Come Back in Three Weeks: Happenings in the Clarence City Council Chambers

2023-01-16 & 23: Triple Rollover Jackpot

2023-02-06T02:56:00+11:00

2022-01-16 14:53: A truck carrying tiles rolls over as it enters the Tasman Bridge from the western end. The bridge is at least partially closed for over four hours as the driver is rescued and the truck and debris removed. The ensuing traffic jam blocks up major thoroughfares on both sides of the river during the afternoon/evening rush.

2022-01-16 16:45: I publish the previous post, and learn the above news.

2022-01-16 19:01: With many councillors and key staff, including Council’s streaming technicians, stuck in traffic in one part of greater Hobart or another, the meeting is adjourned for one week.

2022-01-23 19:01: Everything is fine. Roll tape.

Councillor Walker and CEO Ian Nelson are both on leave this week, and Councillor Kennedy attends via Zoom. Callan Paske, Manager Communications and Strategic Development, fills in for Mr Nelson.

OMNIBUS ITEMS

A lengthy list of engagements for the Mayor and other councillors, including a meet and greet with the chair of the newly established Stadiums Tasmania, where apparently neither Bellerive Oval nor Macquarie Point’s place in the grand plan were discussed in any detail, and a meeting with Hobart Lord Mayor Anna Reynolds at her invitation, with discussion including ferries, stadia and further infrastructure.

Councillor Warren inquires how councillors might be able to provide input into the Mayor’s various discussions on matters of strategic importance. I sense a mild reluctance from Blomeley to commit to briefings at the regular whole-council workshops, preferring instead one-to-one phone calls¹ with concerned councillors. I’m sure things’ll be sorted out in the coming months.

PUBLIC QUESTION TIME

In response to a question on notice from Denise Hoggan: The planning permit for the Rosny Hill Hotel development was recently extended, and negotiations for a sublease continue. The decision to extend was made via delegation by council officers, as are all permit extension requests, though we’ll come back to that later.

Michael Figg precedes his question with a statement³ regarding accessibility to the public of tabled documents and amended motions in council meetings, which has been a point of frustration for me too over the years. Amended motions sometimes, when there isn’t a Zoom participant⁴, appear on the big monitor in council chambers, but almost never show up well on the live stream, leaving me waiting for the minutes to be published for the full text because almost no one explicitly reads out what has changed when they stand up to move it. Tabled documents are a lost cause, be they minutes of committee meetings or letters from the Minister for Local Government, I haven’t the foggiest where they end up and I’ve certainly looked.

His question regards the proposed Macquarie Point stadium and its effect on the continued economic viability of Bellerive Oval, but the proposal is too new for any meaningful answer to be given.

And then things get complicated. Victor Marsh, regular Public Question Time questioner, brings two questions. The first, regarding the apparently quite tetchy Bellerive Oval alarm system, is taken on notice.⁵ And the second? Well maybe you should just see it, with some added context from the far distant land of a couple of metres away and nearly two years ago:

Meeting footage property of Clarence City Council, used under Australia's fair dealing provisions for criticism or review

In the end, calling the police wasn’t necessary, and never actually happened; Marsh left of his own accord after a brief conversation with council staff. It’s a difficult position to be in for all involved: As far as “impugning the chair” goes, I can somewhat see the throughline, though it’s not a great look to shut down questioning about comments verifiably made by one’s self, “offensive” or otherwise. On the other hand, despite Marsh’s protest that the question was only about prior events, the subject of the comments (the Kangaroo Bay Hotel and Hospitality School) and Marsh’s stated goal in subsequent interviews (to ascertain the ways the Mayor’s opinion had changed on the Kangaroo Bay Hotel and Hospitality School) did put the question pretty firmly in the “too close to a subject (the Kangaroo Bay Hotel and Hospitality School) on the agenda (four times over)” camp, which Council’s PQT Policy does pretty clearly give the Mayor the right to put a stop to.

Was all this avoidable? Probably. Did anyone come out of the mess with something to be proud of? Well it’s a gold star for the staff involved in the de-escalation effort, but I won’t presume to speak for either party. In any case, when Council returned from recess five minutes later, there were no further questions.

STOP PRESS: Mr Marsh has put a version of his originally intended question on notice for the upcoming meeting, which includes no items on Kangaroo Bay, ruling out that avenue. We’ll see how that goes, eh?

As I distracted myself with digging through historical videos looking for the incident in question, two items zipped by: A deputation from Kym Goodes, managing director at 3P Advisory, who are running Chambroad’s consultation on the December 2022 proposal, briefly outlining the consultation process; and a planning item which, due to the previous week’s adjournment, had already had to be dealt with under delegation, so just a procedural motion to note the delegation and that was the end of it.

Which brings us to the stack of Kangaroo Bay-related motions. I’ll deal with the first three all in one clump:

8.4.1

CHAMBROAD REQUEST FOR BUY-BACK EXTENSION OF TIME

Recommendation

That Council:

Notes the request from Chambroad Overseas Investment Australia Pty Ltd (“Chambroad”), dated 5 January 2023, seeking an extension of time to the Sale and Development Agreement (“SDA”) buy-back option so that Chambroad can undertake further community consultation on its modified development proposal.
Refuses the request for an extension of time dated 5 January 2023 and requests that Chambroad present its initial consultation findings and refinements to its Concept Design as originally proposed no later than 6 March 2023, after which time council may consider whether an extension for further consultation has merit.
Authorise the Chief Executive Officer to facilitate an invite to participants in the recent City Heart Project consultation process to participate in the Kangaroo Bay Hotel consultation process proposed by Chambroad.

9.1

NOTICE OF MOTION - COUNCILLOR RITCHIE - KANGAROO BAY LAND BUY-BACK – CHAMBROAD SITE

Amended Motion

That Council:

Authorises the Chief Executive Officer to initiate the buy-back process in accordance with the terms set out in the Sale and Development Agreement (dated 25 May 2017) (‘SDA’) between Chambroad and Council, to be given effect after Council’s 20 March 2023 meeting but before 12 April 2023 buy-back deadline, subject to Recommendation C below.
In relation to Recommendation A, authorises the Chief Executive Officer to fund the buy-back through a combination of council reserve funds and internal loan, with the relevant budget adjustments to be reported in council’s next quarterly report.
Notwithstanding the rejection of the buy-back timeframe extension request by Chambroad (Agenda Item 8.4.1 on this agenda), council notes that Chambroad has committed to publicly consult on its Modified Development proposal and provide community feedback and an amended proposal to council before 6 March 2023 in order to enable council to make a decision on whether or not to support the Modified Development at its 20 March 2023 council meeting.
Authorises the Chief Executive Officer to incorporate the Kangaroo Bay land into the City Heart project considerations, with a specific focus on possible alternative uses for the land within the broader context of the City Heart project, in order to provide council with options for development of the site should Chambroad not provide a Modified Development Proposal acceptable to council as set out at Recommendation C above, and council has bought back the land.

9.2

NOTICE OF MOTION - COUNCILLOR WARREN - KANGAROO BAY WHARF SITE CONSULTATION

Original Motion

That during January / February 2023, council, through its “have your say” program conducts independent consultation on questions surrounding the Kangaroo Bay Hotel Development, to provide further community insight to help inform council as it assesses the future of this important site.

The questions are:

Do you support a boutique hotel development in Kangaroo Bay? (Yes / No)
1. Why and is there anything else you think should be considered by the developers or council for the site?
Do you support a ‘buy-back’ of the Kangaroo Bay land? (Yes / No)
1. Yes = what would you propose council utilises the land for?
2. No = why?
3. Do you support adding this site into the City Heart project scope?”

Broad agreement is the name of the game tonight. There is, for example, broad agreement among councillors that Chambroad’s request for an extension should not be granted. The reasons vary, be it doneness with the whole thing or an open mind towards whatever may come out of Chambroad’s consultation but a wish for them to stick to the schedule they’ve come up with to do it. The broad agreement is such that the first motion should, by all rights, pass unanimously. And yet:

8.4.1: Recommendation

FOR

Blomeley, Chong, Darko, Goyne, Hulme, Hunter, Kennedy, Mulder, Ritchie, Warren

AGAINST

James

CARRIED

There is, for example, broad agreement that if Chambroad cannot rise to the task, then the land should be bought back. For some, it may be the case that Chambroad couldn’t possibly pull it off, and when March rolls around, I’m sure they’ll vote to go ahead with the buyback. For others, as is their fashion, it will come down to the conditions on the night and the documentation provided to them. For others still, it could be any number of things. All this is to say, the broad agreement, that the ball should at least be started rolling on the buyback, should put the second motion through in similarly undisputed fashion. And yet:

9.1: Amended Motion

FOR

Blomeley, Chong, Darko, Goyne, Hulme, Hunter, Kennedy, Mulder, Ritchie, Warren

AGAINST

James

CARRIED

There is, for example, broad agreement that something will eventually have to be done with the land on the waterfront at Kangaroo Bay, and that community consultation would be helpful in deciding exactly what. Now I do have some concerns about over-consultation and duplication of work: I think these are probably questions that would need to be asked in a larger campaign after a buyback anyway, so this is perhaps jumping the gun a smidge. As such, dear reader, I am less concerned with the precise outcome of this motion, though you may be experiencing some déjà vu:

9.2: Original Motion

FOR

Blomeley, Chong, Darko, Goyne, Hulme, Hunter, Kennedy, Mulder, Ritchie, Warren

AGAINST

James

CARRIED

This trio of sole dissents from Councillor James is baffling to me, but in no way surprising, because it aligns perfectly with his previous voting patterns. My bafflement comes from a lack of understanding of how he doesn’t see these motions as movement towards his apparent goal of a buyback. Will that goal be achieved immediately? No, but in the grand scheme of things the wait is tiny, with just three meetings between now and the deadline in April, which remains exactly where it was before this meeting.

The sheer impatience of the “buy back now” mantra seems to me to lead only to frustration and pain, and I think people get enough of that out of the process already.

9.3

NOTICE OF MOTION - COUNCILLOR JAMES - BUY-BACK KANGAROO BAY WHARF SITE LAND

Recommendation

That Council:

Determines to exercise its right to buy-back the land in accordance with the Sale and Development Agreement (“SDA”);
Authorises the Chief Executive Officer to exercise the buy-back option contained in the SDA (in particular clauses 13.1 and 13.2) as soon as practical and prior to 12 April 2023; and
Authorises the Chief Executive Officer to fund the buy-back through a combination of council reserve funds and internal loan, with the relevant budget adjustments to be reported in council’s next quarterly report.

Sometimes, though, you just can’t win anyway.

Local Government (Meeting Regulations) 2015

Section 19: Discussion of a resolved matter

(1) The chairperson of a meeting may only allow a matter in respect of which a decision was made earlier in the meeting to be discussed again at that meeting if –

(a) in the opinion of the chairperson, the vote may not have accurately reflected the opinion held by the meeting due to misunderstanding of the motion or for some other reason; or

(b) new information comes to hand; or

(c) in the opinion of the chairperson, some vital information has been overlooked.

(2) A motion that a matter be allowed to be discussed again under subregulation (1) is to be made and voted for in the affirmative before the matter may be discussed.

While Councillor Ritchie’s motion at 9.1 may not have immediately enacted the buyback clause to its fullest extent, it did pretty clearly set the wheels turning, and with a solid majority. There was neither new nor overlooked information to be had. Though Councillor James was given an opportunity to explain either of these away, I think he may have got started on his opening speech instead, and the motion was rightly blocked. In a stunning counterpoint to my previous notes on patience, Councillor James was about 20 minutes late to the punch.

COUNCILLOR’S QUESTION TIME

Tonight’s keywords: AFL Tasmania and the Clarence Zebras⁶, the delegation of planning permit extension applications⁷, FOGO⁸, refusals to grant extension by proponent⁹, the Niche Structure Plan¹⁰, Bellerive ferry parking effects, Wellington Street drainage¹¹, conflicts of interest¹²

And… Okay so this still went out the day of the next meeting. In fairness, the gap was much reduced by the week’s adjournment of this meeting, but also two weeks is still pretty poor. Writing is hard, I’ll get there eventually. See you soon.

16 & 23 January, 2023 Vote Record

FOR AGAINST ABSTAIN¹⁵ MOVED SECONDED

Blo

Cho

Dar

Goy

Hul

Hun

Jam

Ken

Mul

Rit

Wal

War

Present

¹³

4. Omnibus Items

Recommendations

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

7. Planning Authority Matters

7.1. Development Application PDPLANPMTD-2022/02858 – 1 Gordon Street, Richmond - Outbuilding

Note Delegation

10-1 (1)¹⁵

CARRIED

8.4. Governance

8.4.1. Chambroad Request for Buy-Back Extension of Time

Recommendation

10-1

CARRIED

9. Motions on Notice

9.1. Notice of Motion - Councillor Ritchie - Kangaroo Bay Land Buy-Back – Chambroad Site

As Amended

10-1

CARRIED

9.2. Notice of Motion - Councillor Warren - Kangaroo Bay Wharf Site Consultation

As Given

10-1

CARRIED

9.3. Notice of Motion - Councillor James - Buy-Back Kangaroo Bay Wharf Site Land

Note: Motion ruled out of order under section 19 of the Meeting Regulations.

Which if you’re the sort of person who dreads using the phone² sounds like a reasonable way to ensure no input at all. ↩
And I am, though I suppose I don’t have to worry about it. ↩
Oh I do hope we’re not making that a trend this year. ↩
And there almost always is these days. ↩
The problem has apparently since been fixed, but we’ll see I guess. ↩
Followup to incomplete answer from last meeting. ↩
Is probably not worth relitigating, tbh. I foresee a lot of council meeting and report writing time wasted on this if a repeal is decided. ↩
Food Organics and Garden Organics collection. Mooted for discussion in the budget process. ↩
That’s the planning item I was talking about. A detail quibble. ↩
On hold while the Skylands project is still percolating. ↩
In Richmond. Apparently quite bad. ↩
Must be assessed by the relevant councillor. Gifts and donations over $50 must be reported to the CEO. ↩
Councillor is on leave of absence. ↩
When I refer to an approval or refusal as alternative, I mean that it was recommended, but the motion in question substantially modified or replaced the recommendation. ↩
Abstentions count as votes against. (Local Government (Meeting Procedures) Regulations 2015 s28(3)) ↩↩

2022-12-19: A Misguided Double Down

2023-01-16T16:45:00+11:00

I usually go into these meetings with some sort of main event in mind, a drawcard, something I think will be the most interesting. Last meeting that was the Council Prayer motion,¹ the meeting before the end of the election I was eyeing up the Little Howrah Beach item, and so on. This doesn’t always pan out. Tonight’s big item descends into mundanity and what should be simple becomes complex. Roll tape.

