Council meeting

November 24, 2016

Signe Westerberg Headshots FAV (26 of 102)Where to begin, First I guess is the behaviour of our councillors has improved markedly, seems removing the chief procrastinators worked. Thanks to those who didn’t endorse them I guess!
Councillor Balloot thankfully removed his ridiculous proposal to drug test all Liverpool Council staff and councillors. Some of the newer councillors will need to do some research when it comes to issues that are brought back for discussion, sadly none of the new members of council attended prior to their ascension into council and last night showed how out of touch some of them were in relation to issues that have been addressed on several occasions. This is not new of course, many of those seeking your votes never bother to actually attend council meetings prior to wanting to be councillors and the trend for them to forget council exists once they lose their seats is also the norm, Former Cllrs, Mannoun, Ristevski, Gillani, Napolitano, Lucas, etc etc no longer attend on a regular basis if at all. A couple have shown up once or twice, but the majority walk away like they never cared anyway.  In most cases this is actually good news in my opinion and clearly life does go on.

There was a couple of issues that are worthy of note: The passing of David Pack, a long time contributor to all things Liverpool, 14 –yep 14 matters of confidence. The voluntary Planning Approval allowing retrospective adjustment of DA’s by buying out council. A contribution of $230,000 from Lateral estate (Skyhaus) to go towards Collingwood House renovations.  While I am supportive of contributions to things of such import as Collingwood House, I am as I have mentioned numerous times not happy that for a few dollars changes can be made to a DA that significantly change to height/character/impact of a development after such changes have actually been made. This building was approved at 28 Stories, ridiculous as is, and basically for $230,000 they can add 23 more apartments and 3 more stories. Cheap if you consider 23 apartments at let’s guess $650,000 a piece… cheap cheap don’t’ you think? Please note I’m guessing the cost of the apartments, lets face it, the views would be something to pay for I can imagine and I could be well off the mark, but the point remains. Then to have Cllr Rhodes suggest we should use that lousy VPA to fix the issues the building itself creates is a stretch too far. Seriously, we should pay for their mistakes????? come on let’s get real and those impacts on surrounding homes, streets etc etc $230,000 is a drop in the bucket.  If we as a council have not considered all those issues in the planning stages we have some serious issues on council imo and I’ll be damned if I think we residents through any contribution should be left to pick up the tab.

Mayor Waller went to considerable length to advise why she feels it inappropriate for the chair to comment on issues before council, while I think the formerpowermadmayor had waaay to much to say, she got elected as a representative of the people and the occasional comment when warranted is in my view appropriate. That said Wendy did only stand for the chair position so perhaps she didn’t want to be in a position to comment… either way she does zoom through the agenda, sometimes a bit too fast. Many in the gallery struggle to keep up and worse some of the councillors do to. It would be nice if she slowed down the actual yays/no’s a little so the gallery could see who actually voted which way before on to a new topic.

The link to the business papers is below, a couple of things that are really important I’d like to highlight. There are three major planning proposals/master plans on exhibition at the moment, two about the River developments and the other the CBD. As it is your rates that will eventually be used to support/maintain/fix issues relating to these major projects I can only stress the importance of your comments and submissions. I will be working on my submissions in the coming week or so and will post them here. Please consider having a close look at what is on exhibition at the moment and make comment. You can do this simply by emailing your views, doing the surveys’ through Liverpool Listens or write your views and post them to council. This doesn’t have to be a huge or lengthy detailed submission, dot points will do, just have your views heard. Keep in mind the proposal to have 40 story buildings on the old Cablemakers site is just one to consider and there are so many more, please take the time to have a look, comment and be heard.

 

Minutes of last nights meeting should be online sometime tomorrow…

As always if your views differ I’m happy to put them up here for all to see.  Your opinions are as valid as mine so I encourage you to use this opportunity to get yours across.

