The News Headlines

Wednesday February 10, 2010

Letters to the Editor

Promaccom Fine Accommodation

From The Mirror, February 7, 1990

Downpour damage

FOSTER’S SES volunteers had several call-outs last Thursday evening after torrential rain fell across the district.
The worst damage was sustained by the canteen at South Gippsland Secondary College. The guttering and downpipes on the building, which includes the college gymnasium and music centre, could not cope with the heavy rain, which fell over only a short period. Water flooded into the building and the ceiling of the canteen collapsed.
“There was an inch and a half of water across the floor,” said Assistant Principal Russell Forte, who called the SES at about 8pm.
“We’d like to thank the SES for their prompt attention and the wonderful job they did.”
The SES spent a couple of hours cleaning up at the college, and the next morning experts were called into to assess the damage.
Local electricians Brian and Shaun Roffey checked out the electrics, fortunately finding no serious damage, though a few minor electrical appliances may need to be replaced. There was no significant stock loss, but the damage bill (to be met by the Education Department) is estimated at $20,000, with the damage to the ceiling being extensive and improvements to the plumbing deemed vital.
Surveying the scene on Friday, Gary Bullen of Leongatha builders Considine and Johnston was confident his firm could carry out the repairs over the weekend.
The request for assistance from the college came at the end of a busy day for Foster SES. Earlier in the day they were called to Coal Creek to assist police with a search.
Then, as the rain hit at about 5 in the afternoon, a call for assistance came through from a house which had been flooded at Sandy Point. Friends and neighbours, however, rallied round to mop up there, so the SES volunteers were able to go to Waratah Bay instead, where Camp Waratah was rapidly filling with water.
The downpipes of the main building of the school camp could not cope with the downpour, and the water poured down into the low-lying outbuilding, which houses laundry equipment. The SES spent some time pumping it out. Fortunately, no permanent damage was caused by the flooding.
Rainfall totals differed widely across the state – and even across the district. Melbourne received only about 11mm, and Leongatha and Venus Bay reputedly even less, while Foster’s downpour came to roughly 44mm and Sandy Point had upwards of 50mm by some estimates. In the north of the state some areas received much more. Mostly, the rain was welcomed, coming as it did after a long dry period.

Fresh delight at third consecutive win

FOR the third year running, Foster IGA Supermarket has won the Gippsland Regional award for top IGA Produce Department, which relates to the fresh fruit and vegetable display and sales at the shop.
Produce Department Manager Wendy Kelly and store proprietors Chris Bettles and Trudy McLauchlan are all massively chuffed with the win as the region stretches eastwards from Narre Warren through to the New South Wales border and includes 18 stores.
Chris explained that the judging is based on what the store does with the available space for produce, which evens out the competition somewhat between the larger and newer stores of the same IGA ‘tier’ in comparison with the resources available at stores such as Foster’s.
A shortlist of stores is recommended by the IGA Regional Business Manager to IGA Executives who then visit each finalist without giving any prior warning so they see the department as it presents normally to the public.
“A lot of this award is down to Wendy,” Chris acknowledged.
“She didn’t have previous experience in produce at the time I offered her extra hours working with produce orders to help me when we took on the business three years ago,” he said.
“But it was love at first sight for her with the produce department,” he recollected.
“She taught herself about ordering, presentation, bargaining with sellers at Footscray market, pricing and understanding our local market in terms of what people want to buy and what their prices limits are,” he credited warmly.
“She is passionate about her department, and very hardworking.
“When I ask her – as with all staff every six months – if she wants a change of area, Wendy always replies, ‘Are you kidding?’”
Chris laughed, “She has pushed me right out of produce ordering and even comes in on her holidays to make sure the orders are done right!
“It’s because of Wendy that Foster IGA is one of the top four in the State for the proportion of fruit and vegetable sales as a percentage of the store’s total sales, which is fabulous!” he added.
Another interesting ‘produce fact’ is that Foster IGA sells more pineapples than any other IGA supermarket in Victoria, and there are about 140 stores in the State.
The consistency of the winning run also reflects the passion and policies that Chris and Trudy have for their business.
They strongly believe that all of the food businesses in Foster contribute to making the town a valued destination for food shopping, and are generous in inclusively praising the attributes of Foster Foodworks, Aherns fruit and vegetable shop, the two butcher shops, Foster Seafoods and the bakeries in contributing to this market pull.
“Foster is picking up a reputation as food providore to the Prom,” Chris grinned.
“People are more likely to come if they can compare choices and prices, and often they might buy fresh produce both at our supermarket and at Aherns, for example,” Chris said.
“I see our competitors as being Leongatha and Wonthaggi, because if people are shopping in Foster, we can have a share in their business, but if the shopping dollar is leaking out of town, then we all have a problem.”
He said, “That’s why I would welcome a delicatessen business in Foster and why I appreciate having two supermarkets in town, because even though it might reduce our sales in one or two areas, it will bring more shoppers into Foster overall and we would probably make up on any losses with more sales in other sections.”
Other sales policy strengths underlined by the couple are:
· Making purchasing choices to reflect seasonal produce – getting into the seasonal changes early and heavily - which simultaneously means freshness and allows for cheaper prices.
· Preferring to buy at a low price and sell at a low price so that profit is made on sale quantities rather than on price mark up margins.
· Turning over large quantities of the perishable produce, which again assists with freshness as produce is only on the premises for a short time.
· Selling fresh produce that is appealing for reasons other than perfect looks – such as low price favoured over a ‘polished’ look or smaller than standard size apples that are handy for children’s appetite capacity.
· Offering fresh produce at prices discounted beyond market specials because people attracted to it are more likely to buy other goods in the store too; and
· Not raising prices to take advantage of peak visitor periods, because they want to retain the goodwill of their regular customers.
 

