Extraordinary Council

Extraordinary indeed!

Newcastle Herald Report: HERE 

A group of TRRA Committee members had to drive to Raymond Terrace to witness the unedifying spectacle of Council rule by numbers at an Extraordinary Council Meeting tonight Tues 17 December 2012. It is not hard to see why the web-casting of Council Meetings has been dispensed with in the light of what occurred, but it was a long way to drive to witness a debate where nothing was debated. At the last Council Meeting 11 December 2012 the last item on the agenda was:

NOTICE OF MOTION, ITEM NO. 1, FILE NO: A2004-0217

ALLOCATION OF REPEALED SECTION 94 FUNDS

COUNCILLORS: BRUCE MACKENZIE, SALLY DOVER, KEN JORDAN, STEVE TUCKER, CHRIS DOOHAN, JOHN MORELLO, PAUL LE MOTTEE.

THAT COUNCIL:

1) Allocate repealed Section 94 funds to the following projects:

a. Soldiers Point Memorial Hall asbestos environmental clean $30,000;

b. Tilligerry Aquatic Centre upgrade of electrical switch board $10,000;

c. Salamander Bay Children’s Centre stage one kitchen upgrade $12,000;

d. Cornerstone Christian Fellowship Hall upgrade of amenities to accommodate community playgroups displaced by the closure of Soldiers Point Memorial Hall $18,000;

e. Brandon Park cricket wicket resurfacing $40,000;

f. Brandon Park cricket net installation $6,500;

g. Seaham Park picnic shelters and furniture $12,000;

h. King Park playing surface drainage works $13,600;

i. Fern Bay Van Village community shipping container $4,000;

j. Medowie Rugby Union Club equipment shipping container $4,000;

k. Medowie Rugby Union Club concrete pad under awning $4,000;

l. Karuah Men’s Shed $25,000;

m. Croquet courts (2 off) at Boomerang Park Raymond Terrace $40,000;

n. Nelson Bay foreshore playground shade structure $30,000;

o. Anna Bay Lawn Cemetery top dressing of lawn cemetery $10,000;

p. Salt Ash Equestrian Centre top dressing of pony club arena $10,000;

q. Tilligerry Men’s Shed $20,000;

r. Nelson Bay Skate Park $20,000;

s. Boat Harbour Reserve Committee $2,000.

MOTION

Councillor Ken Jordan, Councillor Steve Tucker

It was resolved that the Notice of Motion be adopted.

BACKGROUND REPORT OF: STEVEN BERNASCONI – COMMUNITY AND RECREATION SERVICES

BACKGROUND

The projects listed for funding in this Notice of Motion contribute to community and recreation capital infrastructure. The allocation of these funds will:

(a) match other sources of funds and allow some projects listed to be completed out right,

and

(b) provide seed funds for other projects to enable plans and matching grant funding to be pursued.

FINANCIAL/RESOURCE IMPLICATIONS

Comment: Existing budget: No, Reserve Funds: No,

Repelled Section 94 Yes, $311,100 Funding from repelled Section 94 $450,000.

External Grants: No, Other: No.

The other three Councillors Nell, Dingle and Kafer were not consulted and neither were the Community Groups or 355C Committees about the compilation of this list. The first they heard of this distribution of largess, was when they read about it in the Council Papers on the Friday before the meeting. They lost the ensuing vote 7 – 3.

In an attempt to at least bring on a public debate on the issue of totally isolating a third of the Councillors from any input into this major distribution of Council funds to favoured institutions, they moved the rescission motion that was the subject of tonight’s extraordinary meeting.

The meeting lasted 10minutes. The three Councillors supported their motion by raising their objections to the allocation of the funds, some on the grounds that it was against the rules to allocate money to private businesses and churches etc. and the blatant self interest of another $10,000.00 to the Mackenzie Equestrian Centre.

Councillor Dingle asked the Mayor three questions, which he just flatly refused to answer.

1. Why did you not consider that all Councilors should be included in discussion about distribution of section 94 funds?

2. Why did you think that the community should be excluded for any conversation, consultation on this matter?

3. What is your understanding of what repealed section 94 funds can be expended on?

He said something like “I am only here to take the  vote, not answer your questions, all those in favour, those against, Motion declared lost, Meeting closed”. and they all got up and walked out.

Nobody else said a word, Three speakers for the motion, none against, no debate.  Motion lost 7-3, meeting closed. Brutal!  Goodbye $311,000.00. No further correspondence please. Bruce Mackenzie’s Team To Achieve in action!

Councillor Morrello is the Council Representative on the 355C Committees in East Ward, I am sure they will have something to say to him next time he fronts up. Even when we have driven up to Raymond Terrace we are yet to hear him speak, but we always see him vote. Maybe next time.

TRRA Inc. thinks that a lot of the money being spent here is for worthy causes, some not so worthy, but ALL Councillors should have have input into what the allocations are, and the Community should be consulted, through their Groups. We don’t believe Santa’s first name is ‘Bruce’ either…………….

This entry was posted in Uncategorised and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.

4 Responses to Extraordinary Council

  1. Christina says:

    Yes, Cr Nell is one of only a minute few voices of reason in the wilderness.
    Must be so disheartening to constantly have his valuable/sensible input so blatantly ignored and disregarded by the majority.
    Since so many residents voted for him as their preferred representative on council, is obviosly an insolent kick in the teeth for them as well.

  2. Margaret Wilkinson says:

    Interesting that Cr Nell topped the poll in East Ward and was completely excluded. Democracy in action…… far from it.

    • Colin Samuals says:

      Councillors Dingle Kafer & Nell obviously do not understand the political process – The elected councillors are representatives of the people – i.e. The voters made a decision to vote for who they wanted to represent them . These three are now sooking because they do not get their way

      • Margaret Wilkinson says:

        The political process is very well understood. Nowhere did I see in the election material mention that 7 Councillors would be voting as one bloc. No mention of political alignments – they were all supposed to be independents! If there are considerable funds to be distributed, people who voted for the other 3 have just the same right to be represented.
        Sooking no……. concerned yes.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.