7.1

DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION PDPLANPMTD-2022/026489 – 26A ESPLANADE, LINDISFARNE - BOAT SHED AND JETTY

Recommendation (Approval)

That the Development Application for Boat Shed and Jetty at 26A Esplanade, Lindisfarne (Cl Ref PDPLANPMTD-2022/026489) be approved subject to the following conditions and advice.
1. GEN AP1 – ENDORSED PLANS.
2. Construction access and methodology plan must be submitted and approved by Council’s Group Manager Engineering Services prior to commencement of works.
3. An erosion and sedimentation control plan, in accordance with the Hobart Regional Soil and Water Management on Building and Construction Sites document, must be submitted and approved by Council’s Group Manager Engineering Services prior to the commencement of works. The plan must outline the proposed construction practices in relation to:
  - erosion, siltation, sedimentation and runoff from the property during construction;
  - procedures to prevent soil and debris being carried into the River Derwent; and
  - how works would be undertaken generally in accordance with ‘Wetlands and Waterways Works Manual’ (DPIWE, 2003) and “Tasmanian Coastal Works Manual” (DPIPWE, Page and Thorp, 2010).
ADVICE
- The Department of Natural Resources and Environment (Conservation Assessments) recommends that the impact site is surveyed by a suitably qualified person in accordance with the Guidelines for Natural Values Surveys - Estuarine & Marine Development Proposals.
- A building surveyor will be required for the construction of the boatshed in relation to the application for building approval.
- Marine and Safety Tasmania (MAST) recommends no vessels are to be berthed on the eastern side of the proposed development.
That the details and conclusions included in the Associated Report be recorded as the reasons for Council’s decision in respect of this matter.

Ah, here’s what David Beard was here about at the last meeting. Unfortunately, it seems Beard’s concerns will be going unallayed: His question inquired about marine standards used in assessing the application, but such matters are really the realm of MAST², ruling them out from consideration at the planning stage.

Councillor James has some issues with setbacks from the proposed building and a lack of forecourt, but Councillor Walker notes there has been no alternative floated, and the idea doesn’t seem to have legs under the scheme anyway. We avoid last meeting’s mess by a good margin, though there is a somewhat bizarre vote against from Councillor Mulder, who’d seconded the recommendation.³

Recommendation (Approval)

FOR

Blomeley, Chong, Darko, Goyne, Hulme, Hunter, Kennedy, Ritchie, Walker, Warren

AGAINST

James, Mulder

CARRIED

Mayor Blomeley continues to have some issues with correctly providing right of reply speeches to movers of motions, though there are extenuating circumstances in parts. A quick jaunt through the Quarterly Report⁴ takes us up to:

8.4.2

APPOINTMENT TO COMMITTEES, BOARDS AND AUTHORITIES

Recommendation

That the following schedule of nominations be endorsed by Council: [see minutes, I’m not dealing with tables right now]

Where we find the unexpected excitement I was talking about. All positions⁵ filled by nomination, no elections required, should be very simple, and yet… Councillor Mulder gets up to object to the nominations for the CEO Review Committee (set as the Mayor and two other members, in this case Councillors Ritchie and Goyne for 2 and 1 years respectively) but his objection is based on completely incorrect information.

Now I also have a problem with this selection in that I don’t think both the Mayor and the Deputy Mayor should be on this specific committee, reviewing as it does the third member of the Executive, but we take what nominations we get. No, no, Mulder’s objection relates to the Better Clarence Team that Blomeley and Ritchie led at the elections in October. Mulder complains that all three nominees for the committee are members of that team, which might be reasonable… If Goyne had actually been one.

Councillor Goyne was not a member of the Better Clarence Team, indeed, she was not a member of any ticket that went to the election, operating a completely independent campaign. The Mayor goes to correct Mulder, who doubles down??? Blomeley is⁶ correct to call the behaviour poor and, yes, tawdry.⁷

The back and forth, which ends up dragging in Councillor James, and results in no meaningful apologies from anyone involved, so confuses matters as to cause the Mayor to attempt to call the motion before everyone has had the opportunity to weigh in. Fortunately, some people are on the ball and we do get to hear the remaining speeches in a far less combative manner. Indeed, it seems an extensive process has brought things to where they stand, and the vote shows how much simpler this all could’ve been:

Recommendation

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

8.4.2

CHAMBROAD REQUEST FOR EXTENSION OF TIME AND MODIFIED DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL FOR A HOTEL

Recommendation

Notes the terms of the “Standstill Agreement” negotiated between Council and Chambroad Overseas Investment Australia Pty Ltd (Chambroad), dated 14 October 2022, requiring Council to advise Chambroad on or before 5.00pm, 21 December 2022:
1. If Council does not accept the Modified Development proposal; and
2. Whether or not Council consents to Chambroad’s request for a further extension of time to satisfy clause 6.3 of the current Sale and Development Agreement (SDA).
Does not consent to Chambroad’s request for a further extension of time to satisfy clause 6.3 of the SDA (as made by a letter, and supporting letter, dated 27 September 2022) and subsequently deferred in accordance with the Standstill Agreement, to achieve substantial commencement of the project under the current SDA, for the reasons set out in this report (specifically at paragraphs 2.12 to 2.16 of the Associated Report) and summarised below:
1. that the SDA “substantial commencement” requirement relates to a physical start of works and does not require consideration of contractual or other matters related to the project;
2. that Chambroad has not provided any reasons sufficient to justify why it has not substantially commenced the development by starting the physical works referred to in clause 6.3 of the SDA or why that failure is not within the reasonable control of Chambroad; and
3. that, to the extent if any that Chambroad securing an education provider is relevant, while Chambroad has made significant attempts to secure an education provider to support the project, by its own admission that now appears unlikely to occur in the short to mid-term due to substantial changes to the education market post-pandemic. A further extension of time for substantial commencement, no matter how long, is unlikely to result in Chambroad securing an education provider in the short to medium term.
Does not accept the Modified Development proposal provided by Chambroad (Attachment 3), on the basis that:
1. there has been inadequate time to properly consider the Modified Development proposal and insufficient detail as a consequence of time constraints;
2. there has been no public consultation on the Modified Development proposal undertaken by Chambroad and therefore no opportunity for Chambroad to consider that feedback and refine its design before seeking the agreement of Council; and
3. As of 14 December 2022, Chambroad communicated that they would not include concept designs in the information pack to be released with this agenda item and sought for the draft Development Agreement, which was negotiated under the “Standstill Agreement”, to remain confidential at this stage. Both these circumstances were contrary to clearly stated requirements put forward by council officers at the commencement of this process.”

In comparison, though it does take a little under an hour of speeches to get there, this item is an absolute cakewalk. The meeting opened with deputations from two Chambroad representatives urging councillors not to take up the officers’ recommendation to deny COIA’s request for a yet further extension to achieve substantial commencement… And also completely change the fundamental nature of the project from a hotel and hospitality school to not only just a hotel but a completely differently designed one at that.

Those designs, by the way, only went public at 7pm on the night of the meeting, i.e. the start of the meeting. Apparently both it and a draft Development Agreement could’ve been available sooner, but Chambroad baulked on the former and refused on the latter, despite Council’s requirements. Call that transparency, because I don’t.

There is almost unanimous support for the officers’ advice, backed as it is by well-considered legal advice telling councillors the time was not yet ripe to activate the much-discussed buyback clause, but I had made a bold prediction to my family in the leadup: The vote would come to 11-1, with Councillor James as the only holdout because he didn’t think the recommendation went far enough. Lo and behold, in the middle of a series of speeches ranging from eagerness to put this chapter behind us to notes that the community had had less than an hour to look at the design and hey maybe this new idea will be good, Councillor James is the only one to indicate he’ll be voting against because, against the legal advice, he would rather call the buyback immediately, considering the recommendation a dragging out of proceedings.

This is all well and good, and I’m sure he’ll find plenty in the community who agree with him, but as someone who lives in Clarence, I’d rather Clarence wasn’t spending money on otherwise unnecessary legal battles. And besides, there’s always the next meeting. No, seriously, at time of going to press, we’ve received the agenda for tonight’s⁸ meeting, which includes no less than four items related to the Kangaroo Bay project.

There is little good news in this decision for COIA, despite their best(?) efforts. I don’t subscribe to the idea that foreign investment is by default a bad thing, though I am wary of projects that appear to have state backing. Despite this philosophy, it is difficult for me to see a way forward for Chambroad in Clarence. The site remains as it was half a decade ago, a slightly larger gravel pit than there was before, where a project that couldn’t find the backers it wanted never really got off the ground. Whether anything ever will is anyone’s guess.

Recommendation

FOR

Blomeley, Chong, Darko, Goyne, Hulme, Hunter, Kennedy, Mulder, Ritchie, Walker, Warren

AGAINST

James

CARRIED

COUNCILLOR’S QUESTION TIME

Tonight’s keywords: Pipe Clay Esplanade,⁹ AFL Tasmania and the Clarence Zebras¹¹, Olympia FC Warriors¹², planning staff¹³, voting fine waivers¹⁴, Mount Rumney¹⁵, derelict property¹⁶

Which finally brings me to the end of the meeting. Sorry again for taking so long, hopefully I can do better in future. Next post should be the next meeting, and that election expenditure wrapup is still on the way, just as soon as I get my inspection in.

19 December, 2022 Vote Record

FOR AGAINST ABSTAIN¹⁸ MOVED SECONDED

Blo

Cho

Dar

Goy

Hul

Hun

Jam

Ken

Mul

Rit

Wal

War

Present

4. Omnibus Items

Recommendations

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

7. Planning Authority Matters

7.1. Development Application PDPLANPMTD-2022/026489 – 26A Esplanade, Lindisfarne - Boat Shed and Jetty

Rec Approval

10-2

CARRIED

8.4. Governance

8.4.1. Quarterly Report to 30 September 2022

Recommendation

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

8.4.2. Appointment to Committees, Boards and Authorities

Recommendation

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

8.4.3. Chambroad Request for Extension of Time and Modified Development Proposal for a Hotel

Recommendation

11-1

CARRIED

The moment of reflection tonight was even briefer than I was already expecting. If they’re all going to be that short I couldn’t care less whether it sticks or not. Big win. ↩
Who did, at least, provide some advice to the applicant. ↩
Genuinely can’t find a reason for it in his speech, which read to me like a for vote was the only valid option, whether he liked it or not. 🤷‍♂️ ↩
Just a quick question on Pass Road funding, another on the Rosny Hill lease and a third on homelessness from Councillor James. ↩
At least those currently being made open, apparently there’s a big committee review going on at the moment, leaving a good chunk off the table tonight. ↩
And I’m not usually going to be quick to praise him, so he can count himself lucky tonight. ↩
adj., showy but cheap and of poor quality. (Oxford via Google) ↩
I blame the holiday and the heat and also I have no work ethic and ooo look at that pretty bug over there. ↩
A largely unsealed¹⁰ road in Cremorne running alongside Pipe Clay Lagoon, being considered in the development of Council’s Sealing Gravel Roads Strategy. ↩
At its southernmost extremity it seems to just sort of become Cremorne Beach but there’s still eight or nine houses left. Proper houses too, a couple of them have pools and everything. Very weird. ↩
Who booked Wentworth Park’s playing surface and social areas, respectively, the Zebras intending to hold their AGM, but AFL Tasmania assumed they were entitled to the social areas so that was a whole thing. ↩
Who have lost their National Premier League Licence, and are looking into new options. ↩
Who now only have a presence in the Bligh Street chambers in the morning. ↩
Costs to council will be what they are. ↩
Hooning and vehicular destruction and antennae, oh my! ↩
If you’ve been to Bellerive, you know the one. ↩
When I refer to an approval or refusal as alternative, I mean that it was recommended, but the motion in question substantially modified or replaced the recommendation. ↩
Abstentions count as votes against. (Local Government (Meeting Procedures) Regulations 2015 s28(3)) ↩

2022-11-28: Amen and Amen (and AGM)

2022-12-15T02:30:00+11:00

Most people come to a council meeting looking for something to happen. They might be advocating for or against a planning item, or have a question to ask, or just want to be there when a big thing happens.¹ Whatever the case, if you watch enough,² you will come to the conclusion that, for factors no one involved seems to be in control of, most people don’t and indeed cannot get what they want.

Tonight, in what turned out to be a bumper meeting, I present a slice of this philosophy, as an uncaring planning system sends much of a packed gallery home unhappy.

PUBLIC QUESTION TIME

Council’s policy on Public Question Time³ provides that it will last for at most fifteen minutes⁴, that members of the public may each ask one question without notice, though the chair has discretion to allow further questions, and perhaps most important to tonight’s proceedings, that “All questions and answers must be kept as brief as possible,” and that it “provides an opportunity for people to ask questions about Council’s activities, not make statements.”

Opening tonight’s questions without notice is David Beard, a councillor over in Tasman who is also the General Manager of the Motor Yacht Club Tasmania. Beard requests the opportunity to ask, and does eventually ask, two questions, but his first question is preceded by a considerably lengthy segment of largely irrelevant background, much of which is spent inviting Councillors to visit the Club.

Across the river in Hobart they more explicitly define their terms: “Individuals will be allocated 60 seconds combined to provide a background and ask their question.” The background to David Beard’s first question is two and a half minutes long. When he does eventually get to asking the question, it turns out to be one staff can’t answer, because it relates to the assessment of a planning application that is still being assessed.

Beard’s second and thankfully much briefer question relates to Pindos Park in Tranmere, a play space for which will be going out to tender early next year: Will it be delivered within the financial year? Dunno, depends on the contractors.