Kids’ Hub money announced

THE Federal Minister for Early Childhood Education, Child Care and Youth Kate Ellis and the State Minister for Children and Early Childhood Development Maxine Morland jointly announced funding of $2.55 million for the construction of Corner Inlet Children’s Hub at Foster last week.
To be located in Pioneer Street on Crown land between the scout hall and the tennis courts, the Hub will cater for up to 58 children and house a kindergarten, child care services (long day care, family day care and occasional care), playgroups, child/maternal health, parenting programs and allied health services in one building.
The Hub will also operate outreach services to Fish Creek, Toora and Welshpool.
The location is walking distance to Foster’s primary school and secondary college.
The Federal Government will contribute $1.85 million, the State Government will contribute $500,000 and South Gippsland Shire has tapped into its capital works program savings to contribute $200,000 to the project.
Council’s Projects Coordinator Shelley Fixter observed that the funding for the Hub, “Was a massive amount compared to that for other locations.”
A series of local people have been consistently lobbying for a child care facility for Corner Inlet for more than 15 years and the concept of some kind of child care facility has been discussed for 20 years.
The proposal took a big step closer to fruition when the Australian Labor Party promised funding if it won office at the last Federal election.
However achievement of the final result is due to the consistent hard work by a core of local individuals (a mix of parents and others who are passionate about children’s services) with support from Prom Coast Children’s Services, Foster Community House, South Gippsland Shire, Kilmany Uniting Care and local politicians.
FANTASTIC NEWS
Megan Vuillermin, a community representative who has been active in working for the Children’s Hub facility, received the announcement as “fantastic news”.
She was thrilled and surprised at the amount of money being granted, and said she hadn’t realised how much the Shire were prepared to put in.
Prom Coast Children’s Services (PCCS) Committee President Sita Morton was also “terribly excited” by the news, even though a consequence of the Children’s Hub means that PCCS will relinquish its kindergarten operation licence to the Hub operator as the organisation did not tender to be the Hub’s service provider.
Although none of the announced funding is for equipping the Hub, Coastal-Promontory Ward Councillor and former kindergarten teacher Mohya Davies believes that as construction takes place, arrangements for equipping the Hub will “fall into place.”
At last week’s Council meeting, Cr Davies advised that Kilmany Uniting Care, which is licensed to operate child care in the region, was the “preferred choice of service provider” for the Hub after a range of acceptable competitive tenders had been received via an open tender process.
(Ms Fixter has advised that operating licences have not yet been approved for the Hub).
“This partnership of all levels of government recognises the importance of the early years on shaping educational, social and emotional development throughout life, and a quality facility like the Hub can help overcome disadvantage experienced in the early years,” Cr Davies said.
“The funding for the Hub is driven by social equity not by client numbers, which shows recognition that rural children are entitled to the same experiences as Melbourne children.”
She continued, “It’s a new, one-stop-shop concept and I hope that the outreach capacity will increase the services currently available in Welshpool, Toora and Fish Creek.
“I firmly believe that it is not just Foster that is going to win out of this.”
Cr Davies also expressed hope that the Hub would be used as a pilot project providing an example to other areas about how to institute the federal Government’s announced ‘early years’ changes and associated staff training.
“These changes, such as the 15 hours per week of kindergarten time for every child, are the most significant in 30 years and Corner Inlet Hub will be in a position to take the best advantage of the changes and to be a leading example,” she stated.
While attributing praise to various elements for getting the project over the line, Cr Davies singled out Megan Vuillermin for particular thanks for “being a driving force on various committees” for the Hub project.
NEXT STEPS
The Reference Group that had been working on the feasibility evidence for the Hub project will wind up, probably at the end of February, however several of its members are expected to transfer to a steering committee/project working group that will include the Hub service provider and Council representatives.
This group will probably include a kinder cluster staff representative, Corner Inlet community representatives, a primary schools representative and other relevant persons able to commit to working on the project.
Ms Fixter advised that an open tender for the detailed design of the Hub has already closed and that several acceptable tenders are being evaluated.
Once the detailed design has been completed – probably by March/April, an open tender for the construction of the Hub will be put out, most likely around the start of May.
“The successful building tenderer will have to be able to start pretty well straight away because the grant requires the building to be completed by the end of December, which is a very tight time scale, however we couldn’t progress any further until we were sure we had funding,” Ms Fixter explained.
“I hope that the first sod will be turned on the site in June or July.”
Once the detailed building design is known and the Hub operator has been confirmed, Ms Fixter anticipates that the chosen service provider will host a public information session in Foster where interested people can have the design and operation explained by the architect and the service provider, and have the chance to ask questions and provide feedback.
In regards to the Council funding, Ms Fixter stressed that the contribution was from unspent savings in capital works and would therefore not be at the expense of any other project in the municipality.
Ms Vuillermin added that she hoped ways of encouraging community ownership of the Hub would be undertaken, such as naming the Hub, and involvement in aspects such as the garden or decoration of a wall.
 

