Image of parent’s rally in March 2022 to protest planned childcare centre sale in Port Phillip (Source: Herald Sun) 

Following a community backlash earlier this year, Councillors decide against selling three childcare centres subject to Victorian Government financial support. Mayor Marcus Pearl announced on 18 August 2022, ‘Our Council last night decided against selling three community-run early years education and care centres, subject to finalisation of funding arrangements’.

The announcement follows community consultation about the future of these centres - at 17 Eildon Road, St Kilda, 39 The Avenue, Balaclava, and 46 Tennyson Street Elwood. Council will seek to rebuild or renovate these centres if Vic Gov funding is received.

Whilst discussions for funding support with the Victorian and Australian Governments are ongoing the Port Phillip Mayor has released this update for transparency. Mayor Pearl said ‘We can report there have been productive conversations with the Victorian Department of Education and Training about long-term early childhood infrastructure needs across our city, including at those three centres. Discussions with the Department about potential co-funding arrangements under the Building Blocks Partnership program are progressing well’.

Previously Council had decided to sell the three centres after the Victorian Government advised Port Phillip that it was not eligible for state funding because of certain eligibility hurdles. After the issued blew up the state government has corrected their earlier advice and will accept an application for funding. 

There has been an overwhelmingly positive response to the Council’s commitment to continue supporting community run childcare across Port Phillip which is conditional on assistance from the Victorian and Australian Governments who are responsible for funding early learning. The City of Port Phillip own 17 facilities which provide over a third of our city’s licenced childcare places. 

The Council has committed to update the community on this important issue as soon as they can but cannot provide further details due to the confidentiality of the continuing discussions.

In line with Rotary protocol a new President is appointed every twelve months, Warwick Lloyd is Rotary Port Phillip’s new President and one of his primary objectives is to recruit new members to help service the many projects Rotary is looking to deliver. 

As a demonstration of the powerful community of Rotarians, over 20,000 people from across the globe will be visiting Melbourne next May, to listen and talk about how Rotary can make a difference. Rotary's theme of Imagine is very appropriate.

So, if you’re interested in finding out more the Rotary website is  Portphilliprotary.org.au and here are the reasons why you should join Rotary. 

WHY JOIN ROTARY

Friendship: In an increasingly complex world, Rotary provides one of the most basic human needs: the need for friendship and fellowship. It is one of two reasons why Rotary began in 1905.

Business Development: The second original reason for Rotary's beginning is business development. Everyone needs to network. Rotary consists of a cross section of every business community. Its members come from all walks of life. Rotarians help each other and collectively help others.

Personal Growth and Development: Membership in Rotary continues one’s growth and education in human relations and personal development.

Leadership Development: Rotary is an organization of leaders and successful people. Serving in Rotary positions is like a college education. Leadership: - learning how to motivate, influence, and lead leaders.

Citizenship in the Community: Membership in a Rotary club makes one a better community citizen. The average Rotary club consists of the most active citizens of any community.

Continuing Education: Each week at Rotary there is a program designed to keep one informed about what is going on in the community, nation, and world. Each meeting provides an opportunity to listen to different speakers and a variety of timely topics.

Fun: Rotary is fun, a lot of fun. Each meeting is fun. The club projects are fun. Social activities are fun. The service is fun.

Public Speaking Skills: Many individuals who joined Rotary were afraid to speak in public. Rotary develops confidence and skill in public communication and the opportunity to practice and perfect these skills.

Citizenship in the World: Every Rotarian wears a pin that says “Rotary International.” There are few places on the globe that do not have a Rotary club. Every Rotarian is welcome – even encouraged – to attend any of the 29,000 clubs in 194 nations and geographical regions. This means instant friends in both one’s own community and in the world community.

Assistance when Travelling: Because there are Rotary clubs everywhere, many a Rotarian in need of a doctor, lawyer, hotel, dentist, advice, etc., while travelling has found assistance through Rotary.

Entertainment: Every Rotary club and district has parties and activities that provide diversion in one’s business life. Rotary holds conferences, conventions, assemblies, and institutes that provide entertainment in addition to Rotary information, education, and service.

The Development of Social Skills: Every week and at various events and functions, Rotary develops one’s personality, social skills and people skills. Rotary is for people who like people.

Family Programs: Rotary provides one of the world’s largest youth exchange programs; high school and college clubs for future Rotarians; opportunities for spouse involvement; and a host of activities designed to help family members in growth and the development of family values.

Vocational Skills: Every Rotarian is expected to take part in the growth and development of his or her own profession or vocation; to serve on committees and to teach youth about one’s job or vocation. Rotary helps to make one a better doctor, lawyer, teacher, etc.

The Development of Ethics: Rotarians practice a 4-Way Test that governs one’s ethical standards. Rotarians are expected to be ethical in business and personal relationships.

Cultural Awareness: Around the world, practically every religion, country, culture, race, creed, political persuasion, language, colour, and ethnic identity is found in Rotary. It is a cross section of the world’s most prominent citizens from every background. Rotarians become aware of their cultures and learn to love and work with people everywhere. They become better citizens of their countries in the process.

Prestige: Rotary members are prominent people: leaders of business, the professions, art, government, sports, military, religion, and all disciplines. Rotary is the oldest and most prestigious service club in the world. Its ranks include executives, managers, professionals – people who make decisions and influence policy.

Nice People:  Rotarians above all are nice people - the nicest people on the face of the earth. They are important people who follow the policy of it is nice to be important, but it is important to be nice.

The Absence of an “Official Creed”: Rotary has no secret handshake, no secret policy, no official creed, no secret meeting or rituals. It is an open society of men and women who simply believe in helping others.

The Opportunity to Serve: Rotary is a service club. Its business is mankind. Its product is service. Rotarians provide community service to both local and international communities. This is perhaps the best reason for becoming a Rotarian: the chance to do something for somebody else and to sense the self-fulfilment that comes in the process and return of that satisfaction to one’s own life. It is richly rewarding

By a long-time St Kilda resident

In the 1980’s, St Kilda was perceived as a seedy suburb of Melbourne that attracted society’s undesirables and activities.  St Kilda was described as “a dynamic place where good and evil worked alongside” according to the late Albert Tucker.

In the 60’s and 70’s Melbourne media ran headlines describing the St Kilda area as streets of hell, the devil’s triangle and documentaries were made showing people buying drugs in Fitzroy Street. Mary Lou Jelbart, a former resident and Councillor of the City of St Kilda felt that a festival celebrating all the actors, writers and creative people living in the area would change these negative perceptions and reassure people that “they were living in a good community, with very good neighbours around”.

The St Kilda festival was introduced in 1980 to change the public perception of the area and to showcase that there are some beautiful and very positive aspects to community life in St Kilda.  In the 80’s the intention was only to celebrate the local area but today, music is the central programmatic driver of the festival.

In an interview for U3A Port Phillip, Jelbart offered the following summary of the first festival:

“We had the first St Kilda Festival in February or March 1980. It was absolutely wonderful. The council blocked off the Upper Esplanade. We celebrated St Kilda’s history. We had a revival of Frank Thring films – not Frank Thring the Hollywood actor but his father who was a St Kilda based film producer in the 1930s. We showed the films at the Palais. We had ice-skating at St Moritz which was still in existence. George Dreyfus conducted a mass, a non-religious mass. Mirka Mora, who was living in St Kilda at that time, drew a mural on masonite and children came and coloured it in. In fact, she did three murals, for three successive festivals. One has disappeared, but one is in the St Kilda Library. At Christ Church in Acland Street the vicar and his wife provided Devonshire teas under the trees. It was really enchanting. The weather was perfect. Everything was just beautiful. The two days ended with 15 minutes of fireworks over the bay. The Esplanade was crowded with very happy people. It was wonderful to see the community celebrate together.”

Things have certainly changed…

The festival has seen many formats since its inception over 40 years ago.  With an attendance of a mere 5,000 in 1980, today around 400,000 people flock to the foreshore to witness Australian musicians entertaining the crowds. The St Kilda Festival is known as Australia’s largest free community festival – a celebration of community spirit, Australian talent, and the beautiful St Kilda foreshore.

According to the 2021/22 Council Plan and Budget, the Council paid $1.7M as a contribution towards the costs of the festival (compared to a $159K contribution towards the St Kilda Film Festival).  These costs are included in the Council’s $4.3M annual budget for all festivals, major events, Esplanade market and Indigenous arts programs, including the Yaluk-ut Weelam Ngargee event.

Many people have commented on the perceived unfairness of St Kilda as the focus of these events (and therefore festival funding being focused on St Kilda).  They believe that other areas including Elwood, Port Melbourne, Albert Park, South Melbourne and Middle Park should all receive funding for similar local events.

Other residents have complained of poor behaviour from Festival patrons, some of whom believe that, because it’s St Kilda, they can behave in any manner they please showing no respect for the local community.  In 2012, a Festival patron was jailed for 34 months (15 months without parole) after he detonated 2 homemade devices in separate incidents at the Festival.  Five people were injured, 2 seriously, despite the defendant’s claims he ‘just wanted to have some fun’.

During the 2013 Festival, a man was charged over the bashing of a 23-year-old New Zealand man as he walked along Jacka Boulevard.

Others, including Councillor Andrew Bond, staunchly support the Festival and claim that delivery of the St Kilda Festival has the potential to bring economic, social and cultural benefit to the community.

Over the years, the suburb of St Kilda has transformed itself into a highly desirable place to visit, live and work and embodies our deep connection to beach culture.

So, do you believe there is still a need for the St Kilda Festival?  How do you, as a ratepayer, feel about the financial support given to the festival on your behalf?  We would be interested to hear your comments, opinions and ideas.

In the meantime, we will leave you with some recent comments from Mary Lou Jelbart at whose instigation and initiative, the Festival was founded.

“The St. Kilda Festival was originally conceived as a boutique event, promoting the talents of local artists, musicians, writers and performers who had been attracted to the bohemian and cosmopolitan character of the area.  But the magical quality of the first Festivals has been eroded by its transformation into a major rock event, swamping the foreshore with tens of thousands of fans who do nothing to add to the amenity of local residents.  Many have told me they feel prisoners in their homes during the Festival.  I continue to regret that I wasn’t able to persuade fellow Councillors to let the Festival come to a natural end after a decade.  In the case of more recent Festivals, bigger has not been better.”

By a concerned resident
Image of Pop-up bike lane infrastructure at the intersection of Marine Parade and Glen Huntley Road in Elwood

Residents have raised concerns over the danger, confusion, and traffic congestion caused by the installation of Department of Transport’s  Pop-up bike lane infrastructure at the intersection of Marine Parade and Glen Huntley Road in Elwood. 

Helen, a resident of Elwood said ‘lives are at risk here where they previously were not. Wait to see what kind of havoc this causes. Cars turning left at an intersection (pictured above), into a bike lane, where the previous 100m or so would have riders think they have right of way. The big peletons with smart riders won’t even use these lanes. Where will the culpability rest? Certainly not with the community who have clearly and repeatedly warned of the dangers, although our taxes and rates may end up footing the bill’

By a concerned couple from South Melbourne

Image displays the location of the issue.

We are residents of Eastern Road and parents of a one-year-old and a dog. We have lived in the street for five years and know how much of a high pedestrian area our block is consisting mostly of people coming/going to work, parents & kids going to the kids park on Park Street or people and their dogs going to the Dog park on Eastern Road/Park St/Heather St. We are concerned about the pop-up bike lanes were implemented recently on Park Street, South Melbourne.