Really, as a councillor from another council, and not a new one either,⁵ Beard should know better than to pull this sort of thing during public question time, but a bigger question I have is why the Mayor didn’t push him to get to the point. Early instalment jitters again? Probably, but either Blomeley needs to learn to put his foot down or Clarence’s policy needs to take a leaf out of Hobart’s book and put explicit limits on question length.⁶

Tonight’s other question without notice comes from thrice-unsuccessful Council⁷ and once-unsuccessful state Franklin⁸ candidate Michael Figg, who wants to know where Lauderdale’s stormwater management plan is. As we find out later tonight, stormwater engineers are in pretty short supply. 2026-27 is floated as a potential timeframe for flood risk mitigation projects in Lauderdale, but with the supply issues I get the impression even that might be generous.

7.1

DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION PDPLANPMTD-2022/030002 – 22 THOMPSON WAY, CLIFTON BEACH - DWELLING, SECONDARY RESIDENCE AND OUTBUILDING

Recommendation (Approval)

That the Development Application for Dwelling, Secondary Residence & Outbuilding at 22 Thompson Way, Clifton Beach (Cl Ref PDPLANPMTD- 2022/030002) be approved subject to the following conditions and advice.
1. GEN AP1 – ENDORSED PLANS.
2. The secondary residence is approved as part of the single dwelling and must comply with the following:
  1. has a gross floor area not more than 60m²;
  2. is appurtenant to a single dwelling;
  3. shares with the single dwelling access and parking, and water, sewerage, gas, electricity and telecommunications connections and meters; and
  4. may include laundry facilities.
That the details and conclusions included in the Associated Report be recorded as the reasons for Council’s decision in respect of this matter.

7.2

DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION PDPLANPMTD-2022/028640 – 30 CREMORNE AVENUE, CREMORNE - ADDITIONS AND ALTERATIONS TO DWELLING

Recommendation (Approval)

That the Development Application for Additions and Alterations to Dwelling at 30 Cremorne Avenue, Cremorne (Cl Ref PDPLANPMTD-2022/028640) be approved subject to the following conditions and advice.
1. GEN AP1 – ENDORSED PLANS.
2. Amended plans showing a permanently fixed screen to the lower-level deck to a height of not less than 1.7m above the finished surface or floor level, with a uniform transparency of not more than 25% along the side facing the western boundary must be submitted to and approved by Council’s Manager City Planning prior to the commencement of the use/development. When approved, the plans will form part of the permit.
ADVICE
- This Permit is issued on the basis that the dwelling remain a single dwelling as defined under the Tasmanian Planning Scheme - Clarence. Conversion to other uses, such as multiple tenancies or short stay accommodation would require further approval from Council.
- The property is within a mapped Coastal Inundation and Erosion Hazard prone area, as such the works are at minimum Category 3 Notifiable Building Work under the Directors Determination. Notifiable Building Work requires a Building Surveyor to be engaged to create and certify an Application for Building Approval. A Hazard Report for Coastal Inundation and Erosion from a suitably qualified person that meets the requirements of the Determinations and Building Act 2016 must form part of the certified documents issued by the Building Surveyor for the building application.
- An application for a Plumbing Permit to install an on-site wastewater disposal system must be submitted and approved as part of the Building Application.
That the details and conclusions included in the Associated Report be recorded as the reasons for Council’s decision in respect of this matter.

These two planning items have caused me much consternation and delay. Trying to cover them has completely discouraged me from putting in the work, which is why this post has taken so long. For the sake of my sanity, I will keep my comments general.

There were deputations on both planning items tonight, one on the Clifton Beach application and two on the Cremorne application. The Clifton Beach and one of the Cremorne deputations came up against the three minute limit imposed by Council policy,⁹ and the Clifton Beach deputation additionally brought a presentation that couldn’t be shown. My recommendations to aspiring speakers to council include:

Ensure that you can comfortably relay the information you have to give within the three minutes allotted.¹⁰ You will not be allowed any sort of extension.
If you have any sort of supplementary material, you should provide it to councillors ahead of time.¹¹ Each councillor has an email address listed on council’s website.
Barring that, bringing hard copy/s of said supplemental material to be distributed amongst councillors is a reasonable play.¹²
And you can just talk to them, if you can rustle up the spoons to deal with social interaction.¹³

The similarities between the two developments are impressive: Both coastal properties, both facing concerns around setbacks, one with further concerns around bulk and scale and the other overdevelopment, both begrudgingly moved by Councillor Hulme and again begrudgingly seconded by Councillor Walker.

Nobody comes away from tonight’s planning segment in high spirits. I glance across the gallery. The absolute despair and disdain on the faces is really impossible to capture in words. The councillors make their own displeasure clear, but at the same time all admit that planning scheme, the planning commission, TASCAT and the state government have combined to tie their collective hands.

Councillor James wonders why no one came to the meeting with an alternative motion to refuse ready for either item, but admits he doesn’t have one ready either, as he’d been hoping someone else would. Councillor, “someone will get to it” is exactly how no one gets to it. Councillor Mulder is unconvinced any alternative would have legs, anyway, and I would tend to agree based on the debate.

Both items’ recommendations are struck down, in the end, but with no alternative provided the road becomes murky. The CEO takes a rare opportunity to talk to an officer in private just after the first vote, and returns with the advice that he will ask the proponents of each development for an extension to come to a decision, but barring that it will go to the planning staff by deputation, at which point the recommendations will go through anyway.¹⁵

I should be clear that I do not blame the planning staff at all for any of this. They’re all working in the same system (and with less staff than they’d like to have) and provide councillors with their best judgement as to what is the correct decision.[^legal]

[^legal] In the legal sense of the word correct.

If you feel in any way disillusioned by this turn of events, welcome to the club. Planning is where most dreams go to die, and there’s so much to go around. That the system has developed to this point is an absolute travesty, but I have no grand solutions to offer you, no words of consolation to soothe this pain. This is the way things are, and it is bad.

Item 7.1: Recommendation (Approval)

FOR

Blomeley, Goyne, Hulme, Ritchie, Walker

AGAINST

Chong, Darko, Hunter, James, Kennedy, Mulder, Warren

LOST

Item 7.2: Recommendation (Approval)

FOR

Blomeley, Chong, Goyne, Hulme, Ritchie, Walker

AGAINST

Darko, Hunter, James, Kennedy, Mulder, Warren

LOST

8.4

GOVERNANCE

Congratulations to the Rosny College Springboard Kizuna Drummers on their (largely) successful partnership grant application for a new project in their ongoing Taiko program, and commiserations to the other applicants, missing the mark for various reasons. Polish up those plans, and better luck in the next round.

Another month, another TasNetworks easement. Substation moving 30 metres up the road. Nothing exciting, obvious unanimous vote.

A land swap with Homes Tasmania as they aim to build some houses along Chipmans Road in Rokeby, as well as a small land purchase by a neighbour, reduces the public open space at 36 Duntroon Drive to a small chunk in the corner. Cr Mulder notes a missed opportunity in conjunction with Rokeby Beach, which now abuts several industrial developments and a gymnastics academy.¹⁶ In exchange, Council gets 17 Goodwins Road in Clarendon Vale, apparently critical to the Bayview Sporting Precinct. Rokeby isn’t really at a loss for open space, though I note the objectors’ concerns about flatness.

As expected, the once-every-three-weeks Council meeting schedule continues. There’s brief mention that the 16 January meeting might not happen if nothing comes up, though I’d be concerned about the regulatory requirement for at least one meeting per month.¹⁷

The big surprise for me is what didn’t happen at this meeting. Committee membership remains in limbo, and the mooted moment of recognition for former Aldermen Peers and von Bertouch didn’t end up happening. I’m sure we’ll get to all that eventually, but I am no less confused for that certainty.

9.1

NOTICE OF MOTION - CR MULDER - CLARENCE STORMWATER SYSTEM

Original Motion

That as part of taking ‘positive action on climate change’, Council requests officers to:

Prepare a report on potential projects to ‘future-proof’ Clarence’s stormwater system. Such projects to include but not be limited to:
1. detention basins to regulate flow of stormwater into areas subject to inundation and potentially act as wetland habit;
2. ‘pump-out’ solutions to protect areas subject to inundation by diverting water into detention basins, water courses or the ocean.
Advise on potential funding sources for stormwater project management.

It’s a bit scary looking at the flood maps Council released back at the start of 2021. I have to wonder, with the frequency and intensity of recent flooding events, whether they aren’t already out of date. Setting aside homes, I worry about the key infrastructure we’ve put in the low-lying places flooding affects most badly, y’know, shopping centres, schools, we set much of the Tasman Highway in a valley next to a rivulet, these things add up, they have consequences.

Much of the conversation revolves around whether the motion is actually deliverable in the current resourcing environment, but the word from the CEO and the Group Manager Engineering Services is this was the sort of thing Council was probably going to do anyway. They really can’t stress the resourcing problems enough, though. Councillor Walker asks about the private sector, but no, they’re in the same boat.

Council reportedly has a literal “rainy day fund” by the good foresight of a previous Chief Financial Officer, an amount set aside every year to build up and be spent when current stormwater assets… All come due at about the same time? Well that doesn’t allay my worry at all.

As climate change barrels on, this will be one of the many problems facing not just this LGA but everyone. Councillor Mulder seems to have gotten the impression there were a couple of against votes coming, but he needn’t have worried…

As Given

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

9.2

NOTICE OF MOTION - CR CHONG - COUNCIL PRAYER

Original Motion

That Council remove the opening prayer from the beginning of Council meetings and, over the next few months, consider whether a more inclusive affirmation or reflective silence is appropriate.

For many years, Council has opened its meetings with a prayer, which reads:

Almighty God, we humbly beseech thee to vouch safe thy blessing upon this Council. Direct and prosper its deliberations to the advancement of thy glory and the true welfare of the City of Clarence. Amen.

The prayer was carefully drafted to (supposedly) remove it from any Christian context, but in doing so failed to remove it from its religious context. This sort of thing, religious observance in meetings of government bodies, has always been weird and wrong to me, and so, in March, when Councillor Warren put up a motion of notice that would have moved the Acknowledgement of Country to the top of the agenda and replaced the prayer with a minute’s silence, I quickly drafted a deputation and headed for chambers. By the time I got there, removing the prayer had come off the table. C’est la vie.

A new Council arrives and very quickly the motion above shows up. And so, armed with new data, I threw together another deputation and once more found myself on a bus to Eastlands. I get the impression my speech received a mixed reaction from the gallery,¹⁸ but no matter, my target audience were the twelve councillors seated in front of me.

Almost an hour and a half later, the debate proper began. The debate was entirely calm, and largely relevant, barring a strange contribution from Councillor Goyne regarding the Lord’s Prayer,¹⁹ which is: a) not the prayer under consideration nor as far as I am aware has it ever been council’s official prayer; and b) does not in any way mention the Commonwealth²⁰ as she suggests. Birthday or not, I do generally expect people to bring pertinent arguments to the table, and this is not a good start.

I categorically reject the idea presented by some councillors that anyone is actually excluded by not having a prayer at the start of a council meeting, and indeed, the data shows that more people are already excluded by its inclusion. I think the original motion was set to pass,²² but some councillors got hung up on the idea that the prayer would be replaced with moving on to the next part of the agenda until further discussion could be had.

Frankly, I’d’ve been fine if it’d been left at that, the idea that Council needs some sort of statement of intent is a bit silly to me, it doesn’t make any difference to what actually goes on in the chambers, which as I’ve seen the past few years can be far from professional. It’s swapping noise for noise, and a waste of time, IMO.

Unfortunately, even when we get what we want we can’t always get exactly what we want. Councillor Walker requested an amendment to the motion, which was accepted by the mover and seconder, and after some exhaustive drafting, redrafting and reredrafting, it then read:

Amended Motion

That Council remove the opening prayer from the beginning of council meetings and, over a period of three months, trial a moment of reflective silence.

Which seems to be on course to take up about the same time as the prayer did. My suspicion is that we’ll get to the end of the trial and this will become the status quo, which is mildly disappointing to me. Ignoring my objections to the religious element of the old prayer, I can’t help but feel that both it and this new thing are getting in the way of getting on with things.

The story from Councillor Chong about her mother was nice though, and even though it wasn’t a complete victory, I will take what I get here. This could’ve been worse. Don’t get me wrong, I’m largely happy. I… exhales Moving on.

As Amended

FOR

Blomeley, Chong, Darko, Goyne, Hulme, Hunter, Kennedy, Mulder, Ritchie, Walker, Warren

AGAINST

James

CARRIED

COUNCILLOR’S QUESTION TIME

Tonight’s keywords: Potholes, abandoned service stations,²³ playgrounds, derelict buildings,²⁴ Arm End,²⁵ Department of Defence,²⁶ Pass Road,²⁷ Snap Send Solve

And I’d stop there if not for having taken so long to write this a whole Annual General Meeting happened in the interim, but nothing particularly interesting happened that wasn’t the usual mayor, CEO and CFO presentations.

There was confirmation at that meeting that Monday’s meeting will include the long-awaited and potentially-final-but-something’ll-probably-come-up-later next chapter in the Chambroad Kangaroo Bay saga. And then it’s the holidays. At some point I’ll be doing a quick flick through the candidate expenditure returns for the elections just past, but that’ll depend on how quickly the Electoral Commission forwards them through to Council.

Come back… Next week? Ack. Sorry again. This one was rough.

28 November, 2022 Vote Record

FOR AGAINST ABSTAIN²⁹ MOVED SECONDED

Blo

Cho

Dar

Goy

Hul

Hun

Jam

Ken

Mul

Rit

Wal

War

Present

4. Omnibus Items

Recommendations

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

7. Planning Authority Matters

7.1. Development Application PDPLANPMTD-2022/030002 – 22 Thompson Way, Clifton Beach - Dwelling, Secondary Residence and Outbuilding

Rec Approval

5-7

LOST

Note: Alternative not provided, CEO to seek extension from proponent, otherwise item to be delegated to planning staff. (And likely approved as originally recommended.)

7.2. Development Application PDPLANPMTD-2022/028640 – 30 Cremorne Avenue, Cremorne - Additions and Alterations to Dwelling

Rec Approval

6-6

LOST

Note: Alternative not provided, CEO to seek extension from proponent, otherwise item to be delegated to planning staff. (And likely approved as originally recommended.)

