DEMOCRACY AT LAST!!

We have all been waiting for the ‘fat lady to sing’ and looks like it has finally happened. 

The Surf Coast Shire Council met on Wednesday 23/5/12 and in light of the number of objections have resolved NOT to proceed with the Precinct 2 Roads & Drainage Scheme. 

They also say they will not pursue any alternate scheme at this time and any future Scheme will require strong support from the community. I think we can consider this a ‘win’ for the little guys. 

Well done and Thank You to all involved.

We cannot attach the relevant documents because the Surf Coast Shire website does not allow downloads. The Surf Coast Shire website is cumbersome and very user-unfriendly. 

It is a simple matter for council to post Minutes etc in a very accessible way. 

Makes you wonder why they don't.

However they can be viewed on the Surf Coast Shire Website, go to Council Meetings, Agendas and Minutes, May Meeting, Pages 53 – 55:

http://www.surfcoast.vic.gov.au/My_Council/Agendas_Minutes/Council_Agendas_Minutes

DELAYED TIL COUNCIL'S MAY AGENDA?

The people voted - 63% against the scheme.
The people spoke - loud and clear at Council's hearings on Friday 13th April.
The position is clear.
BUT...
Instead of dealing with the overwhelming community opposition to this rate, and declaring the abandonment of the scheme as they are bound to both legally and morally,
the Surf Coast Shire Council has decided to push this question back til the May Council meeting.
Meanwhile, having mucked their rate-payers about since January, wasting our time, energy and money, they refuse to concede. And yes, they are wasting more of our money on this dud of a scheme as each day passes.
Unimpressed.

COUNCIL HEARINGS! BUT IS COUNCIL DEAF??

Well, after dozens of locals spoke heartily and united against the Special rate scheme at council hearings on Friday the 13th of April, ratepayers are STILL in the dark about council's mysterious procedure. (Council engineers read out a letter from an unknown absentee 'supporter', despite NOT reading letters from absentee objectors on the night.)

Only 4 councillors showed for the hearings, a pretty poor effort considering the impact of this scheme in the community.
One councillor who did not appear 'due to her conflict of interest' is the very same councillor who moved the original motion to declare this scheme. Seems council applies a very flexible standard of Conflict of Interest rules.

Ratepayers are waiting for this circus to end. It has eaten up $43K in public funds for the Citizens Jury farce, plus who knows how much in officer's salaries pushing this scheme over 6 years since 2006 to today.
It has wasted the time, money and energies of hundreds of ratepayers who made their objections clear months ago.
How long and how much more money will Council waste on this dud of a scheme?
Stay tuned to the Surf Coast Shire website for the next council meeting agenda!

SURF COAST SHIRE CHEATS PROTEST VOTE

The Surf Coast Shire has gone back on its word and changed the number of properties AFTER the community's protest vote. Council officers and Councillors confirmed  - in writing and verbally - on more than one occasion the total numbers at 311 properties.

The protest vote was overwhelming, needing 156 for 51%, and getting 188 objections.

Council's decision after the vote to INCREASE the base number of properties to 358 

by including potential subdivisions shows true contempt for its constituents. 

This devious re-jig of the numbers attempts to try to reduce the community's win to a margin of just 8 instead of the true 32.

Yet even then there are still enough votes to beat this scheme, even with this latest act of dissembling by Council.

This is clearly outlined in Local Govt Act: Section 163B (6): http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/vic/consol_act/lga1989182/s163b.html

        

Yet Council is insisting that 'hearings' now occur, as advised only by a notice posted by stealth on its website.

(Was Council planning to actually communicate this to us in any meaningful way, i.e. by letter?)

These hearings are surely are unnecessary in the face of such true and overwhelming opposition. 

What a waste of MORE of rate-payer's money, their precious time and energy.

Do these Councillors really not understand we have businesses to run families to attend to?

They are paid for this ridiculous waste of time, we are not.

This scheme should be abandoned, it has been overwhelmingly opposed.

Council has wasted so much of rate-payers money already on this since 2008, money far better spent on road maintenance.