Pedestrian issues:
The pop-up bike lane on Park Street, has made it so dangerous to cross over Park Street with no visibility of cars unless you're standing on the road (with a pram, near impossible to do safely) while watching the other connecting streets with potential oncoming cars. 

With a kindergarten & children’s park on one side of Park Street and a dog park across the road, I find it insane that there isn’t a pedestrian set of light or pedestrian crossing connecting these two streets, that now is a serious safety issue to cross - however the safety of the cyclists has been made.

Driving issues:
I have seen two near accidents and have felt so unsafe trying to turn right out of Eastern Road onto Park Street. There is NO visibility of cars coming from Kings Way and bad visibility looking the other direction due to the parked cars now sitting in the middle of Park Street (looking up Park towards the market from Eastern Road).

This means it is a constant edging out/checking for cars & it is so dangerous, we have had frustration EVERY time we have done this since these pop-up lanes & new car spaces have been shifted to make way for the bike lane. 

Planning failure:
The pop-up bike lanes on Park Street don't keep going once you are over Kings Way heading to St Kilda Road so they are redundant in keeping cyclists safe, once over the biggest connecting highways in the area and forcing cyclists to merge into a lane with cars (so what's the point in keeping you so safe in a family-orientated neighbourhood on the South Melbourne side as opposed to the city side??).

We also frequently see cyclists in the area not using the designated lane built for them (especially around roundabouts on Moray Street), which renders the question - why bother doing these at all!

We never had any kind of issue seeing cyclists in our area before, my husband and I both used to ride our bikes to work and had no issues. Now we are infuriated with what has happened on Park Street with no plan for safety of the pedestrians & children living in the area and the cars trying to navigate out of Eastern Road. Such a disappointing upgrade that we will see reflected in our next rates notice, I'm sure. 

Thank you for giving us a platform to express our feelings towards this, we knew we were not the only ones and were going to reach out to someone to report how unsafe it was!

By a concerned Mills Street Resident

Image attribution: Google Image of Herbert-Montague Street and Kerferd Road intersection

There is increasing concern regarding the proposed Shrine-to-Sea Avenue proposed by the Victorian Government in partnership with the City of Port Phillip. Residents are concerned the project may not only divide Port Phillip but also divide the Albert Park locality. The path to Beaconsfield Parade from Kingsway along Albert Street and Kerferd Road is already clearly delineated.  Source

Many residents have voiced their concern that a dedicated path with intersecting side roads blocked off will seriously and permanently create a barrier that will have an effect similar to that which occurred when the enforced Kingsway was forged through the middle of South Melbourne – creating a freeway dividing the then city into two distinct areas with little communication between.

Residents are concerned that the closure at Herbert-Montague Street and Kerferd Road, Albert Park may be the beginning of a series of Council planned closures to implement this divisive community policy. 

The Herbert and Montague Streets closure now appears to be permanent following extensive delays of the trial that started in February 2021, with the traffic data collection. The Council website states  ‘Due to Covid-19 restrictions, we have been unable to record the final traffic data counts and will conduct these as soon as restrictions ease. Until this time the trial will remain in place’. Source

There are good reasons for not implementing this and other road closures:

1. An inconvenient barrier to the Albert Park shopping centre from the east of Kerferd Road and to Middle Park from the Albert Park side.

2. All street closures have negative impact on other surrounding streets by re-directing and increasing traffic in an abnormal pattern. Traffic will be increased on: 

• a. Canterbury Road
• b. Hambleton Street
• c. Richardson Street
• d. Merton Street
• e. O’Grady Street
• f. Little O’Grady Street
• g. Finlay Street

3. Inhibits community interaction for an ageing population

4. It is not any safer for pedestrians or cyclists

The traffic management solution at Danks Street where it crosses Kerferd Road (see Google image below) has worked well to remove the vehicle danger of the intersection. If prevention of vehicle accidents is the concern, then a similar solution can easily be implemented at the Montague-Herbert Street intersection with Kerferd Road.

Councillors voted in favour of a motion that requests the Department of Transport (DoT) to modify some of the new Pop-Up Bike Lanes and to undertake a safety audit of all the new bike lanes. Council was responding to a massive community backlash on social media that raised concerns about the safety of some of the bike lane infrastructure and visual impact. Residents have questioned if the program enhances the on-road safety for cyclists because pedestrians, motorists, and cyclists are confused by the treatment of roads, random placement of concrete blocks, bollards and speed humps, and the distraction of excessive and contradictory road markings.

The infrastructure is semi-permanent as the trial will be conducted over 12-18 months and residents are concerned the infrastructure will be not modified or removed despite overwhelming opposition. 

The final Council motion was not as strong as Cr Andrew Bond’s original motion that called for an immediate halt to the project and immediate removal all speed humps, concrete blocks and bollards installed as a part of the DoT project. Cr Heather Cunsolo and Cr Bond agreed to a compromise position that most Councillors supported, to ensure Council officers can commence discussions with DoT with a clear position of Council. 

The Council meeting was attended by 80-100 people and 25 residents raised concerns over the safety of the Pop-up bike infrastructure and the desecration of heritage streets. Nina Taylor MP (Southern Metropolitan Region) said DoT had consulted extensively prior to the installation of the infrastructure and three people supported the DoT project, including the CEO of Bicycles Victoria, a Member of Port Phillip Bicycle Users Group, and a resident. 

Robyn Taylor from Albert Park said, ‘The pop-up bikes program was supposed to be ‘light touch’ but it has created a significant ugliness to our once beautiful streets and villages of Middle Park, Albert Park, South Melbourne and Port Melbourne’.  

Cameron Smith from South Melbourne said he ‘supports of the use of public space by pedestrians, cyclists, motorcyclists,  scooters, motorists and was not anti-cycling per se. However, the new bike infrastructure impacted safety in a negative way and are therefore poorly designed. They are not necessarily located in appropriate streets and have left many residents scratching their heads about the actual need for these bike lanes over and above existing bike lanes’.  

Other speakers said they were blind-sided by the new bike lanes because DoT did not adequately consult residents. Only a few residents received the DoT postcards and noticed the public notices fixed to poles and there was a paucity of information on the DoT website when residents clicked on the QR code in the DoT materials. DoT have recently updated their website to include more details of the road infrastructure. 

The Council supported motion states that the CEO

1. Writes to the Department of Transport and requests that they re-instate the left hand turn into Williamstown Road from Bridge St in Port Melbourne.

2. Writes to the Department of Transport and requests that the Bridge St Port Melbourne central bike lane be removed, and the original conditions be reinstated.

3. Writes to the Department of Transport and requests that DOT come back to Council with options for alternative proposals to the Westbury St, St Kilda East central bike lane.

4. Writes to the Department of Transport and requests that where swerving around speed humps is observed; where speed humps are located on a 40kmh local road; where speed humps are immediately preceding or following a raised pedestrian crossing, and for all concrete blocks, bollards, and yellow lines, that DOT shows Council a justification for their requirements on safety or other grounds, or facilitate their removal, or proposes an alternative treatment.

5. Council officers to brief Councillors on Department of Transport response to the Council letter as soon as possible and no later than August 2022.

6. Writes to the Department of Transport and requests that they conduct a safety audit that reviews safety concerns raised by the community.

7. Request that DOT works with the City of Port Phillip to review the Pop-Up Bike Lane programs prior to any revisions and future installation of infrastructure in the City of Port Phillip as part of the DOT Pop Up Bike Lane program following the upcoming practical completion.

8. Request that DOT conducts thorough consultation with the residents of the City of Port Phillip prior to any revisions and future installation of infrastructure in the City of Port Phillip as part of the DOT Pop-Up Bike Lane program following the upcoming practical completion.

By Dean Hurlston

A review of inner Melbourne councils has revealed that green open space levels are their lowest since records began. It’s not just limited to inner councils and is rapidly emerging as an issue in middle suburbs too. Open green space has a direct link to mental health. 

This isn’t just a result of densification and overdevelopment but rather a neglectful and intentional problem created by local councils. 

For many years experienced local councillors have mined the databases and parent lists of local sporting clubs with precision, knowing this is the fertile ground of vote harvesting. 

What your local councillors know or quickly learn is that those on council remain on council with council investment in sporting clubs - new stadiums, pavilions, grounds, change rooms, equipment, and the like. The more they get council to invest in local sports, the more likely they will be re-elected. It’s the McDonalds happy meal effect. Toys bring demanding kids and parents wallets. In this case councillors who provide sporting facilities garner trust and votes because “they are doing it for the kids”. 

Well so they say!  

But the real victim here is the parklands, green wedges and local open space that is compromised for the ever-expanding sporting clubs. 

Amid declaring climate emergencies - killing trees becomes an inconvenient truth.  

What councils always seem to forget is that sporting users come and go. 

The local residents who use the parks and green infrastructure are the ones that lose their connection to green space. All for the sporting clubs to expand. Don’t get me wrong with our ever-expanding population the need for sports is only going to grow. This is where the systemic and intended failure of councils shows. Councils should be regionalising sporting facilities to get greater efficiency and pooling resources. 

They should be planning together. There are already groupings of councils like the infamous M9 that cover inner city councils. The best they have come up with is consistent street signage. For some reason they just can’t bear any co-investment in sporting facilities.  

In many cases councils build facilities on their municipal borders often with ample supply within 1km in the adjoining council. 

It is madness. 

It is Wasteful and terrible for the community who loses their green space. 

Where is the state government in all of this? Silent. Funding pet councils where they can harvest votes. 

The system is ultimately broken. 

Councillors are taking the community for a ride. They know open space doesn’t lose as many votes as they gain from all their sports investment. 

The local councillors who speak up against this are bullied and targeted by those who have gamed the system. 

Local government is broken. It has no oversight to stop this utter madness. 

It has no standards that prevent sporting facilities that ruin local amenity. 

All that happens is councils pit local residents against sporting clubs and create painful rifts and divisions. 

It is councillors who are dividing their communities and that is the real shame in all of this. 

The real victim is the green space that is pillaged and often destroyed. The trees, ecosystems, and serenity are ultimately concreted and desecrated. Concrete and brick sporting shrines emerge and cost a fortune to run adding huge costs to councils budget. This in turn means that older facilities get neglected and fall apart. Often eventually requiring huge investment to fix. 

Look to any council newsletter and it will be filled with building sports facilities and spruiking sports investment.

As for the trees, the parklands and open space. Despite a supposed climate emergency, they are to be bulldozed and forgotten.

by Matthew Fagan

What a night!

It was a bit like a soccer match.  Nothing happens and then a goal.  Sheer frustration.   2 1/2 hours of boredom punctuated by moments of madness. Like a friend as a jumbo pilot who said flying was 14 hours of extreme boredom and 3 minutes of terror.

Thank you to all our brave speakers. You did very well.   

Each took a different angle and supported each other, but there was very little aggression and there were few tears.

Jack Kagan, a senior structural engineer stated clearly that the convict bricks and old structure would not support 200 people on the roof, especially dancing. But one councillor said that was a matter for the next planning step. Jack's point was that there would be no next step if the building collapsed.

What I find amazing is that hundreds of people have complained about their huge loss of amenity and quality of life and parking and so much, but the Hotel owner did not attend the meeting and has never even tried to justify the development as being in the interests of residents in any way, just himself.  And the council wants to compromise.  Surely for a proposal to go ahead, the locals have to get something from it?  But it seems developers have the right to do what they please and councillors have an obligation to compromise.   

