are 23 trees
to be removed.
Can I just ask about those and which trees they are and whether any
of those trees are memorial trees, please?
CR PATTISON: I'll pass that to our CEO to respond to.
MS ROBYN SEYMOUR: Thank you.
I'll refer that to the GM of Placemaking & Environment.
MR CHRIS PIKE: So through you, Mayor, the number 23 does not resonate with me.
I know that some trees have been identified on the northern boundary
that should be considered for removal and I think that was considered in some
of the context that Councillor Bodsworth covered earlier in terms of their threat
to the new facility and also their impact on its operation, but 23
is not resonating with me.
SPEAKER: I can clarify.
CR PATTISON: Sorry, it's just the Councillors
and officers that engage in this part of the meeting.
Would you like to speak to the motion, Councillor Wellington?
CR WELLINGTON: It would be helpful if someone does know something about that,
Mayor, if we could suspend standing orders for a minute and if there
is someone that knows about it, I'd appreciate it.
CR SCHONFELDER: Mayor, if Councillor Wellington moves
to suspend standing orders, I'm happy to second that.
CR PATTISON: We're not suspending standing orders, thanks.
CR WELLINGTON: Excuse me, shouldn't it go to a vote, Mayor Pattison?
CR PATTISON: No, because I don't think there's a need
to suspend standing orders.
I'll just clarify
- CR WELLINGTON: If I move a motion to suspend.
CR PATTISON: If we can pause for a moment and I'll just seek clarification
from Governance.
So if we can just wait for a moment.
CR SCHONFELDER: Mayor, can I just ask a question?
Are we in North Korea or are we in Australia?
CR PATTISON: If you'd like to be rude,
- like can you please be respectful with the way that you're speaking?
CR WELLINGTON: That was not me.
CR SCHONFELDER: Respectful works both ways
CR HODGE: That's close to a code of conduct.
CR PATTISON: Excuse me, Councillor Schonfelder,
I have asked everybody to be respectful and quiet while we allow Governance
a moment to consider what is being put forward.
So I ask all Councillors to please be silent while Governance gets
back to us on this matter.
OFFICER: Mayor, our understanding is that you are not required
to accept a motion to suspend standing orders.
CR PATTISON: Thank you.
The question
- CR WELLINGTON: Can I ask which Governance rule?
CR PATTISON: Sorry, Councillor Wellington, I'm currently still speaking
with Governance.
CR WELLINGTON: Apologies.
CR PATTISON: I was seeking clarification around a member
of the community giving input at this point.
It's never happened and I don't think
- I wanted some clarification around that with regards to the tree removal.
CR WELLINGTON: Can I speak now?
CR PATTISON: We're just waiting for Governance, please.
Sorry, I understand, Councillor Wellington,
you can't see everything that's going on here.
CR WELLINGTON: No, and I've got a delay.
I'm sorry.
I'm not intending to interrupt you, but there's a delay.
I think there's a delay on the audio.
CR PATTISON: That's fine.
That's no worries, thank you.
OFFICER: Through you, Chair, just clarifying
is the question can members of the gallery ask questions
during a debate?
CR PATTISON: No, it's can they clarify the comment with regards
to the trees which is not within our report.
OFFICER: It would be up to the Chair's discretion.
It's not
- from my understanding, it's not in the Governance Rules,
it would be up to the Chair's discretion.
However, it would be, in my view, highly unusual for that to take place
during a formal Council meeting.
CR PATTISON: Thanks.
I think we'll move forward and we can get back to you on that matter
because in the context of the recommendation,
I don't think it's a significant point that needs to be clarified.
Would you like to speak to the motion, Councillor Wellington?
CR WELLINGTON: Look, thanks very much.
I think that we're sort of hearing a debate saying it's either
retain this hall or it's build a brand-new facility
and I don't actually think they're the only options.
I suppose my first concern is we've been a custodian
of this heritage building and it is a heritage building
and Council's heritage adviser recommended
- advised Council that we should be seeking to preserve it if we could.
We've had two previous independent structural engineering reports that have
said that the building is salvageable and is not
- you know, that the sorts of issues it faces,
which wouldn't be any surprise to anyone to hear that these are the kinds
of issues that heritage buildings face everywhere.
That's what happens when you get old.
You get a bit doddery, you need a bit more care
and you need a bit of renewal from time to time.
But it doesn't make a heritage building worthless.
I'm really concerned that we've been the custodian of this building,
we've allowed it to become wet underneath, we've added structures to it,
which have led to it being wet underneath.
We haven't, you know, kind of moved to address that over many, many years
and now we're saying it's beyond repair and we've got to get rid of it.
From my perspective, this community very much deserves
a community facility which allows for child care and for, you know,
social events and gatherings and for the arts and culture and
for healthcare support and all the things that every community
rightly expects at this time.
I'm very surprised in the report that's put to us that there is no needs analysis.
There's an analysis of what people want, but in my role as the health planner
and strategy person over many years, we would always look to say well,
what's the population doing, what's the analysis, where's the need,
and that should have been presented to the community tonight
to justify the expenditure of $9 million
- almost $9 million, or $8.4 million, for what is a population
of something less than 600,000 people
- not suggesting the Deans Marsh population is not worthy at all,
but I am suggesting that there needs to be proportionate expenditure
and that that has not been shown to Council.
The justification has certainly not been put forward in the report tonight.
I would like to thank Jennifer Bantow for coming along.
She's been a great advocate for protection of heritage in our shire
and I'm really rather
- to be honest, I'm rather dismayed that as a Council we don't see the priority
of that.
I think that the options for this building
- there's numerous buildings across the Winchelsea shire
that are heritage buildings, have needed significant retrieval work
and have ended up being absolutely magnificent
with beautiful heritage parts included and then add-ons
to make them more liveable and contemporary and they've done very,
very well and they really do preserve the best of the past and bring in more
of the new.
We haven't had a costing for anything like that and that's disappointed me.
It feels to me that the stage
- you know, the pathway was set when this whole
project started and there wasn't really a full consideration
of potentiality alternatives.
So I'm pretty disappointed at that.
I do think the issue of we're being told that if we try
to save the building, we will be impacted by Regulation 233 of the Building Code,
which requires everything to be brought up to current standards, my understanding
is that is discretionary and in heritage situations it
is very often those standards are not imposed and it is absolutely possible
to come to a compromise position where you do protect the old
and accept some lesser environmental performance and then you add, you know,
contemporary and well-built sort of modern structures.
So I don't support this motion.
I'm with Councillor Barker.
I doubt that we'll get the federal and state funding for it.
I can't imagine that the State and Federal Government are
going to be very
- CR PATTISON: Councillor Wellington, I'll ask you to wrap that up.
CR SCHONFELDER: Mayor, I'm happy to move an extension
- CR WELLINGTON: Can I have an extension of time, please, Mayor.
CR SCHONFELDER:-
- for Councillor Wellington.
CR PATTISON: I'll grant another extension of a minute, which is the maximum that
we've granted for others.
CR WELLINGTON: Thank you.
CR PATTISON: So one more minute, Councillor Wellington.
CR WELLINGTON: Thank you.
I think that it's going to be a big leap of faith for that sort of money to come
from the Federal and State Government, given the current economic situation.
I'm not sure that it's needed.
I think in Deans Marsh also there are other options with land next
- or near to the school that's for sale, with historic buildings on it as well,
a beautiful old church building, et cetera, and there could have been
other options looked at for kindergarten and after-school care.
I think the number of children in Deans Marsh is going to continue
to be very low and even with the population projections,
there's still going to be a small number of children,
but they do need child care, they need a good facility for it.
It's not beyond our wit to do that.
So I'm very, very disappointed with the process, very disappointed
with what's going to be the obvious outcome.
The final point is it will have to get a planning permit to be demolished
and I'm sure there will be objections and, you know, we may end
up in a few years' time with no planning permit, no possibility
to demolish and back to square 1.
Thank you.
CR PATTISON: Thank you, Councillor Wellington.
Do we have any other Councillors that would like to speak?
Councillor Gazzard?
CR GAZZARD: Thank you, Mayor.
So this has been a really challenging I guess decision over the
- well, it's been a long process.
The first time I stepped into this hall was on Friday
- thanks, Genevieve and Susan for showing me around
and telling me your stories
- and I agree
- I don't think anyone is disputing that it's a
beautiful building and there's a real atmosphere
and it does feel very poignant that we're having this discussion
in the building, but appropriate I think.
I have really reflected a lot on what is heritage and the technical terms
of architectural heritage and cultural heritage and that
- yes, it's not really my area of expertise, but thinking philosophically
along the lines of the Ship of Theseus, where if something is totally replaced
over many years, is it still the same building or the
same ship and I think that's all about the character
and what the community bring to it as well and there's been eight different
extensions over 60 years.
It hasn't detracted from the character, but it's made the building difficult
to service the community at this stage.
I think the embodied energy and embodied carbon
from building demolitions is a really important point,
but that the current building is not energy efficient and with time
will need to be replaced anyway, or at least 50% replaced and repaired,
that there's large carbon emissions from either option.
Thanks to the project steering group and all the engagement from the community
and I'm sorry to hear, Deb, that it's been
- that it was a traumatising process and I know there has been division
in the community, which again, it is a difficult decision to make.
I think what it comes down to
- in my heart I feel like I want to save the hall,
but I also have a scientific mind and when presented with the evidence,
I think I have to vote for the motion, mainly on the basis
of the future generations, particularly around early childhood supports
and maternal child health services, which are my passions, as well
as environmental sustainability and disability access.
So thanks to the other Councillors for the robust discussion.
Yes, it's not been an easy decision to make.
CR PATTISON: Thank you.
CR SCHONFELDER: I'd like to speak.
CR PATTISON: Yes, Councillor Schonfelder.
CR SCHONFELDER: I'd like to say first of all, Mayor, that I would have liked
to have heard from the community members briefly tonight
who are very passionate about the hall and in relation to the trees,
which I find really dismaying and I find that we did declare
a climate emergency, but we're actually going to fell and cut
down a large number of trees, also the fact that to demolish and
to rebuild the facility here and the hall, much more carbon emissions from that
and that's something that we're supposed to be reducing tonight.
I car pooled when I came here trying to be more environmentally friendly,
sustainable.
I just find it's all lip-service, I'm afraid, and I just feel very sceptical
about what we're doing.
We're supposed to think globally and act locally, but it's just rhetoric
and the decision tonight will just illustrate that.
The Deans Marsh Community Hall heritage significance has been established
by several assessments and is protected by heritage overlay.
Why do we have an overlay I ask?
The condition of a place does not diminish
that significance.
Conservation and continuing maintenance is essential.
Restoration of the central and wing section
will conserve the building and provide sufficient interior area
for community functions, and
as Councillor Wellington very pertinently remarked,
the Anglican Church has closed.
