The following questions were addressed to the above meeting. Some questions were adequately responded to at the meeting, however others required a more detailed response in writing.
This document includes both verbal and written responses. In this instance, no written responses were provided as issues were adequately addressed at the meeting.
Mr Tsorotes asked the following questions of Cr Farrell:
In May you retweeted an offensive and racist comment directed towards me where I referred to as “A Greek Property Parasite”. Why Cr Farrell did you feel this was appropriate in your position?
Cr Farrell took the question on notice.
When Georgia Capper commented on this you clearly back tracked saying “love the Greeks” “Property parasites, not so much”. Please elaborate what you define as a property parasite?
Cr Farrell took the question on notice.
Why Cr Farrell have you not apologised to me for this or made any effort?
Cr Farrell responded she did not believe that she did anything wrong.
The following question was directed at Cr Lyons and Mr Frost:
I made a written complaint on the matter and was astounded to learn that there is no social media code of conduct governing the behaviour of Councillors aside from the Mayor, even those such as Cr Farrell are using their accounts for the purpose of their roles as civic leader. Why is there no such policy in place, given that many large organisations have criteria which can see employees terminated for behaviour on their own personal accounts if it reflects negatively on the business?
The Mayor took the question on notice.
A subsequent written response was provided by the Manager Administration and Governance in the following terms: |
Council’s response to the questions you tabled at our last Ordinary Council Meeting is as follows.
In respect to questions 1 and 2, Council is unable to provide a formal response as this is a personal matter between you and Jan Farrell. The only official Councillor Twitter account and Facebook page is that of the Mayor. Jan Farrell’s social media accounts are her own personal accounts, accordingly any comments made via these sites, represent personal views and not that of Council.
In relation to question 3 Council does have a Social Media Policy, a copy of which is attached. As highlighted on page 3 of 7, “personal media accounts must not be used to conduct City of Greater Geelong business.” Page 4 of 7 confirms the only official Councillor Twitter account and Facebook page is that of the Mayor.
Barton van Laar, President Bike Safe asked the following questions:
Could any unallocated funds in this year Budget mid August review be used to fund:
Design works for cycling infrastructure as identified in the PBN Priority Works List (Items 1,2,3,4 and 26) - $150,000;
Capital Works (Items 4, 5, 14) - $410,000;
Can any of the CBD related works be funded in the existing CAA Budget – specifically (Items 3, 5b, 7, 8, and 20);
Can Council allocate a dedicated engineer to facilitate the PBN in design, planning and submissions, reviewing existing and future works and budgets?
The Mayor took the questions on notice.
Cr Richards responded to the third operations question – planning money:
Barwon to Bay Project is in this year’s budget. Other projects not in this year’s budget include:
Boundary Road to Malop Street $25,000, Northern Suburbs Cycling Link $30,000, Southern Moorabool Street Bridge Link $30,000, Armstrong Park Local Link $50,000 -total $135,000.
These will be discussed over the next two weeks.
Barwon to Bay is going to cost $3M, Boundary Road to Malop Street, $187,000, Northern suburbs Cycling Link $400,000, Southern Moorabool Street Bridge Link $200,000 – any project over $500,000 will be hard to fund from this year’s budget.
Cr Harwood added Home for Cycling is being developed on the Geelong Criterium Circuit (Belmont) which will house a huge education department for young riders and much needed facilities for cycling events, club competition and training.
A subsequent written response was provided by the General Manager City Services in the following terms: |
Thank you for your question regarding funding of new cycling infrastructure during Public Question Time at the Ordinary Council Meeting on the 8 July 2014.
The budget allocation for 2014/15 has been allocated for the construction of specific projects within each Capital Works Program. Engineering Services does have an annual design budget for design of infrastructure works in future years. We have allocated some of these funds towards the Eastern Park cycling infrastructure project.
As you may be aware, opportunities for grant funding are made available to municipalities from time to time, for example the recent Local Infrastructure Fund via the TAC. The City will be applying for this grant.
In regard to funding works within Central Geelong this matter will be reviewed by the Central Geelong Task force and relevant transport committee.
I wish to advise that the contact in Engineering Services for cycling related matters is Mr Chris Marston, Senior Infrastructure Engineer. Chris is a member of Council’s Cycling working group which consists of members of staff from across Council including Traffic Management, Design, Recreation and Infrastructure. Chris may be contacted via email [email protected] or ph 5272 4644.
Should you have further queries regarding this letter please contact Ms Vicki Shelton, Manager Engineering Services on 5272 4348.
Lyn Mason directed her questions to Cr Richards:
Firstly, you commented at the Council Meeting in May that the question regarding fracking would be addressed in the Environmental Management Strategy document when it comes back to Council in June/July. As there is only one more scheduled Council meeting in July, can you please let me know when we should expect the EMS document to be available?
Can you advise the process that will be adopted to determine Council’s position on coal seam gas mining in Geelong?