But then, in the middle of boring deliberations on approving the recommendations from Planner Beard, the one who told no one anything, it was announced that the owner who lives in Brighton or the operator (Australian Venue Corporation) had already filed for relief with VCAT!  

Pandemonium ensued.

What followed was a three-ring circus as the owner/operator had already objected to VCAT about the council decision before the council had even made a decision!  So, whatever they were going to decide, there was an appeal in progress.  No one knew what to do, as they were to decide what to do, and it had already been rejected?   

Now it might seem crazy, but that now means the Council must defend their decision, whatever it might be, and they had yet to make one.  It was Keystone cops!  A 3-minute break. Then a 5-minute break.  Then 20 minutes.  

But Councillor Andrew Bond decided that he already had a solution and had drafted one by editing the original proposal and in essence he proposed:

• 1. a ban all music on the roof apart from 'background' music which was defined as low enough for two people to have an intelligible conversation at 600mm separation.
• 2. reduced the hours of operation to 10pm.

The problem was Cr Bond’s motion was not ready and we had to wait while they edited the text live over 30 minutes and Andrew Bond checked that it matched his draft. More slamming of doors and keystone cops.

Meanwhile Green Councillor Copsey had seconded Andrew Bond, before it was even decided what he had decided.

Councillor Christina Sirakoff made a wonderful speech for five minutes and covered all the points in detail.  Very well prepared and factual.  And it did not admit any alterations at all to the oldest,

most significant, tallest, grandest, and most beautiful historic building and the only hotel in the area, literally the foundation building of Middle Park, home to 5,000 people. So, Cr Sirakoff voted against the revised motion.  So did Councillor Heather Cunsolo. 

The vote was 6:2 (one Councillor was absent) in favour of Andrew Bond's amended motion. The approved motion bans loud music on the roof at all and imposes a 10pm closing time on most nights. 

Either way the owner/operators had already objected, no matter what the motion.  An extraordinary situation. So, we adjourned, fled into the night.  Wondering what had just happened and what exactly it meant.

The outcome is the Council and residents are all off to VCAT and the Council must pay for lawyers, as they are defending their final decision before, they had made it. And whether they like it or not, we are joined at the hip against the owner/operator.   

But if everyone including the council wants to avoid the battle and the expense, why not appeal for register the Middle Park Hotel on the Victorian Heritage Register.  Then there is no need for VCAT! If the John Curtin hotel can be registered and it is one of the ugliest hotels in Melbourne, the beautiful and historically significant and unique Middle Park hotel will sail through this time.

Especially with council support.  And I saw tonight how the Victorian Heritage Register people may  have been intimidated by the owner, the first person they contacted.  We can supply the backbone they need with a massive petition.

So, despite their incredible desire to compromise, the councillors have run up against an owner who will not compromise.   Which is fine because neither will we.  The hotel will be registered and if we, do it right, we will have the support of the council.

By Dean Hurlston

There is little doubt that the one of the hottest debates in our country is climate change.

In Victoria our 79 councils are fast declaring climate emergencies and looking for ways to reduce their carbon footprint or get to “net zero”. So far almost 40 Victorian councils, including Port Phillip have joined the “cities power partnership”. Source

This partnership aims to link councils together to help them get to net zero as fast as possible and to ensure all aspects of councils operations minimise emissions and all power purchased is renewable only. This is a noble pursuit but it’s missing a key component, Buying power!

The goals of the partnership neglect a key aspect of the local government act (Vic) 2020. Councils must provide services to the community with “value for money” as a key requirement.

There is little doubt “renewable” electricity purchased from electricity companies is more expensive. There is cost in installing solar panels and batteries on all council buildings, changing petrol fleets to electric only (think council cars and garbage trucks). In reality there will need to be HUGE investment by member councils in replacing fleets and installing solar and battery - in many cases this will run into the millions. The goals of entering the partnership have to be realised within 5 years of joining. 

Stupidly, the group buying power delivers NO COST SAVINGS on power bills. 

None. Zip. Nada. 

The program has missed the chance to save councils money and instead has cheaply gone for the emotional rhetoric and photo opportunities of the climate change narrative, but it will look great in their council newsletters - more tokenism.

Put simply, councils joining this program will need to spend more ratepayers money creating the narrative that they are combatting climate change.

Sadly, this is our councils theology of today, if we look good, feel good, and “appear” to do good perhaps the residents won’t notice the open chequebook in our hands.

Attribution: Councilscombat climate change with an open chequebook (ratepayersvictoria.com.au)

Image Created by Andy from South Melbourne

Deep coloured, ripe and delicious fruit and vegetables, aromatic hand-made cakes and jams, freshly laid free range eggs and just cut flowers are only a few of the sumptuous goods you’ll find at our monthly Gasworks Farmers’ Market, held on the third Saturday of each month. 

You will love spending Saturday mornings on the grass soaking up the vibrant atmosphere and sampling the very best of local Victorian produce, direct from Victorian farmers and specialty makers.

Gasworks Farmers’ Market is proudly accredited by the Victorian Farmers Market Association (VFMA) and our market received the Outstanding Farmers’ Market Award at the 2012 delicious. Produce Awards.

The Gasworks Resident Artist Studios are also open during the Farmers Market, so make sure you pop in and say hello!

For the full list of stallholders and the circuit of accredited farmers’ markets in Melbourne every week, go to the Regional Farmer's Market news Facebook and Instagram.

Please remember, Gasworks Farmers’ Market is plastic bag free and all packaging is as environmental responsible as possible so bring your own trolleys or baskets, reusable bags and coffee cups/mugs.

Gasworks Farmers’ Market, 3rd Saturday of every month, 8am – 1pm.

https://gasworks.org.au/whats-on/gasworks-farmers-market  

An estimated 30% of all food produced globally is lost or wasted every year.

Rotarians are a practical canny lot and partnered with SecondBite very early on in their development to correct this statistic.  The graphic highlights SecondBite’s wonderful work for the disadvantaged and the environment.

Our Food Waste lunch is on THURSDAY 2nd JUNE, and we hope you take the opportunity to book.

Don’t delay!! Please book your place today for this inaugural event and support our activity in the Rotary Area of Focus – The Environment.

Bookings: https://events.humanitix.com/rotary-food-waste 

The BCNA is a not-for-profit community association in Port Melbourne. It is the successor organisation of the Swallow Street and Bain Street Residents’ Association formed in February 1987.  It was formed out of fear that the Victorian Government would acquire their homes as part of an urban renewal project.  

Purpose:
BCNA’s purpose is shown in its Rules of Association.  It is to “… provide a forum for all residents of Beacon Cove and abutting neighbourhoods to discuss key local issues and thence to take appropriate action to preserve and enhance the quality of life for residents and visitors to the area…”.

How we operate:
BCNA representatives meet key people and organisations to find solutions to local issues. They include Members of Parliament, State Government departments, the City of Port Phillip, Victoria Police, developers, the Environment Protection Authority, and Ports Victoria.  

Current issues:
Some of the recent issues BCNA has been involved in are:
•    Hoon driving and excessive vehicle noise around Station Pier and Beacon Cove.
•    advocating for air quality monitoring near Station Pier.
•    advocating for the redevelopment of the Waterfront Place precinct.
•    the enforcement of planning controls.
•    protecting the foreshore from overshadowing from developments.
•    An upgrade of the Princes Street stormwater drain.
•    Port planning.

Communicating to members:
The committee reports on progress with current issues by short news items on the organisation’s Blog website at www.beaconcove.org.au.  Members can receive these news items by subscribing to an email news service. In addition, a hard copy newsletter, The Beacon, is prepared twice a year and delivered to about 2800 mailboxes in the area.  

Encouraging a sense of community:
In addition to the email news service, BCNA organises social events. Often these are dinners at local restaurants. The events are popular and attract around 60 plus attendees.  They are a good way for newcomers to meet neighbours and to hear about local news.    

Membership:
Membership is open to individuals. You do not need to live in the area. An application form is shown on the website at www.beaconcove.org.au.  Current membership stands at 461.  

Further information about BCNA can be found on the website www.beaconcove.org.au 

Or contact:
The President at president@beaconcove.org.au
The Secretary at secretary@beaconcove.org.au 

At a Special Budget Meeting on 29 June the majority of City of Port Phillip Councillors voted to increase rates by 1.75%. Last year in the middle of a Covid epidemic Councillors increased rates by 1.5% and this year with the highest cost of living increases in many years, they increased them again. Councillors who voted for a rate rise: Cr Heather Cunsolo, Cr Louise Crawford, Cr Peter Martin, Cr Katherine Copsey & Cr Tim Baxter. Those who voted against it were Cr Clark, Cr Christina Sirakoff, Cr Andrew Bond & Mayor Marcus Pearl.

The only positive for residents was motion passed by Councillors requesting Council Officers to identify options for ongoing cost reductions that would enable Council to consider adopting a 0% rates increase in financial year 2023/24. Cr Tim Baxter and Cr Katherine Copsey voted against this motion. Cr Crawford voted for the motion and suggested that any savings could potentially be used to fund projects that were not fully funded.

The CEO is required to identify cost saving options by the end of November 2022 for implementation in the 2023/24 budget.

Council does not have to cut essential services to achieve a rates freeze. Council must stop wasteful spending and identify efficiencies to bring Port Phillip rates into line with other councils. It is disappointing that efficiencies could not be identified for the 2022/23 year and rates are set to rise again this year.    

Is it too much to ask Councillors to actually vote for savings that would reduce the rates for residents who already pay some of the highest rates across Melbourne due to the high expenditure by council and Councillors?  

Ant’s Rant - Source

It was only a matter of time that a serious accident or death caused by bad placement and planning of a bike lane had to happen. The one in Fitzroy Street is a prime example of a badly designed double bike lane with little or no thought to safety. The recent death of a 57 year old pedestrian on 10 June 2022 (https://7news.com.au/news/melbourne/respected-melbourne-charity-worker-revealed-as-man-struck-and-killed-by-cyclist-c-7310472) crossing this nightmare bike lane is a clear indication of how this anti-car ideology has gotten out of control and how little thought has gone into squeezing bike lanes onto our road system. Roads that have been designed for motorised vehicles such as cars, trucks and motorcycles with road rules designed to ensure a safe road transport system where there are consistent rules and drivers that are licensed to understand and obey these rules. 

Is it practical to paint lines or place barriers on our roadways with little or no thought to safety or how this makeshift bike lane system would affect traffic flow? No thought to education of bike riders or rules where and when and how the system actually works. No consistency in how these popping up bike lanes connect or interact with traffic. Cheap, nasty, no thought, solutions hatched by council to solve the imaginary bicycle transport problem. Or rather a half-baked solution looking for a non-existent problem.  

Forcing cars off our roads in anticipation or rather hope of a new world order where push bike riding rules our roadways is bizarre, foolhardy and a lunatics pipe dream that defies logic or reality. What evidence is there to support these dramatic wholesale interruptions to our road systems. Are bikes the future for the greater community? Babies, children, school students, mums, workers, shoppers, retirees, old aged and infirmed, will they all be getting around on bicycles now?  If anything, there will be more electric vehicles adding to our road traffic congestion not less and for safety sake slow moving push bikes and faster moving motorised vehicles need to be separated from each other and not just by painting white lines on the roadways .

Our Council has made poor decisions with little or no input from the wider community who must endure poorly located and designed lanes. The bike lobby have undue influence on councils and our Councillors are not listening to the community. The greater community don't want these poorly designed and potentially dangerous bike lanes. Bike lanes must be designed to specifically keep everyone safe. There need to be rules for bike riders not just motorists. Some busy and fast-moving roads are not suited for bike riders and bike lane must be located in suitable street to keep riders safe. 