I believe it's for sale.
That's a hall that's been unused in our community here that has potential
to be used also.
Furthermore, a nearby new building connected
to the hall could provide the facilities to serve the hall
and other functions needed in the new community hub.
I also concur with Councillor Barker the financial situation.
At the moment we have people stealing food in local supermarkets including meat
to survive.
We have a housing crisis.
It was brought to my attention by a local resident here that
with the amount of money which will increase
- I believe it's 8 million at the moment, but by the time the facility
is built I believe it will be over $10 million,
how many houses could that build for people who are homeless or people
who are going to rent houses who sometimes there's 100
people going to rent one room in a house even.
So that's something that we should consider as well.
So I'd like to just finish by saying that Marjorie Lawrence
is in a way the equivalent of Elvis Presley, the most famous person
in Australian history possibly.
She performed in this hall and she was
- she grew up in this area and I just think that we had International
Women's Day and the recognition of famous women is very important
and I think people who have been performing or involved in a building,
that's also very important, Mayor.
I have been in contact with Heritage Victoria
and I believe that's something that our Australian culture is accepting
because, sadly, a lot of Australians are more famous overseas
and more appreciated than they are here.
I ask the Councillors to reconsider their view on this item.
Given the importance of retaining local amenity
and the local feel of our towns, a new building will completely change
the feel of this town.
Thank you.
CR PATTISON: Thank you.
Councillor Hodge, would you like to speak?
CR HODGE: I won't be long, people.
I know you've been sitting there very patiently.
My first connection with Deans Marsh Hall over the years
- I've been on Council now for 20 years and come up here for the Louise Brown,
the choir, and it's been fantastic.
It's a lovely atmosphere, so it is something very special.
But I did want to say I first came to a meeting here and it was chaired
by Mr Di Natale and it was a very passionate meeting.
We heard a lot, and this was before the concept plan was up.
So we knew it was going to be very heartfelt in this community
and we heard very robust against anything with the hall
and then we heard a resurgence later on in the meeting
of people that did want change, did want something new.
So we have been really careful and I'd like to thank the people
against who have contacted me, but I'd also like to thank the people
for the changes who have contacted me.
But I did get a feel, and we heard it again tonight,
that the process going through something like this can be bruising
and community engagement is not a direct science.
Everyone is different and it brings different emotions
to the table and it brings emotions that some people mightn't even know
they have, but it's something in their community that they really love.
I'd like to thank Madeleine and her crew.
I know they experienced a lot of meetings, a lot of ups and downs,
and that's just sometimes part of a process.
It's like the process of anything that we do when there's
passion.
I disagree with Councillor Schonfelder about it's not in our role
to build houses even though we'd love to, but we put money into Winchelsea pool,
we're putting it into the Torquay pool, we're doing a lot of big projects
- CR SCHONFELDER: Point of order, Mayor.
I never said it was our role to build houses.
CR HODGE: Well, something to do with houses.
CR PATTISON: We can let Councillor Hodge continue with her speech.
CR HODGE: It's not our role.
We've got to put money into what the community really need or
what they want in the future.
I have
- I hope I don't lose a friendship over how I'm going to vote tonight,
but I think the building has passed its due date.
I'm a strong advocate for accessibility and right up
to the Disability Discrimination Act of 1992 that
all buildings really should be part of and I think this is what's needed too.
I think in the future
- look, we can look at the past and look at that beautiful
- you know, there is magic in this hall, but I think in the future there
will be that magic again because it's the community that brings
some of that magic.
And I'd like to say I will vote with the recommendations tonight
and I've been on Council for a long time to know how, you know, 2.6 million,
it's a start and there's a long way to go, but if we don't put something forward,
if we don't advocate either way for this Deans Marsh Hall,
it could be lost for other grants.
So it might be a slow process, you might have this still
for another five or so years.
But you've got to plan for the future, your children, your grandchildren.
And with the new housing now where a second house can go on a block now
without permits and bungalows, you could well have a community that's
growing because it's a beautiful community
So I will be accepting the recommendations tonight and look forward to the future
because there will be more discussions.
There will be more discussions on the concept plan of what goes
on in the building and what we can reuse.
So I'd like to thank the passion of the community, the passion
of the Councillors.
We are sort of friends behind the scenes.
It's all okay.
But we hope the community can gather around again and stay strong
because it's the next phase and it mightn't be your phase,
it might be the phase for the future.
Thank you.
CR PATTISON: Thank you, Councillor Hodge.
Do you have any closing remarks, Councillor Allen?
CR ALLEN: Thanks, Mayor.
Could I remind Councillors and everybody that the heritage overlay is
for the precinct.
It's for the precinct.
Now, could I say to Councillor Wellington, Councillor Schonfelder, myself,
all other Councillors, we value heritage.
We made it a core part of our strategy in the Council plan.
I weep when I see buildings with architectural significance pulled
down and I know Councillor Wellington referred to buildings in Winchelsea,
but they would have had architectural integrity.
The Cumberland in Lorne was demolished.
It was beautiful.
It was a beautiful deco building.
It couldn't be saved.
If it was standing now, it would be a destination venue.
Sadly, this building has lost
its architectural significance.
It's architecturally compromised and that is just a very sad reality.
I don't want to be brutal and insensitive at a time for the community,
but the hall does not have the same architectural merit.
In my view, it does not meet the aesthetic and scientific themes listed
in the Burra Charter, but it does have two themes listed
in the Charter, that of social and historic value,
and the historic value can be interwoven into the new facility
and the social cohesion continued over time in a fit-for-purpose facility.
Councillor Barker, I urge you to reconsider because if what you say
- and I accept your sincerity totally
- that you are concerned about ratepayers' income and rates,
then to spend $2.64 million say over the next 10 years
to maintain a facility that will ultimately fail,
and I take Councillor Wellington's human analogy like I'm failing and
in 10 years' time this hall is going to fail and it will need to be replaced
at a vastly larger sum is hardly meeting your objective
of looking after our ratepayers' funds.
So Councillors, I urge you to support the recommendation.
CR PATTISON: Thank you, Councillor Allen.
CR SCHONFELDER: Mayor, I have one question.
There is a lady in the audience who wanted to say something very briefly.
CR PATTISON: No, I'm sorry, Councillor Schonfelder.
As I've already identified, our Governance Rules does not allow us
to engage with the community past question time.
CR SCHONFELDER: It's at your discretion, Mayor.
CR PATTISON: It is and my discretion is that we've now been
- it's now 7.47.
Members of the audience have been here for a long time and we're now putting
the motion to the vote.
All those in favour of the motion on the Deans Marsh Community Hall please
raise your hand.
And all those opposed.
Thank you.
And the motion is passed 6-3.
We now move on to our next item on the agenda,
the Council Plan Progress Report Mid Year Three.
The purpose of this report is to note the Council Plan Progress Report
Mid Year Three.
I do note that some of you may at 7.47 want to leave and that
is totally fine.
I really appreciate you coming along.
So we'll pause for a moment as some of the members leave.
Thank you for coming.
Alright, we'll now continue with our meeting.
So it's item 4.2, the Council Plan Progress Report.
The purpose of this report is to note the Council Plan Progress Report
Mid Year Three.
We have a recommendation before us.
Does anyone wish to move a motion?
Councillor Stapleton
- is that as per the recommendation?
CR STAPLETON: It is, Mayor, thank you.
CR PATTISON: And do I have a seconder?
Councillor Bodsworth.
Councillor Stapleton, would you like to speak to the motion?
CR STAPLETON: Thank you, Mayor.
So this motion is asking Council to note the report detailing progress
that has been made up to the halfway point of year 3 of the Council Plan.
By way of background, the Council Plan is the four-year
strategic plan developed at the beginning of each new Council term to set the vision
and way forward for the Council.
During 2020 and 2021, Council worked with community
through a deliberative engagement panel who spent something like 1,000
hours considering, debating and prioritising what should be included
in the Council plan.
This then went out to the broader community to comment on
and provide feedback.
The resulting document is the Council Plan we are now working
with.
It addresses seven key themes in the areas of First Nations reconciliation; healthy,
connected communities; environmental leadership;
sustainable growth; diverse and robust economy; arts and creativity;
and an accountable and viable Council.
Some people talk about Councils only being responsible
for roads, rates and rubbish and while those things are important,
the reality is that the role of local government has evolved
significantly since the 1950s and the obligations
of Councils have expanded over many decades.
Councils are now mandated to address much more than roads, rates and rubbish
for their community.
In fact, Victorian Councils have responsibilities
under more than 100 Victorian acts
and regulations, including responsibility for the municipal health and wellbeing.
This ranges from mitigation and planning for climate change risk,
to ensuring gender equity in our policies, services and programs.
There are also many Commonwealth acts and regulations,
ministerial directions, codes of practice, Australian standards, state
and federal laws, and other guidelines that Councils must
abide by.
Importantly, it is recognised that not every municipality
is the same and the mix of local demographics leads
to different needs.
In some communities perhaps all their needs and wants fall
within the remit of roads, rates and rubbish,
which would actually make life much easier , but I know that in many places,
and definitely here in the Surf Coast Shire, residents expect much more.
That is why Councils have autonomy to provide services that meet the needs
of their local community and will establish processes and plans
to guide what occurs within their local area.
That is why it is so important that local communities
have an opportunity to develop the priorities determined
through the Council plan.
Most Councils deliver more than 100 different services
to their local communities and Surf Coast is no different.
Off the top of my head, I can think of child care, maternal child
and health services, environmental protection,
reducing greenhouse gas emissions, food safety, pet registrations,
parks and gardens, netball courts and cricket clubs, events and festivals,
supporting local businesses and creative industries, libraries, grants
and emergency management.
I know there is so much more and if you look at our Council plan
and specifically at the progress report we are considering here tonight,
you will see the breadth of services, programs
and infrastructure that Surf Coast Shire Council is aiming to deliver.
The Council Plan includes 19 strategies, each with a clear outcome.
It is noted that the priority of these may alter over time as a result
of changes to our local environment, community feedback and lessons we learn
along the way.
And of course no Council is perfect and no Council plan is perfect.
It is the best reflection of community needs and input at a moment
in time.
We don't always get it right, but I believe we are on a path
of continuous improvement and are always working
toward better outcomes for community.
I won't go into detail of progress made under each strategy as I assume some
of my fellow Councillors will want to do that, but I
will just flag the work that's been done under strategy 12 to improve access
to affordable residential accommodation as that is a particular passion of mine.
The outcomes we're working towards is that at the end of our four-year term, people
will have access to more affordable and sustainable
residential accommodation options.
It is not a lofty goal and will not resolve the broader housing
crisis we face as a nation, but it is our aim to make a difference where
we can in our own local community.
