OPINION – Carol Altmann

The exposure of senior Warrnambool City Council manager Peter Abbott as the author of anonymous comments to the local newspaper attacking some councillors has revealed a toxic culture developing within its walls.

The local newspaper has today named Mr Abbott, who is the head of the council’s tourism services and manager of the Flagstaff Hill Maritime Village, as the author of a string of comments to its online forum in which he regularly targeted Crs Peter Hulin and Brian Kelson while hiding behind a pseudonym.

This is not the actions of some junior staff member, over-excited by the opportunities of social media to air his spleen anonymously.

It is the actions of an experienced, highly-paid council manager who has set out to systemically discredit two of the people elected to represent ratepayers.

Mr Abbott cannot claim to have had a single rush of blood to the head.

Instead, he has carefully differentiated between commenting under his real name and making up a string of names such as Robinhood, Trash and Smallman to accuse Cr Kelson, in particular, of making false claims, getting his facts wrong, and failing to attend meetings.

These are highly personal attacks, designed to diminish the public’s view of elected members that – as representatives of the people – Mr Abbott is paid to serve.

If he was a senior public servant within the state or federal government making anonymous, critical attacks on MPs, he would have been dismissed for behaviour that is unethical, unprofessional and totally inappropriate.

The question is, how did Mr Abbott come to think that his behaviour was acceptable and, now that it has been exposed, how has he survived in his position?

Mr Abbott’s actions are indicative of a toxic culture that has been allowed to flourish within the council that considers some people – in particular Crs Kelson, Hulin and Sycopoulis – to be fair game.

It is a culture fed by a misguided belief that a council should be passive by not asking too many questions, not rocking the boat and agreeing to every decision as a united front.

Those who refuse to fit this mould are considered troublemakers who need to be discredited or, even better, removed from council altogether.

With this in mind, Mr Abbott no doubt thought that he was doing his bit.

The council’s chief executive Bruce Anson knows a lot about the potential problems of attacking councillors behind pseudonyms when he was scrutinised – and cleared – of any involvement in a series of letters to the newspaper written by his son under the pseudonym of Wilma Wright.

These letters, written over a period of four years, included personal attacks on Crs Sycopoulis, Hulin and then-councillor Jennifer Lowe during the 2012 election campaign.

Given this recent history, I would have expected Mr Anson to come down heavily on a senior staff member who has been exposed for such extraordinary and unprofessional behaviour.

Instead, Mr Anson has backed Mr Abbott to the hilt.

In his statement to the paper, Mr Anson said while “staff” should not engage in political debate online, he stood by “the excellent work” Mr Abbott had done at Flagstaff Hill and that he would  “be heavily involved” in the upgrade of the site.

Indeed Mr Anson even feels sorry for Mr Abbott: “It’s always a challenge, when you work as a public servant, to weather the criticism that comes with the job.” (I am sure the people who Mr Abbott has attacked would agree).

So Mr Abbott is going nowhere and will suffer no professional consequences for his actions.

I am trying to imagine the CEO’s response if Mr Abbott’s anonymous, public criticisms were aimed at Mayor Michael Neoh or, indeed, himself?

Would it be considered okay to continue in your position if you publicly criticised the two top civic officials you worked for?

Or what if Mr Abbott had used his anonymous comments to undermine the two women councillors, Crs Gaston and Ermacora? Would he (quite rightly) be taken to task then?

This should not be about individuals, but standards. Unfortunately what we have seen unfold today indicates that our local council has a long way to go in not only setting the highest standards for its staff, but enforcing them.

Note: It was Cr Brian Kelson who exposed the extent of the problems with the collection management system at Flagstaff Hill that has since revealed more than 130 missing artefacts, damage to Loch Ard relics and inadequate to non-existent record keeping. You can read our two earlier pieces on this issue here and here.

OPINION – Carol Altmann

* A warning, this piece includes a graphic photo from the Levys Point rendering plant which some readers may find distressing.