We need well designed and interconnected bike lane systems that don't interfere with road systems. Proper routes, proper rules, and proper planning. Less and safer solutions not a free for all. The reality is that bikes will never outnumber vehicles on our roads, especially in inclement weather. Not everyone can or wants this as their transport system so council needs to take a reality check and redress the current foolish bike lane trend. 

I would implore all residents to contact your Councillors and the CEO and get them to stop this madness before more residents are killed or maimed on our roads. 

Image: Design by Graham Burrows of Jackson Clements Burrows Architects.

A petition regarding the development of a Youth Arts Precinct comprising a 350-seat theatre and a studio theatre adjacent to the Gasworks Park was presented by Christine Fetterplace, an Albert Park resident at Council Meeting on 6 July 2022. The Friends of Gasworks Arts Park are concerned about the impact of the arts precinct on parking and how the arts precinct will interface with the park. 

Victorian College of the Arts Secondary School (VCASS) will construct a new arts precinct in partnership with Albert Park College adjacent to the Gasworks Park. The arts precinct will consist of a major theatre, studio theatre, training and rehearsal areas, exhibition spaces with lighting, audio, digital projection, 3D and stage technologies. The arts precinct will have the capacity to host 50 or more major productions each year and construction is planned to commence later this year on land adjacent to the Gasworks Arts Park.

The Friends of Gasworks Arts Park petition containing 63 signatures states:

“We believe the proposed Victorian Youth Arts Precinct is an overdevelopment of the former Multiplex site adjacent to the Gasworks Park. According to the plan on the internet the development covers most of the site with no open space. A theatre is one thing but a Precinct with two theatres, rehearsal spaces, a cafe, box office and other facilities is not needed and is in the wrong place. There is no provision for car of bus parking. This will cause problems for all residents in the area with up to 50 productions a year proposed with seating for 350 in the main theatre. The wall which separates the development from the park is to be removed according to the plan. We the undersigned ask the Council to make sure this wall is not demolished or reduced in height. It separates the Park area, which is managed by the Council from the adjoining Precinct, which has never been part of the park and will be managed by the school”.

The State Government will fund the project and will be constructed by the Victorian School Building Authority (VSBA). Although the project does not require Council planning permits, Christine Fetterplace said “Even though education projects under the VSBA are exempt from any Council planning permits, this does not mean Council is exempt from its responsibilities to make sure parking, traffic and resident's amenity considerations are not sacrificed”.

The existing Gasworks theatre is owned by Council and does not interface with the park. It is one of the original heritage buildings and is unobtrusive on the park area. The new arts precinct will consist of two storeys high modern buildings and will dominate the Park if the wall separating the park and arts precinct is removed. The Friends of Gasworks Arts Park oppose the removal of the wall (pictured) because it would give students great access to the park. Christine Fetterplace said, “Council has a responsibility to its residents to consider the impact on the park and its many users, not just do whatever the school wants”.

Mayor Pearl spoke to the motion saying that community consultation produces better outcomes, and it is “Council’s responsibility to advocate for the best interests of our citizens”. Councillors voted unanimously to request the mayor to write to the Minister of Education to request the VSBA to undertake formal consultation with Council on the design of the Youth Arts Precinct and request that the process be established by the VSBA or relevant state government departments or agencies for addressing local residents concerns during planning and construction and following the opening of the Youth Arts Precinct.

The motion also recommended petitioners to contact the Victorian Youth Arts Precinct (VYAP) and VSBA with their concerns (see website below).

LEARN MORE | VicYouthArtsPrecinct

Victorian College Of The Arts Secondary School & Albert Park College | Victorian School Building Authority (schoolbuildings.vic.gov.au)

By  a St Kilda Elder

Having lived in St Kilda south for over 40 years, I have had numerous encounters with the homeless, or as the more woke amongst us say, “people experiencing homelessness”. Some rather pleasant - like when Rebecca stopped me in the Woollies carpark and offered me a bundy and coke if I would give her a cigarette. It was 8am so she was on her own with the bundy, but we had a fag together and talked about her life- she had once had a car but had lost it. She didn’t mention drugs but admitted she loved her booze. She quite liked the Acland Street area and told me most locals were kind and generous.  Rebecca is probably in her late 30s, not unattractive and was articulate and easy to talk with, at least that day she was. Other times when I've greeted her by name, she has actually scared me. So there is clearly a mental health issue going on. Last week I saw her in the entry to the Coles arcade and asked her how she was coping with the cold and if she needed a warm jacket. She was a bit distracted but said she was ok.

My latest strategy with folk sitting outside the supermarkets asking for change, ( we probably cannot say begging ) is to ask if they are hungry or thirsty before I go in to shop, Then I can offer a juice or a serve of hot chicken on my way out. On occasion, in a fit of generosity or middle-class guilt, I have handed over $50. I stopped giving cash after I saw one large middle-aged man, sprawled in a doorway, throw the couple of $2 coins back at a lady who had deposited them on his hanky, screaming at her “that won’t even buy me a cuppa coffee!!” 

Today on the ramp to Woollies I met Dale, a young man who would once have been considered handsome. This morning though, he had sores on his face and his forehead was bleeding. When I inquired, he told me they had fallen on his face onto concrete. I asked whether he was hungry and handed him $10 saying he could choose what he wanted to eat and if I could ask him couple questions. He is a regular on the ramp and I asked whether he considered himself homeless. He told me he had no-one, no family, no home. He told me he uses ice and showed me a nasty looking sore on his arm. He said if he can get the money, he sometimes stays in hotels for about $100. I asked him about money, and he said he gets regular money from the State Trustees, put there by his mother. I presume she made this arrangement before she died, to ensure he didn’t blow the lot on ice. When I said - oh gosh, ice is a really bad drug, isn’t it? he smiled for the first time and said - nah, I love it… feels good. 

As we talked a bloke came down the ramp and handed Dale a small can of coke and a large bag of potato chips. He stuffed a handful in his mouth and almost immediately started coughing and gasping and muttered something about having been exposed to a gas leak down in Port Melbourne. The coughing fit continued, and I joked about me doing the Heimlich manoeuvre to help him. Then he turned nasty - telling me I was trying to make him talk while he was hungry and wanted to eat the chips. He was still coughing and blaming the gas leak and I suggested he have a sip of the drink. He got nastier and told me in no uncertain terms to  bugger off. As I left I urged him to buy something a bit healthier with the ten bucks. 

I feel over-whelming compassion for people sleeping rough but, what the hell can we do to alleviate this issue of people sleeping rough, begging outside shops and doing hard and dangerous drugs. According to the Security Guard at Acland Court, it used to be much worse some years ago. He said the gates to the court are locked at midnight, but he sees the occasional person in the doorways. The 'concrete garden’ at the end of Acland Street seems to attract groups of what might be called people 'without purpose'. Once I made biscuits and tried to hand them round to a few groups but had not many takers. 

Many residents do feel apprehension and fear having to step over sleeping bodies on the streets of Port Phillip. I understand that some areas have become like open air drug camps. In summer I guess that is. There is verbal abuse and even my acquaintance Rebecca has charged at me screaming. The harm minimisation approach does seem to have created another industry of despair. Is providing food and blankets and social workers and clothes washing service and turning a blind eye to hard drug use going to heal these people? Help them get out of the vicious cycle of drug use and homelessness and more drug use…? Will drug decriminalisation and a safe injecting room make Port Phillip proud and productive? 

I don’t know the answers - but homeless hotspots around the world are coming to the end of their progressive tethers. San Francisco residents are so sick of dodging human faeces on the sidewalks that they are reassessing their approach. They are wanting more prosecutions of the open use of hard drugs and petty crime like shoplifting. In Europe some countries require those seeking social benefits to attend drug or alcohol treatment centres or get help for mental illness. It was publicised in January this year that: “Port Phillip becomes the first Australian community to measurably reduce rough sleeping”. This was seen as a "key milestone on the path to reaching functional zero.” Data had been collated and stakeholders consulted, and money spent. I do wonder how much of our rates is spent on tackling these problems. And whether the drop in homeless numbers had a lot to do with Covid funds providing hotel accommodation. Still the challenge of too little affordable housing remains. 

I was quite excited to see a recent item on the ABC news site, about Noosa Council considering an application by a builder, Greg Phipps, to build dozens of tiny modular homes to provide affordable housing in Cooroy, which will be self-sustainable - meaning no bills for residents. Good onya Greg! A great idea. Now where on earth could Port Phillip place dozens of tiny homes for the needy? Oh I know - Elsternwick Park! We must already have some equity in that improvement project, having kicked in hundreds of thousands…

By Ron B

I thought our old wooden cottage at our family country property could potentially burn down each and every fire season. I thought that I could catch some deadly disease or get cancer at some stage of my life was a possibility. I could have a heart attack or stroke any minute. I thought I could be involved in a car accident or get run over crossing a bicycle lane. But then I never thought that my house would burn down. But it did. 

And despite having had good insurance, the emotional shock, total life upheaval and the revelation that myself and partner could have died in that fire certainly had an impact.

A friend sent me this video and although I don't think that it will ever happen to me the information, I know now has armed me … just in case. 

You know what they say “Information is Power” “forewarned is forearmed”...So check out this video… 

AND make sure you install a smoke detector in each bedroom… It's the cheapest Life insurance you can buy… You can take my word for it...

PLEASE WATCH THE VIDEO!

Image of Bridge Street bike lane running down the centre of the road.

Residents all over Port Phillip have expressed outrage over the poorly designed and dangerous pop-up bike lanes. Vic Roads and Port Phillip Council need to bear responsibility for failed $13 million project, with poorly designed bike lanes, speed humps in front of existing speed humps or the bollards in the middle of the road causing chaos. The Bridge Street bike path in Port Melbourne is particularly dangerous where the bike lanes on the left and right sides of the road cross automobile traffic lanes to the bike lanes running up the centre of Bridge Street. Facebook followers will be aware of hundreds of comments such as these:

“I just watched a young man try and negotiate the section where the lane crosses into the middle. Trying hard to do the right thing he still almost got a car up his rear and then got stuck trying to cross back over when no cars would let him merge”. Paul – Port Melbourne Focus

“I've just driven up Bridge St from Ross St to Bay St. It's like an April Fool's joke.  And now you're not supposed to turn left into Bay to drive city bound? Truly bizarre. I turned left anyway to head to the Town Hall” Justine – Port Melbourne Focus

“The sheer idiocy of VicRoads and Council with the installation of the so-called pop-up bike lanes beggars belief. Not only allowing the project to proceed but allowing them to remain. A complete and utter disregard for public safety. Interesting question on the individual culpability of those who allowed this dangerous situation to occur and then continue if there is an injury or death”. Bryce – Port Melbourne Focus

Vic Roads and Port Phillip Council need to improve its consultative processes. Residents say they were blindsided by the new bike lanes and have asked why they were not consulted about the bike lanes. VicRoads are completing up to 40kms of pop-up bike routes in the City of Port Phillip with minimal community engagement. Vic Roads posted notices in the affected streets and put postcards in letterboxes, like the one displayed below. The postcard displayed a QR code that highlighted affected streets, but detailed designs were not displayed. Vic Roads also directed residents to “Have your say” on the proposed pop-up bike lanes, click here The website is difficult to use and many people gave up responding to the survey. 