Local author tells Catherine’s story

THERE’S a special local twist to a new children’s book about a special little girl.
‘Catherine’s Story’ is written by Genevieve Moore, who since 2004 has called Foster home.
“I am constantly surprised and excited by the number of creative and talented people living and working within the township and surrounding districts,” says Genevieve. “It must be something to do with the breathtakingly beautiful environment.”
Although she is too modest to admit it, Genevieve is one of those creative and talented people.
Some of you may have seen her in the delightful local production of ‘The Producers’ which graced the Foster stage in recent years.
She divides most of her time between making and selling goat milk soap, doing voiceover work, consulting in human resources and occasionally getting paid acting work – she appeared on the small screen in the UK this month in ‘Neighbours.’
‘Catherine’s Story,’ her first book, is a delight and deserves a wide audience.
Beautifully illustrated by acclaimed British graphic artist Karin Littlewood, it is aimed at children from two to six years of age but is likely to appeal to older children as well – and to adults.
“I have many friends who are well past childhood who tell me they love reading the story. It’s that thing where many children’s stories can be very appealing to adults too,” says Genevieve.
‘Catherine’s Story’ is about a child born with severe additional needs, with the focus on the special nature of her abilities. It positively reinforces the image of children with disabilities and prompts discussion about their place in society.
Genevieve says that she wrote ‘Catherine’s Story’ for her brother and his daughter, who was born with a kind of epilepsy known as ‘infantile spasms’ or West Syndrome which left her profoundly and multiply learning disabled.
“When Catherine was turning nine - she is nineteen now - I wanted to give her and my brother something special for her birthday, as well as celebrate her life for my unwell mother (Catherine’s grandmother) so I wrote ‘Catherine’s Story’, initially illustrating it with photographs of my niece.”
Genevieve was encouraged to find a publisher for her story, and was delighted to attract interest from the UK publishers Francs Lincoln Limited.
“With one thing and another it was then nine years from acceptance to publication during which time I may have used up my life quota of patience! It was all done via email and by post, so although I have spoken with the editor I haven’t met him or the illustrator.”
When the publishers suggested that Karin Littlewood illustrate ‘Catherine’s Story’ they sent Genevieve some of the illustrator’s previous work and she felt very honoured. Karin is a very well known illustrator, particularly in the UK, and has worked with a number of authors to produce exquisite books. Her work has been nominated for the prestigious Kate Greenaway Medal three times, and looking at the illustrations in this book it is easy to see why.
In another coup for the first-time author, bestselling UK author Jacqueline Wilson has written a very complimentary foreword for Genevieve’s book: “This is a story about a very special girl, Catherine – and it’s a very special book too. It’s warm and sensitive about a child with disabilities, but gently subversive too. It’s a delightful positive happy story, beautifully produced and illustrated. It belongs on every nursery and infant school bookshelf.”
Newly released, ‘Catherine’s Story’ is available for purchase from Foster’s Little Bookshop for $27.95. The author herself will be in the shop this Saturday morning between 11am and 12 noon and will be happy to sign copies of her beautiful book.
Genevieve says it is great to finally have ‘Catherine’s Story’ published, and very encouraging that it is attracting quite a bit of attention and lots of positive reviews both in Australia and overseas.
 

