Minutes of the Ordinary Meeting of the Greater Geelong City Council held at the Council Conference and Reception Centre in City Hall, 57 Little Malop Street, Geelong on 29 January 2019, commencing at 7:00pm.
Henry Szuka
Jack Karpinski
Maria Krywult
Halina Zychla
Krystyna Matczak
Lois Newman
Tom Debar
Councillors:
B Harwood (Mayor)
A Aitken
S Asher
E Kontelj
S Mansfield
J Mason
P Murnane
P Murrihy
T Sullivan
M Cutter ( Chief Executive Officer)
B Luxford (Director Investment and Attraction)
G Smith (Director Planning and Development)
G Wilson-Browne (Director City Services)
M Dugina (Director Finance & Strategy)
R Stevens (Acting Director Community Life)
L Barton (Acting Executive Manager People and Organisation Development)
R Leonard (Executive Manager Legal Services & Governance)
The Mayor declared the meeting open at 7:00pm.
Council acknowledged Wadawurrung Traditional Owners of this land and all Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander People who are part of the Greater Geelong community today.
Nil.
Councillor Asher moved, Councillor Nelson seconded –
That Leave of Absence be granted to Councillor Kontelj from 22 February to 4 March 2019, inclusive.
Carried.
Councillor Nelson moved, Councillor Kontelj seconded –
That Leave of Absence be granted to Councillor Asher for 12 February 2019.
Carried.
Councillor Sullivan moved, Councillor Kontelj seconded -
That the Minutes of the Ordinary Meeting held on 11 December 2018 be confirmed.
Carried.
Councillor Harwood declared a Conflict of Interest by Close Association in Agenda Item 4 – Tender T1900015 – Provision of Grinding and Decontamination Services in that he is a friend and former business partner with one of the Directors.
Electronic Gaming Machines Application – Polish Community Association:
The Mayor provided the following address to the Gallery:
Before we take questions, I understand there is a lot of community interest in the Polish Community Association’s Electronic Gaming Machines Application on tonight’s agenda and many question have come in for public question time. Firstly, I’d like to thank you for coming in to address the Council tonight and express your opinion.
City officers have put a recommendation before Council this evening and Councillors will debate the matter. This means we will be unable to answer specific questions raised as we cannot pre-empt a decision. I still welcome you to ask your question and we will take it as a submission in our decision-making process.
Henry Szuka:
Our Club's proposal involves spending a total of $4.7 million. This will include:
A major upgrade of our sporting change rooms;
An upgrade the hospitality areas of our Club;
Provision of an all - weather synthetic soccer pitch for community use;
Installation of regulation sporting field lighting.
All this will be provided at NO COST to the ratepayers, now or in the future.
Furthermore, the cap set 12 months ago on the number of gaming machines in the Geelong area for the next 20 years was 1,416. Currently in operation there are only 1,385 gaming machines.
Why is the Council opposing our application and potentially depriving the community, and over 80 soccer kids, of sporting and other facilities our Club will be able to offer especially when:
Evidence shows that increase in number of gaming machine does not increase the incidence problem gambling. Just as limiting the number of alcohol retail outlets won’t decrease alcohol abuse in our community;
The 43 Gaming machines will be installed in three tranches over a period of five years, during which time the population of Geelong will increase.
Jack Karpinski
State Government Gaming Taxes are structured in such a way that having MORE machines at a venue results in less gaming tax. This means the Polish Community Association’s proposal will be funded mainly from this tax advantage (around $400,000 a year) and from bank borrowings.
The additional licences we have acquired are from the Geelong area and in no way increase the number of gaming machines in Geelong. Furthermore, there is no evidence that increasing the number of gaming machines at a venue, will increase problem gambling at the venue. On the other hand, if our proposal is unsuccessful, then we won't receive this tax advantage and therefore we won’t qualify for bank loans. Our club will be forced to sell the land where the current sub - standard sports fields are located, and we will have to forego our dream of an all - year - round community sports field.
Given the tangible, certain and overwhelming benefits our proposal will bring to the community the minute risk of any disadvantage and the likelihood of the VCGLR agreeing that the benefits of our proposal grossly outweigh the disadvantages (as was in the case with the Geelong RSL), why should Council spend money fighting our proposal?
