Analysis – Carol Altmann

It would sound like a line from Monty Python if it weren’t so serious, but the Warrnambool City Council is increasing its transparency by moving more of its business behind closed doors.

That’s right: as part of its decision to finally podcast its monthly meetings so people can listen online, a majority of councillors agreed (4-2) to no longer allow councillors to ask questions in “general business”, but to have such questions restricted to council briefings, which are closed.

On top of this, the podcasts will be edited, as necessary, by the Chief Executive Officer before they are released.

This is not about transparency, but about control.

It is part of an ever-increasing damage control mentality that is engulfing the council because some councillors refuse to stick to the script and raise issues that are uncomfortable or potentially embarrassing.

These are issues, I would strongly argue, that the community has every right to know about.

Take, for example, the recent decision to spend up to $50,000 on a shed that nobody else wanted and which will cost up to another $90,000 to move (it is still sitting out on Wangoom Rd, by the way). This issue was raised by Cr Brian Kelson in general business, as were questions about the saga of the missing Loch Ard ingots (and other historic items) from Flagstaff Hill.

Does the public have a right to hear about these things as part of an open council meeting? Of course it does.

The truth, however, is that it is becoming increasingly harder for anyone to ask questions of the council, or to express a public opinion on its performance.

This has even extended to the council monitoring comments by the public that appear on social media.

Bluestone is among those who have been sent letters by the council in response to comments made on Facebook – in our case it was a broad, hot-headed swipe by a reader claiming the council was “corrupt” – asking for proof of the statements made so it could investigate them further.

While such hyper-vigilance against alleged corruption is admirable, the message from the council is clear: we’re keeping an eye on you.

Working alongside this monitoring is a well-oiled public relations machine inside council, where information is issued via a carefully prepared media release and then dutifully reproduced almost verbatim by the mainstream media.

This way, the council hopes you, the ratepayer, only get to hear all of the “good” news, because nobody has the time, or opportunity, to find out more.

Like Oliver Twist, Bluestone always asks for more, but, like Oliver Twist, we are rarely obliged.

Let me give you just one example.

Earlier this year, Cr Jacinta Ermacora made front page news with revelations that $250,000 had been spent on sorting out various legal disputes and in-fighting between councillors over the past two years, including $150,000 to employ a governance officer to handle these issues.

Such an extraordinary revelation deserved greater scrutiny and so Bluestone asked for a breakdown of this $250,000: where had the money gone and on what? And what was the role of this governance officer? Was she hired to deal only with litigious matters between councillors or was her role much broader?

Despite several emails to Cr Ermacora, the council’s director of corporate services Kevin Leddin and the council’s media manager, Nick Higgins, we are still waiting.

In the meantime, there has been not one shred of extra information given to the public about where a quarter of a million dollars of their money has gone.

The next step, if we were to pursue it, is to lodge a Freedom of Information application, which costs money and can take months.

Having said that, we have recently lodged FOIs for other matters, including the investigation into the “Wilma Wright” letter writing saga, and the investigation into the missing artefacts from Flagstaff Hill, because it is one thing to report the outcome of those investigations, but quite another to learn how they came to these conclusions.

This is the tightly managed WCC world which already operates and the removal of general question time it is only going to make it worse.

There are also moves afoot to make it harder for the public to ask a question at council meetings, and journalists will need permission to record an open meeting, which in this age of digital media is so ridiculous it is beyond comprehension.

Combine this with a new policy that says councillor emails can be monitored and reported back to the CEO and you are inching toward a system based on paranoia rather than transparency.

This is a concern for the media, of course, but it should be of even greater concern for the people of Warrnambool.

As I have written about before, the ability to ask questions of our government bodies, be they state, federal or local, is critical to a thriving democracy and each time information moves behind closed doors, we become further disempowered.

The council is justifying all of this because of laws around defamation, copyright, privacy and conflict of interest, all of which already influence how the council operates and should not change one iota because of podcasts.

But if we needed any more proof that such undemocratic changes are unnecessary, we only have to look at other councils who podcast or live stream. We picked one – Hobson’s Bay City Council, around Altona.

It has been podcasting since at least early 2014 and a quick look at a council agenda and minutes reveals there are “Questions from Councillors”, “Public Question Time” and, lastly, “Urgent and Other Business”.