A majority of Councillors voted to endorse the Vic Roads $13 million pop-up bike lanes identified in the map below in the City of Port Phillip on 1st September 2021.  The motion gave authority to Council Officers to process any permits and approvals necessary for the installation and maintenance of the ‘pop-up’ bike lane infrastructure on Council owned roads. 

The pop-up bike lanes are being trialled for the next 12 to 18 months. Your feedback is important for whether this becomes permanent or not. Scan the QR code to provide feedback.

By Dean Hurlston, Ratepayers Victoria, Inc. 

It is well established that Council CEOs move around the industry to advance their careers.

The vast majority of Large Council CEOs come from smaller Councils or roles within the local government sector. A review of CEO profiles on LinkedIn shows just how mobile Council Executive staff and CEOs are. They are always on the lookout for larger roles and larger pay packets.

Across Victoria there is an immeasurable talent pool from Private industry , but you will rarely, if ever, see any of the Private sector talent running our 79 Councils.

Local Councils do not have a definition in law that constrains them to rubbish, roads and rates which is what most people expect Councils to deliver on.

The Local Government Sector is awash with CEO’s and Executive staff that are in it for one reason and one reason only – to resume build, and they don’t want competition from the private sector.

When the Local Government Act was updated in 2020, the CEOs and their union (The MAV) took absolute exception to the Minister at the time (Adem Somyurek) inviting ratepayer organisations to make suggestions on what needed to be changed. 

It was no accident, but it was a defining moment.

For me, it was the start of a study of the Local Government Sector and why CEO’s did not want the end user, consumers (residents and ratepayers) being anywhere near the legislative changes.

Many good suggestions made it into the original draft legislation, only to be removed by intense lobbying by the MAV and Council CEOs. Some of the changes sought to address the power imbalance the public has when dealing with the CEO and executive staff.

When power does not want to be accountable and is fastidious in lobbying against any resident and ratepayer protections, you know there is cartel behaviour behind it.

So what is this cartel?

Quite simply CEOs preside over budgets of hundreds of millions of dollars. They also have very high delegated spending limits (some as high as $2M). These delegations mean the CEO can spend this money without ANY accountability. Only if a spend goes over do they need Councillor permission.

There is a long established pattern in Councils (uncovered by the Victorian Auditor General VAGO, and the Ombudsman) of getting around delegated authority limits by breaking spends into smaller amounts to avoid scrutiny. This has been raised for many years by VAGO as a corruption risk, yet still nothing changes.

Further to this, CEOs use Council projects as the money makers to progress their own careers. These projects have slim, rhetoric-based business cases, if at all. They also use large swathes of ratepayers’ money or enormous amounts of borrowings. Either way, it is long known amongst the CEO group that the way to grow your career is to “BUILD STUFF”. CEOs often go to councils where there is a significant build pipeline because this is what motivates them. 

It is of course these projects that build ones resume and career opportunities. 

The boring stuff of council, running an efficient and lean business is absolutely not on the agenda.

Any listed public company director knows that a good CEO is able to do two things – run an efficient and cost-effective business and innovate to drive transformation that better serves its customers or stakeholders. Yet why is this the antithesis of Council CEOs?

Self Interest. If there is one thing all CEOs have learned in the political machinations of Councils, it is of their self-interest. They are not responsible to industry KPI’s, or standards and they can pretty much make anything up as they go. There are horrific stories across the industry of fraud, politicisation, and cost blows outs, but rarely if ever does a CEO get fired. If they find themselves in a position that is untenable, they are easily able to move Councils and leave behind the trail of destruction, for the ratepayers to pay for yet again.

The Council CEO industry is awash with Ego and hubris. They all regularly inform the government and ministers about their views of what needs to happen in the industry and so far we have a government hell bent on protecting the CEO culture instead of holding them accountable.

Let’s be clear here, many Council CEOs wouldn’t last a month in the private sector, accountable to a real board of directors. They don’t have the business acumen to run a lean and efficient organisation.

On the topic of building, we have seen so many communities oppose large projects and offer alternative cheaper models over the years. Every time they have been outmanoeuvred and outsmarted by CEOs and executive groups who have access to top lawyers, top experts and advisors who will do and say anything to defeat well-meaning residents and ratepayers.

This is the dilemma of Councils. A corporation, run by CEOs who do not have to answer Councillors questions, who keep councillors stage managed with only the information they want to share.

CEOs who have unfettered power. CEOs who can hide community grant recipients connected to Councillors. CEOs who can command internal reviews when things go wrong, but nothing changes. CEOs who buy luxury cars to keep mayors happy. CEOs who know that ultimately, they run this show and they call the shots. CEOs who know that building large projects keeps councillors happy too. These projects help their favourite councillors get elected and re-elected. CEOs who know that they can do things politically for Councillors that will keep them in a job. CEOs who can sit on boards and regularly be keynote speakers in businesses that profit from the sector.

CEOs who wouldn’t dare go to the public sector because that would be an impossible transition.

CEOs who know the sector doesn’t hire from outside, so they are always a protected species.

So next time you drive past a Council project worth tens of millions of ratepayer dollars, whether it be a pool, an indoor stadium, a multi-level carpark, a retail precinct, or a new Town Hall, just remember that this is the legacy of Council CEOs. Their only purpose. To build stuff for their resume and continue to grow the ever-ballooning number of staff at their beck and call.

While they are at it, they command salaries of $300,000 - 700,000 per annum. More than our highest paid state politicians, yet the CEOs are not elected and control $12 billion our money every year. 

A Cartel, you bet!

by a St Kilda Elder

Friends in Brighton are astonished when I tell them what I pay for rates in City of Port Phillip - for a small house and frontage… oh and the couple of hundred dollars extra I have to pay, so I get to park on my street and to allow my 96 year old Dad a visitor parking permit if he visits.

So imagine my surprise, and my indignation when I recently discovered that CoPP is planning to kick in financially, to assist to our wealthier Bayside neighbours to upgrade parts of Elsternwick Park; including an Urban Forest and Wetland. It is only a few years ago that I tied myself to a tree on the old Beachcomber Marine Parade site, as I saw men with chainsaws arriving to cut down a bunch of very old (probably over 100 years) Washingtonia Palms (the very tall skinny ones) which had adorned the site. I thought CoPP was the greenie Council, with respect for “significant trees”. Yet these grand old graceful palms were hacked down, all over the block to make space for the 23 apartments which now stand there.  Before the police came to escort me off the site, someone showed me a piece of paper which indicated the trees "were or would become unstable". Well yes, if you dug foundations or basements under them, of course they would become unstable! God forbid the architects could consider a slightly lower density urban French approach, seen all over central Paris, where apartments are built around enclosed gardens containing… trees! 

Ok that’s one gripe off my mind! But now an “Urban Forest and wetland” in Elsternwick Park? I've walked a dog all around that park. I've played golf on the course. Seemed like there were plenty of trees and ponds to make my terrible golf game even crappier. Ducks and other birds abounded. Even frogs. It was a bit rough and ready in places - but then...that’s nature!!

On 21 March 2018 CoPP met to discuss “the development of an Urban Forest and Wetland in Elsternwick Park North, subject to confirmation that the Urban Forest would reduce flooding, improve public amenity and water quality, includes water harvesting and distribution and protects and enhances biodiversity.” [Meeting minutes Port Phillip Council 16/3/22: Exec Summary para 2.1]

Wetlands make sense, but so do composting toilets and I don’t see any of them around St Kilda/Elwood/Elsternwick. Perhaps the well-paid Council workers would prefer not to have to distribute humanure. Biodiversity, stormwater harvesting, and public amenity are all fab aspirations - on my teeny block I have water tanks and possum houses and amenity galore. However, the goal of the upgrade had as its first cited aspiration “...reduce flooding…” Having experienced firsthand the 1984 Kilda/Elwood flood, when canoes were paddling down Wordsworth Street outside my house and water was tiptoeing up to my veranda, I thought the flood mitigation plan, albeit in an adjacent Council, might be worth something to St Kilda/Elwood areas. 

But the first part of the Masterplan to bite the dust was - yes you guessed - the “flood retention basin” as Melbourne Water “chose to instead pursue an alternative flood mitigation option.”

The cost to Bayside (without the flood mitigation basin) is to be around the $20 million dollar mark, of which $12 million is for the wetlands construction and stormwater harvesting components. Estimated costs for transporting water to Point Ormond, MO Moran Reserve are estimated to cost CoPP ratepayers $300k-600k and if transported further to St Kilda Botanic Gardens and the Peanut Farm  - $3-5million. Wait for that Ratepayers!!!

Currently the CoPP ratepayers are already contributing funds as a "co-funder” of the design stage “...in the 2022/23 financial year …approximately $320,000 is required to project manage the design and engage consultants to complete the design.” [CoPP Minutes 16/3/22 para2.7] 

And of course, it won’t stop there… So put your hands up Ratepayers of CoPP - who wants to kick in for yet another eco education centre, the urban forest which might not have been necessary but for CoPP block clearing for more high-density development meaning additional rates for them. Oh and increased amenity for a park that is not even in our Local Government Area. 

By Jimmy Olsen

Sometimes we wonder if the council staff actually mean what they say. Here is an example from  last week that seems, on the kindest interpretation, misguided. And possibly even …….. well what does our community think?

Last Friday (20th May) this flyer was hand delivered to all the shops in Clarendon Street with a welcoming smile to “join in the discussion”. We noted that the event scheduled had started 45 minutes prior to the invite being delivered and asked the obvious. How were we able to prepare for this? How were we able to attend given that we were all busy staffing our own shops and perhaps most bizarrely, why pay someone to hand deliver invitations to an event that was already almost half over. 

We don’t use Facebook but have been bombarded (at least daily) on Instagram with the image of a City of Port Phillip staffer thrusting out a card “We want your opinion”. Fair enough, we feel confident that it is a good idea (if not a legal requirement) for our Councils to consult with the community, but we are left wondering if performing this role is possibly more about theatre, than substance.

It may be that when the council uses those other paid “consultants”, it is often receiving more “palatable” responses. Maybe even advice more in line with its own needs and ideas. Consulting with unpaid members of the community can sometimes lead to tougher processes. We understand their approach. We too are all for an easy life. And we certainly don’t feel ignored because, as she walked out (to deliver more late invitations) she turned to assure us that our thoughts would be “relayed to Council”. So that’s alright then.

Sometimes we wonder if the council staff actually mean what they say. Here is an example from  last week that seems, on the kindest interpretation, misguided. And possibly even…….. well what does our community think?

Image by Sean Cummins - see full screen

A message from the School Council Presidents - Hannah Lawson & Elisa Webb

Dear Parents/Carers,

On Wednesday night, despite a petition with over 1,300 signatures and hundreds of emails objecting, the City of Port Phillip Council voted to go ahead with their plan to place a public toilet near the entrance of our school.  

As a School Council we are very disappointed with this outcome and with the conduct of some Councillors in the meeting (particularly Cr Peter Martin, who said that SKiPPS parents need to educate their children more about safety).  

We are not opposed to public toilets, but the location needs to be well considered and we believe that safety standards and cleaning regimes need to be above what currently exists elsewhere in the CoPP.  

To summarise the vote: 

• Cr Bond, Cr Pearl, Cr Copsey and Cr Martin voted to go ahead with the project
• Cr Crawford abstained from voting 
• Cr Consulo, Cr Clark and Cr Sirakoff voted against placing the toilets in the proposed location and to stop the project.

