[box] The Warrnambool City Council is getting closer to making a decision on how to improve boat launching facilities at the breakwater, with increasing political pressure to build a fully enclosed harbour. Bruce Campbell explains why this is the worst option:[/box]

By Bruce Campbell

Leader, Warrnambool Coastcare Landcare Group

Member of Safer Launching & Retrieval of Boats Community Reference Group

[dropcap style=”font-size: 60px; color: #A02F2F;”] ‘C[/dropcap]r Brian Kelson’s call to construct a fully enclosed harbour flies in the face of the very thorough consultation process that he himself was involved in.

One section of the boating community is conveniently ignoring the facts and aggressively lobbying councillors in order to pursue their self-interest.

The Safer Launching and Retrieval of Boats project is about precisely that: finding a way to launch and retrieve boats more safely.

It is not about spending millions of taxpayer dollars on a pipe dream to try to steal some of Portland’s competitive advantage.  I hate to break the bad news but Portland’s deepwater harbour and proximity to fishing grounds will always outcompete Warrnambool.

The project is also not about floating restaurants (yes, this has seriously been proposed) or the floating seasickness medical centres that would then be required beside them.  The project is not about creating mayhem on Pertobe Road with queues of cars and boat trailers preventing locals and non-fishing tourists from enjoying Lake Pertobe and the foreshore.

The project is also not about choosing the most expensive and environmentally risky option – a fully enclosed harbour – rather than the cheapest but completely practical option – installing a larger, cleverly designed boat ramp that reduces wave surge and ongoing dredging.

According to the project’s technical advisory group, this simple option will successfully provide safer boat launching and retrieval for 90% of the time.  90% also happens to be the proportion of time that ocean conditions make it safe enough for boats to leave the harbour.

[dropcap style=”font-size: 60px; color: #A02F2F;”] ‘C[/dropcap]oastcare groups, less vocal sections of our boating community and many passive recreational users of the harbour area do not want to see a fully or partially enclosed harbour for a range of reasons.  Many fishers also do not want to see this because they understand the potential environmental impacts on fish numbers.

There are serious concerns with the unknown long term impacts of new breakwaters on beach erosion and sand movement and with the likely introduction of marine pest species to Merri Marine Sanctuary via increased numbers of boats and trailers.   There are many examples of this occurring after harbour developments, including at Apollo Bay where the nearby marine sanctuary is now threatened by an invasive pest.

Our Merri Marine Sanctuary protects a very large number of significant plants and animals and it produces a large quantity of fish that supports recreational and professional fishing.  For example, on a calm day professional lobster fishers know to set their pots just outside the sanctuary for good catches.  Putting this at risk would be a very poor and shortsighted decision.

The minimal development option will provide safer boat launching and retrieval, will allow the sailing community to continue their activities unhindered, will not destroy the wider community’s enjoyment of our wonderful Lake Pertobe and foreshore area, will cost less taxpayer’s money and will be the least environmentally risky.  

And finally, for those who love to just sit in the car at the harbour carpark and look across Lady Bay, you won’t lose your view.”

Bruce Campbell

[box] You can download the WCC’s discussion paper on the proposals here (pdf)[/box]

Analysis  – Carol Altmann

The figures for the 2015 Fun4Kids Festival are in, and it’s a case of good news and bad news for the Warrnambool City Council and, by default, its ratepayers.

The good news is that it didn’t blow the bank.

In other words, it kept within the $450,000 budget that was set aside last October and avoided anything like the $150,000 blow-out of last year. Phew.

The bad news, however, is that the festival is attracting less people and therefore, you can assume, generating less economic and tourism benefits to Warrnambool but still costing $450,000 to run.

While there is still no official report on the results, the council released some figures to Bluestone today which said about 15,000 tickets were sold for the seven day event.

Last year, when the event ran over eight days, it attracted 19,758 people.

Of the 15,000 tickets sold this year, 24% were from metropolitan Melbourne – the highest percentage ever – which sounds like great news, until you work out that equates to only 3600 people compared to 3965 in 2015 and 5590 in 2013.

When you are coming off a smaller base, the percentages start to get wobbly.

It is extremely difficult to run a critical eye over a children’s festival – after all, it is aimed at children for god’s sake – but someone also needs to be the kid in the crowd as the Emperor marches by and point out that he is wearing no clothes.

So Bluestone, at risk of being deemed “too negative”, is prepared to say that the Fun4Kids Festival is getting precariously close to being bare-butt naked.

The reason is that the festival is no longer what it was designed to be, which was a major tourism attraction for Warrnambool.

Indeed in its heyday, the festival was pulling crowds of more than 32,000 people: double what it now achieves.

It was also costing less – far less – and at one point it was thought the council may not need to subsidise it at all because it would cover all of its own expenses. Such a notion now seems fanciful.

Here is the critical stat: in 2005, not long after the festival first began, it cost the council $156,354 and attracted 32,112 people.