That looks like a council leaning forward, not turning inward.

The fact that a majority of our councillors, unlike Hobson’s Bay, support less transparency, rather than more, is completely at odds with why we elect councillors in the first place.

Analysis – Carol Altmann

Is the Warrnambool City Council in favour of same sex marriage?

I realised during a recent visit to California – one of 37 US states to have legal same sex marriage – that I didn’t know the answer and that it was time to find out.

While some people may argue that taking a stand on marriage equality is not a local council issue, it most certainly is, because it reflects what sort of community we are and what sort of community we wish to live in.

In just the same way that many councils are now declaring their positions on family violence, racism, asylum seekers and climate change – all, big-ticket, federal issues with local implications – so too are they choosing to stand up in support of same-sex marriage as part of social justice and equality.

It is all about sending a message, a clear and unequivocal message, that we are tolerant, open-hearted and accepting of a diverse community and in a highly masculine, regional city like Warrnambool, this is even more important, because growing up gay in such an environment can be tough – even in 2015.

Byron Shire Mayor Simon Richardson last year sent a marriage equality proclamation to every council around Australia and has since been watching the results flow in.

I was surprised to learn that, perhaps prompted by Mayor Richardson, more than a dozen councils around Australia have since declared their support for marriage equality, including the unanimous vote by Hobart City Council in April.

Other councils to express their support thus far include Albury, Glen Eira, Greater Geelong- Surf Coast, Tenterfield, Byron Shire, Sydney, Leichardt and Port Douglas, while Launceston has embarrassed itself by going in the other direction and voting 8-3 against.

I say embarrassed itself because there is no doubt the wave of support for marriage equality among the majority of Australians (72% in a 2014 poll) will soon see Australia go where so many countries have gone before (21 at the most recent count) by legalising marriage between same sex partners.

Unfortunately our local politicians are embarrassing themselves too, with Wannon MP Dan Tehan, South-West coast MP Dr Denis Napthine and Victorian Upper House MP James Purcell all opposed to marriage equality.

Indeed some of the statements by our political representatives have been nothing short of extraordinary.

Take this example from Mr Tehan in 2010: “This isn’t a matter of discrimination of same-sex couples, this is about the union of marriage which is traditionally between a man and a woman and I believe it should stay like that into the future.”

Boy, that certainly sounds like discrimination to me.

And this from Mr Purcell, also in 2010: “I think same-sex relationships are quite legitimate – what people want to do is their business – but marriage is an institution that’s been around for thousands of years and I don’t think we need to change it.”

Quite legitimate? What people want to do is their business? Surely this is not a discussion on whether it is okay to be gay – god forbid we have to roll back the debate that far – but about equality and human rights.

Most of our Warrnambool City councillors, I am delighted to say, completely agree.

Bluestone contacted each of the councillors to ask the simple question: “Do you support gay marriage?” and five out of the seven chose to respond. Those that didn’t, disappointingly, were Cr Peter Hulin and Cr Rob Askew.

The remaining five, however, were all happy to express their support and here are their written responses:

Mayor Michael Neoh:  “I do not have any issue with consensual marriage between any two adults. This is my personal opinion.”

Cr Brian Kelson: “I don’t believe this should be a issue for local council, personally I believe in equality, but it will be a Federal decision that will make it a reality.”

Cr Jacinta Ermacora: “I’m sure you know already, but just confirming I support marriage equality. No government regulated institution should discriminate against any one in our society. What the religions believe is their business and will not be impacted by Bill (Shorten) and Tanya’s (Plibersek’s) legislation.”

Cr Peter Sycopoulis: “I have always tried to live a life where I treat others with equality, fairness and respect, irrespective of race, religion or even sexual orientation. I see no reason why I should treat the subject of gay marriage any differently. I support the concept of an individual’s right to choose.

“In particular, I find it quite unfair that same sex couples are not afforded the same legal rights and protection as others. The legal recognition of same-sex marriage would not only give all couples the same legal rights and protection but also the same legal responsibilities to their partner and family.”