You can Listen to the Councillors discuss the proposal at the meeting on 15 June from the 1 hour 48-minute mark in the webcast https://www.facebook.com/cityofportphillip/videos/836525410663145/ 

We encourage any school families or community members who wish to show their continued opposition to the construction of the toilets at the site to write to the COPP Mayor, Cr Pearl, and the CEO, Peter Smith.

Marcus.Pearl@portphillip.vic.gov.au 

Peter.Smith@portphillip.vic.gov.au 

It is also time to escalate the issue to elected officials at the State level, and we encourage you to contact the Education Minister, the Premier and our Local Member, Martin Foley.

james.merlino@parliament.vic.gov.au 

daniel.andrews@parliament.vic.gov.au 

martin.foley@parliament.vic.gov.au 

The land in question is owned by Parks Victoria, so you can also write to the Parks Victoria CEO, Matthew Jackson, and the Chair, Hon. John Pandazopoulos.

ceo@parks.vic.gov.au 

John.pandazopoulos@parliament.vic.gov.au 

If you have any other suggestions or contacts, please get in touch with School Council via Michelle at

michelle.bove@education.vic.gov.au 

By John Hawker 

John Hawker, a resident in Gateway Ward has given PPM permission to publish his letter on rates to Port Phillip Councillors  who will vote on rates rises on 29 June. 

Dear Councillors,

I’ve never written to a local council in my 65 years of life; however, on this occasion, I feel compelled to do so after the recent Federal election. Voters are enlightened and there’s an “appetite“ for change. The two major party system is weakened, and this will flow into local government, unless our elected officials listen to their ratepayers. Teal is the new black!

I am a relatively long tern ratepayer; having lived in the area in two different premises in Gateway Ward since 2005 . I enjoy the amenity and proximity to beach and the city. In recent years I have become disillusioned with how the rates I pay you have been used. I’ve done some homework / research and find that my rates on a comparative basis are very high compared to other local councils. On further “digging“, I’m perplexed as to why CoPP has significantly higher operating costs compared to our neighbouring councils. There can be several reasons for this; however, I certainly do not see the level of service greater than other council areas. This has now prompted me to consider requesting a rate review. I also consider this given Councils desire to spend our rate money in another council area. Id support this if our council was operating efficiently; however, I feel it cannot be. On this basis, I also strongly believe councillors should consider a rate freeze. If you can spend money out of your rateable area, you have spare money. Freeze the rates and reward your ratepayers with some relief in these current extremely difficult times.

So, I seek your support for a rates freeze in 2022/23. You have a cash surplus forecast and our rates are already excessive compared to our neighbouring councils.

As a councillor , I believe you are accountable to ratepayers to represent our community. I can see from a number or projects that have happened whilst I remained quiet; are wasteful, inefficient, self- serving in some instances and don’t improve services. Surely your aim should be to enhance community benefit / improve service. I note the CoPP has the highest headcount and wages bill of all neighbouring councillors. I don’t see anything more to show for it. How do you hold the CEO and his executive team accountable? I also note that you don’t appear to “zero base“ your budgeting, which is international best practice. It seems your executive are simply adding a percentage year on year when they formulate the CoPP budget. This is not the way to glory. It’s the road to bankruptcy, inefficiency, and laziness. It’s a predictable process of built-in increases. Further, the year-on-year headcount appears to grow and there’s very little to show for it. I’d question the CEO on whether he’s building an empire and have him consider a headcount freeze; which the huge corporates I was involved in did business; particularly in difficult times for customers ( in your case read ratepayers).

Having our elected councillors consider a rate freeze, would indicate you are listening to ratepayers, and you do care about us. After significant trouble over the last 2 and a half years; and the impending issues we now face in the economy (inflation, interest rate increases, fuel, power, gas and food prices) we won’t see any relief imminently nor for the foreseeable future.

There is hardship in our community, but please don’t ignore me.  At some point, those who can support the hardship cases, hit a tipping point. I’m there, hence why I’m now doing more research. The research, as mentioned, indicates I’m paying significantly more than ratepayers in similar sized premises for similar services. Thank you for waking me up to move my case forward re my rates. 

Individual council areas have their peculiarities like beaches and markets etc. Please don’t insult your ratepayers by trotting out this excuse. It’s a benign argument. 

I now learn that council is considering a waste charge. Please be honest and transparent in this with ratepayers. We are not stupid. This is a way to increase rates by stealth. 

I ask you to support a rate freeze for 2022/23, as well as voting against a separate waste charge. Think about us , the people who voted for you . Think about how you spend our money. Think about the demographic of the people paying you the rates (pensioners, retirees, families, single people). Think about whether you are giving ratepayers value for their money. Think about the change in the air regarding elected officials.

Yours sincerely 

John Hawker 

St Kilda Park Primary School (SKIPPS) community were disappointed that Port Phillip Councillors voted on 15 June to build public toilets metres away from the school. The decision ignores widespread opposition to the project, including the Albert Park MP and a petition containing more than 1,300 signatures.  

Hannah Lawson, Vice President of SKIPPS School Council said, “As a School Council we are very disappointed with this outcome and with the conduct of some Councillors in the meeting (particularly Cr Peter Martin, who said that SKIPPS parents need to educate their children more about safety)”.  

Hannah also observed that “Council run toilets in the Coles Car Park in Balaclava, Shakespeare Grove and on The Slopes regularly attract anti-social behaviours and are not cleaned and serviced regularly enough to provide a safe facility for the community”.

Five Councillors voted in favour of the proposal, three opposed the motion and one abstained (see details below). The majority decision approves the construction of the public toilet in the selected location near the school, while allowing discussions with Parks Victoria to “see if the toilet block can be moved slightly further north” (towards Princess Street). However, the motion does not guarantee that the toilet block will be moved further from the school. 

The Councillors voting in favour of the public toilets near the school said there is a need for public toilets on Fitzroy Street. One councillor observed Council had attempted to build toilets in18 other locations over a 14 year period but have been frustrated by community opposition and petitions. 

Claire Scothm, a St Kilda resident commented on the decision that “It shows how out of touch some of the Councillors are from the community. Failed to listen. Dismissed the petition and plethora of emails raising legitimate safety genuine concerns. Removed the kids protest notices straight away. No way of guaranteeing the toilets won't be filthy and used for everything but their purpose”.

SKIPPS opposed the proposal public toilets because of health and safety concerns. The petition states that Council has a poor track record of providing clean, safe, and well looked after public toilet facilities, and parents are very concerned that these toilets would present a safety risk to students, families, and wider community members. Importantly parents are concerned the proposed public toilet block will become an unsafe for children because these facilities attract drug users, discarded syringes and other anti-social behaviours. 

SKIPPS advocated for public toilets to be re-located further down Fitzroy Street towards the beach to mitigate the risks of placing it next to a primary school and better meet the Council's stated aim to serve the needs of shoppers and bar and restaurant users, the majority of which are located between Grey Street and the Esplanade. Elisa Webb, a SKIPPS parent said “there is a long history of public toilets being built, and then closed or demolished due to public safety concerns in Fitzroy Street. Inviting these safety issues to the front of a primary school is unwise, with potential legal ramifications, especially as the feasibility studies have not included a formal risk assessment process”.

Listen to the Councillors discuss the proposal at the meeting on 15 June at the 1 hour 39 minute in the webcast https://webcast.portphillip.vic.gov.au/archive/video22-0615.php

Crs Clark, Cunsolo and Sirakoff voted against placing the toilets in the proposed location and to stop the project. 

Crs Baxter, Bond, Copsey, Martin & Pearl voted to proceed with the construction of the new public toilet block. 

Cr Crawford abstained from voting.

Image of Peanut Farm sourced from CoPP website

by a St Kilda Elder

We all know water is a resource which, at least in the southern states, must be conserved at all cost. The proposed CoPP donation to the Elsternwick Park (Bayside) project, is partly justified by water CoPP is supposed to be able to transport from Bayside to CoPP, including to The Peanut Farm.  Oh, did I mention? It will be a huge future expense, whether brought to our area by pipes or trucks. Or maybe ratepayers could have a low-cost community activity with a fun bucket brigade stretching from Elsternwick down Glenhuntly Road. 

Recently I had occasion to wander around the Peanut Farm, the oval, and the nearby gardens. I was particularly interested in the footy pavilion. Lots of roof there.  Lots. And so close to the oval which literally sucks water. Now being a mother, I do not begrudge the oval. I spent many a freezing night watching my kids play sport there. Although I was a little surprised when a few years ago, the whole oval was completely re-turfed, rather than replanted with seeds for the appropriate drought friendly grasses. So to my mind, and I confess I had a country girlhood, a large roof means large water tanks to collect large amounts of rainwater. 

There is one small tank at the east end of the Pavilion, about the size I've managed to squeeze into my tiny yard. Maybe enough to flush the public toilets but certainly insufficient to service the oval. Water tanks now come in a range of shapes, sizes, colours. You can even buy tanks which are about 20 centimetres wide - which could replace all the old paling fences between houses. CoPP should consider water collecting tanks on every Council property. How many litres are harvested off the Town Hall?  Every roof is sacred space for rainwater collection.

And to finish up this watery tale - I have photographs showing sprinklers generously  spraying water around Renfrey Gardens when it was actually raining! I was appalled then. And I remain...

by a St Kilda Elder

It has come to my attention that the City of Port Phillip propose to introduce an extra fixed waste charge, despite little support with only 35% in favour (53% strongly disagree or disagree and 12% neither agree nor disagree), at a recent Deliberative Consultation. And despite some 12% of my rates being said to cover waste. Council will of course tell us that this waste levy will be revenue neutral in the first year; in that the extra bin charge will be offset by an equal reduction in existing rates, but the bin charge will be a source of an estimated $25 million of additional revenue in following years. 

So, are they offering something extra? Can they make silk purses from the swine’s ears we lob into our bins? 

We have never had green bins or food waste bins, as many other councils do, where rates are indeed lower that ours. Instead, those of us who are prepared to put our money where our mouths are, on the issue of sustainability and recycling, install our own worm farms and compost bins to handle much of the organic waste. It can even be done on balconies. 

[FYI people:  worms can tolerate soft paper, leaves and just about all food stuffs except anything from the citrus and onion/garlic families. Compost bins can handle citrus and onion. I warn folks about meat products as they can attract vermin and the last thing, I want is a Council Rat Catcher levy!]

CoPP seem always to be contriving to suck more money out of ratepayers. And they prefer the kind of income that is not constrained by the Fair Go rates cap which restricts rate rises to the CPI. So, this year the bin levy may not be noticed in our rates. But CoPP is optimistic enough to forecast increases of 6.4% in 23/24 and 10.4% in 24/25, subject only to the Essential Services Commission’s tick of approval. 

So, is the waste levy just a ploy to sidestep the rates cap? I wonder which well paid consultant dreamed this one up.

By Ron B

Standing there 4am in an old t shirt and jeans the fire almost out, shivering thinking about getting something warm on. It dawns on me that what I am wearing are all the clothes I have. Everything else is gone, Burned or in the rubble of what was left of our home. I ended up finding some old farm coat that was in the garage ready for a trip to the Salvos, which made me look like some hobo and didn't flatter my 4pm appearance on the 7-news interview.