Next year is shaping up as a defining one for the long-term future of Warrnambool and its residents, with three major projects that will change the landscape for decades to come.

• The first is the proposed 34m-high milk processing plant and an adjacent 29m-tall cold store that will both operate 24-hours a day, seven-days a week in Scott St, Merrivale.
• The second is a $3 million upgrade of the rendering plant at Levys Point that sits adjacent to the Merri River wetlands and the Warrnambool-Port Fairy rail trail.
• And the third is a nine-level apartment and penthouse complex to replace the former Madden’s building on a prime site overlooking Merri/Gilles streets.

All three projects are linked to one of the most successful businesses and businessmen in Warrnambool: Midfield Meats and its founder, Colin McKenna, who, understandably, are always looking for opportunities to expand and build upon their already multi-million dollar status. There is nothing wrong with that.

The problem, however, is that the consequences of such expansions on the rest of us – the little people and our city – can be significant and irreversible.

As such, we have one chance to get it right, lest it all go so horribly wrong, and this is where we look to our civic leaders to act in the best interests of us all.

So far, however, most of the Warrnambool City Council and its elected members have appeared reluctant to rigorously press, probe and challenge the merits of all three projects put forward by one of Warrnambool’s most high-profile businesses, as if any “progress” is good progress.

Let’s start with the rendering plant at Levy’s Point, which was built in the 1970s at a time when the area was considered way out of town and nobody gave much thought to the environment.

In 2014, both of these things have changed dramatically.

We now care that a rendering plant is right next door to a beautiful wetlands and not only is it no longer isolated, but the Port Fairy-Warrnambool rail trail passes by its front door.

I had been warned that if you cycled along the rail trail, you could be confronted with the clawing stench and shocking sight of dismembered animal parts pushed into a meat mountain, but I didn’t quite believe it.

But yes, it is true and I can’t begin to imagine what tourists must think when they stumble across this sensory assault. The residents of nearby Merrivale, of course, have been living with the stench for years.

It is not the fault of Midfield Meats that they have inherited this location, but its application for new works at the plant provides a rare opportunity to strongly argue that it is time to relocate.

This is exactly what the Merri Wetlands Protection Group – a five member, volunteer based group – will argue when it presents its case to VCAT in April.

The majority of our councillors – Crs Ermacora, Hulin, Sycopoulis and Kelson – actually agree with them, but the final position taken when two of these councillors were absent saw the vote of Crs Neoh, Gaston and Askew turn opposition into support. Go figure.

Then there is the proposed milk processing plant and cold store that will tower over the inner industrial estate and create a whole new set of issues for the people of Merrivale while adding a 10-storey and a nine-storey shed to the skyline.

In a complex set of transactions involving state and local government, the council has bent over backwards to accommodate the Midfield plans by selling them part of its depot land, yet CEO Bruce Anson said recently he had no idea the site was intended for a milk powder factory until shortly before settlement.

So again it has been left to the little people, like the We Love Merrivale group, to stand up and challenge the idea of a factory being built so close to their homes, because regardless of the assurances given about dust emissions and noise, they are the ones who will have to live with it in their backyard.

And lastly we have the nine-storey Warrnambool Apartments project that will dominate the end of Merri and Gilles streets.

This complex will replace a 1940s art-deco building that had been recommended for heritage protection, but was rejected by the council, allowing its recent demolition. (Ironically, the council is now seeking a heritage overlay on the house next door, which was built at the same time, by the same builder.)

Irrespective of what you think of the design – personally, I think it is more suited to Melbourne’s Docklands than Gilles St – the sheer height of the building at almost 30 metres is at odds with the council’s planning guidelines for the area that say buildings should be no more than 7.5m (in one section) and 10.5m (in another).

As Julie Eagles from the Warrnambool Planning and Heritage Group said so succinctly at a recent on-site briefing for objectors, “given the council’s own guidelines, what are we even doing here?”