Cr Kylie Gaston: “I have been a supporter of same sex marriage for years. I have many gay friends and have never been able to understand the logic that I had the right to marry and they did not. This is about ending discrimination.  So as a nation I believe we should remove discrimination against same sex de facto couples in federal legislation as an absolute priority so that all citizens of Australia will have equal rights on this matter.

“I find it frustrating and sad that we are now lagging behind many other countries over this matter especially when polling is indicating a clear majority of Australians support SSM. I’m looking forward to a couple of weddings of some very close friends in the not too far distant future!”

The question now is which councillor will take the next step and table a motion – or even Mayor Richardson’s proclamation – that the Warrnambool City Council declares its support for marriage equality?

This is as an opportunity for the council to not only add its voice to an important national discussion, but to remind every citizen of Warrnambool – regardless of gender, race or sexuality – that they are all equal.

[box]You can visit The Australian Marriage Equality website here.[/box]

[button link=”http://the-terrier.com.au/subscribe-2/” type=”icon” icon=”heart” newwindow=”yes”]Bluestone needs at least 500 subscribers in 2015. If you wish to support independent media, please click here to become one.[/button]

Find more Analysis here…

Rates, races and rubbery figures

Why doesn’t Warrnambool have a major art prize?

Once proud Rowitta is now an abandoned ship

W’bool City Council’s big shed shemozzle

Analysis – Carol Altmann

[dropcap style=”font-size: 60px; color: #A5CECD;”] T [/dropcap]here are two things which always go up each May: the Warrnambool City Council rates, and the council’s corporate marquee at the May Racing Carnival.

They make for a painful double.

Painful because ratepayers are again facing a 5.5% increase in their annual rate bill, following on from a 5.5% rise last year, which is more than double the inflation rate and amounts to an 11% increase in two years. (Glenelg Shire Council recently announced a 1.95% rate rise).

This means, for example, if you were paying $1700 in rates in 2013-14, you can expect to pay almost $1900 this financial year.

Cities the size of Warrnambool are not cheap to run and ratepayers collectively contribute around a third of the total $64 million operational budget, with the remainder coming from grants and user fees and charges, so every cent – and how it is spent – counts.

The council reminded us of this at its monthly council meeting (May 4) when it outlined where it had tried to make savings – by trying a different road building method, for example – and how some of the big-ticket items, like the drainage tunnel for Simpson St, were both necessary and costly.

“Times are tough”, “budgets are tight”, “things will only get harder when rates are capped”, are common mantras around the council at the moment, which is why a corporate tent at the May Racing Carnival seems like a complete waste of money and an insult to ratepayers.

Last year, the hospitality tent had a budget of around $25,000, but actually spent $17,000 on the 90 guests who attended out of 168 that were invited.

While $17,000 is small in an operational budget of $64 million, it is the perception that bites: the council’s corporate tent at the races is still considered “non negotiable” when it comes to savings.

(We asked, but have not been told, the budget or guest list for this year. Judging by the photo above, however, it may have at least been scaled back.)

It might be more palatable if the hospitality brought some tangible rewards, but based on last year’s event, the party is largely made up of council staff, councillors and members of the various boards, bodies and legal firms that the council already works with on a regular basis. In other words, it is a junket.

[dropcap style=”font-size: 60px; color: #A5CECD;”] P [/dropcap]erception also comes into play when we look at the vehicle provided to the Chief Executive Officer as part of a $288,000 annual salary package.

In the rubbery figure ways of corporate salary packages, this car is valued at $10,000, but don’t expect a car that is actually worth $10,000 – that is a reflection of the annual leasing cost.

In reality, the council provides its CEO with a sleek Hyundai Genesis that is worth around $60,000 and which sucks up 11.2 litres of fuel per 100km. Surely, in these cost-cutting times, something like a Toyota Prius would be a better choice and more environmentally friendly – if not as “corporate” – and send a message to ratepayers that everyone is doing their bit.

On the subject of rubbery figures, given the forensic nature of setting a budget and justifying where and why each dollar should be spent, it was extraordinary to learn earlier this week that some material provided to councillors has been cut and pasted from previous years.

Cr Peter Hulin made the discovery – which he shared at this month’s council meeting – after comparing what are called “service overviews” from previous budget papers to those provided in this year’s papers.

