These are the public questions asked by Councillor Ken Liu, for the Council public meeting of 2013.03.13, with answers by Council CEO Andrew Boardman.
Note that the CEO, in the Council’s published minutes, censored out the necessary and interesting preamble by Cr Liu. This administrative meddling with the job of elected members is getting very unpleasant; it is contempt for the elected councillors and for the electorate, and does not respect the rules of democracy.
The Council minutes being made deliberately incomplete, you can find the complete on www.KIpolis.net
For further information, see also
Penneshaw threatened by proposed sewage dam — Knight, Shirley, 2013.03.03
— The webmaster
**********************
Since the adoption of the Penneshaw CWMS design plans in June last year (some 9 months ago), I have regularly received enquiries from the people who are affected by the proposal. I am embarrassed by not being able to answer their questions as the plans are classified as confidential. The most common questions are related to:
- When will the plans be released to the public for comment?
- Why couldn’t we see the plans while others could?
- Where is the new location of the treatment plant and are we affected by the dam?
In light of recent earthquakes near Kangaroo Island reported on the local press (http://www.theislanderonline.com.au/story/1316055/ki-earthquake-biggest-in-50-years/?cs=1525), I gave notice provided to me in Section 10(1) of Local Government (Procedures at Meetings) Regulations 2000, to ask the following questions raised with me at the March Council meeting.
Questions on Notice
March Meeting of Council (13/3/2013)
Re: Design Plans for Penneshaw CWMS
Question 1:
Given Penneshaw is prone to earthquakes, what are the provisions made or the ‘seismic design criteria’ adopted in the designs for the Revised Plans approved by Council in June 2012 for the LGA subsidy funding, to ensure that the CWMS structures are able to survive a rare and severe earthquake and would not collapse endangering the lives and well-being of the Penneshaw community?
Answer
This will be part of the risk assessment process associated with the design submission for DAC approval and if the risk profile indicates that this is necessary then the design will reflect this appropriately.
Question 2:
Could the CEO provide a definite date for the release of the design plans for public viewing, given that some of the community members have already seen the plans when the majority of those affected by the Scheme have still been kept in the dark about the changes made to the proposal?
Answer
No, the CEO is completely dependent on the LGA CWMS Managers completing their assessments and calculations and cannot predict when these may be completed at this time. It is not prudent for the plans to be put before Council for approval for Consultation until such time as the LGA Subsidy is calculated and a formal indication of support has been attained.
Question 3:
When was the decision made to keep the preferred design plans for the Penneshaw CWMS in-confidence to prevent the public from viewing the proposal? Please give the date of the Council meeting at which the decision was made and the resolution passed by the Council.
Answer
There has been no decision put to Council for consideration that would keep the preferred design plans confidential.
The original recommendation carried in the 13 June 2012 Council meeting reads:
Item No 15.4
Report Title
Penneshaw CWMS
Moved Cr Boxall Seconded Cr Willson
That Council approve the workshopped design of a gravity / pressure hybrid wastewater collection network together with the centralised wastewater treatment plant and storage lagoon option (detailed within sheets C08 and C11 supplied at the workshop).
The approval is for the purposes of :
1. Capital costs confirmation by Wallbridge & Gilbert for submission to the LGA CWMS Management Committee
2. The LGA CWMS Management Committee will confirm design suitability and whole of life cost and revenue projections and determine the likely subsidy available for the proposed scheme.
3. The funding model is then returned to Council for consideration.
CARRIED.
At the July Meeting the following motion was put and lost
Item No 10.6
Report Title
Update on Penneshaw CWMS Cost and Subsidy Calculations
Moved Cr Denholm Seconded Cr Liu
That Council place on display the Penneshaw CWMS preliminary design, with the drawings clearly endorsed, subject to continuing assessment and possible amendment forthwith.
LOST. 3 For 3 Against on casting vote by the Mayor.
Cr Walkom called a division:
For – Crs Walkom, Liu & Denholm.
Against – Crs Willson, Boxall, & Clements.
Question 4:
On what grounds under the provisions of Section 90(2) of the Local Government Act 1999, did Council make its order to exclude the public from attendance at the meeting when these design plans were considered?
Answer
As the Councillor would be aware (being an attendee), the CWMS Project was discussed at a specific Workshop / Informal Gathering held in May 2012. By Council resolution such Workshops / Informal Gatherings are not public meetings but informal gatherings for information dissemination and discussion as is permitted under the Local Government Act 1999. This is a matter that has been clarified many times in the past and has been commented on by the Ombudsman as entirely appropriate and in keeping with the Act.
Question 5:
Did Council formally resolve to keep the Penneshaw CWMS design plans confidential, pursuant to Section 91(7)(b) of the Act? If Council did, when will this resolution to keep these design plans in-confidence cease? Please give the date of the Council meeting at which the decision was made and state the resolution passed by the Council.
Answer
No.
END of QoN by Cr Liu
Cr Ken Liu
Kangaroo Island Council
P O Box 80, KINGSCOTE SA 5223
Ph: (08) 8553 2823 Mobile: 0428 322 005
Email: ken.liu@bigpond.com
Interest editorialising in the preamble to this article – smacks of precisely the same thing that you accuse Council of…
Have you ever noticed the sporting colours of Dudley United? To the uninitiated, the green and gold colour might just be the colours of Penneshaw in summer – bright green stripes of sewerage enriched grass streaming down to the ocean amidst the golden yellow cured grass.
If we wait long enough maybe the water will get polluted enough to discourage both fur-seals AND penguins and everyone will be happy! I said when I was on Council all those years ago words to the effect that “enough is enough – it is time for a few loud, self-interested voices to pull their heads in and we can get on with the job of putting the poo in the pipes”. Perhaps then the oval can be watered with the cleaned up recycled water rather than the incredibly expensive de-sal water.
Craig Wickham where have you been for the last so many years – maybe somewhere off this planet? Have you not heard the story of the worm and its micro-organism friends? The town of Penneshaw can have them eat all the poo we can provide. NO NEED FOR POO PONDS OR PIPES FOR POO IN THE CENTRE OF TOWN. No risk of a dam overflowing onto the dwellings and people or into the sea. It can all be done on the property at almost no cost to the Council and no need for residents to pay at least $600 year. See what you have been missing! Poor you!
Come to Penneshaw to see how green our garden can be at the end of summer and the oval can also be green; all because of a clean way of doing things. Additionally you will find the many people against the folly of this council are NOT the self-interested kind. They are from all walks of life including pensioners, small business people and speaking for the writer giving up their retirement time to make sure the Council spends our money wisely and looks to get us out of the ever ending debt. NOT SPLASHING OUT ON MILLIONS OF DOLLARS FOR 100 YEARS OLD SMELLY TECHNOLOGY TO RIP UP OUR BEAUTIFUL TOWN.