STOP
PRESS
Fallen—or
Pushed?
Paul Crewe, Executive Manager,
Infrastructure and Development Services, has left the Shire’s employ after
filling the position for not much more than a year.
His departure seems to have been unusually
abrupt.
31
October 2017
MORE
BREAKING NEWS…
David Wallace has been re-elected to the
position of Shire President.
The new Deputy Shire President is Kevin
Trent.
Congratulations to both.
At their first meeting yesterday, councillors elected David Wallace unopposed. The deputy's position was contested by Kevin and Denese Smythe, with Kevin winning by 4 votes to 3. The vote was by secret ballot, i.e. according to the rules, which suggests that previous elections for the position that were decided by a show of hands were very likely invalid.
(Regarding the conduct of such elections, see Schedule
2.3 of the Local Government Act 1995.)
So I've no idea who voted for whom.
25
October 2017
An
afterthought (30 October 2017): As mentioned above, Kevin Trent won the
deputy president's position by 4 votes to 3. The council consists of 4 women
(Ferro, Heaton, Saint and Smythe) and 3 men. Assuming that the men all voted
the same way (which might not be the case) it must follow that one of the women
voted for Kevin.
It’s possible (though highly unlikely) that
one of the men voted for Denese, in which case two of the women would have voted
for Kevin. Of course there are
other conceivable permutations, but I think they lie beyond the bounds of
probability and need not trouble us.
Because the election was by secret ballot,
we'll almost certainly never know which woman (or women) voted for 'one of the
boys'. I have a hunch, based on information
from a reputable source, but I don’t intend to share it. I wouldn’t want to embarrass the lady
in question.
BREAKING
NEWS…
Results
of the Shire election
Candidate Votes
David Wallace 562 (Elected)
Kevin Trent 375 (Elected)
Denis Warnick 349 (Elected)
Trevor Randell 247
Sharon MacDonald 203
David Taylor 133
Tricia Walters 112
Congratulations to the successful
candidates, commiserations to the others.
And thanks to all candidates for entering
the fray and to all those who took the trouble to vote in this important
election.
22 October 2017
BREAKING NEWS…
Proposed Allawuna landfill
DWER received 150
submissions.
Some were signed by
more than one person. One
submission contained around 100 signatures. Each signature will count as a
separate submission.
The final number of submissions,
along with a summary of them, will be attached to the report of the Minister’s
decision.
Well done, the people
of York.
19 October 2017
So,
how did the meeting go?
Six of the seven candidates turned up to
face an attentive audience of an estimated 45 to 50 electors. The absent candidate was Cr Trevor
Randell, who submitted an apology.
I think most of us were sadly disappointed
that Cr Randell had pressing commitments elsewhere. I for one would like to have asked him if he has changed his
mind about a rubbish-led recovery for York, now that his friends are no longer likely
to be involved in it.
The audience included three sitting
councillors, Heather Saint, Pam Heaton and Jane Ferro.
The meeting began with former shire
president Pat Hooper, one of the principal architects of York’s current
financial misfortunes, launching into an impassioned monologue in defence of
his monumental legacy, the YRCC.
This had very little to do with the
declared purpose of the meeting, but Keith Schekkerman as chairman generously allowed Pat to orate unchecked for what seemed like an eternity but was probably
less than five minutes.
In passing, Pat made joking reference to
somebody having christened the centre the Taj Mahal. This was of course inaccurate. The name actually given was Splurj Mahal, a play on the
English word ‘splurge’, meaning to spend extravagantly, while mahal is a Persian word of Arabic origin
that means ‘palace’ or ‘mansion’.
Tourists shopping in Bali will probably
have encountered the related Malay/Indonesian word mahal (‘dear, costly’), perhaps in the phrase terlalu mahal, ‘too expensive’.
Pat would have had no reason to know any of
that, so I’m happy to pardon his mistake.
Presentations
Responding to an opening question from the
chairman, every candidate affirmed opposition to the proposed siting of a
landfill at Allawuna. That was excellent
news for all of us.
On the whole, candidates in their
presentations added little to what they had told us in their published election
material.
Kevin Trent,
who was first off the block, mentioned that he is a retired road planner with
experience in town planning. He alluded
to the need for improved footpaths and drainage in York.
Kevin expressed concern for the failing
bladders of the elderly, repeating his thoughtful desire to see a public convenience
installed in Avon Terrace, presumably so that that old fogies like me, when
taken short while shopping, aren’t compelled to engage in an undignified sprint
down to the toilets in Avon Park.
Next came David Taylor. I was in the front row directly facing
the candidates, so I was able to hear his every word, but others have told me
they had difficulty in hearing him because he wasn’t speaking loudly enough.
That’s a pity, because what he said,
especially about shire finances and auditing, was well worth hearing. Luckily, he has published the full text
of his presentation on the other blog.
I was particularly struck by David’s
advocacy of a system of advisory committees rather than the current feebler system
of ‘advisory groups’ to help Council in coming to important decisions, and by
the scope and depth of his interest in the auditing of shire finances.
If elected, he will call on the Shire to
explain why it won’t try to fix past financial mistakes other than by thrusting
its hands ever more deeply into ratepayers’ pockets.
Cr Heaton asked David whether, if elected,
he would continue writing for the other blog. He replied that he wouldn’t, because if he were elected,
there would be no need.
I think he was being unduly optimistic
about that, but if the need doesn’t go away, he will be welcome to contribute
to this one—at any rate, for so long as this blog remains in operation, which it
may not for very much longer.
Cr Tricia Walters was by any reckoning the star of the evening. She spoke clearly, rationally and
eloquently in favour of local government transparency, restraint in spending
and more open communication between government and the governed.
Trish argued for closer scrutiny by
councillors of the Shire’s budget proposals, an exercise, she said, in which
she had received no support or cooperation from her colleagues on Council.
