Showing posts with label ordinary monthly meeting. Show all posts
Showing posts with label ordinary monthly meeting. Show all posts

Thursday 5 October 2023

The saying ‘start as you mean to go on’ has acquired a darker meaning under the new Clarence Valley Council Mayor


Clarence Valley Council Ordinary Monthly Meeting 
26 September 2023
Mayor Peter Johnstone in the Chair


 

The first order of business at the Clarence Valley Council Ordinary Monthly Meeting of 26 September 2023 was the mid-term election of a mayor.


So that quite sensibly, if there was a change as to which councillor held the office, the new mayor would chair the remainder of the monthly meeting.


Thus twenty-one minutes into the meeting by a margin of one vote Cr. Peter Johnstone became the new mayor. This was followed by election of the Deputy Mayor, Cr. Jeff Smith.


After these votes the meeting immediately became interesting.


It seems unbeknownst to the general public that morning as Cr. Johnstone, Mayor Johnstone had sent a notice to the other eight councillors that he intended to make a notice of motion rejecting the tender for Regional Aquatic Facility (Grafton Pool Redevelopment).


So when he as Chair requested that Item ITEM 07.23.184 RFT22/41 be brought forward to be considered as the first item of business, he appeared to do so on the pretext that there were a number of residents & ratepayers in the visitors seats who were there to hear council’s decision concerning this tender. A tender which council officers had formerly recommended be accepted as set out in the 26 September Business Paper.


Cr. Day called the item and Mayor Johnstone requested Day to put forward “his motion” which called for rejection of the tender for the Grafton Pool Redevelopment.


The Day motion was as follows:


That Council as Crown Land Manager of Grafton Westward and General Douglas MacArthur Park Reserve

(R540035):

1. Decline to accept the tender offers for RFT22/41 Regional Aquatic Facility (Grafton Olympic Pool) as

the tenders received were higher than anticipated.

2. Revise the Aquatic Centre project to begin with:

a. replacement of the 50m pool (stage 2),

b. demolition of the existing dive pool and 50m pool and importing fill as required to make the

ground flat,

c. the completion of the other works for which grant funding has already been received,

d. and any other matters that will need to be completed to ensure the operation of the new 50m

pool.

3. Defer commencement of the remainder of the project until after the election of the next council.

4. Prepare a report for the October Ordinary Council Meeting setting out the expected timescale and

recommendations for the completion of the project as set out in item 2.

5. Receive a report at each subsequent Ordinary Council Meeting on the progress of the project until

completion.


In the middle of reading of the motion there was some interjection from the gallery at the point where further consideration of full redevelopment of the site was to be deferred until after the next local government election in September 2024, with no direction to seek another tender for work in the interim set out in Point 2. 


Understandable, given the gallery was peopled by around 40 residents/ratepayers who mostly either firmly supported the Regional Aquatic Facility, had made deputations and/or organised a community petition seeking a positive council decision concerning redevelopment of the community pool site. 


Johnstone barked out “Order” in a best parade ground voice, followed by a somewhat inaudible sentence. Some minutes later he made a second request that the audience “keep silent please”.


After reading of the motion was completed Cr. Novak appeared to notice that the wording of Cr. Day’s motion closely resembled the notice of motion sent out that morning by Johnson and sought confirmation of this fact. Johnson confirmed it was indeed “the same motion” he had sent out.


Cr. Toms then fairly efficiently dissected what was essentially the Mayor’s motion and Johnstone refused to answer a question put to him by this councillor.


Cr. Pickering also called the Mayor out as to the late timing of the motion, but it was Cr. Whaites who called a spade a spade when she asked Johnstone did he wait to introduce the motion at this time because he anticipated using the mayoral casting vote “to not do what our community wants – yes or no”.


Johnstone refused to answer, ending the exchange with Whaites on the words “when the mayor’s speaking you will not speak”. Audible laughter could be heard from the gallery at that point.


Cr. Toms continued to question Johnstone’s understanding of the role of mayor once Council in the Chamber had already made a lawful decision to proceed with the full redevelopment of the Grafton Pool site.


As the formal debate of the motion played out Johnstone reminded the gallery that he could order its members be removed. Given the mild nature and short duration of gallery interjections during this monthly meeting Johnstone’s attitude was somewhat puzzling.


Before it came time to vote on what by then every councillor was accepting as being Johnstone’s motion not Day’s, the motion was called “a farce, a joke, and it’s making a mockery of the entire process” by one councillor andit’s slow-minded and it’s short-sighted” by another councillor.


At times the ongoing debate became rather tense but remained essentially civil, nevertheless Johnstone accused Cr. Novak of something like an “act of disorder”. Again quiet laughter could be heard from the gallery.


A meeting recess was called which went on for about 5 minutes. After which the Mayor effectively gagged further debate, with the exception of himself. He spoke to his own slyly delivered motion.


In the end Mayor Johnstone’s motion was voted down five votes to three – only Johnstone, Day And Clancy supporting that motion to reject the tender.


Cr. Pickering having earlier foreshadowed the original council officers motion this was then put as follows:


COUNCIL RESOLUTION - 07.23.184

Pickering/Novak


OFFICER RECOMMENDATION


That Council, as Crown Land Manager of Grafton Westward and General Douglas MacArthur Park

Reserve (R540035):

1. accept the tender from Hines Construction Pty Ltd for RFT22/41 Regional Aquatic Facility (Grafton Pool Redevelopment) at a cost of $29,141,586 (GST Inclusive) to be funded in accordance with the funding strategy – Attachment B.