 Shire - muzzling or logical input ?

WILL foreshadowed changes to the way in which members of the public can give their views and ask questions at South Gippsland Shire Council meetings muzzle community input or help the decision-making process be more logical?
During last Wednesday’s Council meeting, Chief Executive Officer Tim Tamlin revealed that a report would be put to Council – hopefully next month - proposing a new process for public presentations at Council meetings.
In particular, Mr. Tamlin foreshadowed that people wanting to make submissions on an agenda item would be required to make their comments a week or more earlier than the meeting at which the agenda item is listed for consideration.
He did not provide any detail on how this might be achieved but did mention after the meeting that it would involve lengthening the process for items getting onto Council’s agenda.
One reason for this change – and the reason for Mr. Tamlin’s comments being made at the meeting - would be to reduce the instances of Council receiving information at the last minute prior to making a decision and therefore not having the time to either digest the possible consequences or to follow up on answers to questions arising from the new information.
When this occurs, Council sometimes defers making a decision until a later meeting, which results in delays in the matter being actioned.
While Mr. Tamlin’s comments were made when the Mayor Cr Jim Fawcett was absent from the room due to a conflict of interest in the matter under debate, the Mayor later confirmed, “We’re looking at ways of getting issues aired earlier so that there is not so much discussion [at the point of making a decision].”
In situations where Council decides to proceed with a decision despite last minute information, some Councillors complain during the debate that they are being forced to make decisions in a hurry and in an emotionally-charged atmosphere, which can result in a split vote as some choose not to make a decision if they don’t feel they have a full understanding of the matter.
The degree to which Councilors feel affected by the situation seems to vary with individual personalities, with the degree of information being provided and whether or not the information conflicts with advice provided on the spot from Council officers in attendance.
Some members of the public give extensive handouts in support of their submission to Councillors at the meeting, apparently without realising that the recipients effectively do not have the time to read them at the meeting, although occasionally standing orders are suspended to allow for this.
On the other hand, from comments and questions during Council meetings, it would appear that some Councillors do not read their agendas comprehensively before meetings.
Therefore, they do not give themselves sufficient time prior to the meeting either to clarify matters beforehand with Council officers and community members, or to provide local information that Council officers may not be aware of.
POSITIVE IMAGE
Another reason for bringing in a new presentation process would be to improve Council’s image and level of control at meetings and possibly to reduce the amount of time taken up during the presentation process, which can last for more than an hour at some meetings even though submitters are nominally restricted to a five-minute presentation time – or when many submissions are being made – to a three-minute window of time.
Since the commencement of work on the Draft South Gippsland Rural Land Use Strategy in general and the imposition of the Planning Minister’s Amendment C48 in particular, Council meetings have often been disrupted by a series of questions, sometimes put in an intimidating manner, by various individuals.
Council has been put on the back foot at such times and gives the impression of being reactive rather than proactive, and of being divided rather than working as a united team.
Questions and submissions can range from matters over which Council has no control or jurisdiction through to the extremely pertinent and valuable – whether pointing out an oversight in a report recommendation to Council or in directing Council’s attention to an issue of community concern or appreciation.
Compared to other Victorian municipalities, South Gippsland Shire is unusual in the amount of opportunity provided to the public to put submissions and ask questions.
Many municipal Councils in Victoria do not give any opportunity for public input at meetings, but South Gippsland gives the chance for input both at the start and the end Council meetings.
The opportunity for public comment and questioning challenges Council to be accountable and transparent.
The replies and discussion that arise in response to questions and comments also often give a deeper understanding of how Council operates or why certain decisions are made.
It would be a loss if the proposed changes did muzzle the public whether intentionally or not, but at the same time when the privilege is abused, it wastes the time of both Council and other people in the public gallery.
While Councillors regularly state at meetings that they strive for the ideals of accountability and transparency, members of the public can be understandably frustrated if it takes weeks for an answer to be provided, if the answer is provided by private letter and not given publicly or if the content of answer is uninformative.
In one of two humorous comments on the topic made at a later point in the meeting, Mayor Cr Fawcett recounted that ‘serial questioner’ Paul Norton of Leongatha South (who puts long, rambling presentations to Council at most meetings) had given him a three-minute timer as a Christmas present, but for some reason the timer always stuck at the two-minute point.
The gallery broke out in a wave of laughter, however the Mayor’s flippant “We’re transparent when it suits us!” fell rather flat when he joked in response to Cr David Lewis’ statement that questions asked in public should be answered substantively in public.
When the matter of changing the public presentation process is listed on the agenda, it will be interesting to see how many individuals feel motivated to tell Council their views about it!
 