Along with the social and affordable housing project currently
under way in Aireys Inlet, the past six months have seen Council
progress with its Tiny House on Wheels pilot
and support the Lorne community with a series of webinars
to consider possible housing solutions.
We are also working with the Anglesea community on a co-design
process to consider a new community and health hub incorporating affordable
and key worker housing.
Council will continue to advocate to the State and Federal Government
on housing and develop funding strategies to deliver affordable housing projects.
The planning scheme review currently in progress will provide an opportunity
to embed commitments to housing diversity and choice
through planning scheme amendments.
And I'll leave it at that.
Thank you, Mayor.
CR PATTISON: Thank you.
Councillor Bodsworth, would you like to speak to the motion?
CR BODSWORTH: Thanks, Mayor.
So the recommendation is to note the Council Plan progress.
I'm very happy to recommend that we note the progress.
In doing that, Councillor Stapleton has covered some
high-level stuff.
I want to zoom in on a couple of things just briefly.
So strategy 3, I'm really pleased to see the focus on precinct planning.
That's a bit of a new initiative.
We have a couple of projects in the sort of early initiation stage
around precinct planning and I was at the launch
of the Barwon South West Public Health Strategy last week.
I was the only Councillor there, but it struck me there how
important Council's work can be to public health and wellbeing,
particularly through precinct planning and particularly
through improving walkability and cycleability.
So that was a key theme on the day, the desire of the group
from a public health context to see greater what we can call active
living, active transport, but in fact it's us
and the State Government very much who are in a position we can shape neighbourhoods
to provide those opportunities for people and to help do our part towards them
living healthier longer.
Another one that I want to mention is very pertinent to tonight.
In strategy 3 on page 144 it talks about the important work that we have
ahead of us on the integrated social infrastructure
and open space plan.
What I particularly want to highlight with that is the importance to me
to balance what works for our organisation with what works for communities
and I think tonight's meeting and the discussion around this precinct
and the hall highlights for me that we need a balance of the head
and the heart in that social infrastructure plan.
So that plan has the potential to have a highly sort
of quantitative feel about it.
I want to get to the qualitative and the qualities
of that social infrastructure because that's so important
to how people embrace it and the value that communities get
out of it.
In terms of strategy 5, which is around making it easier for people to get
around and between towns without relying on cars, what's not in there
and which I hope we can get to at some point,
or the next Council might get to, is questioning the value judgments
that lie behind our allocation of road reserve space
to cars versus walkers and riders.
For example, we have many streets in our towns that have parking
along both sides of the street.
If residents agreed, we could move parking to one side of the street only
and use the other side for protected cycle lanes.
So at a very, very small cost to people living there
- some might disagree, I'd argue it's a small cost
- we can provide safe and convenient cycle access.
I've got lots of other stuff, but I'll leave it, thanks.
CR PATTISON: Thank you, Councillor Bodsworth.
Councillor Allen?
CR ALLEN: Thanks, Mayor.
Again, I must comment on how much I appreciate the format
of this progress report.
You may not agree with some of the actions that we plan to do, but it
is clearly presented, particularly identifying the factors
that may hinder our progress.
When preparing for tonight's meeting, it did occur
to me that it may be helpful in the report to identify those actions or requirements
that are mandated because often we get criticised
by the community why are we doing this?
Well, the answer is we're required to.
So maybe in the report it could be useful when explaining
to the community this is mandated.
We don't really debate this, we must do it.
I'd just also like to highlight a couple of strategies.
Improved access to affordable accommodation
- I attended a recent meeting of the committee
for Lorne where the shire was roundly criticised by all participants
for our lack of advocacy for issues specific to Lorne and
for our lack of any tangible steps towards a solution.
I did point out that the work in Aireys Inlet
and Anglesea are our main focus at the moment and that, when completed,
we will have some potential benefits to all communities in the municipality.
And I'm sort of reminded of my first meeting here when I was
appointed as a Councillor and Andrew Stewart spoke to me
about how it was terrible, that we could be providing affordable
housing in this community if you could only have a second dwelling
on a farm.
Well, now that's possible as long as we don't breach any bushfire overlays.
So there is a lot of potential now and I'm sorry Andrew isn't here that
we could highlight, but Kristy, I'm sure you'll take that back to him.
Strategy 13, our tourism and events strategy,
have both encouraged people to stay longer.
Multi-stay visitations are metrics identified
in the economic success framework later in the agenda.
Lorne has been a significant beneficiary of the events strategy and
with the funding of the Biennale identified in strategy 16.
Also in strategy 16, the Surf Coast Arts Trail is a key element
in our Creative Places Strategy, bringing close to a quarter
of a million dollars to sales to artists over that weekend,
and I know that the proprietors of the Deans Marsh store said
to me recently that their business benefits by inclusion in that trail.
Also a benefit to the Deans Marsh community was
the SHED Talk initiative and the Deans Marsh Streetscape project,
where we assisted with the scope of the project, soon I believe
to be delivered or completed.
Sue, I know you're not allowed to comment, but you can nod if that's the case.
Very good.
The Council has the opportunity in future budgets to support this project
and there will be of course opportunities for small grants.
Strategy 17 highlights the increased support for the arts
with the creative halls project.
Lorne Community Connect receive funding under this project for improved lighting
which will enhance its capacity to hold theatrical productions
and exhibitions.
So thank you.
CR PATTISON: Thank you, Councillor Allen.
Would any other Councillors wish to speak?
Councillor Schonfelder.
CR SCHONFELDER: Mayor, I'd just like to add briefly that I'm very proud
of our Council plan and the points raised in particular
from Councillor Allen are so correct in relation to the fact that we're obliged
under the Local Government Act to have a local Council plan.
And I recall fondly and I thank Rowena Frost
for her participation in the development and the implementation of the plan
and I know that having been elected in 2020 and participating
in meeting different residents in relation to the plan at Winchelsea at La Hoot,
it was a great experience even though we all had to wear masks.
I know tonight, Mayor, that we had a four-legged
visitor in the hall and I know that my dog, whistler,
accompanied me on that occasion and I know that Ms Frost enjoyed his
company.
I'd just like to also add that the First Nations reconciliation theme one
is something that I have really enjoyed being a part of as an elected Councillor
and meeting First Nations people and learning more about their culture
and I know that throughout the world
- in Japan there were original Aboriginal people and in North America, for example,
there were American Indians, and I know in different buildings when you enter
the building there's an acknowledgment of the First Peoples when you arrive
and it's something that I welcome and I know that other Councillors,
including Councillor Hodge, have championed those causes
and it's a journey that we continue with First Nations people.
But I know with the other themes as well, it is a continued journey
and even though we may not always agree on different items, we do try our best.
Thank you, Mayor.
CR PATTISON: Thank you.
Would any other Councillors
- Councillor Gazzard?
CR GAZZARD: Thank you.
Highlights for me include, yes, working with the traditional
owners towards reconciliation, particularly the second Pilk Purriyn event
that we held on January 26, which had 2,500 people attend
and was a really moving and powerful event.
There's definitely some overlap with the strategies,
they're not mutually exclusive, and I think that worked well going hand
in hand.
You know, First Nations reconciliation is linked to better health outcomes
for them and for caring for country and improving our environmental
sustainability.
So like the gobata dja, or caring for country, plan is strategy 7,
but it also links in to strategy 2 and 1.
I'm proud of our environmental leadership and also linking in
with strategy 13 around tourism, we're working towards completing
eco destination certification, and I agree with Councillor Bodsworth that
we could work more on our active transport,
noting that the Jan Juc to Bellbrae shared pathway
is progressing slowly.
That's all, thank you.
CR PATTISON: Thank you.
Councillor Wellington, would you like to speak to the motion?
CR WELLINGTON: Thanks.
Yes, I think the motion is to note it and I think we should note it.
There's a huge amount of work going on.
I think there is a debate to be had about how broadly this Council spreads its
resources and attempts to spread its influence.
I think Councillor Stapleton, but others also, are very prone to sort
of say it's either roads, rates or rubbish or it's
all these really interesting social things and I don't think it's one or the other.
I do think roads are important and I don't hear in the community people
saying it's just roads, rates and rubbish.
They don't say that, but they do say, "When are you going to fix my road"
because it's an important element of, you know, their lifestyle
and their ability to get around.
I joined with officers last weekend meeting
with people at Winchelsea and Moriac talking about unsealed roads
and there was certainly a lot of food for thought there
about this community's satisfaction with the way that we deal with roads.
I did a scan on this document for the word "road"
and I didn't find it anywhere, which is interesting to me that we managed
to develop a council plan without the word road in it anywhere
- or developed this report, I should say, without the word road in it.
I think there's going to be an ongoing debate about what local government is for
and I think the people who engage in this debate are not saying that it's
not important to be doing things around housing and
around Aboriginal reconciliation, but a lot of people do feel that this
is a duplication of effort that's happening at national
and state level and that we should be focusing
on local issues and I've never heard anybody
in my community say, "Why isn't this Council putting more
into Aboriginal reconciliation?"
And I believe in reconciliation personally,
but I'm not sure that we as a Council
- I'm not sure how it got to be number one in our Council plan,
but it's there and so we're spreading our resources across all those things
and people should just note it and think about what they want their Council to do
and make it clear to their Councillors what they want the Council to focus on.
Thank you.
CR PATTISON: Thank you, Councillor Wellington.
Councillor Barker?
CR BARKER: Thanks.
I've had issue with the closing statement that's
in the Council plan for a long time, "We will leave the Surf Coast better than
we found it".
It's a very subjective statement, but as Councillor Wellington highlighted,
the number one theme is Indigenous reconciliation, tripling up
on the work done by Reconciliation Australia
and Reconciliation Victoria.
I don't see how replicating work done by other bodies leaves the Surf Coast
better than we found it.
I'd rather we treat all people the same regardless
of their ethnicity, sex, religion, age, political views or any other attribute.
Strategies 3 and 9 aren't terrible, but as time goes on, I see this document
as a driving force of invasiveness and a redirect of finite resources away
from what I think the core focus of Council should be, keeping
to the basics of road repair, reliable rubbish removal
and reducing rates.
I'll support the motion as it's simply noting it,
but it actually makes me sad that our basic responsibilities are ignored
through this document.
CR PATTISON: Thank you, Councillor Barker.
Would you like to have some closing remarks,
Councillor Stapleton?
CR STAPLETON: Thank you, Mayor.
Look, I guess I would just add that I would really encourage residents
to have a read through the Council plan progress report.
It's really well presented and easy to read and I think it does give you some
great insight into the breadth of services delivered by Council.
And I think it's important to note that no-one,
and especially not me, is dismissing the need for attention
to roads, rates and rubbish and I think that it's well accepted that
that is part of Council's business as usual program, if you like,
and that the Council plan is an opportunity
for each Council when it comes in to actually I guess work
with the community to identify what are the priorities of this community
at this point in time.