2. accept the schedule of rates submitted from Hines Construction Pty Ltd for the earthworks, total

cost to be calculated based on actual quantities as determined by a geotechnical engineer during the project works.

3. delegate authority to the General Manager to approve appropriately deemed variations to the Contract and those variations be reported to Council within the Quarterly Budget Review Statement (QBRS) once the Contract is finalised.


Voting recorded that motion carried as follows:

For - Johnstone, Novak, Pickering, Smith, Tiley, Toms, Whaites

Against - Clancy, Day.


One can be forgiven for suspecting that Clarence Valley Council may have chosen the wrong person to lead it for the next 12 months.



Wednesday 1 March 2023

Legal advice to Clarence Valley Council states the way is open to walk back inappropriate planned but as yet unrealised urban development on Yamba flood plain

 

On 6 December 2022 Local Government Legal sent Clarence Valley Council a letter in response to a request for advice and clarification concerning the following: 


(i) whether compensation becomes liable when and if the NSW Planning Minister was to rezone vacant lands that have not had DA approval for development on the Yamba floodplain (WYURA ) from R1 General Residential to RU2 Rural landscape and C2 Environmental Conservation zonings at Council’s request, and 


(ii) whether compensation becomes liable if land previously approved for the importation of fill was to be similarly rezoned;


 (iii) whether there are any other legal implications of such an action.

 

It is clear from the wording of advice contained in the letter, that vacant land can be lawfully rezoned so as to change its status from R1 General Residential to RU2 Rural landscape provided proper processes are followed under provisions of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.


It is also clear that compensation is not payable to the land owner if such a rezoning is done in good faith and with due reference to the Act.


It would appear that vacant land may also be rezoned C2 Environmental Conservation under the same provisos.


Existing development approvals on the Yamba flood plain are not affected by rezoning of adjacent or adjoining vacant land which does not have a development consent attached.


However, by walking back the current urban residential zoning on the remaining vacant land in what little is left of the northern section of this natural flood storage area, there is a chance that in restricting the number of new dwelling planned for the West Yamba Urban Release Area (WYURA) to the est. 409 dwellings contained in existing development approvals and thereby curbing population growth on the floodplain it will: 


(i) ease the pressure on emergency services during east coast low storms, high rainfall events, floods or bushfires;


(ii) allow Council to both redesign and upgrade the town's stormwater drainage system to minimise the existing negative impacts of changes to overland water flows caused by largescale landfill being created under existing development consents; 


(iii) allow more choice of flood mitigation measures to increase the town's resilience in the face of ongoing climate change; and


(iv) reduce the risk of loss of life during natural disasters. 


Local Government Legal’s advice was on the agenda at Clarence Valley Council's Ordinary Monthly Meeting on 28 February 2023:


ITEM 07.23.004 ADVICE IN RESPONSE TO NOTICE OF MOTION ON REZONING LANDS ON WEST YAMBA FLOODPLAIN with OFFICER RECOMMENDATION That the advice responding to Item 06.22.013 be noted. 


UPDATE


Snapshot of resolution 07.23.004 and text of excerpt from Clarence Valley Council, Minutes of of Ordinary Monthly Meeting, Tuesday 28 February 2023 (Minutes generated 2 March 2023 at 5:12:23PM) at p.11:


Click on image to enlarge






The advice is provided as a confidential attachment (Attachment A) for further consideration.


OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

That the advice responding to Item 06.22.013 be noted.


COUNCIL RESOLUTION - 07.23.004

Clancy/Johnstone

That the advice responding to Item 06.22.013 be noted and a workshop conducted prior to the March Council Meeting. [my yellow highlighting]


Voting recorded as follows

For: Clancy, Day, Johnstone, Novak, Pickering, Smith, Tiley, Toms, Whaites

Against: Nil

CARRIED

UPDATE ENDS



BACKGROUND


Clarence Valley Council Local Environmental Plan 2011 (Current version for 1 December 2022 to date) states:


Zone RU2 Rural Landscape

1 Objectives of zone

To encourage sustainable primary industry production by maintaining and enhancing the natural resource base.

To maintain the rural landscape character of the land.

To provide for a range of compatible land uses, including extensive agriculture.

To provide land for less intensive agricultural production.

To prevent dispersed rural settlement.

To minimise conflict between land uses within the zone and with adjoining zones.

To ensure that development does not unreasonably increase the demand for public services or public facilities.

and

Zone C2 Environmental Conservation

1 Objectives of zone

To protect, manage and restore areas of high ecological, scientific, cultural or aesthetic values.

To prevent development that could destroy, damage or otherwise have an adverse effect on those values.

To protect coastal wetlands and littoral rainforests.

To protect land affected by coastal processes and environmentally sensitive coastal land.

To prevent development that would adversely affect, or be adversely affected by, coastal processes.


North Coast Voices


Friday, 23 December 2022

Is Clarence Valley Council finally beginning to grapple with the need to limit development on the Clarence River floodplain? at https://northcoastvoices.blogspot.com/2022/12/is-clarence-valley-council-finally.html


Friday, 16 September 2022

If the NSW Government and emergency services tell Yamba it rarely floods and its houses are safe from all but extreme flooding, are the town's residents supposed to believe them? at

https://northcoastvoices.blogspot.com/2022/09/if-nsw-government-and-emergency.html


15 August 2022

Yamba Residents Group formed in response to inappropriate overdevelopment of a flood prone small coastal town at https://northcoastvoices.blogspot.com/2022/08/yamba-residents-group-formed-in.html