This year, it cost up to $450,000 and attracted 15,000 people.

These are the cold, hard facts and why council staff last October recommended that the festival be discontinued because it had seemingly had its day.

But the decision to kill Peppa Pig, as it were, proved too emotional for the majority of the councillors and they agreed to press on in 2015 – turning the festival into more of a grassroots, simple-kids-fun kind of event with an extra heavy reliance on volunteers.

According to council spokesman Nick Higgins, this formula is set to be repeated in 2016.

“Council will shortly call for expressions of interest from local people keen to be part of the festival’s community consultation panel,” he said via email.

“The panel worked well this year and generated plenty of ideas and enthusiasm for the festival.”

It is wonderful to see such ideas and enthusiasm and I am sure most of the 15,000 people who turned up this year had a terrific time, but is this the best use of $450,000 each year to generate more visitors to Warrnambool?

Cr Kylie Gaston asked a question this week of Cr Brian Kelson, when he successfully pushed for free CBD parking over December and January, as to where the $70,000 in lost car parking revenue could be cut from within the budget.

I can think of at least one area….

For my money, I think free off-street parking over the busy summer period will do more for local traders than seven days of Fun4Kids where most of the action is confined to a plastic palace on the Civic Green.

If we want to continue to run a kid’s festival for, mostly, local and regional kids to enjoy, then let’s embrace that idea and stop pretending that Fun4Kids is a major tourism magnet.

It was once, but it is no longer, and there still needs to be a full and frank conversation about its long-term future.

Comment – Carol Altmann

[dropcap style=”font-size: 60px; color: #DC943C;”] H[/dropcap]aving dipped out of the Liberal pre-selection race for the South West coast by-election, Warrnambool City Council Mayor Michael Neoh is tipped to contest the seat for the National Party.

Bluestone understands that Mr Neoh resigned from the Hamilton branch of the Liberal Party soon after withdrawing from the Liberal Party pre-selection – which is fast attracting as many entries as the Melbourne Cup – and is to be confirmed shortly as the Nationals candidate.

Mr Neoh’s nomination by the Nationals would give him a clear run at the highly-prized seat, without enduring a potentially embarrassing face-off against Liberal Party contenders including Tom Napthine, the son of Dr Denis Napthine, agriculture activist Roma Britnell and former Upper House MP Donna Petrovich.

Mr Neoh could not be contacted today for comment and the National Party’s Victorian head office was tied up in its national conference in Canberra.

Sources have told Bluestone, however, that Mr Neoh’s candidacy for the National Party was all but assured.

The somewhat surprising move fits with Mr Neoh’s cryptic comment after withdrawing from Liberal Party preselection earlier this week that he was “keeping his options open”.

Mr Neoh repeated the same comment to the ABC earlier today:

“I certainly would love to represent rural and regional Victoria but at this time I still want to keep my options as wide as possible,” he said.

While some thought Mr Neoh might run as an independent, Bluestone has been told that Mr Neoh decided he could only run with the support of a major party behind him.

Again, his comments to the ABC today support this view:

“I think some of the ingredients that are really important to any candidate are having full support and having a platform to do that.”

The Nationals last held what was then the seat of Warrnambool from 1985-1999 under the hugely popular John McGrath.

While this latest move may see Mr Neoh build upon his political aspirations, it will also present a major challenge to the Liberal Party by splitting the conservative vote between the two Coalition partners.

This will be music to the ears of independent Roy Reekie and Greens candidate Thomas Campbell, who will be looking for any advantage they can to pull back a seat that requires an almost 12% swing to change from Liberal hands.

Unlocked – read our earlier comment piece here: By-election: are we on a road to nowhere?

[button link=”http://the-terrier.com.au/subscribe-2/” type=”icon” icon=”people” newwindow=”yes”] Click here to become a Bluestone supporter.[/button]

You might also enjoy…

Roy Reekie’s open letter to voters

WCC wimps out on marriage equality

W’bool losing its character brick by brick

WCC Mackay trip: keeping it in the family

Comment – Carol Altmann

When it comes to showing some spine on marriage equality, the majority of the Warrnambool City Council has proven, sadly, that they have none.

We know this because yesterday (31/8) the council had an opportunity to actually stand up and be counted on same sex marriage and they didn’t even make it to first base.

This is despite a majority of councillors telling Bluestone just two months ago that they had no problem with marriage equality, none at all, yet when it came to doing something about it, five of the seven councillors ran the other way.

How hypocritical.

Here is what happened.

As I mentioned in an earlier piece, Byron Shire Council Mayor Simon Richardson contacted the WCC by letter, asking for it to join a growing number of councils around Australia who have endorsed marriage equality as a civil right.

(Mayor Richardson who, for the record, has a female partner and two daughters, has taken a national lead on the marriage equality campaign within local government and has also formed a Mayors for Marriage Equality group.)