Panel recommendations on townships adopted

SOUTH Gippsland Shire Council voted unanimously to adopt all of the recommendations contained in the Planning Panel report on Amendment C46, which relates to various township planning provisions including Foster Framework Plan.
(During an earlier stage of the process, the Framework Plan was known as Foster Structure Plan.)
As the Panel report is a public document, it can be viewed on both the Council web site (via links to planning, amendments and C46).
The Panel comprising Andrew Clarke and Peter Newman accepted a submission by JAG Holdings, landowner of some 20 hectares at 35 Foster-Promontory Road, that its property be designated as a ‘Low Density Residential Expansion Area’ rather than ‘Rural Living Expansion Area’.
Ultimately this change would allow for subdivision down to lots of 4,000 square metres.
The property has partial frontage to Jay Road, abuts land already zoned Low Density Residential, and was previously marked as ‘Future Rural Residential’ in the 2008 Foster Structure Plan.
However the Panel did not agree with submissions from property owners Peter Hutchinson (Gardiners Road) or Russell and Sherryn Jones (Law Road) for alteration of their land from Farming Zoned to Rural Living Expansion Zone arguing that these were better served by changes that may come about as a result of the South Gippsland Rural Land Use Strategy when it was completed.
The Panel also did not feel inclined to be persuaded by arguments put on behalf of Ingrid and Ian Eddy that all 42 hectares of their title fronting Foster-Fish Creek Road and Linton Road should be designated for Rural Living Expansion rather than the 28 hectares proposed by the Framework Plan.
In the case of the balance of the Eddy land, the Panel found that it did not have any characteristics that especially marked it out as being more appropriate for such a zoning change relative to many other similar lots in the area.
Further, rezoning all of the Eddy land could not be justified because it would result in an oversupply of rural living allotments compared to the estimated land release requirements contained in an assessment report by Essential Economics.
The Panel also rejected a proposal put by Les Wagstaff of 40 Foster-Promontory Road for deletion of clauses requiring “that residential land release (including rural residential land) occurs in a staged, contiguous and integrated manner.”
Like the Eddys, Mr. Wagstaff is keen to proceed with rezoning and subdivision, however the Panel’s decision reflects a clear preference that development proceed sequentially out from Foster rather than leap-frog vacant land, even though owners of land located in between cannot be forced to develop it if they do not want to.
No changes were recommended in relation to the provisions for Foster Town centre, with the Panel noting that the sole submission on this topic, received from Dr. Owen Casson, was “generally supportive” of the proposed Amendment.
Given the geographically wide-ranging nature of Amendment C46, the Panel also received submissions and made recommendations regarding township provisions for Leongatha, Mirboo North and Loch.
In relation to Leongatha, issues were divided into areas concerning bulky goods and highway commercial retailing areas, Leongatha Hospital and helipad area, industrial land, residential land and the town centre.
 

