 |
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was subsequently withdrawn.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......