8.4. Governance

8.4.1. Partnership Grants

Recommendation

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

8.4.2. TasNetworks – Creation of Easement – 86 Rosny Esplanade, Rosny

Recommendation

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

8.4.3. Duntroon Drive – Disposal of Public Land

Recommendation

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

8.4.4. Council Meeting Schedule

Recommendation

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

9. Motions on Notice

9.1. Notice of Motion - Cr Mulder - Clarence Stormwater System

As Given

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

9.2. Notice of Motion - Cr Chong - Council Prayer

As Amended

11-1

CARRIED

5 December, 2022 Annual General Meeting

FOR AGAINST ABSTAIN²⁹ MOVED SECONDED

Blo

Cho

Dar

Goy

Hul

Hun

Jam

Ken

Mul

Rit

Wal

War

Present

6. Confirmation of Minutes of 2021 Annual General Meeting

Recommendation

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

7f. Motion to adopt Annual Report

Recommendation

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

No? Just me? That’s probably fair. ↩
Or perhaps too much, as I have over the past few years. ↩
Which can be found nestled inside its now rather outdated Consolidated Meeting Procedures. (Par exemple, the format of the agenda has changed somewhat, and public questions without notice have been recorded in the minutes for some time now.) ↩
The absolute minimum required by the Regulations. ↩
Beard was first elected to Tasman in 2018. ↩
¿Por qué no los dos? ↩
Sixth, fifth and second excluded in 2005, 2018 and 2022. ↩
As a Palmer United candidate, excluded in the middle of his party’s journey to no seats in 2014. Figg was notably displeased with the outcome of the campaign. ↩
I do have to wonder if it would be fairer to give deputees the same five minutes afforded to councillors in debates, but understand the time concerns that have brought us to this point. The nights are long on Bligh Street. ↩
Historically I have not taken my own advice on this point, at least as far as comfort is concerned. Thankfully, even when I’m rushing I seem to be speaking clearly enough. The YouTube auto captions can hear me, anyway. ↩
I tend to take things a step further and send along the text of the deputation itself too. It certainly helps to reduce the time crunch concerns when I don’t strictly have to finish. I’m also weird and probably not a great role model as far as this is concerned. ↩
That said, perhaps enough reams of paper are churned through on Mondays already. I don’t know that I needed a full colour printout of TasWater’s 112 page long Annual Report, which is already available as a PDF on their website, but I guess this is a thing that I have now, due to its inclusion in the agenda papers. Thanks, I hate it. ↩
I very much cannot. I struggle to respond to emails in a timely fashion,¹⁴ and most conversation with relative strangers ends with me finding a rock to crawl under, preferably with some sort of snack and copious amounts of water. ↩
Sorry, again, to anyone this applies to. ↩
The deputation exists to keep Council out of a particular spot of trouble: In the event that Council fails to make any sort of decision on a planning matter, a) the application will be approved without condition, and b) they will be responsible for paying the costs of both sides of any appeal to TASCAT. Truly, loss without alternative is a terrible situation to end up in. ↩
Several industrial developments and a gymnastics academy walk into a bar. The gymnastics academy spins around it a few times, but is interrupted by the industrial developments bending it in half and chopping it into pieces. ↩
Local Government (Meeting Procedures) Regulations 2015 s4(4) ↩
You can actually see Mike Figg shaking his head at me on the VoD as I get into the fourth paragraph. Oh well. ↩
“Our Father which art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name. Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done in earth, as it is in heaven. Give us this day our daily bread. And forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors. And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil: For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, for ever. Amen.” Matthew 6:9-13 ↩
“Right,” said Jesus, “perhaps I should explain what I was going on about there. So, nineteen centuries from now, a king of many nations will gather them all together, and they’ll all talk to each other, and that’ll be the Commonwealth.” The disciples all stared blankly at Him. “Yeah, you can probably leave that bit out, actually.”²¹ ↩
Translated from a newly discovered Greek text. (I will spare you from the fun romp I’ve just had through modern biblical scholarship. In hindsight, “the Four Evangelists didn’t actually write their respective Gospels, which were probably written well after the fact,” feels like it should’ve been more obvious to me, but oh well, not my problem now, is it. Anywho…) ↩
Either 7-5 or 8-4. Blomeley was the only non-contributor to the debate, and I can’t extrapolate his intentions based on what was eventually voted on. ↩
On land considered contaminated (for obvious reasons) and privately owned, so not hugely appropriate for social housing. ↩
Then discussed at the LGAT General Meeting of 2022-12-08 (Item 9.8) ↩
Still assessing claims of substantial commencement by the developers ↩
Seems the old barracks in Warrane are going on the market at some point, Council interested in it as some sort of homelessness crisis centre ↩
No, sorry, this one’s potholes again ↩
When I refer to an approval or refusal as alternative, I mean that it was recommended, but the motion in question substantially modified or replaced the recommendation. ↩
Abstentions count as votes against. (Local Government (Meeting Procedures) Regulations 2015 s28(3)) ↩↩

Religion in Clarence (and Other Stray Observations from the 2021 Census)

2022-11-25T03:30:00+11:00

In March of this year, a motion was put on notice by Councillor Warren that in its original form¹ would have, among other things, removed the Council Prayer from the agenda. The motion that eventually passed² only moved the Acknowledgement of Country to come first, a compromise designed to placate what was a very divided council. I’d made a deputation at the meeting that night going over the reasons I supported the original motion, and attached a couple of charts for councillors’ perusal.

Fast-forward to the 24^th of November and an agenda document hits my virtual desk, heralding the arrival of another motion, this time by Councillor Chong: “That Council remove the opening prayer from the beginning of Council meetings and, over the next few months, consider whether a more inclusive affirmation or reflective silence is appropriate.” In preparation and support for a further deputation on the topic, I present this updated set of charts and data for anyone interested.

[All charts and statistics in this post are based on or otherwise derived from ABS data, including Community Profiles, DataPacks and TableBuilder. Data contains small random adjustments to protect respondents.]

Growth in Tasmanian LGAs between 2016 and 2021

First, though, a broader look at the state of the state. Clarence City is growing rather rapidly by any metric, and indeed, on the raw numeric change in population, is the fastest growing LGA in Tasmania, slowly taking bites out of Launceston City’s lead.

On proportional growth, however, Clarence City comes 7^th of 29, growing 12.24% over the prior 5 years. By this metric, Central Highlands is the fastest growing LGA, pushing up to 17.70%. All LGAs grew during the 2016-2021 inter-census period.³

Shape of Clarence population in 2016 and 2021

A good chunk of the growth in Clarence comes in the form of a few thousand migrating millennials. The conspicuous bump on the 2021 line is that fresh immigration, which could well have been even stronger had the pandemic not interrupted the reporting period.

Shape of Australia and Clarence populations in 2021

Australia⁴ more broadly has also experienced migration from millennials, although the strength is somewhat dampened compared to Clarence. This chart also illustrates that Clarence skews just mildly older than the overall Australian population.

Prevalence of religion in Clarence and Australia 1996-2021

Christianity Other religion Not adequately described⁵ No religion⁷

Now, though, we come to the point of this whole endeavour. This chart contains the same information as the charts I attached to my previous deputation, with the addition, now that we have access to the 2021 Census data… Of the 2021 Census data. As I predicted in my March deputation, the combination of “No religion” and “Not adequately stated” has risen above 50% in Clarence, but Australia more broadly has not quite got there and is on track for 2026.

And actually, if you decide to ignore the “Not adequately stated” portions, there’s a very decent argument to be made that Clarence is now majority non-religious. In other good news, followers of religions other than Christianity have more than doubled in number since the 2016 Census, and at least on raw numbers have finally crested 1996 levels.

Prevalence of religion in Clarence in 2021 by generation

Christianity Other religion Not adequately described⁵ No religion⁷

It is, of course, young people’s fault.⁸ Christianity remains the majority religion for Baby Boomers⁹ and older, almost to the exclusion of any other religion, but for Millennials⁹ and younger, irreligion is increasingly popular. The large grouping of “Other religion” in the Millennials column almost certainly comes from those immigration numbers earlier in the piece. Welcome, all, and thanks for making Clarence a more vibrant and diverse place to be.

If there’s any takeaway to be gained from this, it should probably be that the long slide into irreligion does not look to be slowing up any time soon. Christianity has long since stopped being the default position. I can’t tell you what any of this means for Australian society. I just like looking at cool charts. Go away now, I’ll see you again next week.

…Wait, they’re not electing the committees on Monday? What?

“A. That Council move the Acknowledgement of Country to be the first item on the agenda of Council meetings. B. That Council replace the Council prayer with a minute of quiet reflection, immediately following the Acknowledgement of Country.” ↩
“A. That Council move the Acknowledgement of Country to be the first item on the agenda of Council meetings, as recommended by the Reconciliation Action Plan Working Group, and authorises the General Manager to amend the meeting procedures accordingly. B. That Council consider at a workshop replacing the Council prayer with a minute of quiet reflection immediately following the Acknowledgement of Country.” ↩
Yes, even King Island and Flinders, although that growth is so small it doesn’t even get a full pixel in the chart. ↩
Which in this chart is actually represented by a version of Australia with the same population as Clarence, in order to illustrate the upcoming point about aging. ↩
Including those who didn’t answer the question⁶, or otherwise did not usefully respond. ↩↩
Religion is the only optional topic in the Australian Census. ↩
Including secular and other spiritual but non-religious beliefs. ↩↩
GEN Z, BABYYYYYY- no im sorry that felt wrong bluh ↩
As designated by the ABS. ↩↩

2022-11-07: Start As You Intend To Go On

2022-11-12T14:50:00+11:00

Here we are, then, after the election. All the votes have been counted¹ and we have a new set of twelve councillors. Some are familiar, some are new, one is returning from absence. All were gathered in the chambers on Bligh Street, as the CEO opened proceedings with the declarations of office. One thing is certain:

We’re going to need a third frame on the wall.

Declaration of Office²

I, [full name], having been elected as Councillor to the Clarence City Council, do solemnly declare that I will

(a) faithfully carry out the functions and exercise the powers vested in me by virtue of that office to the best of my ability and in accordance with the law;

(b) comply with the Council’s code of conduct;

(c) engage in ongoing professional development; and

(d) abide by the principles of good governance.

Declarations were made first by the mayor, Brendan Blomeley, and deputy mayor, Allison Ritchie, then by the remaining councillors in order of election. As the mayor left his opening remarks until the end of the procession, however, we here on the blog will start with:

[A disclaimer, actually. Some speeches have been edited for length.³ Seats were selected by councillors as they made their declarations and may not reflect final arrangements. All charts derived in part from TEC data.]

Councillor Allison Ritchie, Deputy Mayor (elected 4^th, 0.99 primary quotas)

It’s a strong first showing for the former Legislative Council representative for Pembroke, who only barely missed election as Councillor on primaries, and led the deputy mayoral election from the first count all the way to the end.

I look forward to working with you all on behalf of the community, and particularly at a time when we are all navigating many social and economic issues, from COVID-19, globalisation, growing mobility, the increasing interconnectedness of communities online, and so many other factors that have changed the way that people live, work and identify with their local area.

I’m looking forward to getting down to work utilising my skills as a former state MP and government minister to strike the best balance between manintaining a strong financial position and delivering the essential Council services and infrastructure that our community will require for future growth and prosperity.

I’d like to thank the members of the Better Clarence Team: Mayor Blomeley, Anthony James, Noelle Harb, and Kaye McPherson.

Speaking of that ticket, it’s been a bit of a mixed bag. While the campaign has successfully elected both its preferred mayor and deputy mayor, the remaining members (marked in red in the chart below) have flown almost completely under the radar, and received next to no support from either Blomeley or Ritchie.

It also remains to be seen how cohesive the new executive will be. Ritchie is a former Labor member, and Blomeley is about as big-L Liberal as you can get without ever having been elected or run as such.

Councillor Tony Mulder (elected 1^st, 1.50 primary quotas)

In the end, 533 votes separated Mulder from a seat at the executive table. Personally, I feel like the flow from Chong’s distribution should have been a little better, but such are the whims of democracy.

Our collective jobs as Councillors, in my view, is to deliver the best possible social and physical infrastructure for the people of the eastern shore. It is our paths, roads, reserves, local sporting facilities, play parks and tracks that enhance our lifestyle, and that contributes to our health and wellbeing.

But we must do this with a limited revenue base, namely the rates paid by the citizens of Clarence. We must resist state government attempts to cost shift their responsibility to us. Although we can assist and cooperate, public transport and social housing and, indeed, the health system are not our responsibility, and what’s more we lack a revenue base to do any of the heavy lifting.

We are not a government at all, in my view, we collectively occupy the treasury benches.

Which does seem largely accurate, though he does tend to harp on about it.

Mr Mayor, your job is to manage meetings and to ensure that all aspects of a debate are fairly heard and considered. The chair is not a position from which to steer the debate, but indeed to manage it, and you, Mr Mayor, have the quite often difficult job of representing the will of Council, and sometimes that will involve you presenting a case which you do not personally favour, but you, Mr Mayor, you do not rule us, you do not even lead us in that sense, but you must represent our collective view, and that sometimes can be a tough job.

Mr Mayor, I call upon you and your administration to honour your election promises, conduct yourself in a statesmanlike manner, indeed as we all should, tolerate diversity and treat all with respect.

Mulder and Blomeley have what could generously be described as a history of animosity towards each other. This particular speech⁴ seems rather tame, but past performance is no guarantee of future results. It could be a very long four years.

Councillor Heather Chong (elected 3^rd, 1.10 primary quotas)

In the mayoral race, Chong received strong preference flow from Beth Warren, but both had started from a couple of thousand behind Blomeley and Mulder, and ultimately it wasn’t to be. Her remarks are brief:

Could I just start by congratulating everyone who’s been elected to Council? I know how difficult it is to get on to Council and for those that have been here before it is not an easy job to do, so congratulations.

I want to thank the community and family that have supported me in all the work that I do here, and I look forward to working with all of you in an ongoing and collaborative way to do the best for all our community over the next four years.