This is a scandal.

Council creates impossible deadlines, devises unbeatable odds to fabricate a Herculean task that citizens must undergo just to obtain a fair representation. And when we beat even these most devious of rules, they change the rules.

It's no wonder people end up with scant respect for Council and Councillors, and despising the whole system.

MAJORITY VOTES AGAINST 'SPECIAL RATE'

The Surf Coast Shire Council has just failed in its bid to levy a 'Special Rate' in Aireys Inlet Precint 2 for unwanted road seal, pathways and drainage.

For many this was a cost of $3,000, $6,000, $10,000 and even $40,000+ for some households.

Overwhemlng community opposition (188 written objections) has stopped this scheme in its tracks.

Council has wasted $43,000 on "consultation" with a 'citizen's jury' and unknown further funds propelling this scheme since 2008, all the while ignoring the voice of its own community. Money that would have been better spent on routine works.

Why are Councils so deaf to their rate-payers? How can they afford to expend $15 million on new council offices in a spend of $40 million in Torquay-centric headquarters, and say there are simply no rate-payers funds left for general maintenance works in Aireys Inlet?

Council then tries to force rate-payers to pay again for everything from basic road works to unnecessary and unwanted road-seal and pathways.

What has become of Council's fundamental advocacy role? This disconnection from constituents provides a stark contrast to connected, creative communities like Aireys Inlet.

Surf Coast Shire wasting $43,000?

At all recent Council information sessions, the Juror's recommendations were never shown to the community. Only the Council's 'paving' plan was displayed. Residents were not made aware there were other recommendations.

After repeated requests, council has finally posted the Citizen's Plan, on 28.2.12 - nearly TWO MONTHS after the scheme was advised.
Not only that, how would anyone KNOW this information had been posted? Quietly, online, and unannounced to all effected parties.

Why did Council spend $43,000 on a 'Citizen's Jury' and then refuse to disclose the recommendations of residents and consulting experts?
Why did council keep this VITAL information from residents?
Why is council ignoring the recommendations?

DEADLINE for Objections 9 March

If you have not objected yet, please do so pronto.
Fill in a form at the bottom shops, AND write a letter of objection to council.
The deadline approaches!
This may not be the last Special Rate you are charged. they are becoming more prevalent than we ever knew.

When councils borrow...

Here are some interesting articles which go to the notion that councils are not infallible.
In fact, decisions by some councils have killed their towns with debt.
We remember many councils making bad investments with ratepayer's funds in the 80s and 90s, losing fortunes.
Why is the Surf Coast Shire levying Aireys Inlet properties over $10,000 a block for unwanted road paving paths and drains, while it happily paid $15 million for its own new Shire offices?
Ratepayer's rates are used as security for the loan that paid for these new Shire offices. The banks are sure they will be repaid, by ratepayers.
Where is the responsibility to provide for we constituents first?
Why is the Surf Coast Shire so insistent that $1.6 million in (unnecessary) works is done and paid for by a forced levy instead of by our rates?
Makes you wonder.
This is how bad it can get..... Read on, it's scary:

In Alabama, a County That Fell Off the Financial Cliff

Jefferson County, Alabama, is drowning under $4 billion in debt, the result of a botched sewer project and corrupt business dealings.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/19/business/jefferson-county-ala-falls-off-the-bankruptcy-cliff.html

Looting Main Street

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/looting-main-street-20100331

Jefferson County, Alabama - Screwed by Wall Street - Files for Bankruptcy

The city was roped into a series of deadly swap deals by a number of banks, most notably JP Morgan Chase, that left the county billions of dollars in debt.

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/blogs/national-affairs/jefferson-county-alabama-screwed-by-wall-street-files-for-bankruptcy-20111110

EVER-CHANGING MAPS

With no advice to residents at all, The Surf Coast Shire has quietly posted to its website a new version of its map of Precinct 2.
And it's changed AGAIN!
River Road disappears again, and more go from Luggs and Boundary Rds.
Inexplicable.
This is the 4th version of the delineation of the affected area circulated since council began this project.
Council make it extremely difficult to have confidence in their capacities regarding this entire scheme, when information is quietly and so often changed, numbers remain inconsistent, mistakes abound.