It doesn't mean that Council would stop delivering its mandatory services
and things like roads, rates and rubbish will always be there, I would imagine,
for local Councils.
It's an opportunity to look over and above that about what's really important
to our community for us to work on over the next four years.
Thank you.
CR PATTISON: Thank you.
We'll now put the motion to the vote.
All those in favour.
And the motion is carried unanimously.
We have now been going for over two hours, so we will have a 15-minute break
and could I have a mover to suspend standing orders?
Councillor Stapleton and seconded by Councillor Schonfelder.
All those in favour.
The motion is carried unanimously.
So we'll suspend standing orders and we'll be back at 8.25.
So thank you, everybody here in person and online.
We'll see you at 8.25.
(Short break) CR PATTISON: Thank you, everybody, for bearing
with us while we had a short break.
Could I have a mover to resume standing orders, please?
Councillor Schonfelder and seconded by Councillor Stapleton.
All those in favour.
And the motion is carried.
So we'll now move on with item 4.3, Fair Access Policy.
The purpose of this report is to seek Council's endorsement
to release the Draft Fair Access Policy for public exhibition for a period
of four weeks.
We have a recommendation before us.
Do we have a mover?
Councillor Gazzard.
Is that as per the recommendation?
CR GAZZARD: Yes.
CR PATTISON: And a seconder?
Councillor Hodge.
Would you like to speak, Councillor Gazzard?
CR GAZZARD: Yes, thank you, Mayor.
So the Fair Access Policy is a requirement under the Victorian Government Fair
Access Policy Roadmap.
This motion is for it to go out for public exhibition for four weeks.
So I invite the public to make submissions.
The main purpose of this is to address the known barriers in accessing
and using community sports infrastructure for girls and women and
to help level the playing field, so to speak,
which obviously should not be limited just to sport.
Women and girls are underrepresented in organised sport as participants,
coaches, officials, administrators, and board members across
all areas compared to our male counterparts.
By age 14, girls drop out of sports at double the rate of boys.
These are mainly due to lack of access, safety and transportation issues,
social stigma, decreased quality of experience, cost, lack
of positive role models, and beauty standards.
So this policy goes to start to address some of these and improve women
and girls' participation in sport in our shire.
Thank you.
CR PATTISON: Thank you, Councillor Gazzard.
Councillor Hodge, would you like to speak?
CR HODGE: Thank you, Mayor.
Look, just quickly.
I've been involved with women's sport in Torquay
for many years being a life member of the netball club
and I've seen a huge change in the culture of clubs in the last couple of years
with the introduction of women's football, women's cricket,
and it's been a huge change in a lot of male-dominated areas,
which is terrific.
But now we've got to try to catch up on infrastructure and we have
- I think our facilities for sporting and for the women are pretty good,
but it would be good to have this out in the community, especially
to the clubs to see it and get their feedback too because we
all know if there's infrastructure needed, we've got to budget, we've got to lobby.
But this Fair Access Policy is a roadmap by the Victorian Government that every
municipality will have one.
But I think it really is important.
We've seen the shift in culture.
More women are coming, so we've got to make sure that it's equality
for the women as well.
So I highly recommend this.
Put it out there and let's see what comes back
from the community.
Thank you.
CR PATTISON: Thank you.
Would any other Councillors like to speak?
Councillor Allen?
CR ALLEN: Thanks, Mayor.
The essential question before the Council is should any person be denied equal
access to, in the initial iteration, a community sporting facility because
of their gender?
And one would assume this policy would logically be extended to
all community facilities.
The vast majority of people would say no, no person should be denied fair,
equal access because of their gender.
I've observed over the past three and a bit years that we have applied for
and been successful in gaining funding to upgrade women
and girls' changing toilet facilities.
Put simply, women and girls should not have facilities
of a lesser standard.
Thank you.
CR PATTISON: Thank you.
Councillor Barker?
CR BARKER: Four questions first.
Is this policy development being driven by community wishes or the State
Government?
CR PATTISON: It's the State Government.
CR BARKER: Thank you.
Is this policy development being funded by the Council budget or elsewhere?
CR PATTISON: I'll pass that to our CEO.
MS ROBYN SEYMOUR: So it's funded by Council.
CR BARKER: So we've got the state directing us, but we've got to fund it,
thank you.
If we don't adopt this policy, how much state taxpayer money
will we miss out on receiving
- ballpark?
MS ROBYN SEYMOUR: It's hard to answer that question,
Councillor Barker.
It will preclude us from being able to access a lot of our local sports
and infrastructure grants.
I can't quantify it in terms of amounts, but it means we won't be able to apply
for that funding.
It is a State Government requirement, but it's still also, in terms
of our gender equity position, really important that we're providing
access to
- equal access to all of our community members.
CR BARKER: I agree with that.
And the last question, 11.3 notes that many Victorian women
and girls don't have access to the best courts or grounds.
Additionally, Councillor Gazzard notes other challenges women face in sports.
Is this the case for women and girls in the Surf Coast?
MS ROBYN SEYMOUR: There are areas where that is the case, Councillor Barker,
where the facilities are not equitable between our
- for our boys and our girls or our men and our women, absolutely.
CR BARKER: Thank you.
CR PATTISON: Would you like to speak to the motion, Councillor Barker?
CR BARKER: I'll hold it for now, but maybe later.
CR PATTISON: Councillor Wellington, would you like to speak?
CR WELLINGTON: Yes, thank you.
Well, I think, you know, the goal or the objective
of gender equity or gender equality
- and I think the terms are used a bit interchangeably in this policy
and that probably needs to be looked at because
they actually have somewhat different meanings, but certainly the goal
is really important.
I think Councillor Barker is correct in pointing out that this
is another demand that's been imposed on Council, but more importantly for me,
this is a demand that we're then going to shift
to volunteer sporting clubs and honestly, volunteers in our community
because people are just getting overwhelmed with the burden
and now they're going to have to go out and do assessments of
- they're going to have to do self-assessments
of gender inclusivity within their clubs and areas for improvement.
They won't have any resources, additional resources, to do that,
presumably, and I think it will create an additional burden.
People come to volunteer at sporting clubs to try to help kids
and young people enjoy themselves and, you know, the notion of having to sit down
and do plans and assessments and that sort of thing I think would be quite
an anathema to a number of people in those roles.
So I think that's an issue that the clubs might come back on.
I think we were funded for our gender equity person.
Can I ask the clock to stop and just check if that's correct?
Is that correct that we got funding for a gender equity person?
CR PATTISON: I'll pass that to our CEO.
MS ROBYN SEYMOUR: We put in an application, Councillor Wellington,
but unfortunately we were unsuccessful.
CR WELLINGTON: Right, okay.
So we're paying for our gender equity person
out of ratepayers' money as well and there's a huge amount of plans
and policies and things that no doubt that person is going flat out trying
to review.
Some of the actions in this policy I think, I'm not sure
about that.
Is Council itself going to provide training and mentorship
for girls to learn about leadership?
Is that our role?
I'm not sure.
I don't think it's our role.
That should be a community role, not ours.
I think four weeks is inadequate for community clubs to respond.
So if you're a secretary of a community club,
you get something sent out from Council, you then send it out to your committee.
You may have just had a meeting, you mightn't even have another meeting
in that four weeks.
Somebody is going to have to look at a response and make a response
to Council.
I think we should make it eight weeks and I would like to move an amendment.
CR PATTISON: Sorry, your sound has just gone,
Councillor Wellington.
I'm not sure if that's something tech related or
- can you just speak, Councillor Wellington?
We didn't hear the last sentence that you said.
CR HODGE: I think she wanted eight weeks is what I heard.
CR WELLINGTON: Is that because
- CR PATTISON: You're cutting in and out.
Can you just keep speaking?
CR WELLINGTON: So I would like to move an amendment that we give
the clubs eight weeks to respond.
I don't think four weeks is adequate.
CR PATTISON: Okay.
We'll just get Governance to
- it's specifically to extend from four weeks to eight weeks?
CR WELLINGTON: Yes.
CR ALLEN: Can I ask a question while Governance is doing that?
CR PATTISON: I don't think they need to display it
because it's just changing it from four to eight.
CR ALLEN: Can I ask a question?
CR PATTISON: Yes, you can ask a question.
CR ALLEN: May I, rather?
If it was extended to eight weeks, and I agree with Councillor Wellington,
would that impact on our deadline for 1 July?
CR PATTISON: I'll pass that to our CEO.
Are there implications with extending the consultation time?
MS ROBYN SEYMOUR: I suspect it will make it very tight,
but just let me check with our GM of Placemaking & Environment.
MR CHRIS PIKE: Yes, it will be tight.
It will depend on the level of feedback received,
but on the surface it looks doable to me.
CR ALLEN: I wonder if Councillor Wellington would agree
with six weeks.
CR WELLINGTON: Well, eight weeks from now is sort of end of May, isn't it,
and we would have a June meeting at the end of June,
so there would be three weeks or so for officers to
- there's Easter in between as well which people need to remember,
so if we only give them four weeks
- CR PATTISON: So Councillor, I understand that you're thinking
through it, but I'm keen to progress with your amendment without a conversation
around it first.
CR WELLINGTON: I'd prefer it to be eight weeks.
CR PATTISON: Okay.
CR WELLINGTON: I'd prefer eight weeks and I think eight weeks is achievable.
CR PATTISON: Councillor Wellington is putting forward an amendment
as eight weeks.
As the debate has progressed, we
will now seek a seconder for Councillor Wellington's
- yes, Councillor Schonfelder will second that.
Councillor Wellington, would you like to speak to your amendment?
CR WELLINGTON: I think we need to recognise the burden
on these sporting club volunteers, officials, and if we are going
to do a consultation, it should be meaningful
and I don't think it will be meaningful in the circumstances
if we just give them four weeks.
Committees can't turn themselves around in that time
- you know, for somebody to write something and then the committee to endorse it
and then
- or change it or whatever.
So I think we just have to be respectful of those people and give them enough time.
We're asking them to do a lot already and I think we have
to respect that they're volunteers.
CR PATTISON: Thank you.
And Councillor Schonfelder, would you like to speak?
CR SCHONFELDER: I reserve my right, thank you.
CR PATTISON: Would any other Councillors like to speak, and I note this
is specifically around the change to an eight-week
consultation period.
Councillor Bodsworth?
CR BODSWORTH: My only hesitation in supporting that is that I don't believe
that people in communities, clubs and people affected by this are going
to have any choice in the matter, which is the case for us as well as far
as I see it.
So I don't really know what we're going to get back and what we're going to be
able to do in response to comments from those people, but that's not to argue
against the time being eight weeks, which I think is a fair point.
So I support that.