Maria Krywult
The Polish Club follows best - practice in the Responsible Service of Gaming. By law, the Club also must ensure that all its surpluses are reinvested into preserving our parents' hard - earned legacy at White Eagle House and to continue to provide sporting facilities and general access to members of our broader community.
If we fail in our application, the 43 Gaming Entitlements will most likely be lost from the Geelong community clubs’ pool of entitlements and go to profit - driven, privately owned pubs, whose owners rarely live in the Geelong area. Furthermore, it is generally acknowledged that pubs present a higher risk of problem gambling than community clubs.
Why then would Council support the risk of this outcome by opposing our application?
Halina Zychla
All recent data shows no nexus between increases in gaming machine numbers and gaming expenditure or problem gambling. Specifically in Geelong, the closure of the GFC's 100 machine venue DID NOT result in a drop in gaming revenue, instead the gaming revenue was spread amongst other venues. There is no evidence that our application will result in any identifiable increase in problem gambling. It therefore appears that some Councillors seem to have a political agenda against gaming machines.
Is this “political” agenda sufficient reason for Council to potentially sacrifice the current sporting facilities and forego the $4.7 million upgrade to the sporting fields and the hospitality venue, all of which will add to the economic activity in the Geelong area?
Krystyna Matczak
We understand that all forms of gambling can be detrimental to some individuals and to the community but studies show that alcohol abuse is by far a greater problem. You only have to drive through Moorabool St around midnight on a Saturday to sadly witness the number of inebriated young people dragging themselves or being dragged by friends along the street.
Why are Responsible Service of Alcohol Regulations not enforced at these venues as they are in community clubs?
Why is the Council issuing building permits for more and more bottle shops? We now have bottle shops attached to pubs, bottle shops attached to every supermarket and if there are no supermarkets or pubs on a main street, then we find free - standing bottle shops.
Has the Council set limits on the number of alcohol selling outlets? Or does it only set limits on pokies outlets and then only focusing on community clubs?
The Mayor thanked the Polish Community for their questions and indicated the questions would be addressed during debate of the item.
Questions were submitted to Council prior to the meeting from Rusty; Simon Mims; Cesar Escobido and Peter Cage. As they were not present at the meeting a written response will be forwarded.
Lois Newman outlined her concerns at the application and the harm that an increase of seventeen machines will have on our communities and the families within it. As the Council documents state, the current density of machines in the area surrounding the venue is currently 20 machines per 10,000 adults, compared to the average of 65 in the rest of the City. I feel this number, in an area of disadvantage, is already too high and an increase will have serious impacts on the wellbeing of the community.
What does the Council intend to do regarding this application, and what policies does the Council have in place to mitigate the harms of poker machines in our community?
The Mayor responded the questions will be addressed during debate of the item.
Tom Debar asked:
The social damage caused by poker machines is well researched and documented as I am sure you are all very aware.
The application from the Polish Community Association which you are considering endorsing your previous non-support flagrantly breaches the spirit and most of the provisions of your Electronic Gaming Policy and your staff recommendation fully recognises this situation .
Justifications submitted by the Association are unsupported and very much in the usual pie in the sky mode most of such applications rely on.
Of course the gaming lobby has most state governments in their pocket due to the rivers of gold they contribute and the media clout they can deliver at election time. The last Tasmanian poll was a prime example.
Local government remains the last bastion against such powerful and damaging players and spending money to protect your constituents in the courts I part of your remit.
I am sure the recommendation will be supported by all informed and ethical Councillors.
The Mayor thanked Mr Debar for his questions which would be discussed during debate of the item.
Councillor Grzybek presented a petition in relation to the North East Lara Flooding Works and Single Story Rural Outlook. The residents are requesting Council’s assistance in relation to the overland flooding issue in the Kyema Drive and North of McClelland Avenue area be given priority for completion within the next 12-18 months. Also to assist in limiting to single storey a development application submitted for a two storey dwelling at the rear of 63 McClelland Avenue, which is highly undesirable to the local community.
Contents | Next Page: Section B – Reports
