Clarence Valley Council: when each end of the debate spectrum is right and both are wrong

At the Extraordinary Meeting of 25 September 2012 which saw the new configuration of Clarence Valley shire councillors formally take up their roles, there was a single business item dealing with the creation of dedicated parking spaces for recreational vehicles within Grafton City precincts.

This item was progressed by council on a 7-2 vote and, all things being equal, Grafton City should have formal RV Friendly accreditation very soon as a commitment has been made to create the required lower order infrastructure.

Despite the tenor of certain online comments below recently published media articles on the subject and, a rather misleading print-only article, the fact of the matter was that both sides in the debate undertaken before this vote had legitimate points to make.

Firstly, Cr. Karen Toms quite rightly pointed out that Clarence Valley Council senior management had once again markedly overstepped its authority. A fact staff appeared to have admitted.

Just as they admitted that some of the proposed extended-hours parking for these recreational vehicles would be in the vicinity of residential properties and that property owners had not been informed of any impact this might have on access to street parking for their own visitors or emergency vehicles.

Secondly, Cr. Sue Hughes in her turn was right to point out that attracting more overnight, short and long-stay tourists to Grafton would be of economic benefit to the city and that the present state of the local economy made a proactive stance desirable.

The business item was a rather odd interlude in an extraordinary meeting whose purpose was to elect a new mayor and deputy mayor, as well as appoint councillors to internal committees or as council representatives on external committees.

The fact of the matter was that on 25 September past personal enmity, in-fighting and scapegoating were being carried forward into this new local government term and, the level of dysfunction which had begun to characterize governance for the last four years is now being writ large enough for the political jackals in Governor Macquarie Tower to consider moving in on Clarence Valley Council if they so choose - as they did on Maclean Shire Council when its last mayor went politically feral and on Grafton City and Copmanhurst councils when they could no longer hide the fact that they were being held together by sticky tape and creative accounting.

Councillors would be wise to heed the negative example of Singleton Council which still suffers the impact of past political and organisational disarray and, accept that they need to turn and face the problem in a constructive manner before the level of community dissatisfaction becomes vocal enough to reach the ears of the NSW Premier.

The O’Farrell Government will have no compunction about using this ongoing friction and growing evidence of poor governance as a reason to either formally refer matters to the Division of Local Government for determination or refer any significant documented irregularities onto ICAC.

The presence of National Party members among the nine elected representatives is no guarantee that the Premier and Minister for Local Government will not dismiss or dismantle Clarence Valley Council should it become a public embarrassment.

This state government has already demonstrated that regional New South Wales (and the Clarence Valley in particular) is of little consequence to it.

There is not one of the nine current councillors and not one of the senior management 
team who would be blameless if this were to happen, because every single one has already brought into that old, infantile schoolyard game of who's in and who's out of the magic circle with considerable gusto.

Clarence Valley residents and ratepayers deserve better than this from their elected representatives and from council management.