I just don't think it's going to make much difference.
CR PATTISON: Councillor Allen?
CR ALLEN: Thanks, Mayor.
Look, I support Councillor Wellington's amendment and I suspect that it's
not only this policy, it will be other policies that they have
to give feedback on when applying for grants,
and I heard the comment recently at a committee meeting where they went
through the different stages of things they have to do now, the hurdles they have
to do to apply for grants, and it has significantly expanded.
So I do think an additional period of consultation is in order.
CR PATTISON: Do any other Councillors wish to speak specifically on the amendment
before it goes to a vote?
No?
We'll now put it to the vote.
CR WELLINGTON: I hadn't finished, Mayor Stapleton.
CR PATTISON: There is no
- sorry, Councillor Wellington
- CR WELLINGTON: Oh, beg your pardon.
CR PATTISON: We haven't voted on your amendment.
CR WELLINGTON: Yes, I've got you, yes.
CR PATTISON: So all those in favour of including the amendment.
And the motion is carried.
CR WELLINGTON: What was the numbers on that, please, Mayor Pattison?
CR PATTISON: It was unanimous.
So the motion
- it's increased to eight weeks from four weeks.
CR WELLINGTON: Thank you.
CR PATTISON: And you
- CR WELLINGTON: And I just wanted one final point, if I could in my speech.
CR PATTISON: Sure, that's fine.
CR WELLINGTON: Somewhere
- in one of the papers I read sort of getting myself
across the issues here there was a comment about "access to convenient, clean
and safe facilities with suitable amenities, for example,
toilets and change rooms, disability access and child care
is important for attracting and retaining women and girls in sport",
and it does seem to me rather odd that on the basis of equity this Council made
a decision some months ago now to remove the prohibition on men coming
into women's spaces in publicly owned facilities.
So it feels very odd under a gender equity approach you could
have both of those objectives.
But anyway, I support the policy going out and being consulted on.
Thank you.
CR PATTISON: Thank you.
Would any further Councillors like to speak?
Yes, Councillor Bodsworth.
CR BODSWORTH: Just one really quick point.
So the focus on this is entirely on gender equity/equality, but I'd just
like to make the point that there's effectively kind
of a mobility equity issue with regard to facilities where unless we provide good
pathway linkages to facilities, we're tending
to exclude people who either don't have a car or don't have a driving licence,
perhaps they're too young, and can't get to places by walking or cycling.
So although it's
- sorry, it's not relevant to the recommendation,
but I think it's an issue that we need to consider is good pathway connectivity
to all of our community and sport and rec facilities.
CR WELLINGTON: Mmm.
CR PATTISON: Thank you.
CR WELLINGTON: And sorry, I did have one question, actually,
- well, it's really a comment.
There's a problem in this document with the definition
of community sports infrastructure.
If you have a look at it, it says "publicly owned local, rural,
regional or state-level sport and recreation or neither",
which doesn't make sense
- CR PATTISON: Okay, we'll take that on board.
CR WELLINGTON:-
- and then it starts to talk about a person's gender.
So it needs to be
- CR PATTISON: Thanks, Councillor Wellington.
CR WELLINGTON: It looks like something has been cut out.
CR PATTISON: We can address that.
Thank you for raising that.
CR WELLINGTON: Thank you.
CR PATTISON: You would like to speak, Councillor Barker?
CR BARKER: Thanks, Mayor.
I'll be as brief as I can.
I can see the intent of what this motion aims to achieve,
but I'm concerned that it's primarily driven around the ability to gather funds
from the state and there's a little phrase the path to hell is paved
with good intentions.
While this motion seeks to improve outcomes for women and girls,
I feel that the imposition on clubs, the community
and Council may actually result in a negative outcome for women
and girls in sport.
Hopefully that's not the case and I'm wrong,
but I see that we could remedy the issues identified through my questions to the CEO
through the Mayor earlier through simple policy amendment
and adoption rather than going down this path forced
by the state requiring resourcing by us.
So it's not that I don't want the outcomes identified in this motion,
but I think that the pathway that this motion will set forth won't be
the best way to achieve that.
CR PATTISON: Thank you, Councillor Barker.
Do you have any closing remarks, Councillor Gazzard?
CR GAZZARD: Thank you.
I'd just like to highlight the benefits of sport, particularly for women
and girls, which include that they're less likely
to be involved in unintended pregnancy; better performance at school;
girls are more likely to graduate when they're involved
in sports; as little as four hours of exercise a week may reduce a teenage
girl's risk of breast cancer by up to 60%; it's known to prevent osteoporosis;
it develops teamwork, goal setting
and other performance-oriented improvements, increases confidence,
boosts mental health and physical health, and has lower levels of depression;
fosters emotional wellbeing, social skills and higher self-esteem
and confidence.
Thank you.
CR PATTISON: Thank you.
We now put the motion to the vote.
All those in favour.
All those opposed.
Councillor Wellington, I didn't see you voting.
CR WELLINGTON: I'm in favour.
I did vote.
CR PATTISON: Did you?
Sorry, it must have been a delay with the screen.
That's fine.
I've got you marked as in favour.
So the motion is carried 8-1.
We now move on to Customer Experience Bi-Annual
Update July to December 2023.
The purpose of this report is to provide Council with the By-Annual
Customer Experience Update for July to December 2023.
We have a recommendation before us.
Do we have a mover of a motion?
Councillor Stapleton
- is that as per the recommendation?
CR STAPLETON: Yes, Mayor, thank you.
CR PATTISON: And do I have a seconder?
Councillor Gazzard.
Would you like to speak, Councillor Stapleton?
CR STAPLETON: Oh, look, just briefly.
So this report is for Council to note the Customer Experience Bi-Annual
Update for the period of six months from July to December 2023.
It's a regular report to demonstrate Council's commitment
to understanding customer experiences.
And I guess just some points to pull out of interest, so in the six-month
period almost 20,000 customer requests were registered via
Council's CRM system and of those 20,000 or just under 20,000 requests,
the highest volume areas for requests included waste management;
civil works, which covers things like footpath and roads; parks
and open space; and the environment and development service,
which includes ranger services, planning and community safety.
Importantly, 94% of these requests were completed
in the nominated timeframe.
Obviously we'd love to work towards 100%, but 94% is a great result.
During the same period there were also just over 1,200 complaints recorded.
Most of those complaints related to missed bin services
and infringement reviews as well as property valuation objections.
There were also some complaints about overflowing street bins
and 83 complaints that were investigated under the Complaint Handling Policy.
Council really values complaints and feedback
because that's how officers are able to implement improvements
after complaints are investigated and some ways or some examples
of the ways that improvements have been implemented are through refreshing
of work instruction, staff training, working with facility user groups,
and just thinking about how we communicate with customers to make sure that they,
I guess, are kept in the loop even though some
requests and complaints take time, that we have regular communication
with them.
One last thing that I'll point out is the net promoter score, which
is a measure that comes about by determining the likelihood that
a customer would speak positively about their experience with Council,
the most recent net promoter score is plus 82, which compares with plus 70
for the previous six-month period.
So it's great to see it moving in that direction.
I think it would be really valuable to get some idea of the trend
of that net promoter score and other measures so that we can see how
we're tracking over a longer timeframe, but generally speaking it's great
to have this report and to understand how customers are
interacting with Council.
Thank you.
CR PATTISON: Thank you, Councillor Stapleton.
Councillor Gazzard?
CR GAZZARD: Not much to add
- thank you, Councillor Stapleton.
Just complaints are a crucial part of how Council function in the community
and is a good indicator of community engagement,
so we encourage people to put in complaints.
It's interesting to compare kind of rates of complaints and
whether that means things are functioning better or there's just less engagement or
there's just a natural fluctuation.
So I think that's why it's so important to keep having these reports so
we can monitor our progress.
Thanks.
CR PATTISON: Thank you.
Would any other Councillors like to speak?
Councillor Bodsworth?
CR BODSWORTH: Thanks, Mayor.
So there are three things that I'd like to touch on with this.
One, Councillor Stapleton mentioned wanting
to track trends.
I agree with that and these updates provide essentially
a longitudinal data set which could be expressed graphically
and I think that that would be helpful to us Councillors and to community
to visualise those trends and I understand that you might want
to do that cautiously because they might go up and down
and provide misleading notions of where things are at,
but I do think that graphical representation of those trends would be
helpful, particularly as we extend the timeframe that this has
been happening over.
I was surprised by the number of waste complaints.
We have new contracts, new kerbside waste contracts, for example,
that include technology like cameras, in fact multiple cameras on the trucks,
and GPS spatial technology and I would have thought and
in fact I understand now that those results are trending better
and I'm going to be looking at that next time around, if I'm here,
at the next update to see if those positive trends are continuing.
But I think that that's something we should look at
with our relatively new kerbside waste collection contracts
to make sure that those technologies are providing the value that we hope that
they would.
The other one is in the compliments it mentions
the Anglesea transfer station.
I'd like to do a special shoutout or callout
of the staff at the transfer station, including the lead contractor,
because that place is a highly risky workplace.
It's inherently risky.
It's a very complex workplace where there's a lot of interaction
between members of the public, contractors, independent, you know,
private companies transporting waste and it has an excellent safety record
- touch wood
- and it also has an excellent helpful culture.
So I'd like to really call out that positive culture
at the Anglesea transfer station and the great benefits that flow
from that positive culture.
CR PATTISON: Great.
Thanks, Councillor Bodsworth.
Councillor Allen?
CR ALLEN: Yes, Mayor.
I really would like to see us look at the pros and cons
of township area breakdown of requests and complaints.
It would be interesting say for the rubbish, for example, to know
whether the bin mock rollout at Lorne is effective and we would see
whether that was effective if we knew if the number of complaints
in Lorne were to drop, and following on from Councillor Bodsworth's point,
if it's still maintained, it was maintained at a high level,
it may be because GORCAPA rubbish
- we get blamed for GORCAPA rubbish and GORCAPA rubbish, of course,
the bins don't have the locks and maybe that's something we should look
at, trying to get them to install the same locks.
But I do see it and I would like us to look at the pros and cons of that.
Thank you.
CR PATTISON: Thank you.
CR BARKER: I'll be brief.
CR PATTISON: Councillor Barker?
CR BARKER: Thanks.
While the reporting period largely shows an improvement in the organisation's
performance, it definitely shows that there
is much room for improvement still.
CR PATTISON: Thank you.
Any closing remarks, Councillor Stapleton?
CR STAPLETON: No, that's fine.
CR PATTISON: Thank you.
We now put the motion to the vote.
All those in favour.
And the motion is carried unanimously.
We now move on to item 5, New Measures of Economic Success.
The purpose of this report is to seek Council endorsement
of the Measures of Economic Success Framework.
We have a recommendation before us.