The next 3 days were a bit of a blur as we got the very basics of our lives resorted. I'd been living in the same clothes for 3 days till family and friends started outfitting us with new clothing and basic essentials such like toothbrush and deodorant, undies, hair dryer, brushes-n-stuff. Things just started to appear out of the blue from all sorts of people going out and shopping for us, family and friends collecting money locally and overseas and gifts of food and dinners each day. We didn’t cook for the first month after the fire. Not that we were short of cash, but these many acts of kindness helped us emotionally as well as physically. And the last thing I could do was go shopping as I was trying to cope with more than my tiny brain could handle.

Swarms of well-wishers, friends and family came to visit us over the first 3 days while we were staying next door with our neighbours, taking over their home, devouring refreshments and taking up couch space. A lot of hugs and tears were exchanged during those first days… Not that I am that way inclined, but I did choke up just a little when I initially rang the insurance company and it dawned on me the true state of our predicament. To that end my daughters fiancée took over the Insurance liaison roll, and things started moving forward gaining momentum. 

The house itself looked like a bomb had hit, not that you could see anything from the front or for that matter from the back roadway but there was no roof at the back. Just a lot of blackened and jagged roof beams and a massive teetering Dorma window that was lurching towards the other neighbours house. This all needed to be made safe. If I was standing, there after the fire on my own I would not know what I would have needed to do first. 

My knight in shiny red armour was our insurance company AAMI. They basically took over everything and lead us gently by the hand along a path that firstly made safe the house so that no-one would get hurt and the structure was a safe place for people to work in and not a danger to our neighbours.

They organised a team of demolition people and a 65-ton crane and basket that cut away all the dangerous protrusions and things that could accidentally fall any further. The crane helped to dislodge the massive Dorma into the house itself so there was no danger to anyone. They propped up what was left of the stairs so that there was access to the top floors. Then a team of people cleared access to areas of the house for the other teams of assessors, forensic inspectors engineers, electricians, plumbers, estimators, rubble removers and the contents removals people. 

The way the system worked is that the building side of our policy is treated separately from the contents side. The building side we were given the choice of the Insurance company rebuilding the home to exactly how it was before the fire or the other option of being paid out the agreed or in our case the full insured amount. The contents side we were given a catalogued and photographic breakdown of all the items taken and disposed of including the items I had catalogued and photographed. Then it was up to us to nominate a replacement cost of each item which was then checked or adjusted by the insurer. A lot of work but a lot of money was involved.

From my point of view our insurer was very fair and professional and we were treated well.  30 years + being with the same insurance company... I am happy that we stuck with AAMI (no this is not an ad). They were really good.

St Kilda Park Primary School are concerned about City of Port Phillip Council plans to build public toilets metres away from the school. Mr Neil Scott, Principal said “Whilst we understand the need for public toilets, other council-run toilets in St Kilda are allowed to be dirty, poorly maintained and a focus for anti-social behaviour. If this happens next to a primary school, our students, families, and whole community will be less safe”.

Mr Scott has asked resident to please consider signing our petition to find a better spot for public toilets on the street.

Petition · Reconsider the plan to build public toilets next to St Kilda Park Primary School · Change.org

The petition states the following: 

The City of Port Phillip Council has released plans to construct a public toilet facility in the parkland facing Fitzroy Street, immediately in front of St Kilda Park Primary School. Based on the track record of the Council in not being able to provide clean, safe and well looked-after public toilet facilities, the School Council is very concerned that these toilets would present a safety risk to our students, families and wider community members.

Elsewhere in St Kilda, public toilets have become dirty, unsafe spaces that attract drug users and other anti-social behaviours. We believe that the risks of this happening within 15 metres of our driveway are unacceptable. 

The Council has accepted that these risks exist but are determined to build new public toilets, believing that this location is the only option on Fitzroy Street.

We believe public toilets are important but that a facility located further down Fitzroy Street would remove the risks of placing it next to a primary school and also better meet the Council's stated aim to serve the needs of shoppers and bar and restaurant users, the majority of which are located between Grey Street and the Esplanade. 

Through this petition, we seek to show the widespread opposition to this risky project in an inappropriate location and to urge Council to go back to the drawing board and find a better location for this facility.

In a win for residents, Department of Transport (DoT) has announced the withdrawal of proposed designs for the pop-up bike lanes on Kerferd Road following extensive community consultation and based on the feedback received. This means DoT will no longer make any changes to Kerferd Road as part of the Pop-up Bike Lanes Program.

The decision is a win for residents who actively campaigned against the proposal. Heidi Ireland, a resident on Kerferd Road, together with her neighbours, obtained signatures from the majority of residents specifically impacted by the ‘parking separated bike lanes’ and organised residents to provide feedback to DoT officers at a marquee set up on the corner of Montague Street and Kerferd Road on Saturday 2 April. Residents objected to the ‘floated parking’ design, removal of car parking in front of their properties and loss of two lanes of car traffic which would have would have diverted traffic to local streets and worsened the rat run. 

Heidi said “we are absolutely in support of making Kerferd Road safer for bike riders, however not at the cost of pedestrian safety, in addition to reduced access to homes. We believe there is a practical solution here - but unfortunately so far there has only been an all or nothing approach considered. We are still concerned plans for parking separated bike lanes and removal of two lanes of traffic will be revisited when Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning (DELWP) construct their $13 million ‘Shrine to Sea’ project”.

DELWP’s website indicates the new boulevard connecting Domain Gardens to Port Phillip Bay along Albert and Kerferd Roads, will consider ‘improving safety and experience for people walking and bike riding’ and they have foreshadowed the ‘use landscaping to define a separate bike pathway on Kerferd Road to isolate bikes from cars’ https://www.environment.vic.gov.au/shrine-to-sea 

It is concerning that the Department of Transport in relation to community consultation claim “Overall support for speed limit reduction, reconfiguration of Kerferd Road to one traffic lane and safety improvements” - source. Based on feedback from residents there is no support for reconfiguration of Kerferd Road to one traffic lane.

Greg, a resident who objected to the proposed pop-up bike lanes on Kerferd, objected to the plan to remove one-lane of car traffic in each direction at the Richardson Street Roundabout and on Albert Road under the light rail. Kerferd Road is a major arterial that connects Beaconsfield parade to Albert Road and Kingsway.  Removing the lane under the light rail would make it impossible to get families to sport events at MSAC. Greg said that “This is a very wide road, with existing bike lanes, and would easily accommodate a better design solution that meets the need of bike riders and other road users. I would like Vic Roads to retain the two lanes of car traffic, introduce a 50 Km/h speed limit on Kerferd Road, and together with separated bike lanes that continue through the roundabout, this should be sufficient to meet the safety needs of all road users.”

Image from the ROPP election campaign in 2020. 

According to a report paid for by Australian Services Union (ASU), the Victorian Government’s Fair Go rate cap has cost jobs in the local government sector. The ASU commissioned the Australia Institute’s Centre for Future Work to investigate the impact of the Victorian Government’s Fair Go rate cap which was introduced in 2016 to protect consumers from excessive increases in council rates. The cap limits increases in rates revenue to the Consumer Price Index (CPI). 

The report titled “Putting a Cap on Community, The Economic and Social Consequences of Victoria’s Local Government Rate Caps Policy” concludes “The Victorian State Government’s policy to cap the rates of local government has cost the Victorian economy 7,425 direct and indirect jobs in 2021-22” The report also states, “The rate cap policy, imposed by the Victorian state government on local governments, interferes with the mission of service delivery and expanded, secure employment”. (Source: https://australiainstitute.org.au/report/putting-a-cap-on-community) 

The ASU is the representative body for local government workers and is lobbying to abolish or amend the rate cap because it says their members “are increasingly overworked and underpaid in a way that is not in step with the broader public sector”. 

With its tongue firmly planted in its cheek, the Ratepayer of Port Phillip (ROPP) ran an election campaign in 2020 asking, “How many council staff does it take to change a light bulb?” The campaign reported that Port Phillip rates are excessive compared to neighbouring Councils. This is because Port Phillip Council spends more than its neighbouring councils and the largest cost is employees. Benchmarked against other councils, COPP has much higher staff costs per resident. Does anyone kid themselves that Port Phillip needs 48% more staff per resident than Stonnington, 63% more than Glen Eira and 94% more than Bayside?

Therefore, it is not surprising that the study commissioned by the ASU is being used by the ASU for the benefit of their members. The study argues for the abolition of the rate cap to grow more jobs. This is offensive to those who pay rates and enjoy the protection of the rate cap. If the ASU had its way and thousands of jobs were added to Victorian Councils’ payroll, it would mean ratepayers would have to cough up hundreds of millions of dollars in additional rates annually. 

Local government has been politicised by vested interested such as the ASU and political parties. ROPP was formed to elect Councillors to represent residents and businesses and not these vested interests. Since before the 2020 Council election, ROPP has set out to ensure ratepayers are armed with the facts about how their rates are spent. 

Let’s bust some myths that are floating around COPP:

Myth 1: Services will be cut if Councils don’t get enough rates.

Reality: Councils needs to learn to live within their means like ordinary businesses and residents do. If times are tough, they need to evaluate choices and put some ‘pet projects’ to bed.

Myth 2: Councils need more staff as they deliver services like roads, libraries, planning etc

Reality: Many Council employees are employed delivering services to residents. But a large number are employed to write reports, commission research or promote the Council.

Myth 3: Council costs are increasing more than the rates cap, and they need a rise to keep up with cost increases

Reality: Governments, businesses and households are facing a reality of higher cost of living pressures after a long period of a benign inflation environment. Other levels of Government, not to mention businesses and taxpayers, have had to adjust to these higher cost of living pressures and so should the City of Port Phillip. 

Myth 4: additional jobs can be created at no cost

Reality: They would require a huge additional tax burden in higher rates taken out of the pockets of local residents and businesses.

The ASU find the reality of budgeting and sound financial management to be an inconvenient truth. In response to our election campaign, the President of the ACTU, Michelle O’Neil, campaigned against ROPP endorsed candidates in a social media video during the 2020 Port Phillip Council elections. More recently the ASU is paying for research from the Australia Institute to confirms its desired outcome: more jobs for their members. 

What do you think? Do you think residents can afford an uncapped rates system that would allow Councils to get away with amassing an even larger number of staff? Let us know your views at ppm.editor@gmail.com .

By Joe leong
On behalf of Representatives of the Park Street Neighbourhood Group (PSNG) (Residents and Property Owners of Park Street, South Melbourne)

Park Street, South Melbourne is getting a Department of Transport pop-up bike lane between Kings Way and Moray Street, but you would be forgiven if you knew nothing about it.  This project is not listed on the Vic Roads pop-up bike lane program website  so there has not been the normal process for community consultation about the project.  

Rather, the pop-up bike lane has been embedded and well hidden within the Park Street ‘Streetscape Improvement project’ which according to Council of Port Phillip, aims to create a “safe, connected and refreshed streetscape” for those living on or nearby, travelling through and using Park Street.  Protected bike lanes are proposed between Moray Street and St Kilda Road with:

• permanent construction between Kings Way and St Kilda Road
• temporary provision between Moray Street and Kings Way.

The ‘temporary’ reference is the only clue you will find in the Streetscape plan to this section being part of the Department of Transport pop-up bike lane program.

Residents and the broader community were asked to have their say about the Park Street Streetscape Improvement project just before Christmas last year.  Despite being preoccupied with everything else that happens at that time of the year a number of Park Street residents raised concerns about elements of the proposal.  In particular, these concerns questioned the:

• The need for a protected bike lane as there is already one just one block away in Albert Road
• The need for ‘floating parking’ along Park Street between Kings Way and Moray Street so the bike lanes can be positioned between parked cars and the footpath, and
• The need to remove 12 parking bays between Moray Street and Kings Way

I will broadly go through the background and response we received to each of these key concerns.