 

til next time

 

Sign off

 

http://liverpool.infocouncil.biz/Open/2016/11/CO_20161123_AGN_308_AT.PDF

Advertisements

Further to the Extraordinary meeting post

May 6, 2013

Signe Westerberg Headshots (41 of 102)Below, in italics,  is a copy of the motion to rescind the Mayoral minute,  Cllr Anne Stanley lodged, (thank you for sharing it) but the outcome was as we expected.  The duration 10-15mins, one non attendee (Cllr Balloot) not the expected absentee and the Mayor using his casting vote to make sure his proposed changes were safe and unchanged. There are genuine concerns about the proprietary of these changes from a number of people I’ve spoken with in the community and many have expressed their concern as to what the possible outcomes might be, none of which garner well for our city and council. FTR Cllrs Stanley, Shelton, Harle, Waller, Karnib for the rescission motion Cllrs Mannoun, Mannoun(in essence 2votes) Hadid, Mamone, Ristevski,  Hadchit, against… carried by Mayoral vote.

There are some real concerns with these changes and I dare say I hope a number of residents register and get up at the next council meeting and speak against them… again the changes to meeting practice will mean fewer people can make their views heard and all relevant info will need to be delivered within 3 minutes.

In fairness there are a number of things happening in council I hope the residents are paying close attention to… presently on public exhibition are the plans for budgetary and proposed actions for council the coming year/4yrs, I believe will be accessible and discussed  via the community forums (for the moment there are still 2)

Please, Please take the time to look at the council website, see what is happening and make your opinions known and preferably in writing. I cannot stress enough the importance of writing down objections and voicing opinions either for or against as a written submission carries with it a real weight while a verbal one barely no weight at all.

ANNE STANLEY”S MOTION

“I move the notice of rescission for the Mayoral Minute regarding Liverpool Urban Revitalisation for the following reasons:-

  • The Mayoral Minute was in contravention of the Liverpool Code of Meeting Practice Adopted 6 February 2013 Section 18.1 and 4 and the Division of Local Government Meeting Practice Note August 2009 – 2.7.1 Mayoral Minutes should not be used to introduced, without notice, matters that are routine, not urgent, or need research or a lot of consideration by the councillors before coming to a decision.
  • This Mayoral Minute has wide ramifications to the strategic plan and subsequently the Council’s budget. There were no financial implications in the Mayoral Minute although it is obvious that there are significant financial implications. There was no reference to either the four or ten plans of Councils. I note that the study tour which has been approved for the Mayor Councillors and Staff does not happen until June, therefore this motion could have been put to the next ordinary Council Meeting giving the Councillors and staff, time to provide the relevant information to make an informed decision. This motion puts the cart before the horse.
  • The motion should have ruled out of order by the Chairperson based on s 367 of the Act; s 238 point 1and 2; s 240 and s 241 point 1 of the Government Regulation of the Local Government Act 2005; Division of Local Government Meeting Practice Note August 2009-section 12.1.1; Liverpool Code of Meeting Practice Adopted 6 February 2013 section 2.7.1 and 2.7.4;
  • The Mayoral minute may not meet the requirements of S377 of the Act
  • Ultimately this motion should have been discussed with the benefit of notice and the opportunity for reports to be provided by staff. Liverpool is not only the Central Business district it is much, much more than that. We were elected to serve the whole of the Local Government area and any decisions made must take into account their consequences for all of Liverpool and how it may affect the majority of residents who live and work outside the CBD If this truly so important it should be planned and be well thought out. With only one hour notice this Mayoral Minute did not do that.”

Over to you… especially business owners who pay TIF payments this inevitably will affect you  directly. Comments welcome

Sign off


Coopers Paddock Submission Due NOW

October 21, 2011

click onto the submissions and petitions link if you would like to read my submission… feel free to use it as a guide , however for more comprehensive information refer to the save coopers paddock website http://savecooperspaddock.com/ or the council website for the exhibition information. http://www.liverpool.nsw.gov.au/onexhibition.htm#AMENDMENT14

and lodged your submission today,.