Do we have a mover of a motion?
Councillor Allen, as per the motion?
CR ALLEN: Thanks, Mayor.
CR PATTISON: And a seconder?
Councillor Schonfelder.
Would you like to speak, Councillor Allen?
CR ALLEN: Thank you, Mayor.
For decades economists and policymakers have looked
beyond the quantitative measures to evaluate economic success.
There is no doubt that to produce more in an efficient manner has led
to vast improvements in our material wellbeing.
However, societies now look to more than growth
in measuring economic success.
We now look at how evenly the wealth that is generated is distributed,
how sustainable is our growth, and what are the environmental impacts
of that growth, to name just three.
I applaud the work undertaken to provide meaningful metrics
to guide future Councils in their decision making in the more
efficient allocation of our limited resources and
in assessing the shire's future growth success.
I acknowledge that the development of such measures
is a relatively new approach for local government
and our officers' work must be highly commended.
Officers recommend the selection of three pillars as the most pertinent
to be aligned to two of our Council plan strategies, namely,
our Economic Development and our Creative Places Strategies.
The three pillars are people, place and business and I'll mention just
a few examples.
There is a list in attachment 1 where there are goals that the Council can
influence to achieve a measurable outcome in achieving success.
Some of the examples under the pillar place
is listed additional and improved recreational
and leisure opportunities, including trails and galleries that are
important for both the health, individual health, liveability
and community connections, but they will also help to attract
and keep essential workers and provide healthy options
for an ageing population.
Under the pillar business, the target is industry growth.
Measuring employment in the arts, agriculture, health, tourism
and professional services will indicate that we are achieving growth
in sectors that our community has indicated that it values and wants
to see grow.
If we achieve growth in these valued industries, it leads
to qualitative improvements to our wellbeing.
It is appropriate that I here acknowledge my appreciation
of the fact that the metrics are measured and interpreted in the context
of our Creative Places Strategy.
Growth in our creative industries not only generates employment,
but it can lead to improvements in innovation by pushing boundaries
and introducing new ideas essential to productivity gains.
Growth in creative industries empowers individuals
and supports socioeconomic inclusion.
For the development of this framework, the Council departments have provided
relevant information by the construction of the weighted scores
to determine a target band of acceptance.
This enabled officers, along with the consultant firm Urbis,
to devise measurement tools to enable the shire to target resources
to areas that can boost our future economic success in the broader sense
of that term.
I believe that the future development of this policy should address the market
value of the contributions made to the local economy of adults who stay
at home and by volunteers.
Unpaid work has long been recognised as a significant contributor
to gross domestic product.
Based upon a 2017
publication by PricewaterhouseCoopers titled
"Understanding the Unpaid Economy",
unpaid work has been estimated in Australia to be as high as 35%
of gross domestic product.
I appreciate that this is a difficult task to accurately measure in a local context,
but it should at least be more prominently recognised
in the document.
Councillors, by accepting the framework, future Councils will be able
to make a more holistic view of economic success, recognising the value
to economic growth of a healthy natural environment,
of a healthy connected population, including the workforce,
plus hopefully in the future with that a valuation of unpaid work.
Thank you.
CR PATTISON: Thank you, Councillor Allen.
CR SCHONFELDER: Mayor, I'd like to commend Councillor Allen
on his address then and I concur completely and I just wanted
to briefly highlight the importance of 20-minute neighbourhoods, and I really
like that term as opposed to saying 20-minute cities
because many people that live in our townships and live in districts
like I live in Barrabool, it's not a town and it's not a city and the importance
from an environmental point of view of having services within a 20-minute
area is just so important and in particular too encouraging active
transport and trying to reduce emissions with our commuting, also public transport,
the importance of that, and measures of growth in public transport services
within the shire and it's an important component
to reduce car usage and I know that there's been a growth
of people working from home and COVID has certainly contributed
to that with home-based businesses.
And also the final point I wanted to point out in relation
to that was employment self-containment, which measures the proportion
of workers in the Surf Coast who also live within the Surf Coast, a key factor
in helping to reduce transport emissions.
So I think the digital economy also is adding and helping in this space.
Thank you, Mayor.
CR PATTISON: Thank you, Councillor Schonfelder.
Would any other Councillors like to speak?
Councillor Barker?
CR BARKER: Thanks, Mayor.
I don't see anything particularly wrong with traditional economic modelling.
The policy vision talks about achieving greater levels
of prosperity for the Surf Coast Shire.
You know what helps individuals prosper?
Not taking their money.
The way we collect rates is totally inconsistent
with the philosophy that I live by, the voluntary interaction
between consenting adults.
You could easily view it as theft.
Now, is someone who's been robbed able to prosper?
I don't think so
- far less than had they been able to keep their own money.
Now, going on to environmental sustainability,
this naturally falls into traditional economic modelling.
Customers and businesses have a natural incentive
to ensure that their children's and their children's futures are able
to prosper as much or more than we do now.
Businesses that don't care for the natural environment
will not survive in the modern economy.
I'd really love to see rates paid voluntarily.
Then we'd see how much the work we do is valued by the community.
Potentially we might get more.
We might get less.
Maybe that can be the new measure of economic success.
With regards to the 20-minute neighbourhoods,
it takes away the voluntary interaction between consenting adults
by imposing particular outcomes on economies and any mention of 20-minute
cities, neighbourhoods or any other sort of economic interference by government
is one that I will always oppose.
I won't be supporting the motion and I welcome the support
of Councillors who have had any reservations on this policy.
CR PATTISON: Thank you, Councillor Barker.
Councillor Wellington?
CR WELLINGTON: Thanks very much.
Yes, look, I'm quite intrigued by this work, actually.
I'm a bit of a fan of performance indicators as long
as they're well constructed and as long as they're validated and
in health care we have a lot of performance indicators that
on their face you would say, well, that would measure the quality
of health care, but when you actually test them rigorously
as to whether or not they do measure the quality
of health care, a lot of them fall short, and we've had a great deal of difficulty,
for example, coming up with measures that reliably
- with indicators that reliably measure the quality
of primary health care delivered in the community.
A lot of these indicators have been developed for big cities,
not for diverse kind of environments, such as the Surf Coast Shire,
with basically towns and rural areas and small villages and what have you.
On their face, they probably look
- they look sort of interesting, like employment, the proportion
of residents who are employed and therefore unemployed,
which has a direct link to prosperity.
I'm not sure whether being unemployed or employed
- in some circumstances when you're older being not working
is actually a sign of prosperity.
So, you know, that's kind of population dependent, you know.
There are various other measures here that on their face you could say they're
probably going to be measures of something good happening,
but night-time spending on dining and entertainment, you know,
that might be a very relevant one for Torquay,
but it's probably not going to be a relevant one
for Winchelsea or Deans Marsh or Bellbrae.
So I think I'm a bit concerned
- I would have been more comfortable if we'd have had an academic lens on this
because there's a lot of academic interest in performance indicators, a lot
of knowledge about how you actually validate them
to make sure they do measure what you think they're
measuring.
So I'm a little bit
- just a bit sceptical of having a bespoke model here
at the Surf Coast Shire.
I'll probably support it I think, but I would have liked
to have seen something from Urbis about how they actually validated,
you know, the scoring and pulling these indicators together
and I'm told there is nothing.
They sort of did it by consensus via workshops and that
to me doesn't sound as rigorous as I would like, and I suspect it's cost us quite
a bit of money to do this.
So I suppose I'm kind of interested, but I've got a query about its validity.
Having said that, now that we've got it done,
it's probably not going to be too burdensome, I would hope,
to collect the data and maybe we can look at it, but I would hope with a lens of
- you know, a properly critical lens.
Thank you.
CR PATTISON: Thank you.
Councillor Bodsworth?
CR BODSWORTH: Thanks, Mayor.
So firstly I really
- I've liked, appreciated the emphasis on prosperity
as a broader term in the work that's been sitting around this over the last couple
of years and this is a kind of semantic issue,
but I wish that this was referred to as new measures of prosperity
instead of economic success because to me economic success
is actually going back to that narrow framing
of this that I think the whole point of it was to avoid that narrow framing and
to fit it into a broader, more holistic frame.
So I hope that that's something that we can think about moving forward.
But it's a semantic thing.
So this is about helping the coast and community to thrive, which is central
to the mission that we're all on.
I'm really pleased and proud that we're bringing this piece
of work.
I think it's innovative.
But I do agree with Councillor Wellington that
- and I just assume that even if we vote to adopt this tonight, we'll continue
to work on it and improve it as we go forward and as we get to know it,
it's going to be
- it's a new sort of vehicle for us to use in the work that we do and
as we use it, we'll get to know it better and we'll be able to improve it.
So that's an assumption that I hold in recommending that we adopt this.
And then just sharing my view on 15-minute or 20-minute neighbourhoods, in contrast
to Councillor Barker's, to me it's a great liberator.
15-minute, 20-minute neighbourhoods are about ensuring that people can find
the things that are essential to them, whether that be workplaces or healthcare
or community services, schools and that kind of thing within that radius
by walking and cycling.
So that is in fact freeing people from schlepping it across hours
of suburbia in their cars from having to spend $300-plus a week
on car ownership, which is now the Australian average cost
of car ownership.
So it's an extremely liberating policy that's being used all around the world.
So yes, I'm happy to see this work.
CR PATTISON: Thank you.
Any closing remarks, Councillor Allen?
CR ALLEN: Thank you.
I sort of anticipated that Councillor Barker may have made the comments that
he was going to make this evening and whilst I respect totally his right
to have those views, I desperately thought well, where,
where in the world does such an economy exist where there is a free market
and the answer is, well, nowhere.
Hong Kong was close, but that's gone.
Singapore would be the closest.
Now, in reality
- I mean, the Singaporeans, they pay their taxes,
they pay their rates, and I'll note that in the last 10 years
the social expenditure in Singapore has increased
from $20 billion a year and it's almost doubled to $37 billion
in that 10 years.
So it's all very well in theory, but we are in the reality
of operating a shire with services that are expected of us.
Thank you.
CR PATTISON: Thank you.
We'll now put the motion to the vote.
All those in favour.
And all those opposed.
And the motion is carried 8-1.
We now move on to item 4.6, Proposed Lease to Powercor
- Part of 30 Wadawurrungway Torquay.
The purpose of this report is to advise Council of the outcome
of recent community engagement and seek Council's approval to enter
into a lease with Powercor Australia Limited
to enable the installation of an electrical substation
to service the Surf Coast Aquatic and Health Centre on part
of 30 Wadawurrungway, Torquay.
We have a recommendation before us.
Do we have a mover of a motion?
Councillor Hodge and seconded by Councillor Schonfelder.
Would you like to speak, Councillor Hodge?
CR HODGE: Yes, just very quickly.