What, indeed.

2015 is shaping up as a defining year for both our city, its leadership and grassroots activism – watch this space.

OPINION – Carol Altmann

[dropcap style=”font-size: 60px; color: #A02F2F;”] L [/dropcap]eading Melbourne graffiti artist Matt “Adnate” Last has been chosen to create a $13,000 interactive mural in the heart of Warrnambool.

The Ngatanwarr (“Welcome”) Mural will transform a prominent – but as yet unnamed – site with a 20sq/m mural with an indigenous theme that will be developed in consultation between the artist, who is not indigenous, and the local Aboriginal community.

The interactive mural is central to a wider project being developed by a steering committee that includes representatives from the Gunditjmara Aboriginal Cooperative, the Warrnambool City Council/Warrnambool Art Gallery, Leadership Great South Coast and the F Project, for which a total of $22,000 has been raised from various government and philanthropic sources.

Adnate is the second, high-profile spray paint artist to secure a large-scale mural commission in Warrnambool, following that of Scottie “Bonsai” Neoh, who was awarded the $15,000 commission for the Mortlake Rd pedestrian underpass.

Unlike the Bonsai commission, however, the Ngatanwarr Mural went to expressions of interest, albeit in a tight turnaround time.

The call went out in mid September, with artists given around three weeks to submit an EOI.

Chairman of the selection committee, Paul Lougheed, from Leadership Great South Coast, told us that four local artists were among those to submit an EOI, with Adnate selected “by a panel including representatives from the aboriginal community, arts community and other interested community members”.

[dropcap style=”font-size: 60px; color: #A02F2F;”] T [/dropcap]here is no doubt that securing the services of Adnate is a coup for Warrnambool: his striking work can be found in major cities around the world and, earlier this year, he was chosen to paint a rare, blank 23m-high wall in Melbourne’s famous Hosier Lane.

And there is no doubt that his work will be a drawcard, particularly as it will include interactive QR codes to tell the stories behind the images.

But the perennial question again comes to mind: how can local artists get ahead if they keep being overlooked for significant local commissions?

We raised this same question earlier this year with the Bonsai commission, which followed the awarding of a $20,000 commission to Melbourne artist Ewan Coates in 2010 for his bronze sculpture The Three Pillars of Gratification, and another $20,000 commission in 2011 that was won by Ballan artist Velislav Georgiev for his work Chance Encounter, that sits on the corner of Lava and Liebig streets.

It is a vexed issue.

On one hand, Warrnambool can’t simply close itself off to artists from elsewhere, but on the other, a $13,000 commission (which includes materials and equipment) is the sort of work that can start to make an art career viable to a local artist.

Unlike in metropolitan areas, major commissions are rare in the south-west and many of the murals you now see around Warrnambool were done for very little money, but significant goodwill.

We look forward to seeing what Adnate produces, but at the same time will continue to argue that at least some of these large commissions should stay “at home”.

[box]The Ngatanwarr Mural will be launched on Friday March 20, 2015, to coincide with ‘Close the Gap’ day. You can find more of Adnate’s work on his website here.[/box]

[button link=”http://the-terrier.com.au/subscribe-2/” type=”icon” icon=”heart” newwindow=”yes”]Bluestone is aiming for 500 subscribers. If you enjoyed this story, please click here to become one![/button]

Find more Opinion pieces here…

Sucking the wind out of Portland’s sails

Fun4Kids: the missing bits

Fun4Kids faces axe after cost blowout

We reveal the ‘mystery man’ behind $20m apartments

Granny’s Grave buried in bureaucracy

All words, no funding, for Fletcher Jones story

OPINION

[dropcap style=”font-size: 60px; color:#A02F2F;”] A [/dropcap] compulsory traders levy to fund Commerce Warrnambool is poised for defeat on the back of a successful grassroots campaign to knock the idea on the head.

