01 September 2015

Brown Hill Creek vote 14th Sept

Council will meet on the 14th September to debate the possible outcomes from the recent consultation. If you have read the consultant's report you may have ascertained that after all the consultation and reports that Council really has no more guidance than it did two years ago. The consultation tells us that slightly more creek owners prefer a dam option than not. This result is consistent with creek owners in Mitcham. While there were hundreds of others that sent in a response, most favouring a no dam option, the consultation was flawed in that it was only those with a vested interest who were likely to make a response. It must be remembered this was not a vote or poll and each group and what they have said should be considered separately and for what they are worth.
For me, I need to go back to the facts and vote on what I believe is the best solution for  Unley and the solution that Unley people are telling me they want.
All five Councils will be presented with a motion that is the same, from what I can tell it will recommend Option D, the no dam option. This does not mean that Unley has to even debate this motion if it would prefer an alternate. What is certain is that the matter will be hotly debated and make a very interesting  evening if you have time. The meeting starts at 7pm.


  1. Jennie, it is a pity that the Councils can't work together to find the best way to mitigate flooding in the catchment. The staff of the 5 Councils have determined and recommended that Option D is the best solution but Elected Members seem to be at odds with their CEOs recommendations.
    Because of this standoff by EMs who aren't thinking of the bigger picture, and only thinking of their patch, the Stormwater Managment Authority will decide for on the appropriate plan from them.

    It's a sad indication of the state of affairs of the local government sector at this time when the state has to step in and make a decision because Councils can't agree.

  2. It would be poor governance indeed if Councillors always agree with what the CEO wanted. What role would we have? Fortunately, we think for ourselves and our constituents (and we usually know them better). There will be plenty of time for all Councils to agree on this one, they just have to think the big picture and not for themselves.

  3. Jennie, sorry but I don't think you are correct. Poor governance has nothing to do with whether you agree with the CEO or not. Poor governance in the Council would be not adhering to the rules, or the law, disregarding procedures etc.

    Elected Members employ the CEO and ask for his/her advice and leadership. They seek advice and information from their staff and outside advisers which he/she then passes on to Elected Members. If you disregard that advice you should have a sound and knowledgeable argument to put to back up your decision or the decision can be challenged.

    The community relies on the Council making the best decision. An Elected Member relies on their CEO to give them his/her best advice.

  4. Surely, poor governance is both. Council often disregards the advice of staff for a number of reasons. I reiterate that it is our purpose, as elected members, to assess the advice and then make an informed decision. Usually, that decision, will agree with with staff recommendation, sometimes the recommendation will be tweaked and sometimes the advice will be overturned. Sometimes the advice is rejected by our community, think Goodwood Library, and we redirect our thinking and that of the staff.