Can you advise the timeframe of Council’s discussions on this topic and the process for public questions and input?
Cr Richards responded he has an open mind as Council is governed by evidence and legislation. I must have an open mind to questions before entering the Chamber.
Councillors research the issue and we talk about it at briefings. There is a high degree of technical difficulty, but each Councillor comes to their own view through research and consultation within their community.
Regarding the EMS – Council officers advise the report is unlikely to be presented until August. During discussion today, officers have agreed to separate fracking as an individual report to Council in August.
Gary Van Driel added that in relation to the EMS – the document has been out for public comment and significant feedback was received on the document. The Strategy will come back to Council in August. Cr Richards was correct regarding fracking, which will now be identified as a current issue and officers will prepare a report and recommendation for Council to consider.
A subsequent written response was provided by the General Manager City Services in the following terms: |
I refer to the matter raised by you at Council Question Time on Tuesday 8th July 2014 regarding the draft Environment Management Strategy and fracking.
Council is currently in the process of developing an Environment Management Strategy which will outline Councils response to a multitude of environmental and sustainability issues. It will commit Council to an extensive range of actions which will improve the regions environment, including efforts to improve air and water quality, preserving and protecting biodiversity, reducing energy use and engaging community groups to assist Council in these activities.
Council has undertaken extensive community consultation in the development of the Strategy and received comments on a broad variety of issues. A number of comments were received in relation to fracking, otherwise known as unconventional gas extraction.
Council recognises that this is an important issue and will shortly invite public submissions regarding the issue of gas fracking for a period of one month and that the submission report be presented to council as part of the Environmental Management Strategy report, which is intended to be presented in either September or October 2014.
Judith Brooks asked when Council will be updating the 2010 Barwon Heads Traffic Study?
Gary Van Driel took the question on notice.
A subsequent written response was provided by the General Manager City Services in the following terms: |
In response to your question at the Council Meeting of 8th July 2014.
The previous Barwon Heads Traffic Study was completed in 2010. It is proposed that a study review and update will be undertaken in 2015/16, in the first part of the financial year.
This will provide opportunity for community feedback on issues relating to traffic, pedestrians, cycling and public transport.
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me on 5272 4317
Colin Wallace asked:
Mr Mayor, did you know that Cr Andy Richards was the portfolio holder for Infrastructure during the time, according to a table devised by Council, most and perhaps all of the post-development infrastructure works paid for out of the $100,000 handed to Council by Ropeworks developers Woolworths, that Cr Richards was the portfolio holder for Infrastructure when the first, second, third, fourth, fifth, sixth and seventh of the half-yearly reports Council was to provide to Woolworths or the subsequent owner in accordance with the Ropeworks Section 173 Agreement were due but which were never even produced and that Cr Richards was the portfolio holder for Infrastructure during the entire period of half-yearly reports being due when Woolworths was the owner?
The Mayor reiterated, as previously advised, Council will no longer respond to questions in relation to Ropeworks or matters that are either trivial or repetitive in nature.
Dennis More asked his questions in relation to Agenda Item 1 - Amendment C288 – Adventure Park, Bellarine Highway, Wallington:
Re Appendix 3 – Page 7 – 3rd paragraph:
Is this going to be a consistent approach to other proposed developments?
Peter Bettess responded that it is a consistent approach to land in a comprehensive development zone.
A subsequent written response was provided by the General Manager Planning and Tourism in the following terms: |
I refer to the matter raised by you at Council Question Time on Tuesday 8th July 2014 regarding Amendment C288 – Adventure Park, Bellarine Highway, Wallington.
As explained on the night, the approach to proposed developments as outlined in Appendix 3, page 7, third paragraph, will be consistent with land in a comprehensive development zone.
Should you required further information or wish to discuss the issue further please contact me directly on 5272 4983.
Georg Daglas asked if Council agrees that the Alcoa Pier Point, Point Henry is the most cost effective option to building Victoria’s second container wharf unloading facility given that the majority of infrastructure required is already existing?
Cr Ansett responded he viewed it as more of a State Government issue made between Labor and Liberal. It’s not something I can answer. Cr Ansett indicated he would be happy to provide a written response.
A subsequent written response was provided by the General Manager Planning and Tourism in the following terms: |
I am replying to your question asked at the above Council meeting.
It is agreed that the Alcoa Pier is an important facility that can play a key role in the future development of Geelong Port. The Pier may not be the best location for a container terminal. Container ports require large land side areas for the handling of containers and good rail and road access. The current interstate rail and road connections are to the north and west of Geelong. Point Henry would require new road and rail connections either by crossing the Bay or to the south of the urban area to connect to these interstate links. This additional infrastructure would need to be factored into the cost to determine whether Point Henry is indeed the most cost effective option for a container facility.
Thank you for your interest in this issue. The Council will continue to work with the State Government which has appointed a taskforce to review the future use of Alcoa and Ford sites, and with the Port of Geelong to ensure that the potential of the Port is realised