Councillor Wendy Kennedy (elected 5^th, 0.82 primary quotas)

Kennedy came second in the deputy mayoral race. The margin was considerably bigger than in the mayoral. While that race could’ve gone either way, this had that unmistakable sense of inevitability from about the middle of the process. Regardless, it’s a good result for Kennedy in the councillor ballot, maintaining her 5^th place from last term, and slightly bolstering an already excellent primary count.

Very briefly, I’d just like to congratulate all those people that have elected to Council and those people that have been re-elected. Not easy running a campaign, and I admire all of you for putting your hands up in the first place.

I know exactly how our new colleagues felt four years ago and it can be a little daunting, but we’re all here to help and what I really look forward to is working with a respectful cohesive group of people.

Councillor Beth Warren (elected 6^th, 0.85 primary quotas)

Well it has certainly been a good year for Greens candidates in local government, a few losing out to the whims of democracy, but more coming in to fill ranks. This is especially true in Clarence City, Hobart City and Huon Valley, where two each were elected.

The first returns from her first run on last term’s Council, with mild dips in both order of election and primary count, but this feels like noise to me more than anything else. This seat seems relatively safe for Warren, and the mayoral loss hopefully isn’t too disappointing.

When I first stood in this chamber four years ago I really had no idea what I’d signed up for, but the people of Clarence elected me on a platform of transparent and accountable government, listening to the people and protecting their views, and protecting our special places.

Some of the things I want to concentrate on this term are making sure: That [all] ratepayers feel that their rates are being spent in a way that benefits them; That Clarence is accessible and welcoming to everybody; That we build resilience for both our community and our infrastructure for dealing with those more severe storms, flooding and bushfires that we’re facing as a result of climate change.

Councillor Bree Hunter (elected 7^th, 0.66 primary quotas)

Looking at the Clarence benches as a whole, it’s been a very good year for both women⁵ and the left side of the aisle. I’d give this Council a 7-3-2 split⁶ for the time being, but I’ll be looking at that very carefully over the next four years.⁷

Hunter comes to Clarence after nine years working for Hobart in various capacities. Running for deputy⁸ on one’s first attempt is an ambitious play, and while it hasn’t worked here, third is nothing to sniff at, especially in such a large field. Primaries on the councillor ballot are not especially worrying, but really, anything can happen once you hit the bottom half of the winners.

The last time I sat in this room in a formal sense was three and a half years ago when I became a citizen of Australia.⁹ I was so proud at that moment to be a part of this country, and it made me realise that I wanted to be a part of the community and to represent them to the best of my ability.

Fortunately, at that citizenship ceremony I spoke to Heather Chong, Julie Collins and David O’Byrne, and they inspired me to serve, which, here I am now with this amazing opportunity and I can’t tell you how excited I am to be here.

Councillor Jade Darko (elected 8^th, 0.64 primary quotas)

A win for diversity and Clarence’s second Greens councillor come with the election of one Jade Darko, who, if she isn’t the first person elected to any political office in Australia while openly out as a transgender women, as she believes¹⁰, it must surely be a very short list. She swiftly sets out her stance:

Before I begin, I would like to acknowledge that we are gathered here today on the stolen land of the Mumirimina people, and that this theft of land occurred through an act of genocide at the end of a musket. I commit myself to upholding the process of healing and reparation to the Palawa and Pakana, the rightful custodians of this land.

Historically, Clarence has had, let’s go with trouble¹¹ reckoning with the violent and destructive history of the land where it sits. I think this new council will be a little better about it, but there are no guarantees in local politics.

I would just like to say I’m deeply, deeply humbled by having been trusted by so many of the voters of Clarence to stand here and represent them. It’s truly an honour, and I commit myself to uphold the values on which I was elected, the Greens’ values of social justice, of standing up for the most marginalised in our community, of looking into what we can do with the state government to address the housing and health crises, of upholding the values of democracy, and of what we can do in Council to address the environmental issues that are facing us all, including the urgent, urgent action we need to be taking on climate.¹²

Darko is the only councillor this term to have been elected without also running for either mayor or deputy. Like Hunter, her primaries are probably high enough to win again next term.

Councillor Daniel Hulme (elected 9^th, 0.50 primary quotas)

Now, though, we’re really digging deep. Hulme returns to Council after losing his seat in 2018 on 0.27 quotas. It’s a solid comeback, but at that same election, Peers and von Bertouch had 0.52 and 0.53, and they’re both gone now.¹³ The moral of the story? Preference flow is everything.

It’s great to be back, I’ve been plotting my comeback for about four years. I was on Council previously, for those of you who don’t know, and I’m hoping that I’ll be able to use some of the experience that I’ve gained through serving as your representative in the pursuit of the things that I want to achieve.

I believe that Clarence is an amazing place. We have some fantastic natural assets in terms of our coastline, access to the airport, we’ve got a lot of advantages that I believe we can leverage to achieve some amazing things. I would like to use my time as councillor to look at how we can address a number of challenges, but three in particular that I campaigned on and would like to focus on during my term are economic development, housing affordability and traffic congestion.

Councillor Richard James (elected 10^th, 0.46 primary quotas)

A bit of a knock for James here, coming down from 4^th and 0.76 quotas at the last election. How’s he come down this far? If I were to speculate, I’d probably suggest that he’s been squeezed by more moderate candidates,¹⁴ but it’s really impossible to tell without a deeper dive than I have time for right now.

Ladies and gentlemen, I’m back. It’s been a long long time since I first came into this place in 1984, and would you believe that the seat that I’m in now was where I was basically appointed next to Councillor Bernie Denham. I think what has happened over the years is that it just seems to be natural for me to help people, regardless of their status, regardless of their opportunities in life and so on.

I have always put the people first, and that hasn’t always been what I believe is appropriate, but that’s the nature of the beast, and that’s the way I have always continued, and I would continue to do so.

I think the night in 2017 was a really important time for this Council, and I just want to make a quick comment about that, because 2017, in my view, was the turning point in relation to what the community thinks and how the community responds to the Sale and Development Agreement with Chambroad. I’m not going to go into any detail about that because the matter is still before this Council, Mr Mayor, only to say that at that time I believe that it was necessary for me to oppose that on the basis that I felt it was too big, and therefore it was out of keeping with the area.

Even though, sort of, over the years we’ve had a very concentrated number of people that have really got behind elected representatives, I think this compulsory voting has really made a change to what I thought and what others have had as far as expectations, so it’s something new and it’s something that I think we need to be able to be wary of if we are seeking re-election.

Councillor James Walker (elected 11^th, 0.36 primary quotas)

Walker also takes a dip from 10^th and 0.47, and his primary count is the lowest of those elected, but steady preference flow kept him in the mix right through to his election by default along with James and Goyne. Still though, the numbers have been slipping since his election by recount in 2011. Definitely something to watch four years from now.

Clarence is my home. It’s where I was brought over as a five-day-old on a ferry, where I was raised, where I work, where I’m raising a family… Now it’s home, and it is a privilege, as everyone around this table has acknowledged, to be able to represent this wonderful community. This hasn’t been a straightforward one but I’m just delighted to be back.

I’d like to acknowledge former Mayor Chipman, who was the only mayor I knew for over a decade. He was very impartial around the chair when he was at the table, he was a good mentor for advice, and in my professional opinion, you do have big shoes to fill. I’d also like to pay tribute to the colleagues that aren’t around the table from Councils past that recontested.

I also thank the other unsuccessful candidates for giving the voters some choice. Unlike my colleagues to my right, I guess I’m more freedom orientated and I’m one of the minority of Australians that think voting shouldn’t be compulsory, that we should be treating people like grown-ups, like most platinum western democracies.

There’s a lot to sort of think over for what we hope to achieve in this term. It’s going to be a challenging term. Inflation is going to make the job so much harder, especially in the space of infrastructure and maintaining services. Some people like to talk about keeping rates low. I think the focus that we should have is delivering value for rates, and through value for rates ensuring that we defend the quality of life of our residents and ideally enhance it.

Local government and state government should be acting as laboratories of democracy. We shouldn’t be trying to go out there and say all councils have to deliver the same service and use the same rating systems. When we do things well we should bolster it, when we don’t we should learn from others and take that on board.

Councillor Emma Goyne (elected 12^th, 0.44 primary quotas)

I think I’ve gone on enough about the whims of democracy, but this was a disappointment. Goyne was One Nation’s candidate for Lyons¹⁵ in the 2022 Federal Election. She got 5.35% of the first preferences there, which wasn’t nearly enough, and 0.44 quotas here represents 3.38% of Clarence voters, but preference flows gonna flow, especially in these high seat count ballots.

How much Goyne subscribes to the political philosophy of that most inflammatory of parties is unclear to me, both ON and UAP were basically running whoever’d sign up, chasing every House seat in the country and winning exactly none. The win here tells me the association didn’t really get through to voters. Still, 12^th is a difficult seat to try and build momentum from…¹⁶

Much like everybody else has already said, I’d just like to congratulate yourself, Mr Mayor and Deputy Mayor on your appointments. I want to say that having been born, raised, educated and run family businesses on our shores my entire life, I am absolutely honoured to now have been elected to serve the community of Clarence, and I look forward to working with an absolutely fabulous group of people. I can’t imagine people that were better to work with for the community and for everything that we hope to achieve.

Well that’s as good a start as any towards changing my mind.

Councillor Brendan Blomeley, Mayor (elected 2^nd, 1.49 primary quotas)

…So. While Blomeley was my absolute last choice for Mayor, it’s hard for me to deny that this has been a wildly successful election for someone who just four years ago was 12^th elected, and by a slim margin too.¹⁷ The election of Blomeley¹⁸ as Mayor stands in stark contrast to the leftward shift of the rest of the Council. What does this mean for the term ahead? Gee, would I ever like to know. The first big challenge sits just a couple of meetings away.

Well colleagues, congratulations. To have been elected to serve the people of Clarence is a significant honour and privilege, and we all deserve to be justly proud of our electoral success. As I look around the chamber this evening, I am impressed by just how different a place this is to the chamber I was first elected to some 22 years ago.

The citizens of Clarence have spoken clearly, having elected a team of twelve strong, committed and talented individuals, who all bring extensive professional and life experiences to draw upon. We also celebrate the record-breaking election of seven women to this Council. I did some numbers earlier tonight, I think that’s equal best in the state which is absolutely fantastic.

I’m sure we would all agree that with privilege comes responsibility. I’m mindful that although we come to this chamber with our own perspectives and views on how to make this city a better place, my number one desire for the duration of this term of Council is that we always turn up as our best selves. As I said on Friday at our agenda briefing, my aim is that the next four years is a period of real achievement for our city, so that in October 2026 we can all proudly look back and point at tangible wins for our community.

On a personal note, I would to thank all those who placed their trust in me and elected me Mayor of our wonderful city. The support from all corners of our city has been truly humbling, and the honour and responsibility is not lost on me. I am excited to be leading this new era of Council as we tackle some big challenges and big opportunities for our region in coming years. Please know that I will at all times strive to serve our city well and make decisions that I truly believe are in the best interests of our residents and ratepayers.

Well, we’ll just see about that, won’t we. The councillors declared and the speeches dispensed with, the new mayor calls a five minute recess to let the friends and family file out.

THE MEETING PROPER

Ten minutes later, we’re back on. The meeting proper is thankfully brief. It opens, as usual, with the acknowledgement of country, the council prayer,¹⁹ and the recording disclaimer. The certificate of election and councillor’s declarations are acknowledged. Things are going relatively smoothly until Councillor Mulder raises a point of order before the Mayor can get into the swing of the Omnibus Items, which are usually voted on as a package deal.

Mulder’s issue pertains to the confirmation of minutes. Philosophically, I agree with his point that new members should not be voting on the minutes of meetings they did not attend, but as a result of various interactions of the mechanics of voting, I can’t agree with the raising of the point. To explain why, I’ll need to drag out another chart.

The Local Government Act and the Local Government (Meeting Procedures) Regulations combine to impose the following requirements on votes at meetings of the full Council:

In order to act on business, a quorum of members must be present. For a full Council meeting, quorum is an absolute majority of its members. An absolute majority is the smallest whole number that is more than half those being counted. (4 out of 8, for example, is not an absolute majority, but 5 out of 9 is.)
For a motion to be carried, a simple majority of members must vote for it. A simple majority is an absolute majority of those present.
If a member is present, but does not vote (abstains) their vote is considered to be a vote against.

The chart shows the 29 councils of Tasmania, and the proportion of their members who could feasibly have been present at the last meeting of their previous iteration. The top group, marked in red, could not have confirmed their minutes if they agreed with Mulder. If the new members all left the room, quorum would be lost, and if they all abstained, the motion would be lost as a tie or worse. You could have some leave and some abstain, but that’s rather a lot of faffing about for something that really, truly does not matter that much.²⁰

The middle group, marked in blue and including Clarence, have exactly an absolute majority of of re-elected incumbents and, had one of their number somehow missed the very first meeting would be in exactly the same strife.

The Mayor accepts this point of order, but it is immediately rendered moot, because nobody leaves and only Deputy Mayor Ritchie actually abstains. And that, hopefully, is the longest I ever have to spend describing voting on the confirmation of minutes.

Thoroughly thrown off balance, the Mayor calls a vote on the next part of the Omnibus, mayor’s communication, but the rest proceeds as normal. It’s not clear to me if it’s the interruption, or just first day jitters, but Blomeley looks nervous in a way I’ve not seen from him before, and this carries through until councillors’ question time.

The one planning item comes and goes without much note, only the usual sole dissent from Councillor James. Question time sees a question from James on lease negotiations around Rosny Hill and the Kangaroo Bay Boulevard (still negotiating) and from Kennedy on works around Pipeclay Esplanade (starting this week).

The only remaining thing of note is to comment that the term “alderman” seems to have been given the boot in Clarence at long last. Thanks to Councillor Darko for letting us know how that went down. The most surprising part for me is that it was by the Mayor’s initiative, I’d thought he was rather attached to the title, but no matter. Councillors for everyone! You get to be councillor, and you get to be councillor, you all get to be councillor!²¹

Come back in three weeks, and we can go over all the administrative work that becomes necessary when a new Council arrives. We got meeting dates for the next two years,²² newly reformed committees, all manner of gubbins to fill the night. See you then.

