LOCAL man Steve Chapman wanted to get something off his chest at Tuesday's public inquiry into the proposed Goulburn Mulwaree/part Palerang merger.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
Frustrated with the process and the government's decision not to release a KPMG report financially justifying amalgamations, Mr Chapman couldn't resist an analogy.
"This would be a perfect example of 'Yes, Minister' if it weren't so serious," he said, referring to the famous BBC television series.
"I can remember Humphrey saying to (Prime Minister) Hacker, 'You can be open and in government, but I strongly recommend you don't do both'."
Mr Chapman was one of 13 speakers at the Office of Local Government's public inquiry, exploring the suggested Goulburn Mulwaree/part Palerang merger.
Government-appointed delegate John Rayner presided over the two-hour session at the Goulburn Golf Club. A separate delegate, John Turner, this week hosted the Palerang/Queanbeyan merger proposal.
The majority of speakers opposed the plan, argued Goulburn Mulwaree should stand alone, rejected the splitting up of communities, like Araluen and Majors Creek, or proposed alternatives.
Goulburn Mulwaree Mayor Geoff Kettle and his Palerang counterpart Pete Harrison mounted a two-pronged assault on the plan.
Transparency and politics were also on Cr Kettle's mind in a broad-ranging address.
He repeated his council's claims that Queanbeyan was given the upper hand in shaping proposed local government boundaries in this area.
It comes as Greens MLC David Shoebridge accuses the State Government of withholding key reform documents and treating the process like a "political play thing". He is calling on Queanbeyan Council to release all documents related to reform. (See story, page 3.)
"We understand that the partitioning of Palerang Council in the Minister's proposal was drafted after consultation with Queanbeyan City Council," Cr Kettle told the inquiry.
"It is extremely disappointing that the State Government, after the strong support we have given them, did not consult with Goulburn Mulwaree at all.
"I am clearly of the opinion that the proposal heavily favours the proposed Queanbeyan-based Council at the expense of Goulburn. It has absolutely been designed on a Council solution, not a community solution."
He argued Queanbeyan significantly benefited, with all the growth and high rateable areas. Moreover, the council had determined boundaries that lacked "commonsense, let alone strong communities of interest".
Queanbeyan picked up more than half of Palerang and $7 million in general rates, while Goulburn Mulwaree received the remainder and acquired $1.95m in rates.
He argued that far from the change rendering Goulburn Mulwaree 'fit for the future', it would be of no benefit on financial, scale and capacity, community of interest and road connectivity grounds.
The mayor questioned where the purported $800,000 in savings came from when, according to calculations, his council would be left $1m short in salaries.
“It is clearly evident that the Goulburn based Council will be given all of the staff employed by the former Tallaganda Council but less than half of the rateable area of that former Council. Is that Fit for the Future?” Cr Kettle asked.
He called for an amendment of Section 218C of the NSW Local Government Act, which protected council staff in towns with populations of less than 5000, for life. This would ensure equity and that workers were treated in a “non-discriminatory way,” he said.
Cr Kettle claimed the proposal generally would involve “significant cross subsidisation for basic operations” in the new area, which the State’s merger incentive payment would easily soak up.
The mayor argued Goulburn Mulwaree was fit to stand alone but the Minister’s boundary change would create a generational burden.
But if the State recommended reform, he suggested a minor boundary change, taking in a section of Lake George and South Currawang. It would add 600 people and a rateable income of $755,500.
A second, larger option was to bring in areas of the old Tallaganda Shire and Mulwaree Shires that wen to to Palerang in the 2004 amalgamations. It would add 3500 to the population and $3.2m in rates.
“In conclusion we state clearly the Minister’s proposal is flawed, unfair, unreasonable and will not create a Fit for the Future Council,” Cr Kettle said.
“We request that you recommend to the Minister (it) is rejected and that Goulburn Mulwaree remains as a stand alone local government entity.”
On Wednesday, Cr Kettle also addressed the Braidwood hearing, exploring the same merger proposal.
Yesterday he was back in Braidwood, speaking at the proposed Palerang/Queanbeyan amalgamation inquiry.
Today he and Mr Bennett will meet with their counterparts from Queanbeyan and Palerang in Queanbeyan.
The delegates will hand their reports to the Minister and Boundaries Commission by March 31 for a decision. New councils are due to be gazetted by June 30.