I think you outlined nearly all of it in your introduction.
We did put it out for submissions and there is a map
of where this little bit of land is and no submissions were received.
So if we pass it tonight, it will authorise the CEO to enter
into a lease with Powercor, I think it's up to 30-odd years, and this
is sort of the first step after we get
- we're looking at the tenders now for the aquatic centre or hub at Torquay,
so of course we need the power.
So this is an extremely important lease of land so Powercor can set
up their facilities on that to work with the hub.
Thank you.
CR PATTISON: Thank you.
Councillor Schonfelder?
CR SCHONFELDER: Mayor, very briefly.
I am a very big John Lennon fan and I'm reminded of the song Power
to the People, but I'll say power to the Surf Coast Aquatic Centre.
Thank you.
CR PATTISON: Thank you.
Would any other Councillors like to speak to the motion?
Councillor Barker?
CR BARKER: This is pretty cheeky.
Let me tell you why.
It's privatisation and socialisation.
If someone profits from the work they've done privately,
I think that's fine.
If someone profits while socialising the cost, I don't think that's fine.
Just because this is how Powercor functions doesn't mean
that we should carry on blindly.
I don't think it's fair for public land to be contributing to private profits.
If Powercor wants to pay for the use of land at market rates,
I won't have a problem with that.
Given there was no community feedback, this motion will likely pass,
but even when there's strong community opposition,
motions can still pass, so more than likely it will.
I use this situation as an opportunity to remind people that
when there's government processes, be active, participate, because
if you don't, don't complain when things change in a way you don't like.
CR PATTISON: Thank you.
Do you have any closing remarks, Councillor Hodge?
CR HODGE: No.
CR PATTISON: No.
We now put the motion to the vote.
All those in favour.
And opposed?
And the motion is carried 8-1.
We now move on to item 4.7, Adoption of Stormwater Treatment Asset Selection
and Design Standards.
The purpose of this report is to seek Council adoption
of Stormwater Treatment Asset Selection and Design Standards
to improve the process of the design, construction and transfer to Council
of Water Sensitive Urban Design assets by developers.
We have a recommendation before us.
Does anyone wish to move a motion?
Councillor Bodsworth
- is that as per the recommendation?
CR BODSWORTH: Yes, thanks, Mayor.
CR PATTISON: And a seconder?
Councillor Schonfelder.
Would you like to speak, Councillor Bodsworth?
CR BODSWORTH: Yes, thanks.
So as all Councillors know, the Karaaf wetland
- the ecological damage to the Karaaf wetland that's resulted
from an excess of stormwater and also some stormwater
of poor quality has been a real wake-up call to us as a Council and
throughout the organisation around the management of stormwater
and the risks that stormwater can pose to natural systems
and Councillor Wellington was an early champion of better treatment
for the Karaaf, but the whole Council has definitely got
behind this and the organisation has got behind it big time
and what we're seeing tonight is the result of that and look,
we've had some input from members of the community who've also got
behind this big time and put a lot of their own time and expertise
into helping us tackle these problems and I'd like
to acknowledge the incredible value that we've gotten from people
through our communities on this.
I mention the Karaaf Wetlands, but this is an issue that's important
across the municipality and it's going to be increasingly
important, for example, in Winchelsea within the catchment of the Barwon River
and it's important in other places and I think that these standards are
a great contribution, they're going to sit alongside other standards
from other organisations and they are also
- and it's, as with a lot of things like this and like I just mentioned
with the economic indicators, subject to continuous improvement.
So we've had already some members of the community raise questions
about things that they think might be missing
from this or could be improved and I certainly welcome those.
I don't think that should stop us from adopting these
because I think it's really important work , but I think it's essential that
we continuously improve this and that we do that in line
with other expert organisations, like Melbourne Water.
And so, yes, I'm proud of the team for bringing this to us.
I think it's completely aligned with where we're at as a Council
and I think we should adopt it and continually improve it
as we go forward.
CR PATTISON: Councillor Schonfelder?
CR SCHONFELDER: Mayor, I'm seconding this item,
but I did have a question, so can I ask a question prior to speaking?
CR PATTISON: No, there's no questions between like the mover
and the seconder speaking and questions can happen after that.
CR SCHONFELDER: Because I was just following on
from Councillor Bodsworth's opening remarks about the fact that it has been
brought to our attention that Melbourne Water has a policy that differs somewhat,
but I believe that in the future we would be able to amend our policy
and I know that lessons have been learnt from the Karaaf and science is improving
all the time and it has been mentioned earlier
that in the audience in the gallery tonight we have Jennifer Bantow OAM,
who actually is a Life Member of the National Trust
and I'm also a Life Member of the National Trust
from giving a large donation to the trust and I attended the Amity water weirs,
which are quite historic, with Mrs Bantow and I know that now in the United States
and worldwide overflows and rivers that have been dammed are being
modified so fish can swim upstream.
That's one example.
And in our creeks we have eels and we have yabbies
and we have marine life and it is important to consider their habitat.
Furthermore, with the examples in this report,
which I very much enjoyed reading, examples of bioretention systems,
sediment fall bays, vegetated sediment ponds, so important,
and slowing down the water flow is a way to reduce erosion and the fact that
since colonisation many waterways and swamps and areas have been reclaimed,
have been drained and I do feel, even perhaps harping back
to the Council plan, First Nations reconciliation,
First Nations people need to be consulted.
We are in Eastern Maar country and one of the traditional owners, Ebony,
who I met with, told me about her grandfather talking
about Lake Elizabeth and she was told that the lake was built when
the settlers arrived and I actually said to Ebony that many of the waterways
and waterholes were enlargened.
They were originally there.
So it's very interesting learning about the history.
And one final point, Mayor, is that as a keen skier, I've gone up
to the different ski resorts and I've noticed how the different areas
deal with water that's melting and flowing down streams trying to once again slow
down the flow of water.
But very exciting examples.
Other municipalities have introduced different types of drainage
and I find drainage very exciting.
So I know some people may not feel the same way, but the technology
and the enthusiasm with the organisation in relation to this
is something that I am most impressed with and I'm being positive, which is great,
Mayor.
Thank you, Mayor.
CR PATTISON: Thank you.
Would any other Councillors like to speak?
Councillor Wellington?
CR WELLINGTON: Yes, thank you.
Look, I'm a bit
- I can't quite work out where this sits in the sort
of regulatory process.
So it's unusual for us to develop standards.
I don't recall that in the 12 years almost that I've been on this Council.
Normally we'd have a sort of policy framework that would
be informing the regulatory
- you know, the planning scheme.
So I thought it was a bit unusual that we developed Surf Coast-specific
standards.
I'm very surprised it hasn't been out to community consultation,
particularly when we're talking about, you know, quite significant changes
to the general environment to the amenity, which I think people will really like,
but I think we should have gone out to consultation.
I take the points that have been made to us by people who are quite expert
in this field and we've got some very good feedback
today and I would very much prefer that feedback to be addressed
before we adopt standards with the idea that we might continually
improve them because standards by their nature should have a level
of integrity and permanency and should only require very periodic
revision, not continuous improvement.
You know, a standard is setting a rule effectively about this
is, you know, what we see needs to be met.
So I've been very, very concerned about the Karaaf,
as Councillor Bodsworth said.
I think we had inadequately designed stormwater systems that developers were
allowed to build and then we accepted them when they probably weren't even built
to design and probably also weren't maintained
at the point that we took them over.
So there was a whole lot of problems that have left us
and the community, which has to fund this, a whole lot of residual problems.
So I think the work we've done
- you know, the fact that we're showing commitment
to this to get sort of better systems in place is really good, but the report
to me doesn't explain how these get incorporated into the planning process.
This is about asset selection and design, so it is an important part of the process.
But I feel it needs more consultation.
You know, we have this consultation engagement
policy which for some reason we don't apply
to some things and we selectively apply it and I don't like that.
I would like to see this go out for consultation.
So I won't be supporting it.
To me if it's not complete to our satisfaction,
we shouldn't be adopting it.
Thank you.
CR PATTISON: Councillor Stapleton?
CR STAPLETON: Yes, I guess it's just important
to note that although there was no broad community engagement
on the document, Council does work with the Karaaf Wetlands
Community Reference Group, which is a group, as its name suggests,
of community representatives who are very close to what's happened in the Karaaf
and have had input in the development of these standards.
CR PATTISON: Thank you.
Councillor Barker, would you like to speak?
CR BARKER: Yes.
I'll be extremely brief, Mayor.
This concept could be an interesting way to manage these assets
and could be a good test of how well we leave the asset management in the CEO's
hands, but the problem is that there were stormwater asset
standards before the organisation's actions prior
to the appointment of our current CEO led to the damage of the Karaaf Wetlands.
I think there are those in the community who share these concerns that this motion
is a smokescreen to show that we're doing something when
in actual fact we should have been upholding existing standards earlier,
likely preventing the harms caused.
I support following previously existing standards,
admitting where we haven't done so, implementing them and, in doing so,
will oppose the motion.
CR PATTISON: Thank you.
Councillor Gazzard?
CR GAZZARD: Thank you.
Yes, this is not my area of expertise and I don't know much
about stormwater drainage, so I need to rely on the experts for this one.
I agree with what's been said about the Karaaf
and that there was inadequate management of the stormwater in a very specific
environment which I think it is important that each drainage
is managed per that wetland or creek or river that it drains to.
I think it's good to have standards and they're not necessarily written
in stone, like it's more a guideline, and I guess this
is the asset selection document specific to our area based
on the Melbourne water standards, but tailored to our community needs,
a smaller community rather than a big city.
So look, I think there's probably some improvements
that can be made, but we can make amendments,
or the CEO can make amendments, as we go.
So I think I will support this, thanks.
CR PATTISON: Thank you.
Any closing remarks, Councillor Bodsworth?
CR BODSWORTH: No, thanks, Mayor.
CR PATTISON: We'll now put the motion to the vote.
All those in favour.
And opposed?
And the motion is carried 7-2.
We now move on to 4.8, Award of Contract T24-015 Roadworks
and Resealing Merrijig Drive and Fischer Street, Torquay.
The purpose of this report is to seek Council approval
to award the Contract T24-015 Roadworks and Resealing Merrijig Drive
and Fischer Street, Torquay.
Governance, can you now put up the motion with the unredacted successful tenderer?
CR WELLINGTON: Mayor Pattison, while that's happening,
can I just ask that somebody explain the paragraph 2?
It doesn't make sense to me.
SPEAKER: I can highlight that.
CR PATTISON: I'll pass that question
- you're talking about paragraph 2 within this specific report.
CR WELLINGTON: Yes.
It doesn't explain where the road surface is being
- it looks like it's jumbled, been jumbled.