[Oh, uhh, by the way, if you’re reading this shortly after it comes out, internet charity telethon Desert Bus for Hope starts in a few hours, and will run for about a week. Come watch cool people do fun stuff to distract themselves from a boring video game, while raising money to supply toys, books and games to children in hospitals around the world!]

7 November, 2022 Vote Record

FOR AGAINST ABSTAIN²⁴ MOVED SECONDED

Blo

Cho

Dar

Goy

Hul

Hun

Jam

Ken

Mul

Rit

Wal

War

Present

4. Omnibus Items

Minutes

11-1 (1)

CARRIED

Mayor’s Communication

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

Recommendations

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

7. Planning Authority Matters

7.1. Development Application PDPLANPMTD-2022/030063 – 28 Burgundy Road, Howrah - 2 Multiple Dwellings

Rec Approval

11-1

CARRIED

At an absolutely blistering pace. I don’t know how the TEC pulled it off in just five full days of counting, but they did. ↩
As required by the Local Government Act, section 321, and prescribed by the Local Government (General) Regulations 2015, Schedule 2 ↩
Men, and I am certainly not immune to this, can really get to rambling if given the chance. Frankly, it’s a miracle the meeting finished just after 8. We got 12 people to get through, write shorter speeches. ↩
And I can recommend listening to the full thing in your own time. ↩
Woo! Seven out of twelve! ↩
In rough terms and in no particular order: James, Darko, Hulme, Hunter, Warren, Kennedy and Mulder on the left; Walker, Chong and Ritchie in the center; Goyne and Blomeley on the right. ↩
And planning items really are their own beast. A lot of planning decisions come down to limitations on Council rather than anything else. ↩
Or mayor, for that matter. ↩
Hunter originally hails from California, USA, but moved to New Zealand before arriving in Australia. ↩
“Unless I’m mistaken, this is the first time an openly transgender woman has been elected to any level of government in so-called Australia” ~ @jadedarko 2022-10-30 19:02 AEDT ↩
I should note for completeness that Council did, at its very next meeting, and following a “mild” inundation of tiny Aboriginal flags on their lawn, vote to permanently raise the Aboriginal flag, 11-1. The one holdout was Councillor James. ↩
I suspect Jade and Dean might not have got along well if he’d still been around. Dunno what gives me that idea. ↩
On 0.40 and 0.21, respectively. ↩
James was easily the furthest to the left when Kevin Bonham ran his analysis on the last term of voting. ↩
Goyne lives in Sandford, which is decidedly not in Lyons. Candidate residence is a whole other can of worms that the Local Government Act has largely resolved for local government elections, with some caveats I won’t get into here. ↩
Said Thomas, setting up a callback in the next section. ↩
Albeit after some time off council. ↩
Blomeley was the furthest to the right when Kevin Bonham ran his analysis on the last term of voting. ↩
Which may not be long for this world given the new faces around the table, but we’ll see how things pan out. ↩
And actually, it completely falls down in the case of Huon Valley, who don’t even have an absolute majority of an absolute majority of re-elected incumbents. ↩
BEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEES! ↩
Okay, unless someone decides Council should meet once every 9 business days, I would not expect many surprises out of this one. It’s going to be once every three weeks. Again. ↩
When I refer to an approval or refusal as alternative, I mean that it was recommended, but the motion in question substantially modified or replaced the recommendation. ↩
Abstentions count as votes against. (Local Government (Meeting Procedures) Regulations 2015 s28(3)) ↩

2022-10-17: Bows '22

2022-10-26T00:30:00+11:00

It was a chilly spring night on Monday as I took the bus to Bligh Street for the last meeting of the Clarence City Council for the 2018-22 term. The gallery was more crowded and the meeting longer than I anticipated, which actually worked out better for me,¹ but let’s not worry about that. Onwards!

OMNIBUS ITEMS

I wouldn’t normally pull out a heading for the omnibus, but there’s a couple of things to note here:

John Toohey is retiring as Council’s Manager Health and Community Development after 23 years in various positions. Wishing him all the best.
The CEO and the Mayor met with Chambroad in relation to the Kangaroo Bay site. In line with the decision at the previous meeting, they negotiated to keep Council’s options open in the short-term. Chambroad has put forth the skeleton of an alternative proposal that would see them construct only the hotel, using the buildings for the hospitality school for some other, as yet undefined purpose. Chambroad are expected to put a more detailed proposal in the near future, and Council has been set a deadline of 21 December, 2022 to consider the proposal and Chambroad’s requested extension. Possibly pencilmark the 19^th of that month, as that’ll be the last meeting before the deadline.
At least half the chamber stood to speak about various committees. With reasonable odds of a shakeup around the table, I should note that committee appointments are likely to come through in a big lump at the second meeting after the election.
Bellerive Oval² is a hot topic tonight. Sound and light pollution, traffic woes, public transport inadequacies, things have possibly got out of hand for the ground, situated at Bellerive Beach right in the middle of a residential area. Things are not made easier by the arrival of the T20 World Cup and the ICC’s stringent security requirements for the surrounding area pushing busses out to Clarence Street. No easy solutions, I’m afraid.

PUBLIC QUESTION TIME

Now I’d always intended to show up to this particular meeting, but a fascinating thing happened in the last three weeks. I’d noticed a change to GM Ian Nelson’s sign off in the public notices in The Mercury. And so:

Thomas Chick, Mornington

My question is to the CEO. (Congratulations, by the way.) Assuming that for the purposes of the Local Government Act you are still the General Manager,⁴ for what reason and when did your role transition within Council as a corporate body from General Manager to Chief Executive Officer?³

And the simple explanation is that calling GMs CEOs has become the in thing. The transition seems to have taken place during closed meeting three weeks ago, and Mr Nelson has been delegated all the powers he had as a General Manager under the Local Government Act.

Victor Marsh, a Bellerive resident and regular questioner at these meetings, asks a question for another resident about noise pollution from Bellerive Oval, which is taken on notice. Told you it was a hot topic.

DEPUTATIONS BY MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC

Three (!) deputations tonight, which I’d normally deal with under the relevant items, but one of tonight’s doesn’t have a relevant item. When one of the Marshes turns up, the other is probably nearby, and indeed, talking about Bellerive Bluff, we have:

Joanne Marsh, Bellerive

It was a childhood dream of mine to live on Bellerive Bluff, achieved in 1979. By 1979, we were concerned about some of the decisions already made, such as the demolition of the Town Hall and units built in the playground of the original school in King Street.

Mrs Marsh goes on to present a brief⁵ history of issues with various developments in and around Bellerive Bluff, including Bellerive Oval,⁶ the recently implemented ferry service⁷ and the recently completed public pier,⁸ among other less recent problems. She concludes:

Consequently, I have no confidence in the Council’s understanding of their role in local government as clearly defined by the Local Government Act.

Now my opinion of Council isn’t quite so strong, but I also don’t live in Bellerive, and with the Oval there I’m not sure I’d want to at the moment. That’s enough about Bellerive for now, let’s move on.

7.1

DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION PDPLANPMTD-2022/027863 – 3 DROUGHTY POINT ROAD, ROKEBY - STORAGE (2 SHIPPING CONTAINERS AND FENCING)

Recommendation (Approval)

That the Development Application for storage (2 shipping containers and fencing) at 3 Droughty Point Road, Rokeby (Cl Ref PDPLANPMTD- 2022/027863) be approved subject to the following conditions and advice.
1. GEN AP1 – ENDORSED PLANS.
2. GEN AP3 – AMENDED PLANS [the location of outdoor storage areas (excluding the display of goods for sale) together with details of how these areas are to be treated or screened so as not to be visible from any road or public open space adjoining the site].
3. GEN AP3 – AMENDED PLANS [the provision of a site total of nine on-site car parking spaces].
4. External lighting to illuminate external vehicle parking areas and pathways must be provided, and must be located, designed and baffled to ensure that no direct light is emitted outside the boundaries of the site.
5. GEN S1 – SIGNS CONSENT.
6. GEN AM5 – TRADING HOURS [Monday – Saturday, 7am to 9pm; Sundays and Public Holidays, 8am to 9pm].
7. GEN S1 – SIGNS CONSENT.
8. ENG M1 – DESIGNS DA.
9. ENG A1 – NEW CROSSOVER.
10. ENG A5 – SEALED CAR PARKING.
11. ENG M5 – EROSION CONTROL.
12. ENG S1 – INFRASTRUCTURE REPAIR.
13. ENG S3B – WATER SENSITIVE URBAN DESIGN PRINCIPLES.
ADVICE
- Based on the information provided, the development is likely to adversely affect TasNetworks’ operations. Consideration needs to be given to the underground electrical infrastructure which runs under the new concrete driveway. This infrastructure may need extra protection depending on the type of traffic that will be using the driveway to access the site.
  To understand what these requirements may entail, it is recommended the proponent contact TasNetworks Early Engagement team at early.engagement@tasnetworks.com.au at their earliest convenience.
- The development will intensify the stormwater discharge from the property and hence requires approval under the Urban Drainage Act 2013 and the stormwater is to be designed as per council’s Stormwater Management Procedure for new development.
That the details and conclusions included in the Associated Report be recorded as the reasons for Council’s decision in respect of this matter.

I think coming in to this week’s meeting might have made this blog post more difficult to write,⁹ but that’s not to say it’s without benefit, especially if one gets in early. You overhear a lot of things sitting quietly in the corner waiting for things to get going. This week, for example, I heard one of the councillors talking to the speakers for the other two deputations, both in opposition to the application under this item. Something was up.

The proposal is for two shipping containers in a sealed and fenced off area on a particularly awkwardly shaped lot in what appears to be a residential area. Appearances, however, can be deceiving.

A quick perusal of theLIST reveals the lot is zoned for Local Business,¹⁰ as is the house at No. 1, and the houses south of the lot are zoned Light Industrial¹¹ or Utilities.¹² Light Industrial and Utilities don’t allow for residences, but the Planning Scheme allows for existing uses to continue. This isn’t the problem.

Those two remaining deputations were by residents of those nearby houses. Droughty Point Road is already dotted with industrial areas further south of here, resulting in heavy vehicles regularly trundling past the houses. The proposal was seen by residents as likely to exacerbate that problem and introduce new ones, including the throwing up of dust and other particulate. The Local Business Zone provides a range of allowable trading hours, which you can see in the recommendation above, but these too were problematic for residents just trying to get some sleep.

The Scheme cares not for their plight. Storage is a discretionary use in the Local Business Zone, but discretion can only go so far. The Scheme ignores the fact of nearby residences, concerning itself only with the opinions of those living in areas zoned for Residential, such as the area to the east of the above map, and the people of Princes Building Parade and Knopwood Street seem unlikely to be perturbed.

In an effort to provide some modicum of solace, Councillor Mulder provided an alternative motion:

Alternative (Approval)

[waiting for publication of minutes, couldn’t get my hands on a copy, reduced hours, increased fencing requirements]

But in listening to the conversation, it becomes apparent that nobody seems to think the changed trading hours are in any way enforceable. Further, it seems that no matter how tonight’s proceedings turn out, the applicant is likely to appeal the decision to TASCAT’s Resource and Planning Stream, rendering the whole thing rather moot.

Alderman James foreshadows a Refusal motion, but nobody takes its chances of surviving appeal seriously. Alderman Ewington, at the other end, thinks the amended Approval motion goes too far beyond the scope of what the Scheme allows. Ultimately, there’s an air of inevitability in the chamber as the Mayor calls for the vote. This probably isn’t over, but it won’t be settled in this room, either. The Scheme is a rigid and imperfect instrument, and the only winners here seem to be the developers.

Alternative Approval¹⁸

FOR

Blomeley, Chipman, Chong, Kennedy, Mulder, Peers, Walker, Warren

AGAINST

Ewington, James, von Bertouch

CARRIED

8.1.1

PETITION – EQUITABLE ACCESS TO LITTLE HOWRAH BEACH

Recommendation

That Council:

Notes the petition and the Chief Executive Officer’s (“CEO”) advice that the petition partially complies with section 57 of the Local Government Act 1993.
Notes the CEO’s advice that it is not possible to provide an equitable “DDA” access in the short to medium term, for the reasons set out in the report and authorises the CEO to progress investigations and construction of a temporary, short-term concrete access ramp to enable beach access from the end of the existing access ramp at the public amenities block at Little Howrah Beach, subject to council officers consulting with key stakeholders about the suitability of the proposed ramp.
Authorises the expenditure of $10,000 from a previous budget allocation for a DDA compliant ramp, plus ongoing maintenance costs of approximately $3,000 per annum to maintain the ramp in safe and functional order.
Authorises the CEO to write to petitioners acknowledging the petition and advising of council’s decision.

The existing access ramp at Little Howrah Beach almost reaches the beach before it unceremoniously ends in a single step, depositing the user onto some rocks. This is hardly the peak of accessibility. When it was originally built in 2008, its only problem was being a bit steep for DDA compliance, but sea and soles have stolen the sand to some other shore.

Recently, in an act of guerrilla public service, an unknown person poured a short ramp from the step, over the rocks, using rapid set concrete. Uneven and unauthorised, this patch of concrete is already breaking up, and the CEO has noted that if things deteriorate much further, he may be forced to close the beach entirely. There’s probably a moral to be had here about thinking twice before taking rash action, or maybe just irony, but I’m not sure I like it.

Council are going to pay someone to do a better job,¹³ but the accessibility problems will remain for the foreseeable future. A hollow victory, certainly.

Recommendation

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

ALL THE REST

Alderman James abstained on the Community Support Grants vote at 8.4.1 after raising concerns with the refusal of Gurkha Legends Cricket Club’s proposal, but the reasons given for the refusal seem wellfounded based on a quick look at Council’s Grants Policy. That abstention was the sole dissent,¹⁹ although Councillor Mulder was also interested in the refusal of a Lost and Found sculpture at Cremorne.

