 |
| Lismore City councillors IMAGE: Lismore City Council |
In October 2023 it was reported that the Santin Quarry was once more on the Lismore City Council agenda.
Local residents and farmers in the Alstonville area were objecting to the quarry being made operational again in part because of concerns regarding the impact its activities would have on the Alstonville aquifer.
Echo, 10 October 2023:
Lismore’s Santin Quarry ceased operation in 2021 after an attempt to extend the life of the quarry for 16 years failed. An appeal to the Land and Environment Court (L&EC) by Santin Quarry’s owner Mick Santin was subsequently withdrawn. Yet the quarry is back on the table and objectors are concerned that the current crop of conservative Lismore councillors will approve the extension regardless of the fact that the staff have recommended refusal.
Due to the ‘lengthy history’ of the Santin Quarry modification to the development application (DA) Lismore Council staff ‘engaged an independent town planner, GAT & Associates, to undertake the assessment’.
There were 35 submissions received in relation to the modification with ‘25 against and 10 in support’.
‘The public submissions raised several concerns, including impacts on the visual and acoustic amenity of the area and nearby properties, impacts on the road networks, koalas, and the legality of the potential for consent to extend the quarry’s life,’ stated the staff report.
‘The modification application has been assessed and is recommended for refusal.’ .....
Despite this staff recommendation Council in the Chamber gave consent in a 5 to 4 vote and yet another poor planning decision, in a long line of poor policy and planning decisions that can be placed at the feet of Lismore City Mayor Steve Kreig and his supporters on Council, was underway.
Echo, 15 January 2024:
A local group is challenging the decision-making ability of Lismore Mayor Steve Kreig and his team in court, in what they say is yet another test of that team’s legitimacy.
The Monaltrie Area Community Association Incorporated (MACAI) have commenced Class 4 proceedings in the NSW Land and Environment Court arguing the Lismore City Council had no power to approve a Modification Application (MA) that was made by Michael Santin operating Santin Quarry.
The MA was approved by Mayor Kreig and his team on the 10 October 2023.
Seeking costs and an injunction
MACAI are seeking costs and that the council and Mr Santin be permanently injuncted from acting upon the approval.
MACAI commenced proceedings on January 9. The group alleges that Council did not have the power to approve a modification application (MA) to extend the life of the Santin Quarry, at Riverbank Rd.
The quarry at Monaltrie, 5 km from Lismore CBD, had a modification application approved by Lismore City Councillors in October last year. The application would allow a 12-year extension of the quarry, that owing to an expired consent, had ceased operations in February 2021.....
BACKGROUND
Lismore App, 11 October 2023:
As expected, the Santin Quarry application to extend its life for another 12 years to the 12th of May 2036, was keenly debated and easily dominated the Lismore City Council agenda.
What was not expected was the amount of drama that went on in the one-hour sixteen-minute discussion before the majority of councillors approved the extension 6 votes to 4 (Councillor Cook was away). Once again, it was like a bad reality TV show.
There were five public speakers who spoke in favour of the Lismore City Council (LCC) staff recommendation that the application not be approved. Council staff based that recommendation on the likelihood of the quarry having a significant acoustic impact on neighbouring properties, and the proponent has submitted insufficient information to assess whether all reasonable and feasible mitigation measures have been explored.
However, the five public speakers, one of which does not live on the land in the buffer zone near the quarry in Monaltrie, included previously disputed points that the DA (development application) is not substantially the same and the wording of the consent having expired or lapsed.
LCC staff sought outside legal advice and found the DA could be approved on both points finding the DA was substantially the same and council could extend the life of the quarry as the consent had expired. The sticking point was the acoustic impact.
Where the discussion started turning ugly was when some of the public speakers insinuated that a number of councillors personally knew Mr Santin and this may influence their decision to approve the extension.
One speaker said, "When making these decisions, associations and friendships need to be declared and decisions need to be made on facts, not friendships."
Earlier in the evening, a number of councillors did declare they knew Mr Santin and the association was non-pecuniary and non-significant.
Another speaker was concerned about the road width which was supposed to be widened to 6m but hadn't and was currently 4.9m making it dangerous for cars to pass trucks as they approached or left the quarry.
The final speaker was the catalyst for the meeting to be paused as councillors lost all perspective. To start the October meeting, Mayor Krieg asked councillors to remain respectful throughout tonight's proceedings. That reasoning unravelled at this point.
After prefacing her controversial comments by saying they were her own and she did not represent any body, community or organisation, the speaker went on to challenge the non-pecuniary, non-significant declaration saying, "It seems to me a very obvious conflict of interest."
