Archive for June, 2008

Environment Levy and why we need it.

sue June 20th, 2008

The ‘old’ Hervey Bay City Council introduced an Environment Levy which has been used to purchase land to protect it from development. Last year as I recall, the levy was $25. Many neighbouring Councils have a higher Levy than $25 but I hope to retain an Environment Levy within the new Fraser Coast Regional Council.

Although the price of living continues to rise I truly believe that this Levy is a small sacrifice for each of us to pay and results in enormous benefits for our region. The Levy has already been used to buy 3 large blocks of land at Booral. These blocks are thickly covered in natural vegetation and hopefully will assist in the linking of areas that are known koala habitat.

I expect in the future the carbon credits obtained from this land will be of a financial benefit to our entire community. An Environment Levy will allow us to place your investment directly into land ownership in your community. This land becomes your land! You directly assist in the preservation of our local biodiversity by protecting our natural areas from development.

Please let me know what you think and whether you support a $25 Environment Levy for the coming year? $25 is less than 50cents a week! I think it is an excellent and essential investment in our future.

Tags:

Development pains….and legal costs!

sue June 13th, 2008

Last week Council decided to support a recommendation to build two 8 storey buildings on a site bordered by the Esplanade, Frank St and Freshwater St. Because several blocks had been purchased the total land holding was over 7000sqm but a sewer line traverses the blocks so the development has been split into two buildings. The site is zoned Mixed Use which can allow total site cover if shops etc are provided on the ground floor. The building at the rear of the site facing Freshwater St has no shops but is still sited very close to the boundary. I believe that this development, once again, is an over development of the site and am sad that setbacks and recessioning has not been included in the building design. I believe the development does not meet the intent of our Planning Scheme so I voted against the development. Pleasingly I was supported by Councillors McNeven, Hawes, Hovard and Arthur but the vote was carried by the majority of one. Those in support of the development were Councillors Harris, Nioa, O’Connell, Muckan, Dalgleish and Kruger. I am personally sad that the buildings gained approval but pleased that some Councillors voted against this development. I am hopeful that Councillors will insist that a more rigorous approach is taken with assessing applications and that recommendations to Council are to refuse an application that doesn’t comply more closely to our Planning Scheme. I also am concerned that this development did not require public notification which is something I would like changed within our Planning Scheme as soon as possible.

 This leads me to the last issue making the papers this week in relation to legal costs. Yes we do have legal battles with developers. If we didn’t have these battles it would be simply a case of letting developers develop however they want. I am sure that if the development application that I have mentioned above, had been rejected a legal challenge would have ensued. This is not something Council chooses but is a result of State based Legislation over which we have no control. A developer does have the right to challenge Council decisions and Council, in my mind has an obligation to defend its decisions.

CEO appointed.

sue June 13th, 2008

Council has selected Mr Andrew Brien who was previously CEO of Tiaro and the Interim CEO prior to amalgamation, to continue in the role as CEO of the Fraser Coast Regional Council. The vote was not unanimous with Cr Les Muckan absent from the meeting and Councillors Barbara Hovard, Gerard O’Connell, Anne Nioa and Julie Arthur voting against Mr Brien.

I want a CEO who will focus on getting our basics right. I want the ‘nuts and bolts’ to be tightened and lubricated and put together strongly to ensure our Council delivers excellent services to our new bigger community. I want a sensible financial manager who weighs up carefully the pros and cons of investing in any venture and advises Council wisely. I want a leader who is focussed on ensuring that we have a united staff eager to deliver excellent customer service to our community.

I don’t for a moment think that our residents want a regional government to divest itself of its basic reason for existence which is to ‘govern’ us. It is very easy to mix and interchange the words ‘business’ with ‘government’ but government cannot ever be ‘profitable’ and businesses must be profitable. I don’t want to live in a city or a region that grows ever bigger without getting any better! I don’t want the ‘all growth is good’ mantra to compromise our peaceful lifestyle and our natural environment. So an ‘entrepreneur’ wasn’t what I was looking for. I think we, the Councillors, need to be the entrepreneurs rather than our CEO!

Our Council has no competition, you have to deal with Council there is no other alternative and running services like Libraries and Galleries and building roads, a profit does not make! I want our Council to concentrate on fostering appropriate growth while building a sustainable economy and delivering a high quality service.

I am pleased to listen to anyone with entrepreneurial ideas and believe Council can assist anyone develop such ideas, but in my mind a true leader is someone who can bring out the skills that others possess. I look forward to working with Andrew and I personally believe he already has a great understanding of how to best manage the challenges ahead and meld us into an effective, proactive community focussed Council

Water Park

sue June 5th, 2008

Some comment on the WATER PARK.

Council had to make a decision about the Water Park recently. I am still very annoyed about how painful this process has been. Hervey Bay City Council had not asked for funding for a Water Park so when $5 mil. funding was granted to Wide Bay Water for a Water Park it presented the old HBCC with some difficulties. Firstly HBCC didn’t have matching funding within the budget and secondly all sites that were earmarked as possible sites had constraints.

 I personally did not want to simply give back $5mil to the State Govt but I strongly felt that for a project of this size community consultation should have happened before a final decision was made. As can be seen below I narrowly lost a motion to have community consultation but then I also decided to vote against the proposal as planned because of this lack of community input and that I don’t agree that this design in this site is the best outcome for our Water Park.

 The Water Park is proposed to include fountains spurting water across the road from the Main St roundabout and takes up a 20m strip down the side of the caravan Pialba Caravan Park which will mean reduced revenue to Council. Also there is a privately leased café, The Boatshed, already in this location and that business will reap an income from the Water Park that will be lost to Council or WBW. The Water Park is basically a big flat area for younger children to play amongst water jets and includes a space for a small wave rider. Trees are expected to be retained apart from the ones in the roundabout which will all be lost.