From Councillors’ Questions:

No news on either Rosny Hill or the Kangaroo Bay Boulevard site, Rosny Hill is waiting on draft lease negotiations
Clarence Lifestyle Village have requested to extend the Urban Growth Boundary, but have so far not provided further information that Council has asked for
Consultation on the Seven Mile Beach Structure Plan has been completed
The developers of the Arm End golf course have claimed they have achieved substantial commencement, but have not yet provided evidence to that effect
Roads around Bellerive Oval are experiencing potholing, but the ICC’s security provisions are making things difficult
No progress made on ways to acquire cash-in-lieu contributions for parking
No confirmed date for grading of Pipeclay Esplanade, Cremorne
There are no real rules governing councillors receiving compensation for sitting on the boards of Government Business Enterprises or other government committees

And finally tonight, certificates of recognition were given to, and final speeches given by, the following retiring councillors:

Dean Ewington has been an alderman since the 2018 election. It’s been a bit of a mixed bag for the owner of Oceana Aquatic and Fitness. Although he’s made big moves in relation to the sport and wellbeing platform he was elected on, his political career has been thoroughly sunk by his attendance at an anti-lockdown rally, which resulted in his disendorsement as a Liberal candidate at the 2021 state election. This, combined with his views on climate change and “woke culture”, and his very pro-development stance, has not made him a popular man. I am not going to miss him, though I do wish him the best as he tries to find more time for his family.

Alderman Ewington’s closing speech largely avoids any of the things that got him into hot water over the last four years. He’s looking for the next council to make an overhaul to their grants process, especially around newly starting sporting groups.

Luke Edmunds was also elected at the 2018 election, but left Council¹⁴ in September after being elected as a Labor MLC for Pembroke.¹⁵ While on Council, he was a strong advocate for inclusive play options in parks, resulting, among other things, in the installation of an all-abilities swing at Simmons Park, and the consideration of other inclusive measures at current and future park developments. He also advocated for the continued operation of the Rosny Golf Course, although a motion intended to progress that seems to have backfired. The course is currently being maintained to regular park standards, with golfing disallowed.

Mr Edmunds was in the gallery tonight, and invited to give his own speech. Mostly just thanks to everyone involved.

Doug Chipman has been a councillor since the 2000 election, was Deputy Mayor from 2007 until his election as Mayor in 2011, a position he has held since. Councillor Chong provides some statistical context:

Chaired over 200 meetings, covering some 600 hours
Attended over 440 meetings total, comprising about 132,000 pages of agenda papers

Mayor Chipman has been president of LGAT and vice president of ALGA, and during his tenure as mayor was involved in the conception of the Hobart City Deal and Clarence’s City Heart Project. On the other hand, his tenure has also been marked by the sale and development of public land at Kangaroo Bay and Rosny Hill. His departure leaves big shoes to fill for the next mayor, whoever that turns out to be.

Doug’s closing remarks also contain a lot of thanks, and reflections on the challenges faced during his time on Council and to be faced by Councils to come. He doesn’t really consider this a retirement, more a reset, and he fully expects to spend some Monday nights in the gallery in future.

CLOSING THOUGHTS

On the wall behind the Mayor’s desk in the Council Chambers, two large frames hang with the pictures and names of every councillor and alderman who has sat in Clarence. Laid out in a grid, 6 rows by 7 columns, the frame on the left is full of local politicians from many decades ago. The frame on the right has some much more recent faces.

As I left the chamber, there were three spaces remaining in the bottom right of that right frame. As I finish writing up this post, much later than intended, it is midnight on the day counting is due to commence in the Local Government Elections. With three seats vacant, and few former councillors running, it seems fairly likely that this frame too will find itself full in a few days time. We might even need a new frame. Food for thought.

Come back in¹⁶ two weeks¹⁷ and I’ll see what I can do about introducing you to some new faces. Election coverage might come in a bonus post when I wake up today.

17 October, 2022 Vote Record

FOR AGAINST ABSTAIN¹⁹ MOVED SECONDED

Blo

Chi

Cho

Edm

Ewi

Jam

Ken

Mul

Pee

von

Wal

War

Present

²⁰

4. Omnibus Items

Recommendations

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

7. Planning Authority Matters

7.1. Development Application PDPLANPMTD-2022/027863 – 3 Droughty Point Road, Rokeby - Storage (2 Shipping Containers and Fencing)

Alt Approval¹⁸

8-3

CARRIED

8.1. Determination on Petitions Tabled at Previous Council Meetings

8.1.1. Petition – Equitable Access to Little Howrah Beach

Recommendation

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

8.4. Governance

8.4.1. Community Support Grants

Recommendation

10-1 (1)¹⁹

CARRIED

Night bus schedules are so much fun. ↩
Known commercially as Blundstone Arena. ↩
Geez, I can really compose a run-on sentence, huh? ↩
Local Government Act 1993 Part 7, Division 1 ↩
Mayor Chipman has regularly opened deputation segments by saying that, under the meeting regulations, deputations are limited to at most three minutes in length. In reality, the regulations make no such requirement (s38), and this three minute limit is imposed by a council policy. Ultimately, the power to make that limit does come from the meeting regulations, which are fairly light on detail about deputations otherwise, but to say that the limit is in the regs is misleading at best. ↩
Encroachment onto public land, parking woes, nearby resident movement, noise and light pollution. ↩
Parking woes. (And likely to get worse if not resolved before new stops open upstream.) ↩
Covered in fish remains shortly after opening, resolved some weeks later. ↩
Which is the excuse I’m using for it coming out so late. ↩
“The purpose of the Local Business Zone is: To provide for business, retail, administrative, professional, community and entertainment functions which meet the needs of a local area; To ensure that the type and scale of use and development does not compromise or distort the activity centre hierarchy; To encourage activity at pedestrian levels with active frontages and shop windows offering interest and engagement to shoppers; To encourage Residential and Visitor Accommodation use if it supports the viability of the activity centre and an active street frontage is maintained.” – Tasmanian Planning Scheme 14.0 ↩
“The purpose of the Light Industrial Zone is: To provide for manufacturing, processing, repair, storage and distribution of goods and materials where off site impacts are minimal or can be managed to minimise conflict with, or unreasonable loss of amenity to, any other uses; To provide for use or development that supports and does not adversely impact on industrial activity.” – Tasmanian Planning Scheme 18.0 ↩
“The purpose of the Utilities Zone is: To provide land for major utilities installations and corridors; To provide for other compatible uses where they do not adversely impact on the utility.” – Tasmanian Planning Scheme 26.0 ↩
Possibly also with work done on the stepped access to the beach. ↩
Local Government Act 1993, Schedule 5, s3(1)(eb) ↩
Pembroke covers land from Geilston Bay down past Tranmere. A bit north-heavy, the eastern boundary takes in Mornington and Howrah. ↩
Whoops. ↩
Or maybe three. ↩
When I refer to an approval or refusal as alternative, I mean that it was recommended, but the motion in question substantially modified or replaced the recommendation. ↩↩
Abstentions count as votes against. (Local Government (Meeting Procedures) Regulations 2015 s28(3)) ↩↩↩
Seat vacant due to election to Legislative Council, but was in gallery. ↩

2022-09-26: The Rains are Coming

2022-09-27T18:20:00+10:00

We begin our exercise in the dying weeks of this iteration of Council. Nine of the twelve councillors are out campaigning to keep their seats¹, the other three throwing in the towel². Tonight’s meeting has a slim agenda and a slimmer chance of producing much in the way of soundbites, except maybe for Item 8.4.1, but I’ll be happy to be proven wrong.³

Here’s one of those departing councillors now, on a matter of condolence:

Councillor Doug Chipman (Mayor)

I’d like to acknowledge the passing of the Queen. On behalf of my fellow councillors and staff at Clarence City Council, I’d like to join with the rest of Tasmania, Australia, and the world in passing on our deepest sympathies and condolences on the passing of Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II.

We, along with so many others, have long admired the sense of duty and dedication that Her Majesty brought to the role throughout her extraordinary seventy years of reign. Her Majesty was very fond of our state, visiting Tasmania an incredible seven times throughout her reign, and we will forever be honoured by her interest and the wonderful memories of those visits.

Her Majesty leaves a legacy that is unrivalled in modern history, a legacy of dependability, adaptability, stoicism and dignity that will be an inspiration for many generations to come. May she rest in peace.

A petition is tabled by another departing councillor, Alderman Ewington, regarding accessibility around Little Howrah Beach. Expect an item after the election.

Items 7.1 and 7.3 move along without much hullabaloo, just a dissent from Ald James on each⁴ and Cr Mulder on 7.1, but in the middle of those…

7.2

DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION PDPLANPMTD-2022/026549 – 18 LOWLYNN COURT, GEILSTON BAY - 2 MULTIPLE DWELLINGS

Recommendation (Refusal)

That the Development Application for 2 Multiple Dwellings at 18 Lowlynn Court, Geilston Bay (Cl Ref PDPLANPMTD-2022/026549) be refused as it is contrary to the provisions of the Tasmanian Planning Scheme - Clarence, with regard to:
1. Not satisfying Performance Criteria P3 of clause 8.4.2 Setbacks and building envelope for all dwellings by its southern side boundary setback not being consistent with properties in the area, creating overshadowing and visual bulk impact on the adjoining vacant lot to the south, resulting in unreasonable adverse impact on the adjoining lot’s amenity.
2. Not satisfying Performance Criteria P2 of clause 8.4.3 Site Coverage and private open space for all dwellings, as the dwellings’ nominated private open spaces are designed and located in such a manner that they are not capable of serving as an extension of the dwelling for outdoor relaxation, dining, entertaining and children’s play.
That the details and conclusions included in the Associated Report be recorded as the reasons for Council’s decision in respect of this matter.

Oh dearie dearie me. We had a deputation tonight by someone linked with the proposal, disappointed at the recommended refusal. An excellent point was raised then about the circumstances by which we got here:

Land Use Planning and Approvals Act 1993, s57

(2) The planning authority may, on receipt of an application for a permit to which this section applies, refuse to grant the permit and, if it does so –

(a) it does not have to comply with subsection (3); and

(b) section 60 (1) does not apply; and

(c) it must, within 7 days of refusing to grant the permit, serve on the applicant notice of its decision.

(3) Unless the planning authority requires the applicant to give notice, the authority must give notice, as prescribed, of an application for a permit.

The argument goes that the proposal needn’t have gone out for advertising if Council’s officers always intended to recommend refusal. Which is perfectly reasonable, were it not for Council’s councillors’ ability to ignore the officer’s recommendation entirely.⁵ And case in point, Alderman Blomeley has a very last minute motion on hand to approve the proposal, making the advertisement of the proposal completely necessary to comply with subsection (3). To give everyone time to read it over⁸, Councillor Mulder moves to defer the matter until the end of the open meeting, so I guess we’ll just have to come back to this.

8.1.1

PETITION – PASS ROAD UPGRADE – MOTORIST, CYCLIST AND PEDESTRIAN SAFETY

Recommendation

That Council:

Notes the petition.
Notes the General Manager’s advice that the petition complies with Section 57 of the Local Government Act 1993 (Tas.).
Notes that design is well underway for the Pass Road reconstruction from Glebe Hill Road to Connor Place and the design and cost estimates are to be presented to a future council workshop prior to 2023-2024 budget consideration.
Authorises the General Manager to request the Traffic Commissioner to reduce the existing 80 km/h Pass Road sections to 60 km/h, until the Pass Road upgrade works are complete.
Authorises the General Manager to write to petitioners acknowledging their concerns and advising of council’s decision.

Pass Road is going to be causing problems for residents and Council for years to come. Situated in parts along the Clarence Plains Rivulet, this former coach road has, to put things lightly, not taken recent developments well. A combination of the rapid urban growth of Glebe Hill and the Plains, the flimsy foundation of the road, and continuing extreme and very wet weather⁹ that definitely has nothing to do with climate change¹⁰ have led to a potholed disaster zone labelled on Google Maps as a major thoroughfare.

The recommendation covers a section of the road between Glebe Hill Road and Connor Place, about half the length of Pass Road. Even this half job, when it comes before the new Council at next year’s Budget deliberations, is going to be massively expensive. Obviously it needs to be done, for everyone’s sake, but things being what they are right now, it’s certainly not going to be easy.

Recommendation

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

8.4.1

KANGAROO BAY HOTEL AND HOSPITALITY SCHOOL SITE

Recommendation

That Council:

Notes that Chambroad are expected to provide advice regarding its progress in accordance with the Sale and Development Agreement before 13 October 2022.
In the event that “substantial commencement” has not been achieved by Chambroad, authorise the General Manager to take whatever action is necessary to preserve Council’s rights in accordance with the Sale and Development Agreement.
Requests that the General Manager provide a report to Council as soon as practical after the upcoming council elections setting out any advice from Chambroad, identifying options and recommending a preferred option.

I do so love to be proven right.

Approved in January 2017¹² then again in modified form in December 2017¹³ by the previous Council in an 11-1 vote¹⁴, the Kangaroo Bay Hotel and Hospitality School has been a thorn in the side of Council ever since. The land was sold to Chambroad Overseas Investment Australia¹⁵ as part of a Sale and Development Agreement, with Hunter Developments pegged to develop the site. Five years later, here is the list of work completed:

A derelict building across a footpath from a large flat gravel area has been levelled to, by their powers combined, become a larger flat gravel area.

So things haven’t gone well. A buyback clause in the SDA gives Council the opportunity to repurchase the land if substantial commencement isn’t reached within a certain time. Under LUPAA and the Clarence Interim Planning Scheme 2015¹⁶, levelling the ground would have been enough to qualify as substantial commencement, but the SDA requires quite a bit more work.

In May and November of 2019 Council gave Chambroad extensions of time to commence as it struggled to obtain and retain a provider for the hospitality school portion of the project. In December 2020, during and because of the (continuing) COVID-19 pandemic, Chambroad was given a much longer extension through October 2022, but has never showed any tangible signs of starting anything else, let alone finishing it. There is little appetite in Council or in the community to let this go on any longer.

…Unfortunately, the end of this latest extension of time lands right in the middle of the polling period for Tasmania’s 2022 Local Government Elections. Council believes, as it well should, that it should not be making big decisions that might influence voters during an election season, which is why the result of this motion was completely unsurprising, even if it took a small chunk of fairly unfocussed and politicised debate to get there.