There was a reference to undertones of nepotism and potential corruption if councillors voted against the staff recommendation.
It was at this point that Councillor (Cr) Rob moved a point of order and Mayor Krieg asked the speaker to stop talking. Something she did not do with Cr Rob sitting and continuing to talk also.
Mayor Krieg then banged his gavel asking for order as part of the gallery applauded. The mayor then threatened to clear the gallery if people could not be respectful to each other. The speaker continued to talk in reply to the mayor's comments before he issued one last warning that she would be removed if there was another outburst.
The speaker and another person spoke once more when Cr Rob stood to change the order of business as they walked out of the meeting. Mayor Krieg made another plea to the gallery to keep order or he would clear the gallery. This was challenged by Cr Guise.
"Mr. Mayor, can you please refer to the code of meeting practice where it gives you the right to clear the gallery based....."
At this point, the mayor is on his feet and refers to 6.9 of the code of meeting practice, "When the chairperson rises or speaks during the meeting, any councillor speaking or seeking to speak, must cease speaking and if standing immediately resume their seat."
Mr Guise then replied, "If you're gonna threaten to kick out the public members from a public facility, practising democracy, please refer to the code of meeting practice where you can do that. We are not in an autocratic regime, yet."
Mayor Krieg then adjourned the meeting for five minutes to find the relevant section.
When the meeting restarted five minutes later, Mayor Krieg reiterated 6.9 that when the chairperson stands, a councillor must immediately cease speaking and resume their seat. He then quotes 15.15, "All chairpersons of meetings of the council and committees of the council are authorised, under this code, to expel any person, other than a councillor, from a council or committee meeting for the purposes of section 10.2b.
The mayor then referred to 15.18, "A member of the public may, as provided by section 10.2a or b of the act, be expelled from a meeting of the council for engaging in or having engaged in disorderly conduct at the meeting. If I have to do it individually, so be it, but I will do it. Thank you, Councillor Guise for bringing those to everyone's attention."
Once the order of business was changed, Cr Rob put forward an alternative motion that the application for modification of the Development Consent to extend the life of the quarry be approved for a maximum of 12 years subject to the attached conditions. We later learnt that there were 44 conditions for the Santin Quarry to comply with over various timeframes of the consent. Some of those, like the acoustic noise mitigation measures were to be completed before any quarrying restarts while others were within the first six months of operation and some longer.
Councillor Guise expressed his reasons for not supporting the new alternative motion by outlining the history of the quarry, as well as asking his fellow councillors to support the staff's recommendation.
"Councillors, if you're contemplating ignoring a staff recommendation to refuse this, you are throwing out any adherence to the law. Any adherence to sensible planning decisions and you're ignoring what you folks said you were being elected for, which is to listen to staff recommendations and follow their recommendations. Please don't stand up in this chamber and say that you're going to go against the staff recommendation. When it's quite clear. This quarry will have unacceptable impacts on the community and it does not meet the basic legal threshold tests required for a development application modification."
Later Cr Rob asked Cr Guise what the staff recommendations were when the applications came to the LCC chambers in 2019 and 2020.
Cr Guise responded by saying he couldn't remember those recommendations. Cr Rob mentioned they were to approve the extension of the quarry's life to which Cr Guise replied, "Councillors did resolve to not give consent".
Non-compliance was an issue raised by Crs Bird, Guise and Ekins during the lengthy debate.
Acoustic earth mounds were to have been constructed at the start of the quarry thirty years ago but LCC's Eber Butron said that his understanding was that partial construction has occurred.
Cr Bird put forward a foreshadowed motion to defer the decision so councillors could understand the 44 new and updated conditions attached to the approval before Cr Ekins added more drama to an already bizarre discussion when she said that Mr Santin had donated money to the Greens last state election campaign.
Someone had complained to the General Manager that this caused a conflict of interest for Cr Guise and Ekins. The Greens returned the money but Cr Ekins said, "And in their view (the NSW Greens), it appeared to be an attempt to undermine the democratic process and to remove Council Guise and myself from this chamber."
To this point, no councillor had spoken for the motion to extend the quarry's life. A point not lost on Cr Bird who challenged those councillors to explain their decision.
Cr Rob, who was going to speak then rose and said, " How dare any councillor try and tell me what to do. I do what I want, as long as I believe it's within the code of meeting practice and the code of conduct. So, I'm not going to explain why I want to do this. I'm just going to approve it.
It was put to the vote which was won 6/4 with councillors Gordon, Hall, Jensen, Bing, Rob and Krieg in favour and councillors Guise, Colby, Bird and Ekins against......
No comments:
Post a Comment