The votes have been collated by the Warrnambool City Council, and Bluestone understands that of the 1330 traders that would be affected by the levy, 688 – or 51.7% – took the time and effort to vote “no”.

As with any vote, not everyone filled the form out absolutely correctly, or on time, and after taking such things into account, the “no” vote settles at 49.2%.

While this brings the objections just short of an absolute majority, it would be a very brave (or foolish?) council to fly in the face of such strong opposition.

As such, it is not surprising that council staff have recommended that the levy proposal be dropped when the council meets next Monday (1/12) to vote on the issue.

In addition to a trader vote, anybody could put in a submission either for or against the levy – 36 people put in submissions against the proposal, while only five wrote in support.

[dropcap style=”font-size: 60px; color:#A02F2F;”] T [/dropcap]his is nothing short of a crushing defeat for the levy and a remarkable result for the Facebook-based Warrnambool Traders Action Group which marshalled the “no” vote.

Let’s not forget that the weird voting system applied by the Local Government Act meant that only traders who objected to the levy had to physically vote.

Those who didn’t respond were seen as being in support of the idea, even if, for example, they were interstate, sick, or may have been too busy or otherwise distracted by life events to put pen to paper.

Given this, 688 objections and 36 submissions against the levy is a huge show of dissatisfaction and an indication of how angry most traders are that the idea made it this far.

Because let’s be frank, the proposal never got off to a good start.

[dropcap style=”font-size: 60px; color:#A02F2F;”] B [/dropcap]luestone readers will recall that most traders only discovered the full extent of the levy after reading our story back in May, when it was revealed that Commerce Warrnambool wanted to raise $600,000 a year by applying a compulsory levy to all traders, including those in the industrial estate.

The levy would be in place for five years and rise by 5 per cent a year, with Commerce Warrnambool in charge of deciding how the money would be spent on promoting the city, encouraging people to shop local and lobbying on behalf of business.

Nobody doubts that local business needs a serious boost, but asking them to fund a newly formed body that had yet to demonstrate its capabilities in marketing, promotion or advocacy was ambitious, at best, and naive at worst.

After a trader backlash, led by the Warrnambool Traders Action Group, the levy total was halved to $300,000 a year and capped at $300 a year per business.

Despite this, the proposal failed to ignite any excitement and the revised Commerce Warrnambool business plan contained very little that had not been tried before, such as shop local campaigns, Christmas decorations and car raffles.

The talk around town – and we heard it everywhere we visited – was not how great the levy idea was, but how to get rid of it.

[dropcap style=”font-size: 60px; color:#A02F2F;”] G[/dropcap]iven the council has since received only five written submissions in favour of the levy, it appears that even the 12 members on the Commerce Warrnambool board have not been inspired to each write a letter of support.

And so the levy will – or should – be put out of its misery on Monday.

The question now is where to from here for Warrnambool business? As we wrote last week, the latest local business survey indicates these are glum times for many businesses, which is such a contrast to what we saw when travelling through Traralgon earlier this week.

This slightly smaller city than Warrnambool was jumping: a few empty shops, yes, but still bustling.

Traralgon is the biggest city between Pakenham and Canberra and Warrnambool is the biggest city between Geelong and Adelaide: they should both be thriving.

Could it be the free, timed parking in Traralgon that helps? Lower rents? A mix of big-name stores (Officeworks, Big W, Harvey Norman etc) and niche traders?

This is the conversation we are still yet to have.

[button link=”http://the-terrier.com.au/subscribe-2/” type=”icon” icon=”heart” newwindow=”yes”]If you would like early access to Opinion pieces, please subscribe to Bluestone.[/button]

You can find earlier Opinion pieces here…

Sucking the wind out of Portland’s sails

Fun4Kids: the missing bits

Fun4Kids faces axe after cost blowout

We reveal the ‘mystery man’ behind $20m apartments

Granny’s Grave buried in bureaucracy

All words, no funding, for Fletcher Jones story

Grappling with the work of a predator

OPINION

When the Warrnambool City Council gathers tonight (3/11) for its monthly public meeting, there will be one item missing from the agenda: the full picture of the parlous state of the Fun4Kids festival, as outlined to councillors a fortnight ago.

