Big Agenda in July.

With Council about to move into caretaker mode July will prove busy with two full councils meetings on the agenda.

We will have our usual end of month meeting on the 28th. This will be preceded whoever by one on the 14th.

At the 14th meeting we will review a number of things including the review of our CEO’s performance over the last year, and more importantly the renewal of our waste collection contract.

Home Owners must take responsibility

A startling fact was provided to a small group of home owners in Goodwood and surrounding suburbs at the wildlife preservation presentation at Goodwood Primary School on Thursday night.

That was the revelation that it is us, those who own property in the area known as the City of Unley, who are responsible for the loss of native fauna and flora. As the map below shows very little is owned or under the control of governments, whether Federal, State or Local. The remaining 61% is owned by you and me. And before you say it does not add up to 100, roads account for the other 23%.

The areas in pink on this map are you and me.

After the original settlement of Unley most of the blocks were built on only to around 30%. In recent times the larger blocks have been carved up and we are covering regularly 50%, 60% and even up to 70% with housing stock.

This invasion is long before the recent invasion by DPTI of the electrified rail corridor.

DPTI, to their credit, were a key stakeholder in the recent wildlife project along the corridor. Before the project started they listed the expertise of Zoologist James Smith (see previous Wildlife post) with their concerns about wildlife degradation.

Council has information for anyone who wishes to do their bit to help our local environment. Or ring DPTI on 1300 443 198

Teething Issues with new Committee Structure causes embararasment

City of Unley’s new Committee Structure, the ground breaking initiative of our CEO Peter Tsokas, has experienced its first teething problems.

All new systems will experience teething problems and our new committee structure is no exception. Public & Councillors alike were confused by recommendations put to Council by the re-badged UBED committee.
The Unley Business & Economic Development (UBED) comprises not only elected members and representatives of our various street trader associations but experts, selected to provide us valuable guidance in matters relevant to the committee.
This committee agreed at its last meeting that it felt it should provide input to council on two issues, including the local heritage DPA. It seems that their recommendations, which at the end of the day were in the form of no decision motions which were just requests to ensure certain factors were considered by council when deciding on the final DPA.
Council has delegated this function to one of its three major committees, the Development, Strategy & Policy Committee (DSP). This committee recently heard submissions from a number of residents, businesses and from FOCUS amongst others.
Cometh the problem!
UBED is a section 41 committee and can only report and make recommendations or suggestions to Council. That meant Council had to receive the motion (rather than UBED talk direct to DSP) and to pass this onto the DSP committee to include in their deliberations. Unwieldy perhaps but it could be, as far as I can make out, no other way.
So UBED pass a motion and Council had to receive it and form their own motion to pass it onto DSP.
In doing it this way councillors and FOCUS both felt that UBED was circumventing DSP and that in accepting the motion the Local Heritage DPA Council would be usurping the DSP and ignoring the submissions of those who represented to the DSP.
On behalf of Council and the UBED committee I apologise for this misunderstanding.
As a member of both Committees I can assure everyone that all UBED was doing was making sure economic issues it identified are considered. I can also assure that the DSP will take on all points raised before it.
And as member of Council I can assure everyone that Council has the final say. And when I mean final say I mean the final say of what goes to the Minister for Planning, John Rau.
PS    We will be looking at the Local Government Act to see if there is another way that this communication can occur in future without raising undue concerns for whomever.

A Name Change for Goodwood South

On Tuesday night Council will decide what preferred options we wish to promote under the Representation Review we must conduct every 8 years or so.

Once we have done this (as I have previously reported) we will go out again to the public for their feedback on the preferred model.
Only two possible changes are to be debated and they are:
1                     A reduction of ward from 5 to 6 and therefore the reduction of elected members from 12 to 10, plus the Mayor. The debate on this one will be interesting.
2                     A name change for one ward, our ward … Goodwood South.
It is being proposed to change the name to “Clarence Park”, one of the suburbs of Goodwood South. All other wards currently reflect one of their suburbs, leaving Goodwood South the odd man out.
The other suburbs of Goodwood South are Black Forest, and part Millswood (west of Goodwood Road).
Jennie & I will be interested to know what you think of this proposal assuming it gets the green light on Tuesday.more »