Accident on wet road

A DRIVER was fortunate to escape without injury when her car flipped in wet road conditions last Friday morning.
The woman was travelling towards Foster when she lost control of her vehicle on a bend of the South Gippsland Highway near the Grassy Spur swimming pool. The car spun and flipped, landing on its roof.
The driver, a woman from Meeniyan, was taken to South Gippsland Hospital in Foster for observation, but was allowed to leave.
She was given a penalty notice for driving an unroadworthy vehicle.
A police spokesperson said the accident served as a reminder to drivers to slow down on wet roads, which tend to be particularly slippery after a prolonged dry spell.

 Safer Places debate

THE matter of formally designating a ‘Neighbourhood Safer Place’ (NSP) for refuge as a place of last resort in the event of a bushfire was acknowledged as a vexed and fraught issue at South Gippsland Shire’s Council meeting last Wednesday.
However no reassurance was given to people in Waratah Bay, Sandy Point, Walkerville and Tarwin Lower/Venus Bay, which have been listed by the State Government as being high fire risk locations or ‘hot spots’.
So far, only Waratah Bay has come close to having a location designated as a NSP by Council.
However even that proposal failed to gain approval, with Council regretfully but unanimously voting to follow the recommendation by its Municipal Emergency Manager Lew Wilson that the foreshore near the Gale Street/Brown Street intersection entrance not be designated as a NSP.
Mr. Wilson’s report explained that officers from the Country Fire Authority (CFA) had conditionally recommended the foreshore as being, “Compliant and therefore suitable for adoption by Council as a NSP”.
However the location was not considered suitable for the role by Council’s Municipal Emergency Management Planning Committee, “As it does not meet a number of the assessment criteria” on a Municipal Association of Victoria NSP designation checklist.
Problems included situations of high or king tides, lack of toilet and fresh water facilities, lack of shelter, access for people with disabilities, traffic congestion and [the not insurmountable] issues relating to ongoing compliance with the CFA conditions of vegetation maintenance adjacent to the foreshore and the access point given that Council is not the landowner of the vegetated sand dunes.
Three Waratah Bay residents were in the public gallery to hear Council debate the matter.
In opening the debate and moving the motion not to designate Waratah Bay beach as a NSP, Cr Kieran Kennedy urged Council to, “Err on the side of caution” bearing in mind that 1,500 people could be affected in the event of a fire at Waratah Bay if it was a time when the caravan park was full, there were lots of day visitors and the holiday houses were occupied.
He explained that of the four towns designated as high fire risk, Waratah Bay foreshore had been considered most suitable because it had the least amount of vegetation to be traversed in order to reach the beach.
Emphasising that, “The protection of residents and tourists is paramount,” Cr Kennedy suggested, “It would only take 10 cars parked haphazardly in a panic to block off the Gale Street intersection and stop all emergency vehicle access in and out of the township.”
Cr Kennedy also referred to possibilities such as wheelchairs bogging down in the soft sand, people stumbling on the steps down to the beach, the risk of ember attack onto the beach if there was a northerly wind and issues relating to dehydration and exposure due to lack of facilities.
“In the event of a fire, we don’t know how much time people may have to stay on the beach for,” he said.
Cr Mohya Davies seconded the motion on the grounds that it would be negligent of Council, “Not to take the advice of its Emergency Management Committee,” especially given that Council, “Had put the best people on it.”
Without directly mentioning the ‘elephant in the room’ issue of potential Council liability, she continued, “I believe people will use the beach if there is a fire but I am not in agreement with signing it as a NSP.”
Cr David Lewis highlighted what he referred to as “some facts of life”, which in his opinion suggested there was no longer a rush to formally designate a NSP.
“If there was a fire at Waratah Bay, where else would you go besides the beach as there is nowhere better!” he exclaimed.
He also noted that recently publicised government surveys showed that most people were not planning to leave their homes on ‘Code Red’ or ‘Catastrophic’ days unless they knew there was a fire in the vicinity.
And although Cr Kennedy later reminded that there was still the Labour Day long weekend and the Easter holidays to come, Cr Lewis suggested that the fire season was “halfway over”, the peak tourism season was over and children were back at school, so the combination of peak population numbers and fire risk at the coast was now relatively less.
“What should be done and what makes sense?” he queried rhetorically.
Cr Lewis believed the problem was that the process “has been done in a hell of a rush” with the State Government originally asking for it to be completed by mid-December and without any clear policy guidance to indicate how many aspects failing to meet the assessment criteria checklist for a NSP were acceptable and how many failures meant the location should be rejected.
“We have some qualified people saying its ok and some not – it’s just not good enough!” he exclaimed.
Cr Jennie Deane highlighted the issue of visitors unfamiliar with the area being confused about the safest course of action in the event of a fire and successfully requested an amendment to the motion that, “The community be advised through local media and Council’s Visitor Information Centres that there are currently no designated NSPs in South Gippsland.”
Cr Mimmie Jackson took care to explain that Council’s role in making the decision was to take account of a wider picture of people movements and various safety issues, and was not just limited to the matters that the CFA had to take into consideration in assessing the suitability of a NSP.
In closing, Cr Kennedy stated his belief that, “Most or all of Waratah Bay’s permanent residents won’t be in Waratah Bay on (proclaimed) Code Red or Catastrophic days!”
Doubtless the permanent residents and regular visitors to South Gippsland’s four ‘hot spots’ will be keen to see if any practical progress can be made on creation of the euphemistically-named NSPs in time for the next fire season, even if they can’t get any reassurance this season from any level of government.
 