 While I think a Water Park will be a good thing to have, it will cost thousands and thousands of dollars to operate. Council has conditioned its approval by asking WBW to finance the ongoing costs from business income but I have concerns about how this will occur also especially as the opportunity to have a profitable café is compromised somewhat. Water companies are not usually in the business of running water parks so I hope that we can sort out any difficulties and make this park successful without compromising our Council/WBW budget. I personally would have preferred the Water Park be located to the far East of the Seafront Oval area closer to Tooan Tooan Creek to better fit car parking and take the pressure off the caravan park, trees and Main St roundabout.

From the Council minutes…….

 ORD 10.8       Hervey Bay Water Education Park – Hervey Bay

                    MOVED ( Brooks / Harris )

                    That:

                    1.     Council undertake a community consultation process in relation to the Water Education Park based on the preliminary proposal provided by Wide Bay Water Corporation; and

                    2.     Council advise Wide Bay Water Corporation of the financial parameters and request that Wide Bay Water Corporation provide final design details and financial feasibility report to Council for approval.

                                                                                                         LOST (5/6)

                        Upon a Division being called the following voting resulted:

                         FOR:                         Councillor Brooks

                                                         Councillor Dalgleish

                                                         Councillor MucKan

                                                         Councillor Harris

                                                         Councillor Hawes

                         AGAINST:                Councillor McNeven

                                                         Councillor O’Connell

                                                         Councillor Nioa

                                                         Councillor Kruger

                                                         Councillor Arthur

                                                         Councillor Hovard

                   RESOLUTION ( McNeven / Nioa )

                    That:

 1.     The Fraser Coast Regional Council approves the location for the new Water Park site at the head of Main Street, Pialba, as per Attachment 3 of report DOC #837087.

2.     Council endorses in principle the relinquishment of its tenure interests in the land identified in Attachment 3 of report DOC #837087, including an area of 20m off the end of the Pialba Caravan Park.

3.     Council advise Wide Bay Water Corporation to submit appropriate building approvals.

4.     Apart from the land component, Council will also provide 70 car parking spaces and an ablutions block on its own land as its capital contribution to the project.  Council advise Wide Bay Water Corporation that the limit of Council’s financial contributions will be the cost of the car parks and toilet block.

5.     Council request Wide Bay Water Corporation to include a commitment for the Educational Water Park in the Statement of Corporate Intent that demonstrates the intentions for the facility to be cost neutral without impacting on any short-term or long-term dividends to the Council.

6.     The Commercial activities proposed for the site be subject to agreement between Council and Wide Bay Water Corporation with the joint intention of making a successful and appropriate venture for the region.

7.     Council request Wide Bay Water Corporation to place information on the project in prominent public places, such as the libraries and Council foyers, and the information be disseminated widely through the media, especially the print media in the region, giving full details of the proposal including the draft designs.

                                                                                                     Carried (10/1)

                         Upon a Division being called the following voting resulted:

                         FOR:                         Councillor McNeven

                                                         Councillor Dalgleish

                                                         Councillor MucKan

                                                         Councillor Harris

                                                         Councillor Hawes

                                                         Councillor O’Connell

                                                         Councillor Nioa

                                                         Councillor Kruger

                                                         Councillor Arthur

                                                         Councillor Hovard

                         AGAINST:                Councillor Brooks

Tags:

Dingo fences - do we need them?

sue June 1st, 2008

Many, many residents in both Happy Valley and Eurong townships are very unhappy about the decision made by our State Gov’t to fence the townships. They are even more unhappy, if that is possible, about the bulldozing and methods used to construct the fences.

The fences are supposed to ‘deter’ dingos but are now belatedly been described as ‘fire breaks’. After speaking to staff employed at Kingfisher Bay Resort it is apparent that dingos still frequent that Resort in spite of the fence there. The staff even have pet names for the dingo’s that habitually visit the Resort.

Around both Happy Valley and Eurong the entire route for the fence was bulldozed. The bulldozing is straight through thickly vegetated sand dunes and has been, in my opinion, totally and utterly destructive and unnecessary.  If it could be proved that the fences were needed I still would not support the methods used to construct them.

The residents and local Councils were not adequately consulted about these fences and as time goes on more and more questions are being raised. Why would any town need a firebreak between it and the ocean? Fire will not approach the townships from that direction. Do the townships want a firebreak? Has anyone bothered to ask the people? Will the electrified grids be safe for people if they come into direct contact with them? How big a shock will be received? Are they safe for children and in fact the dingo’s themselves? What if someone has a pacemaker for instance? Will vehicles with sensitive electronic systems be able to cross without damaging these systems?

I believe that if anyone, including Council, used a bulldozer in a National Park to do damage as has been done on Fraser Island, a court hearing and heavy fines would ensue! Is this how we show the world the best way to look after a World Heritage site?

Snakes and spiders can kill me in my own backyard. Sharks can kill me if I swim in the sea. Driving on the road can be deadly! I understand the dangers and risks involved when I visit a natural, wild area. Dingo’s are the top predators on Fraser Island and have been a part of our landscape for thousands of years. They have a right to remain there and when we visit the island we simply need to ‘take care’. Domestic dogs have killed more people than dingo’s have.

I am increasingly frustrated at Legislation designed to protect us from nature and from ourselves. Government has a responsibility to provide a safe community but it cannot insure us all against every eventuality. We must take personal responsibility and look out for ourselves. If I choose to sit under a tree I know a branch may fall on me. I make the choice. I don’t expect every tree to be choppped down in case a branch may one day fall!

Let both the people and the dingo’s on Fraser Island remain free. Fences are not needed and they are most definately not wanted!