Many in the audience might have been disturbed
to learn from her of the restrictions currently imposed on debate at council
meetings and when councillors meet among themselves to discuss agenda items. No less disturbing are those imposed on
councillors’ communication as individuals with the public.
By the way, someone has told me that it was
the public-spirited Cr Walters, not AVRA, who paid for the hire of the hall and
the tea, coffee and biscuits on offer.
If so, it would appear that AVRA has run out of money to fund such
events.
Sharon MacDonald followed Trish. She is
well known in York as our local postmistress. She referred to her considerable management experience,
describing herself as a ‘quiet achiever’.
Sharon made no election promises other than
to say that if elected, she would listen to the community and be ‘open and
accountable’ in performing her duties as a councillor.
Denis Warnick, a dark horse in this race, revealed that he has an honours degree
in environmental science from UWA.
He spoke well and presented his views cogently and concisely.
As a local livestock agent, Denis
presumably has close ties with the farming community. I had the
impression that Cr Wallace may have encouraged him to throw his hat in the
ring.
Denis spoke of promoting population growth
by developing tourism and agriculture and attracting young families to the
town.
He suggested that the Shire should take
greater advantage of the power of social media, ‘reduce red tape’ and ‘speed up processes’ to encourage such
development.
He said he would make no promise to support
a reduction in rates, which I took, perhaps wrongly, as an indication that he would
be unlikely to join Cr Walters in seeking out possible cuts in expenditure when
reviewing the annual budget.
Finally, Cr David Wallace took the
floor. He told us he was born in
York in 1968 into a long-established York family and runs the family farm. He has served on Council for the last
four years, for two of those years as shire president.
David said that a vote for him would be a
vote for good governance and stability on Council. He stressed that he is always available to meet with members
of the public to discuss Shire issues and affairs.
Questions
Before the meeting, I handed Keith
Schekkerman a printed copy of the questions I hoped to raise with the
candidates. They were virtually
identical with those displayed in my previous post.
I also placed a copy for each candidate on
the table at which they would sit.
Someone has written in a comment under my
previous post that Keith stopped me from speaking. That isn’t quite true.
What is true is that he manifested from
time to time a considerable reluctance to let me speak. That isn’t my opinion only. Other members of the audience
noticed it too, contrasting it with the indulgence he had displayed earlier towards
the redoubtable Pat Hooper, author of the notorious ‘minority report’.
Leaving aside that my questions were
carefully framed and based on statistical research, I had no special reason to be
thus indulged. So I’m not
complaining, merely reporting an observation.
However, I did get to ask my first question
in full, the one asking why York’s rates are so high compared with those of
some metropolitan councils offering superior amenity, and what steps candidates
would take, if elected, to lessen the financial burden imposed on what the 2016
Census shows is a relatively impoverished community.
Some of the answers surprised me. Kevin, speaking from a wealth of local
government experience, claimed that one can’t compare different local
government areas.
In many respects, that may well be true,
but it seems reasonable to make such comparisons when rating disparities are
outrageously high compared with the levels of amenity and service provided.
David Taylor remarked that York councils have
made ‘massive financial mistakes’ for which ratepayers are picking up the
tab. I suspect he had in the
forefront of his mind costs associated with the YRCC, which for most of the
evening remained the white elephant in the room.
Trish reminded us that Landgate doesn’t set
the rates, as is often supposed.
It’s the Council that sets them in response to the exigencies of the
Shire’s budget.
Landgate only determines the Gross Rental
Value (GRV) of residential properties and the Unimproved Value (UV) of rural
land. What you pay as rates is a
percentage, determined by Council, of GRV or UV expressed as cents in the dollar.
It was Trish’s view that Council could
reduce rates by adopting a more critical approach to asset planning and cutting
back spending on services that lose money. Again, I suspect she may have had the YRCC principally in
mind.
David Wallace, who apparently had paid little
or no attention to anything Trish had said, did his best to throw the blame
back on Landgate, while Denis, having expressed agreement with the premise of
my question, remarked that the Shire provides ‘a good level of service’—which
wasn’t in dispute.
I didn’t get to ask my second question,
about employee costs, but was able to introduce its main elements as a point of
information.
Somebody else—I think it was Pat
Hooper—asked a question about the YRCC, which in Keith’s opinion (but not mine)
rendered my third question superfluous.
Pat said, without addressing the issue of competitive neutrality, that
the bar and kitchen should be run by the sporting clubs. (I agree, so long as the Shire ceases paying
for operating costs and subsidizing the cost of food and drink.)
Pat also suggested—either at this point or
during his earlier effusion—that the YRCC should function as a community
centre. Kevin agreed with him, on
condition that it must be managed correctly, adding that the Shire should hang
on to the bar and café.
I did manage to squeeze in two further
questions. The first was ‘What do
you regard as the most important aspects of a councillor’s role as defined in
the Local Government Act 1995, and why?’
Kevin replied that the most important
aspect was communicating with the public.
As I recall—I wasn’t taking notes at this point—other candidates agreed
with him, as do I.
Cr Wallace grumbled about the question,
saying that it would need to be googled.
I responded, somewhat severely, to the effect that candidates for
elected office ought to know what it is they are supposed, if elected, to do.
My final question was about the
desirability of a ward system in York, where councillors would each represent electors
in a particular district. I don’t
think there was much enthusiasm for the idea, but I still think it’s a good one
that would make councillors more accessible to the public and more likely to
communicate with the people they represent.
I’ll finish by congratulating Jenny
McColl of Oringa Park on her eloquent reminder of the threat posed to local
farms by the renewed prospect of a landfill at Allawuna. I hope she has shared her fears and
opinions with the Department of Water and Environmental Regulation.