More than a dozen councils around Australia have so far declared their support for marriage equality, including Hobart City Council, Albury, Glen Eira, Greater Geelong- Surf Coast, Tenterfield, Byron Shire, Sydney, Leichardt and Port Douglas.

The people of Warrnambool have also shown they are ready to embrace same-sex marriage, with the most recent poll by the local newspaper coming in at 72% support.

At its regular briefing yesterday, the council had an opportunity to decide whether to join these councils by acting on Mayor Richardson’s letter, together with a marriage equality proclamation that Byron Shire Council has asked each council to sign.

Only two councillors, both women – Cr Jacinta Ermacora and Cr Kylie Gaston – argued that Mayor Richardson’s request should be taken further.

The remaining five, including Mayor Michael Neoh, Cr Peter Sycopoulis and Cr Brian Kelson – who told Bluestone that they support equality – all agreed that it should instead be “parked” ie. do nothing.

This is not leadership. This is weak.

It is also supremely ironic that a council can name Shane Hernan as its Young Citizen of the Year in 2013, yet not consider it worthwhile to publicly support the very issues that Shane is fighting for.

Because it is one thing to support gays, lesbians and transgender people quietly behind the scenes, but another to stand publicly shoulder-to-shoulder when the going gets tough.

And believe me, the going has been tough.

As it stands, there is not one political leader representing Warrnambool who will stand up for marriage equality: not Member for Wannon Dan Tehan, nor outgoing South West Coast MP Dr Denis Napthine, or state MLC James Purcell, or even, it has now come to pass, Mayor Michael Neoh.

In other words, the message to young gays and lesbians from our political leaders in south-west Victoria is that you are, and should remain, second class citizens.

What a terrible, isolating and discriminatory message.

And it is not just about young people. There are many older gays and lesbians living in Warrnambool who, despite their age and wisdom, are still too frightened to reveal their sexuality for fear of rejection.

I know how hard it can be. I grew up in Warrnambool and returned here determined not to retreat back into the closet. Bluestone has lost subscribers because of this, but, I would hope, we have also gained more.

Sexual identity is not something you can just turn on and off. Similarly, it is not enough to “like” gay people, provided they don’t act too gay or start asking for too much.

What is so heartening is that the majority of people in Warrnambool actually get this.

What is so disheartening is that the majority of our civic leaders don’t.

Analysis – Carol Altmann

As anyone who has ever been hired on a contract knows, there is no guarantee you won’t have to compete for your job when that contract ends: except if you happen to be the Chief Executive Officer of the Warrnambool City Council.

As was announced by way of a public notice yesterday (15/8/15) CEO Bruce Anson is set to be reappointed for a third consecutive term on a salary package close to $300,000, although this time it will be for three years from January 2016 rather than the usual four, taking him up to 2019.

All up, Mr Anson will have been CEO for 11 years and employed by the council in various capacities for more than 20 years.

Since Mr Anson took up the CEO’s position in 2008, it has never have been advertised.

While some might argue this gives a council stability, others, like Bluestone, would argue it also stifles any chance of bringing fresh thinking into the council’s top job and ensuring that the city still has the best person in that powerful role.

Mr Anson might well be that person, but surely Warrnambool deserves to be able to throw open the doors and see what other talent might be out there, while also, of course, encouraging Mr Anson to apply.

This happens all the time at the most senior levels of the public service, and at the top level of the higher education sector, so why isn’t it happening here?

The answer is astonishing.

By law, a council can choose to either reappoint its CEO, or re-advertise the position: these two options are always on the table every time a CEO’s contract comes up for renewal.

But Bluestone has learned that the highly secretive review committee that oversees the assessment of the CEO’s performance and recommends what should happen at the end of each contract, has categorically ruled out advertising as an option.

In fact, Bluestone has learned, the performance development review committee says to expect Mr Anson to apply for his own job is an implausible scenario.

The committee also believes that advertising the role would be “a very remote and unlikely possibility” and the only way it could happen is if the council no longer wanted Mr Anson to be in the role.

In other words, under this system, Mr Anson could have a job for life, as long as he wants it.

That is some rare air in today’s world.

The majority of the review committee – made up of Mayor Michael Neoh, Cr Jacinta Ermacora and Cr Kylie Gaston, with Rod Coutts as the independent chair – justifies this approach because, despite what the law says, councils apparently do this all the time: only advertise the CEO’s role if the CEO is leaving.

Maybe they do, but that doesn’t make it right.

Ballarat City Council has this month been grappling with the very same issue, with up to four of the nine councillors in favour of making sure CEO Anthony Schink’s position was advertised.

It wasn’t, and a majority of councillors (although we don’t know how much of a majority) recently voted to sign on Mr Schink on for another three years.

With the way the numbers currently fall at the Warrnambool City Council, the recommendation to reappoint Mr Anson for another three years on around $300,000 a year will also be passed by a narrow majority of 4/3.

It’s great work, if you can get it.