[dropcap style=”font-size: 60px; color: #A5CECD;”] T [/dropcap]hese service overviews detail how an area has performed, and how much money it needs for the coming financial year, so, for example, Aquazone will detail how many people came through its doors, how many people enrolled in learn-to-swim classes etc.

Astonishingly, Cr Hulin found that the service overviews for at least 10 council areas – including Aquazone, Flagstaff Hill, the library, Lighthouse Theatre, art gallery and even environmental health services – had the same figures appearing year after year after year.

In the case of Aquazone, for example, precisely 213,377 people went through the gates and 19,596 people enrolled in learn to swim classes for three years straight.

Let’s be clear: these are figures presented to councillors as part of official budget documents and, irrespective of how much weight they carry in final deliberations, they are simply false. How does this happen?

CEO Bruce Anson could not provide an immediate answer to the meeting, although he did say that he believed the service overview sheets were not updated “for one year”.

“I will have to take the question on notice and get back to you,” he said.

The answer is certain to be interesting and underscores why, when it comes to budgets, it’s always worth reading the fine print.

[box]People can make written submissions on the proposed budget until Wed June 5. The budget will be formally adopted at the WCC meeting on June 22. You can download the draft budget here. [/box]

[button link=”http://the-terrier.com.au/subscribe-2/” type=”icon” icon=”heart” newwindow=”yes”]Bluestone needs at least 500 subscribers in 2015. If you wish to support independent media, please click here to become one.[/button]

You can find more analysis here…

Why doesn’t Warrnambool have a major art prize?

W’bool City Council’s big shed shemozzle

Peter Ronald on the destruction of the 100-year-old Rowitta

Silencing councillors tightens grip on public right to know

The thinking behind A Big Life: Michael Barling & Sean Kenny

Exclusive – Carol Altmann

There is no doubt the hard-working staff within the Warrnambool City Council do many good things to keep our city ticking along, but occasionally they make financial decisions which are difficult to understand – like this shed.

Take a good close look at this shed because, if you are Warrnambool ratepayer, you now own it … and nobody else wants it.

The former premises of Daryl Porter’s cabinet making works on Wangoom Rd was sold by its new owner, developer Graeme Rodger, to the Warrnambool City Council earlier this year for a price understood to be between $40,000 and $50,000.

The sale was sealed on behalf of the council by its director of City Infrastructure, Peter Robertson, who by way of his position has the authority to make purchases up to $149,999 under the council’s procurement policy.

The idea, Bluestone has been told, was to have the shed relocated to council land in the west Warrnambool industrial estate, most likely at the council depot.

Unfortunately neither Mr Robertson or the council’s media manager will answer Bluestone’s questions about the shed, and perhaps the reason why is because it is shaping up as a major liability.

How? Because it has to be moved, and that is a very expensive exercise.

The 700m2 shed and an attached 300m2 lean-to are made of laminated timber, with a Colourbond steel roof and fully clad walls.

Bluestone has learned that the council received quotes to remove, relocate and re-assemble a shed of this type and found it would cost somewhere between $80,000 to $90,000 and this does not include the cost of a concrete slab.

So a $40,000 to $50,000 shed was now going to cost ratepayers well over $120,000.

No doubt realising that the shed was an unnecessary extravagance at a time when budgets are tight, the council recently tried to get rid of it – but nobody was interested in buying.

The shed was a late inclusion in an on-site auction held on Tuesday March 31, where auctioneer Brian Hancock tried his best to extract even a single bid from the crowd.

Hands stayed firmly down and the shed was passed in at $20,000.

It might not be so bad if the shed could stay where it was, and perhaps the council could rent it out to the many community and sporting groups around Warrnambool who could use the storage space, but there is a final twist.

Graeme Rodger needs the shed gone to make way for his residential subdivision later this year.

Indeed the auction advertisement reflected a sense of urgency, with bold letters stating: “Set time for removal. Payment day of sale.”

Mr Rodger told Bluestone that he was not putting any pressure on the council to move the shed, but that some time “in the next few months” would be reasonable.

The council has found itself in a checkmate and the question now is whether it spends tens of thousands of dollars on moving and re-establishing the shed, or walking away and cutting its losses.