DEADLINE 9 March

After much agitation, residents have achieved an extension on this outrageous deadline for objections. You should have received advice of this by now.
The cut off is now 9 March.
If you have not objected please do so in writing asap.

Add your objection to the growing groundswell by writing to your councillor.
and importantly: please mention your wish to speak at a Hearing.
If you do this, a hearing will be held. if you do not do this, 
many who want to be heard will not be given the chance..

 Mr Sunil Bhalla
c/- Surf Coast Shire
PO BOX 350 TORQUAY 3228 by NOW MARCH 9th

We've saved the Pub, now save the residents!

The Surf Coast Shire is hell-bent on levying a diabolical 'Special Rate' scheme to force Aireys Inlet residents to come up with $3000, $10,000, $20,000 and even $48000 in one case for sealing roads that residents do not want.
Apart from the environmental insensitivity of the whole idea, how can anyone ever budget again if councils decide to use this mechanism to get money?
Will councils become as addicted to this way of fund-raising as other governments are to Pokies revenue?
How could council afford to spend $15 million on its own new office building, but not afford to do any road maintenance works?
Special Rate Schemes MUST be challenged.

THEY'RE PAVING PARADISE

Aireys Inlet residents in "Precint 2" 
( including properties in: Bambra, Philip, Luggs, McConachy, Pearse, Aireys, Boundary,Bree, Brent, Gilbery, Great Ocean Road, Hopkins, Kurrajong, panorama, Taroona) be warned:

You will be charged from $200, $550, $3000, $6000, $10000, $20,000 and some up to DOUBLE these fees for drains, sealing of roads and new pathways that Council CANNOT AFFORD to build and that Aireys Inlet residents DO NOT WANT.

Council sent letters advising this charge while many people are still away on holiday, with a deadline of February 9 for objection, advising that no objection will be taken as support!!

Council has instituted a "SPECIAL CHARGE SCHEME" to force resident to pay for these works.
This is undemocratic and unfair in the extreme.
It is also unaffordable, and unnecessary.

WHAT COUNCIL'S LETTER DOES NOT TELL YOU:
If there are not more than 50% objections in by Feb 9, council will proceed.
( Local Govt Act 1958 section 163 and also section 163B regarding

Objection process relating to certain special rates  and charges)

SPECIAL RATE objections: 

http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/sinodisp/au/legis/vic/consol_act/lga1989182/s163b.html?stem=0&synonyms=0&query=special%20rate

Council's own Charter describes their role as:

1. Advocacy (they are NOT advocating on our behalf here. There has been very little consultation, and the farcical Citizen's Jury advice has been ignored.)

2. Improve quality of life ( sealed roads increase traffic, increase speeds, noise, accidents, stress as indeed does such poor representation. Such outrageous and unexpected charges on households in a time of economic downturn is no improvement to quality of life.

In fact this system makes it IMPOSSIBLE for households to budget, as they will never know when council might want to levy another series of 'Special Rates" )

3. Services and facilities that are accessible and equitable. (this is Inequitable in the extreme - some properties paying $48,000 for a few meters of drain while others in the precinct are now paying nothing at all.)

4. Efficient and effective use of resources (Council has spent a fortune - $15m according to council officer - renovating their own council chambers and now claims they have no funds to maintain Aireys Inlet. Council is living above and beyond its means. )

5. Promote business and employement opportunities ( Council is breaking the banks of many local tourism businesses that serve the local ecomony and that attract visitors who spend in the area. Further, households and businesses will not be able to afford to spend any discretionary funds with local tradespeople on painting, new carpets, renovations, any other improvements after council has crippled us with charges like $10,000! This suffocates local business, it does not promote it.)

Councillors are not representing their constituents here.

Add your objection to the growing groundswell by writing to your councillor:
and importantly lodge your objection with:
 Mr Sunil Bhalla
c/- Surf Coast Shire
PO BOX 350 TORQUAY 3228 by Feb 9th.