SPEAKER: It should read "road safety improvements
along Fischer Street between Merrijig Drive and Inshore Drive
and Merrijig Drive between Fischer Street and Wadawurrung Way".
CR WELLINGTON: Right, so that's
- CR PATTISON: And that's confirmed that that's correct.
CR WELLINGTON: Because that should be corrected in the minutes
because it was very difficult to follow, this report.
CR PATTISON: Thank you for that feedback.
We'll include that in the minutes.
So you can see on the screen now the successful tenderer
is put up there.
So it's to Fulton Hogan for the lump sum of 2.115
- $2,115,147.
So do I have a mover of a motion?
Councillor Schonfelder
- as per the recommendation on the screen?
And do I have a seconder?
Councillor Bodsworth.
Would you like to speak, Councillor Schonfelder?
CR SCHONFELDER: I'll speak briefly and I'll thank Councillor Wellington
and Councillor Barker for their clarification.
I know that the better condition a road is, the more environmentally friendly it
is as far as vehicles that use that road, as far as any damage that this causes
to any vehicle, and I know that the roads in question are quite busy
and I'm someone that does use those roads quite regularly and even weekly.
I will say, however, I support this tonight
at this March meeting, but in future I am assessing whether I
will continue to support asphalting when it is a dark colour.
I believe that from an environmental point of view with a climate crisis, we need
to actually change the colour of the roads and I know I have spoken with you, Mayor,
about this and you seem to me to be empathetic about it and
in other parts of the world and also in other shires, I believe Alpine Shire,
they have roads that are white and I noted that
in Melbourne there are roads that are concreted and they're actually white.
And I know just briefly, in conclusion, where I live I put a path that was
white pebbles and I have noticed
- I had a paved area.
I removed the bricks.
Cooler, cooler, and that's a micro climate in my garden.
So I wish the contractors well with this project, but I don't know
about other Councillors, I'm more than happy to hear from them,
but I do once again emphasise the fact that in future I don't know
if I can continue supporting asphalting of a dark colour and I also appreciate
the nods in the audience and in the gallery
from members still present tonight, Mayor.
Thank you.
CR PATTISON: Thank you.
Councillor Bodsworth, would you like to speak to the motion?
CR BODSWORTH: I'll reserve my right.
CR PATTISON: Thank you.
Do any other Councillors wish to speak to this motion?
Councillor Barker?
CR BARKER: Thanks, Mayor.
Now, these roads aren't in too bad of a condition.
There are many more roads in far worse states of repair and a spend
of $2 million could go a huge way to address those roads.
Local roads and community infrastructure program
funding may have had more merit if it were used
along roads that many visitors use, but I think the LRCI funds use here
is totally unwarranted.
Between not even getting the wording in the agenda correct and a focus
on what I think is the wrong area to be renewed,
I will not be supporting the motion.
CR PATTISON: Would any other Councillors like to speak to this motion?
Councillor Wellington?
CR WELLINGTON: Yes, I just have a question about whether the road surfacing
that was there is actually worn in accordance with our expectations.
It seems odd to me too that these roads need
resurfacing at this time.
CR PATTISON: I'll pass this question on to our CEO.
MS ROBYN SEYMOUR: Councillor Wellington, there's been a lot more traffic
on those roads than we had originally anticipated or modelled and so
they have deteriorated faster than we would have expected as a result
of that high level of traffic and the sort of surfacing that is put down is dependent
on the anticipated traffic volumes in terms of road bases
and surfaces and so the road
- my understanding, and the GM of Placemaking & Environment might want
to clarify this if I'm incorrect, but my understanding
is that the road was built using materials that anticipated a lower traffic volume,
which means it's deteriorated faster than we had anticipated.
CR WELLINGTON: And can I just ask is that going to be remedied
through this process so that we get a longer life out of it next time?
MS ROBYN SEYMOUR: Sorry, Councillor Wellington, just
before I answer that, I think the GM was going to
- MR CHRIS PIKE: Well
- yes, through you, Mayor, and I'm happy to pick up the second question too.
The critical difference in the anticipated traffic was in relation
to heavy construction traffic and so the greater use of Merrijig Drive
as the primary entry point into a number of the subdivisions which was anticipated
to be spread across a wider network of roads, so Merrijig copped
more than its fair share in that section of Fischer and so
with the development largely complete, that risk is not as it was or
as it has been realised, so the treatment can be in accordance
with the usual kind of traffic that would use a road
of that kind, including lighter heavy traffic,
but not the prevalence of development traffic that there was
for a considerable period of time.
CR PATTISON: Would you like to speak to the motion, Councillor Wellington?
CR WELLINGTON: No, thanks.
CR PATTISON: Thank you.
Do we have any closing
- would you like to speak, Councillor Bodsworth?
CR BODSWORTH: Thanks, Mayor.
Councillor Wellington has highlighted the issue that I wanted to talk to
with this.
I've got no problem with the procurement side of it and that's
all set out in the report to my satisfaction,
but I think the question that Councillor Wellington has asked
is a really important question for us to keep asking ourselves as we go forward
because I think it's a question
- it's not just around our estimation of the use, the volume and the wear
and tear that the roads
- it's not just around what we're anticipating that
the road will get in wear and tear, but it's around a risk that I think
we face in development areas where the Council takes
over assets that developers have built that aren't up
to scratch that potentially are underspecified or potentially don't meet
specifications and I think that that's a risk that we've identified.
I think that's a risk that sits in the Karaaf and water-sensitive
urban design area as well where we've made
mistakes in specifying water-sensitive urban design assets and we're now picking
up the pieces from that.
So I think it's easy to sort of criticise these judgments in hindsight.
What's important and what I'm seeing now is a recognition that that
is a really important risk, that risk of taking over assets that aren't going
to serve us well and that are not going to live as long as they're expected to
and therefore we're going to have to pay large sums to replace them
before their time.
So I think it's a really important question
and doesn't change my readiness to agree to this recommendation,
but it's really important for us to keep track of.
CR PATTISON: Thank you.
Do you have any closing remarks, Councillor Schonfelder?
CR SCHONFELDER: In closing, I do thank my fellow colleagues
for their contributions and I understand the points that
they raise, but I'd like to say the CEO, Ms Seymour,
very correctly said that Fischer Street in particular, the volumes
of traffic there, it is really an equivalent
to the Surf Coast Highway.
I know I drive along there from the Dunes shopping centre and it is
like an alternative route and I do believe that the traffic volumes
have increased to a level that warrants and justifies an upgrade
of the roads specified.
Thank you, Mayor.
CR PATTISON: Thank you.
We'll now put the motion to the vote.
All those in favour.
And opposed.
And the motion is carried 8-1.
We now move on to Project Budget Adjustments
and Cash Reserve Transfers
- March 2024.
This report contains proposed project budget adjustments
and cash reserve transfers for Council approval.
The report presents adjustments, including existing projects requiring
adjustment, project closures, new projects to be initiated, CEO approved transfers
under delegation or corrections to prior reports presented to Council.
We have a recommendation before us.
Do we have a mover of a motion?
Councillor Allen
- is that as per the recommendation?
CR ALLEN: Thank you, Mayor.
CR PATTISON: Thank you.
And a seconder?
Councillor Stapleton.
Would you like to speak to the motion, Councillor Allen?
CR ALLEN: Thanks, Mayor.
I just want to highlight a couple of things.
There's an allocation of $10,000 from the project savings account
to complete a previously approved project, so I just wanted to make the comment that
that is to install the balcony edge protection
at the Stribling Reserve Pavilion we had previously approved,
but it's necessary to transfer the 10,000 because the cost of
- there has been a cost overrun of the safe egress and access path from
and to the oval that was so important for player safety
and that's caused that shortfall.
I'd like to note and congratulate the Anglesea Netball
and Football Club for the fact that they've made
a contribution of $25,000 towards the netball pavilion upgrade,
a project that is valued at $1.3 million.
I also point to the importance of developer contributions,
in this case $1,197,213 from developments in Torquay and Jan Juc going to the design
of pathways in North Torquay and project delivery
for the Spring Creek pedestrian bridge and for works
at the Oceans View Barwon Water Reserve.
Thank you.
CR PATTISON: Thank you.
Councillor Stapleton?
CR STAPLETON: Nothing more, thanks, Mayor.
CR PATTISON: Would any other Councillors wish to speak?
Councillor Barker?
CR BARKER: There's way too much grant funding involved in this motion,
so I won't be supporting it.
CR PATTISON: Any closing remarks, Councillor Allen?
CR ALLEN: No, thanks.
CR PATTISON: We'll now put the motion to the vote.
All those in favour.
And opposed.
And the motion is carried 8-1.
We now move on to item 4.10, Instrument of Appointment and Authorisation
- Planning and Environment Act 1987.
The purpose of this report is to seek Council's endorsement
for authorised officers under the Planning & Environment Act 1987
through the updated Instrument of Authorisation and Appointment.
This instrument requires updating due to recent staff changes.
Do we have a mover of a motion?
Councillor Barker
- is that as per the recommendation?
CR BARKER: Yes, Mayor.
CR PATTISON: And seconded by Councillor Hodge.
Would you like to speak, Councillor Barker?
CR BARKER: Oh, only a couple of names changed, not a big deal.
CR PATTISON: Thank you.
Councillor Hodge?
CR HODGE: The same, two names have been taken off.
CR PATTISON: Great.
Would anyone else like to speak?
I assume no closing remarks?
We'll put the motion to the vote.
All those in favour.
And the motion is carried unanimously.
It's good to have a few unanimous ones.
We now move on to Conflict of Interest Records.
The purpose of this report is to present conflict
of interest records received since the previous Council meeting.
Do we have a mover of a motion?
Councillor Gazzard
- as per the recommendation?
And seconded by Councillor Schonfelder.
Would you like to speak, Councillor Gazzard?
CR GAZZARD: No, thank you.
CR PATTISON: Councillor Schonfelder?
CR SCHONFELDER: No, thank you.
CR PATTISON: Would anyone else like to speak?
We'll now put the motion to the vote.
All those in favour.
Sorry, Councillor Barker, that's in favour?
Yes.
So the motion is carried unanimously.
He's just delaying a little there to trick me.
No, I was only teasing.
We shouldn't be silly.
It's a serious meeting.
Sorry, conflict of interest record and
- sorry, I just lost my spot.
Closed section.
So Councillors, we have a confidential item
to consider tonight.
As we still have a few members of the gallery, which
is amazing given it's 9.36, I'm going to ask that we take a 10-minute
break while we say good night.
And we will now turn off the live streaming, so thank you
and good night to everyone who is watching from home.
Thank you very much for your attendance and for watching online.
So Councillors, can I have a mover and a seconder to move into
- oh, no, we'll suspend standing orders.
So can I have a mover to suspend standing orders?
Thank you, Councillor Allen, seconded by Councillor Bodsworth.