ANALYSIS – Carol Altmann

[dropcap style=”font-size: 60px; color: #A02F2F;”]T [/dropcap]here was a headline just begging to be written a fortnight ago and it would have read something like this: “Cr Ermacora votes with rogue councillors!”

Or maybe it should have been this: “Shock move: Cr Sycopoulis abandons faction!”

Because despite a sense that the Warrnambool City Council is hopelessly divided 4-3 between two opposing factions who can never see eye-to-eye, they do.

And they sometimes agree on the most surprising and controversial of issues, such as in the case of Cr Jacinta Ermacora voting with the supposed “rogue” councillors Peter Sycopoulis, Brian Kelson and Peter Hulin to refuse a permit for a 2km sewerage pipeline to be built by Midfield Meats from its rendering plant to an existing sewer pit.

This was a significant decision in terms of Midfield Meats – one of the most successful and powerful companies in Warrnambool – being able to press ahead with its plans to upgrade the rendering plant which sits in the heart of a sensitive environmental zone because, when it was first approved 40 years ago, nobody cared about such things. They do now.

[dropcap style=”font-size: 60px; color: #A02F2F;”]A [/dropcap]n hour later, in the same meeting, Cr Sycopoulis stepped away from his supposed rock-solid faction and voted with Crs Ermacora, Askew, Neoh and Gaston to preserve the controversial Rolf Harris mural at the Lighthouse Theatre.

He didn’t have to, they had the numbers, but he did it because that is what he believed should happen.

In other words, both Crs Ermacora and Sycopoulis voted on principles rather than politics and this is exactly as it should be, and it happens more often than you think, but the dramatics that are also part of the current Warrnambool City Council gain much more attention than these occasions.

And nobody is denying that there is conflict and drama, borne from frustration, ideological differences, wrong-doings (perceived or proven) and lapses in leadership, but this is what happens when seven, very different individuals are elected to represent the many different people that make up our city.

[dropcap style=”font-size: 60px; color: #A02F2F;”]W [/dropcap]orking in the media in the past 26 years, I have sat through literally dozens of council meetings in various parts of Australia and watched them transform from stuffy, ultra-formal and dull gatherings made up of mostly businessmen keen to push private interests, into dynamic, diverse forums where not only the councillors are engaged, but the people.

To see the Warrnambool City Council chamber packed for council meetings is a victory for democracy.

And to see our elected officials made up of men and women from different cultural backgrounds, ages, political leanings and occupations is also not only a victory for democracy, but a big beautiful breath of fresh air.

Even if we don’t agree with everything they do or say – should we? – every councillor has to be admired for, as US writer Bréne Brown calls it, stepping into the arena, because that arena is very public, very demanding and, at times, bruising, and that is why most people remain on the sidelines.

[dropcap style=”font-size: 60px; color: #A02F2F;”]W [/dropcap]hat I don’t understand is why our robust, vibrant and, yes, occasionally dramatic council is considered dysfunctional?

It is in good financial shape and surely it is far less important that councillors sit down and have a convivial meal at the end of each meeting, than it is for important issues to be dissected, debated and thrashed out in public.

Judging by his recent statements, newly elected MP and former Moyne mayor James Purcell is among those who claim our “dysfunctional” council could stop jobs growth in Warrnambool because it has had the temerity to question the building of an enormous milk processing plant and cold storage facility by Midfield Meats in Merrivale.

Midfield’s plans are passing through due process and the elected councillors are doing exactly as they should: watching that process unfold while also listening to the hundreds of people in and around Merrivale who have concerns about the single greatest change to their neighbourhood in decades.

Leaving aside for one moment the handful of jobs that will actually be created by this expansion, surely a council is not elected to be a mere rubber stamp for developments and developers?

If so, they should be more rightly described as corporations, not councils.

The day our councillors start to fall silent on the significant issues within our city is when we really need to begin to worry, not when they are making too much noise.

[button link=”http://the-terrier.com.au/subscribe-2/” type=”icon” icon=”heart” newwindow=”yes”]Please click here to subscribe and support Bluestone Magazine.[/button]

 You can find more analysis here…

Sovereign Hill strikes gold as “Flaggy” struggles

Harris mural a lost opportunity to take a stand

Behind the spin, W’bool business is losing heart

The changing landscape under Midfield Meats