"Very positive" response from Minister at C48 meeting

SOUTH Gippsland Shire Mayor Councillor Jim Fawcett described a one-hour meeting held last Thursday morning between a Council delegation and the Minister for Planning Justin Madden about Amendment C48 to Council’s planning scheme as, “Very positive, and encouraging in how the Minister responded.”
According to a Council press release, the delegation met with the Minister, “To outline the critical planning issues facing its rural communities, and to seek some resolution.”
Cr Fawcett was accompanied at the meeting by Cr Warren Raabe, Chief Executive Officer Tim Tamlin and Planning Manager Chris Wightman.
Numerous landowners of properties in the Farming Zone experienced unexpected hardship when the Minister suddenly gazetted Amendment C48 into the Shire’s planning scheme and removed some of Council’s planning powers in the Farming Zone.
The secondary impact of Amendment C48 was to stop planning applications for some subdivisions and for development of a house on land less than 40 hectares size in the Farming Zone.
Mayor Fawcett expanded, “We were given ample opportunity to present our case, and Minister Madden has given his ‘in principle’ support to a process to address the urgent matter of clarifying subdivision provisions and dwellings in rural areas leading to the finalisation of the Rural Strategy.
“I came out feeling very comfortable with what had gone on.”
The Mayor is yet not able to provide any specifics of changes that will be made as a consequence of the meeting since the power for final approval of any such policy changes rests with the State Government.
However once details had been confirmed, Council will announce them to the community.
“The meeting should achieve outcomes that address both local circumstances and reflect State policy,” Mayor Fawcett anticipated.
“We are optimistic there will be a positive resolution for many landowners, however it would be unrealistic to think that the local planning approach will return to its former state and that all individual issues will be resolved satisfactorily.”
He summed up, “We envisage a workable compromise that seeks to address hardship issues.”
The Mayor said he had emailed all Councillors after the meeting and spoken to some in more detail since then when their paths had crossed.
Mr. Tamlin is equally keen to see the rural planning issues resolved.
“This issue has gone on long enough and Council is keen to negotiate a swift resolution,” he said.
“We all need certainty so that the long term prosperity and quality of life is guaranteed for the whole community and so that businesses and individuals have clear guidelines on which to base their investment decisions. “
He reminded, “This region contributes significantly to the agricultural production of the State.”
Mr. Tamlin added, “Once the key issues surrounding dwellings in rural zones have been addressed, the way will be paved to progress the second step of finalising the South Gippsland Rural Land Use Strategy to provide a long term vision for the Shire.”