Recommendation

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

10.4

QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE

Tonight’s keywords: Speed bumps, standing water, Pipe Clay Esplanade, overgrowth, flooding, Little Howrah Beach, Alma’s Activities Centre¹⁷, Coastal Management Plan, food permits, Code of Conduct complaints¹⁸

7.2

DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION PDPLANPMTD-2022/026549 – 18 LOWLYNN COURT, GEILSTON BAY - 2 MULTIPLE DWELLINGS (CONT.)

Approval

1. GEN AP1 – ENDORSED PLANS.
That the Development Application for 2 Multiple Dwellings at 18 Lowlynn Court, Geilston Bay (Cl Ref PDPLANPMTD-2022/026549) be approved subject to the following conditions and advice:
1. GEN AP3 – AMENDED PLAN
  Insert:
  - the communal bin area location of sufficient size to accommodate six bins, and suitably screened from both the frontage and landscape plantings providing screening to Unit 1; and
  - a permanently fixed external privacy screen, for the full length of Unit 2’s east facing living room window (DGW 18/27), with a uniform transparency of not more than 25%.
2. The development must be undertaken in accordance with the recommendations of the Flood Hazard Report, prepared by Flüssig Engineers, dated 10 August 2022, as attached to this permit. Documentation demonstrating compliance with the recommendations must be submitted to and approved by Council’s Group Manager Engineering Services prior to an occupancy permit being issued.
3. ENG A5 – SEALED CAR PARKING.
4. ENG M1 -DESIGNS DA.
5. ENG S1 – INFRASTRUCTURE REPAIR.
6. The development must meet all required Conditions of Approval specified by TasWater notice, dated 23/03/2022 (TWDA 2022/00378-CCC).
ADVICE
The development must meet all required Conditions of Approval specified by TasWater notice, dated 23/03/2022 (TWDA 2022/00378-CCC).
That the reasons are as follows:
- The proposal is discretionary and provides in excess of the minimum ground level private open space (POS).
- There is no unreasonable loss of amenity to adjoining properties.
- Unit positions have been informed by the Flood Report by Flussig Engineers dated 10 August 2022.

Welcome back. When we left off, Alderman Blomeley had announced an alternative motion that was so last minute he hadn’t had time to distribute it before the meeting. This is very much not normal practise, and that takes up a reasonable whack of the debate. The rest essentially proceeds as follows:

The officers had two very good reasons to recommend the refusal of the proposal:

There wasn’t enough space in a certain configuration outside either of the dwellings that was useful for privately doing anything.¹⁹
There wasn’t enough space between the dwellings and the south side of the lot, creating overshadowing problems for the lot next door.¹⁹

But, the argument goes:

Surely whoever goes on to live here or otherwise use the property will know this and adjust their plans accordingly.
Surely whoever goes on to live there or otherwise use the property will know this and adjust their plans accordingly, and besides, if the owner had an issue, surely they would have raised it when the proposal was advertised.

I do generally subscribe to the philosophy that reasonable and consenting adults can do what they want as long as no one else is coming to harm. When the proposal was advertised, it received zero representations, objecting or otherwise. So what do? On the one hand, no representations means the only valid appellant is the applicant²⁰ and they’re not going to complain if they get what they want. On the other hand, a planning authority playing funny with the rules is liable to pay out a lot of ratepayers’ money to the state treasury.²¹^,²² …I should probably point out I’m not a lawyer.

Regardless, in the end it comes down to the choices of ~~twelve~~ eleven humans in a tall, acoustically awful room. Discretion and interpretation is the game, and today’s big winner is the applicant.

Approval

FOR

Blomeley, Chipman, Ewington, James, Kennedy, Mulder, Peers, Warren

AGAINST

Chong, von Bertouch, Walker

CARRIED

Well that was rather a bit more excitement than I was expecting from this pilot run. Come back in three weeks for the last meeting of this iteration of Council. I suspect there may be certificates involved. For now, here’s the big table:

26 September, 2022 Vote Record

FOR AGAINST ABSTAIN²³ MOVED SECONDED

Blo

Chi

Cho

Edm

Ewi

Jam

Ken

Mul

Pee

von

Wal

War

Present

²⁴

4. Omnibus Items

Recommendations

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

7. Planning Authority Matters

7.1. Development Application PDPLANPMTD-2021/021631 – 7 Buchanan Street, Bellerive - Additions and Alterations to Dwelling

Rec Approval

9-2

CARRIED

7.2. Development Application PDPLANMTD-2022/026549 – 18 Lowlynn Court, Geilston Bay - 2 Multiple Dwellings

Defer (Proc)

7-4 (2)²³

CARRIED

Note: Item was deferred to just before closed meeting.

7.3. Development Application PDPLANMTD-2022/029299 – 19 Scott Street, Bellerive - Demolition of Existing Dwelling and Construction of 3 Multiple Dwellings

Rec Approval

10-1

CARRIED

8.1. Determination on Petitions Tabled at Previous Council Meetings

8.1.1. Petition – Pass Road Upgrade – Motorist, Cyclist and Pedestrian Safety

Recommendation

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

8.4. Governance

8.4.1. Kangaroo Bay Hotel and Hospitality Site

Recommendation

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

7. Planning Authority Matters (cont.)

7.2. Development Application PDPLANMTD-2022/026549 – 18 Lowlynn Court, Geilston Bay - 2 Multiple Dwellings (cont.)

Note: As deferred.

Approval

8-3

CARRIED

Four also for mayor and the rest for deputy. ↩
For some value of throwing in the towel; Councillor Edmunds has become MLC Edmunds after a by-election in Pembroke, and has vacated his seat. ↩
looks back over post Hahaha, what’ve you gone and said that for? ↩
Alderman James dissents from the majority rather often. If you limit your scope to just planning items, James has been on the losing side of votes nearly 30% of the time during the 2018-22 term. Alderman von Bertouch is next, then Councillor Warren, but each pulls only a paltry 17%. The most successful councillor on planning items this term has been Alderman Peers, with an excellent 7% loss rate. ↩
Planning authorities⁶ have the ability to delegate some or all of their power⁷ to their employees under section 6 of LUPAA. Clarence delegates the ability to approve certain proposals with very low numbers of representations made to its planning staff, but requires that all refusals go through a council meeting. ↩
Which is to say, councils, which operate in part as planning authorities. ↩
Except the power to delegate power. That way lies madness. ↩
Very last minute. ↩
Oh hey there, La Niña. ↩
This is a lie. I am lying to you. In unrelated¹¹ news, I’d like to wish Alderman Ewington a very happy exit from local politics after the election. Family is very important and I’m glad you’re making time for yours. ↩
Is it, though? ↩
At a Special Council Meeting lasting over an hour. [Agenda, Minutes, Youtube] ↩
At a Special Council Meeting lasting over three hours. [Agenda, Minutes, Youtube] ↩
Councillors Chipman, Chong, James, Peers, von Bertouch and Walker remain from that Council. James was the sole dissent on both motions. ↩
I’m not about to get bogged down in the foreign investment debate, you can’t make me. ↩
Which has since been superceded by the Tasmanian Planning Scheme and its Clarence Local Provisions Schedule, but still applies to DAs and SAs approved underneath it. ↩
A small community hall on Alma Street, Bellerive. Alderman von Bertouch is very passionate about the site, but tough budgeting, especially through the pandemic, has put it firmly on the backburner, slowly falling into disrepair. Hasn’t stopped her trying, though. ↩
With no particular specificity, so watch this space, I guess. ↩
At least according to an arbitrary but generally well-defined standard, as laid out in the planning scheme. ↩↩
LUPAA Part 4, Division 3 ↩
LUPAA Part 4, Division 4, especially s63A ↩
At time of writing, 500 penalty units is A$90,500. ↩
Abstentions count as votes against. (Local Government (Meeting Procedures) Regulations 2015 s28(3)) ↩↩
Seat vacant due to election to Legislative Council. ↩

Hello!

2022-09-26T15:15:00+10:00

You’ve arrived at the beginning of the blog. As a reward for your arrival, allow me to explain to you some of the motivations behind my writing it.

I want to have something that I can look back over four years¹ from now as I’m trying to make another set of difficult decisions at the next council elections.
I believe there is a gap in the market for this sort of content, and:
1. Want to provide it.
2. Think I can provide it.
I’m bored and I think it’ll be fun in some way.³

Enjoy what comes, if anything. I’ll be here.

or eight² ↩
or twelve ↩
And if it isn’t, you’ll know why I stopped. ↩

Come Back in Three Weeks: Happenings in the Clarence City Council Chambers

2023-01-16 & 23: Triple Rollover Jackpot

OMNIBUS ITEMS

PUBLIC QUESTION TIME

CHAMBROAD REQUEST FOR BUY-BACK EXTENSION OF TIME

NOTICE OF MOTION - COUNCILLOR RITCHIE - KANGAROO BAY LAND BUY-BACK – CHAMBROAD SITE

NOTICE OF MOTION - COUNCILLOR WARREN - KANGAROO BAY WHARF SITE CONSULTATION

8.4.1: Recommendation

9.1: Amended Motion

9.2: Original Motion

NOTICE OF MOTION - COUNCILLOR JAMES - BUY-BACK KANGAROO BAY WHARF SITE LAND

Local Government (Meeting Regulations) 2015

Section 19: Discussion of a resolved matter

COUNCILLOR’S QUESTION TIME

16 & 23 January, 2023 Vote Record

2022-12-19: A Misguided Double Down

DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION PDPLANPMTD-2022/026489 – 26A ESPLANADE, LINDISFARNE - BOAT SHED AND JETTY

Recommendation (Approval)

APPOINTMENT TO COMMITTEES, BOARDS AND AUTHORITIES

Recommendation

CHAMBROAD REQUEST FOR EXTENSION OF TIME AND MODIFIED DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL FOR A HOTEL

Recommendation

COUNCILLOR’S QUESTION TIME

19 December, 2022 Vote Record

2022-11-28: Amen and Amen (and AGM)

PUBLIC QUESTION TIME

DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION PDPLANPMTD-2022/030002 – 22 THOMPSON WAY, CLIFTON BEACH - DWELLING, SECONDARY RESIDENCE AND OUTBUILDING

DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION PDPLANPMTD-2022/028640 – 30 CREMORNE AVENUE, CREMORNE - ADDITIONS AND ALTERATIONS TO DWELLING

Item 7.1: Recommendation (Approval)

Item 7.2: Recommendation (Approval)

GOVERNANCE

NOTICE OF MOTION - CR MULDER - CLARENCE STORMWATER SYSTEM

As Given

NOTICE OF MOTION - CR CHONG - COUNCIL PRAYER

As Amended

COUNCILLOR’S QUESTION TIME

28 November, 2022 Vote Record

5 December, 2022 Annual General Meeting

Religion in Clarence (and Other Stray Observations from the 2021 Census)

2022-11-07: Start As You Intend To Go On

Declaration of Office2

Councillor Allison Ritchie, Deputy Mayor (elected 4th, 0.99 primary quotas)

Councillor Tony Mulder (elected 1st, 1.50 primary quotas)

Councillor Heather Chong (elected 3rd, 1.10 primary quotas)

Councillor Wendy Kennedy (elected 5th, 0.82 primary quotas)

Councillor Beth Warren (elected 6th, 0.85 primary quotas)

Councillor Bree Hunter (elected 7th, 0.66 primary quotas)

Councillor Jade Darko (elected 8th, 0.64 primary quotas)

Councillor Daniel Hulme (elected 9th, 0.50 primary quotas)

Councillor Richard James (elected 10th, 0.46 primary quotas)

Councillor James Walker (elected 11th, 0.36 primary quotas)

Councillor Emma Goyne (elected 12th, 0.44 primary quotas)

Councillor Brendan Blomeley, Mayor (elected 2nd, 1.49 primary quotas)

THE MEETING PROPER

7 November, 2022 Vote Record

2022-10-17: Bows '22

OMNIBUS ITEMS

PUBLIC QUESTION TIME

Thomas Chick, Mornington

DEPUTATIONS BY MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC

Joanne Marsh, Bellerive

DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION PDPLANPMTD-2022/027863 – 3 DROUGHTY POINT ROAD, ROKEBY - STORAGE (2 SHIPPING CONTAINERS AND FENCING)

Alternative Approval18

PETITION – EQUITABLE ACCESS TO LITTLE HOWRAH BEACH

Recommendation

ALL THE REST

CLOSING THOUGHTS

17 October, 2022 Vote Record

2022-09-26: The Rains are Coming

Councillor Doug Chipman (Mayor)

DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION PDPLANPMTD-2022/026549 – 18 LOWLYNN COURT, GEILSTON BAY - 2 MULTIPLE DWELLINGS

Land Use Planning and Approvals Act 1993, s57

PETITION – PASS ROAD UPGRADE – MOTORIST, CYCLIST AND PEDESTRIAN SAFETY

Recommendation

KANGAROO BAY HOTEL AND HOSPITALITY SCHOOL SITE

Recommendation

QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE

DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION PDPLANPMTD-2022/026549 – 18 LOWLYNN COURT, GEILSTON BAY - 2 MULTIPLE DWELLINGS (CONT.)

Approval

26 September, 2022 Vote Record

Declaration of Office²

Councillor Allison Ritchie, Deputy Mayor (elected 4^th, 0.99 primary quotas)

Councillor Tony Mulder (elected 1^st, 1.50 primary quotas)

Councillor Heather Chong (elected 3^rd, 1.10 primary quotas)

Councillor Wendy Kennedy (elected 5^th, 0.82 primary quotas)

Councillor Beth Warren (elected 6^th, 0.85 primary quotas)

Councillor Bree Hunter (elected 7^th, 0.66 primary quotas)

Councillor Jade Darko (elected 8^th, 0.64 primary quotas)

Councillor Daniel Hulme (elected 9^th, 0.50 primary quotas)

Councillor Richard James (elected 10^th, 0.46 primary quotas)

Councillor James Walker (elected 11^th, 0.36 primary quotas)

Councillor Emma Goyne (elected 12^th, 0.44 primary quotas)

Councillor Brendan Blomeley, Mayor (elected 2^nd, 1.49 primary quotas)

Alternative Approval¹⁸