For some strange reason, this report – unlike others – did not make the cut and will not be released to the public until at least December, despite the future of the festival being the topic of the moment.

But the full report provides some fascinating details, such as the fact that there is, as yet, nobody to run the 2015 festival.

As you now know, the eight-day festival – whether you love it, don’t like it, or are not-fussed either way – posted a record loss in 2014 which requires $593,000 of council funds to cover, or around $150,000 more than anticipated.

It also posted a record low attendance of just 19,758. By way of contrast, in 2005, the event attracted 32,112 people.

Fun4Kids is dying, and has been for some years, but several councillors and Mayor Michael Neoh remain confident that they can turn things around in just six months and will spend at least another $450,000 to do so.

This means that the total ratepayer subsidy since the festival began is closing in on $7 million.

Let me say that again: $7 million.

It has already been pointed out by Cr Peter Hulin that if Fun4Kids was producing such a stimulus to the local economy, why are there so many empty shops in the heart of Warrnambool?

And isn’t it just a little strange to spend $450,000 on Fun4Kids to stimulate the local economy while also asking traders to pay a compulsory levy to raise $300,000 to stimulate the local economy? (In a neat piece of synchronicity, objections to this levy close today).

And why can’t the council afford to offer 8 weeks of free summer car parking in the CBD to try and make visitors linger longer – at a cost of $100,000 – yet it can fund 8 days of Fun4Kids for $593,000?

None of it makes sense, and it makes less sense when you see the full details of the Fun4Kids briefing provided to councillors on October 20.

While we wait for the official release, here is a summary in dot points:

* As it stands, there is nobody to run the Fun4Kids festival. Both the Service Manager (Events and Promotion) and the Marketing Manager have resigned from their roles. Both positions have been advertised, but not filled. Another part-time staff member will be taking maternity leave in December.

* There has been “an erosion” in sponsorship and in-kind support for the festival, but the 2014 event still secured $646,250 of in-kind support. (Imagine the cost to ratepayers without it!)

* Ticket sale revenue has dropped 30% from 2012 to 2014 ($505, 381 to $372,479).

* Locals are abandoning the festival. Of the 19,758 people who came to the 2014 festival, 9100 were from Warrnambool, compared to 13,812 in 2013. This is despite heavily discounted ticket prices for locals in the final days of the event.

* Less people are coming from Melbourne: 3965 in 2014 compared to 5590 in 2013.

* Council staff met with a lot of groups after the 2014 Fun4Kids festival to discuss the disappointing results: these groups included Sovereign Hill, Great Ocean Road Tourism, Federation Square and Melbourne Major Events. These groups highlighted a lack of local support and the increased competition in children’s entertainment as significant issues.

Given all of the above, it is not surprising that council staff recommended Fun4Kids not continue in 2015.

This is the nub of what they said to councillors on October 20:

“Despite the positive feedback and suggested recommendations, Council officers are not confident, given the above findings, the financial results of the festival, the loss of events and promotions capability within the organisation, and the overall increases in the costs of running the festival, that it would be possible to attract back the levels of audience participation that the festival needs to meet its financial targets.”

They then went on to recommend that community groups, traders and tourism bodies be told as soon as possible that the event was ending, and that council develop an “events strategy” to build on the city’s strengths and attract tourists all-year round.

But we know what happened: the advice was dismissed and the council now has six months to pull off a miracle turn-around.

While nobody wants to be the person who closes down Peppa Pig, it takes true grit and leadership to admit that the event has had its day and another $450,000 could be better used on developing a fresh attraction.