Duplication of the bike path in Albert Road

Why is a second bike lane needed just one block away from a protected lane on Albert Rd, which connects the Domain to Moray St? This existing bike lane connects cyclist to local attractions like Albert Park Lake and the Aquatic Centre.  Council planners point to the findings of the Comparative Assessment of Park Street Bike Link Technical Note (sponsored by council) and prepared by CDM Research, which found that the Albert Road bike path was a poor alternative to the Park Street as it may add an extra 400m to a cyclist’s trip. For comparison, Council considers it reasonable for residents who will lose parking spaces due to the bike lane, to walk up to 400m from their property to where their car is parked. So, residents can be expected to walk 400m, but cyclists shouldn’t cycle that far!

It was also argued by Council planners that the Park Street bike lane would serve demand for, and provide a more direct link between, South Yarra and Port Melbourne, Docklands and ultimately Fisherman’s bend. On such a long route, an additional 400m seems insignificant and the question remains: why can’t the bike route go along the existing Albert Rd bike lane?

Finally, it was argued by Council planners that the Park Street bike lane was required to protect existing cyclists using Park Street as this area had been nominated as a road safety blackspot, with 20 crashes recorded in the past five years. This figure is at odds with the data presented in the Comparative Assessment of Park Street Bike Link Technical Note, which notes that 18 crashes involving cyclists were reported along Park Street between 2010-2020 with 12 occurring between Moray Street and St Kilda Road.  Most importantly, it is emphasised in this technical note that most of these accidents occurred at or near intersections and therefore the success of the bike lane in improving safety was much more dependent on intersection treatments than having a dedicated bike lane along Park Street.  

Floating Parking – where carparking is to be placed between the bike and traffic lanes

The bike lane design places it on the inside (i.e. kerbside) of parked vehicles so carparking spaces lie between the bike lane and the moving traffic lane. The critical concern about this placement, particularly amongst older residents and those with young children, is the requirement to have to cross the bike lane each time to access their vehicles. We have all seen how bike riders often travel at high speed along these dedicated bike lanes. This is an accident waiting to happen. Another concern was that this is inconsistent with the carparking along adjoining areas including Moray Street, which is positioned between the parking spots and traffic.   

Council’s solution to these concerns is to place a buffered zone up to 1.5m between the bike lane and parked cars in areas where there is adequate road width. We fail to understand how this mitigates the need to have to cross the bike lane every time you need to access your vehicle!

Loss of 12 parking bays to construct the bike lane

The proposed bike lane will have high impact on the ambience and amenity of this section of Park Street and will involve a loss of 12 car parking spaces.  As there are only 31 car park spaces in the area available to residents, this represents a significant 20% of loss of car park spaces. Council have offered to make available 4 Taxi Zone bays as a replacement for this loss. Raising concerns about the loss of this scarce resource has also not been without some baffling responses from Council planners. They argue that two of the proposed spaces to be removed are redundant childcare Permit Zone parking spaces and therefore should not be included in the tally of lost car parking spaces. But as the photo above (sourced from Google Maps archive) shows, only ever one bay was assigned for this permit zone.  

Examples like this leave the impression that the consultative process has been inadequate. It has not provided the community the opportunity to raise concerns compared with other Department of Transport bike path proposals.  

We are petitioning the Minister for Public Transport, Minister for Roads and Road Safety to rectify this by allowing the Park St proposal to be lodged on the Vic Roads pop-up bike lane program website and to then follow the same procedure as other pop-up bike lane proposals.

If you would like to sign the petition, please contact Joe Leong by email leong1309@gmail.com or call him on 0413 025 404. 

Written by Joe leong on behalf of Representatives of the Park Street Neighbourhood Group (PSNG) (Residents and Property Owners of Park Street, South Melbourne). 

By Ron the Green Genie

View the World’s First Fish-Less Fish video story: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8RpjGj1z38U 

What can we do in the City of Port Phillip to reduce CO2 emissions and address climate change without expensive wind or solar farms and endless rhetoric from our political parties? We can do a lot and it starts with something as simple as what we are putting into our mouths. 

I came across this interesting video where smart people are challenging the way we look at food and how by changing our eating habits we can make a positive impact. Having been a vegetarian for many decades I have seen the changes to the varieties of plant-based foods that are now gracing our supermarket shelves. Lentils, mung, and soybeans are no longer the only hippy vego food available and if you are eating out and the restaurant offers you a vegetable stack alternative ask for the chef to come out and stack it where the sun don't shine. There are great, tasty fabulous alternatives available everywhere now and the plant based revolution is in full swing.

Welcome to the new age of plant-based foods where alternatives to meat, dairy and fish are freely available at your supermarket. And the best thing is that we are at the tipping point of where this plant-based food revolution  is heading. I’m predicting that in the not-too-distant future we will all be consuming different styles of plant-based foods in favour of the real thing. 

 'And why the bloody hell should we move away from meat?'... you ask

Well beef and sheep production attributes to over 10% of the Australia's greenhouse gas emissions as well as production and processing emissions and soil degradation. Then there’s dairy, pig, and poultry emissions and so it goes on.

I know a lot of people will defend to the death their right to eat meat and I am not here to judge. I was a big meat eater growing up in a European household with a father that was a high-end chef specialising in meats and sauces. So I ate a lot, I mean an awful lot of meat. But that puts me in a prime beef position to tell you that some of this new plant-based food is so close to the real thing that even staunch meat lovers would find it hard to differentiate. 

But don’t take my word for it. Try it. I would recommend that if you want to give it a go, and this is not an advisement, or if it is it’s not a paid ad. Try a "BEYOND MEAT” Burger, available in all good supermarkets, and I think some fast-food chains may even offer these. Then with an open mind let me know what you think. 

My reason for converting to plant-based foods was initially more for health reasons but the environmental and animal welfare issues have over the years crystallised my move away from animal-based foods. 

These new foods offer people a bridge to move to a healthier and more environmentally responsible food source. And a simple way you can save the planet in your local community.

The Green Genie 

9 News reported on Port Phillip ratepayers on 26 April following the publication of our rates calculator and animation. see Twitter video here 

We are paying more rates and charges in Port Phillip you than our neighbouring local government areas Port Phillip’s operational costs are approximately 30% higher than Stonnington and Glen Eira, and 100% higher than Bayside.  Use the ROPP calculator to check your rates and charges, click here.

High rates in Port Phillip cannot be explained by number of residents, number of properties, size of the municipality, length of roads, or the type and number of assets. See Fact check update: how high are Port Phillip rates compared to neighbouring councils? - Ratepayers of Port Phillip (ropp.org.au)

The City of Port Phillip says Port Phillip is exceptional because we have high profile events, South Melbourne Market and beaches, but Stonnington has the Prahran Market, a golf course and two swimming pools. Bayside has beaches. Benchmarking indicates Port Phillip provides similar services to other LGAs but spends much more on most service areas except waste management.

Will Councillors freeze rates and acknowledge that our community is also impacted by cost-of-living pressures? Or are they out of touch with the broader community who want affordable and sustainable rates and value for money? Rates represent a large proportion of household expenses and impact our cost of living. Our community has been impacted by the pandemic and now cost of living increases. Councillors have an opportunity to re-establish trust and goodwill with the broader community when they consider increasing rates again on 1 July 2022.

Did you know that we are paying more rates and charges in Port Phillip you than our neighbouring local government areas?

Ratepayers just have to talk to their friends in other LGAs to know Port Phillip rates are excessive and that they are getting poor value for money.

For example, rates and charges for the median priced house of $1.8 million in Port Phillip are $3,436 which is $1,249 more than Stonnington, $895 more than Bayside, and $644 more than Glen Eira.

Source: https://ropp.org.au/property-rates-calculator/

Port Phillip's operational costs are approximately 30% higher than Stonnington and Glen Eira, and 100% higher then Bayside.

Source: Port Phillip, Bayside, Glen Eira and Stonnington 2021-22 budgets

High rates in Port Phillip cannot be explained by number of residents, number of properties, size of the municipality, length of roads, or the type and number of assets. See Fact check update: how high are Port Phillip rates compared to neighbouring councils? - Ratepayers of Port Phillip (ropp.org.au)

The City of Port Phillip says Port Phillip is exceptional because we have the South Melbourne Market and beaches, but Stonnington has the Prahran Market, a golf course and two swimming pools. Bayside has beaches. Benchmarking indicates Port Phillip provides similar services to other LGAs but spends much more on most service areas except waste management.

Use the ROPP calculator to check your rates and charges: https://ropp.org.au/property-rates-calculator/

Our community has been impacted by the pandemic and now cost of living increases. Rates represent a large proportion of household expenses and impact our cost of living. Councillors have an opportunity to re-establish trust and goodwill with the broader community when they consider increasing rates again on 1 July 2022. Will Councillors freeze rates and acknowledge that our community is also impacted by cost-of-living pressures? Or are they out of touch with the broader community who want affordable and sustainable rates and value for money?

Port Phillip Council proposes to introduce a new waste management plan which does not go far enough to divert waste from landfill. The plan will be funded by a separate waste charge, estimated to cost residents and ratepayers an additional $25 million over the next 10 years. 

Council proposals

Single Unit Developments (SUDs) which include approximately 15,000 houses and terraces plus nearly 3,000 townhouses (only those with at least 30% of the property not covered by buildings):

• weekly kerbside collection of food organic and green organic (FOGO) bins; 
• reduce landfill waste collection frequency to fortnightly;
• pay an additional 50% surcharge on the waste levy.

Multistorey unit developments (MUDs) i.e. more than 50,000 apartments

• keep existing weekly landfill waste bins;
• access to community FOGO bins.

People living in multistorey apartments will have to walk up to 300m to put their green organic and food organic waste into community bins. Council have assumed that apartment buildings do not have sufficient space for kerbside FOGO bins. But apartment blocks already have landfill/recycling bins, and most have car parks that should be able to accommodate FOGO bins. Council’s Waste Management Review Engagement Summary Report revealed significant community concerns with the viability of community hubs, which seem to have been brushed aside. Indeed, both Bayside and Glen Eira Councils provide kerbside FOGO bins to apartments. Is Port Phillip Council effectively saying that apartments in Port Phillip are different? Even the City of Melbourne is rolling out FOGO bins to multi-unit dwellings between two and five storeys high. 

Unlike neighbouring Councils, is Port Phillip Council just giving up on attempting to divert food waste (from apartments) from landfill?

Environmental Impact
Composting food scraps and green waste instead of sending them to landfill significantly reduces carbon dioxide emissions. When food scraps and other organic materials are sent to landfill, they begin to rot anaerobically (without oxygen) and release greenhouse gases, primarily methane, which contributes to climate change.  The impact of methane on climate change is around 25 times greater than carbon dioxide. In fact, about 3% of Australia's total greenhouse gas emissions comes from organic matter rotting anaerobically (without air) in landfills. Source: https://compostrevolution.com.au/

Port Phillip is one of Victoria’s worst performing Councils in waste diversion because it sends 68% of its waste to landfill compared with similar LGAs (51%). The introduction of FOGO bins would divert kerbside waste from landfill. (Source: https://knowyourcouncil.vic.gov.au/councils/port-phillip/reports/summary)

A Middle Park resident said “The proposal is disappointing from an environmental perspective because Port Phillip Council has effectively said that they are not interested in increasing waste diversion from landfill for 75% of properties (MUD's). If Council thought that communal FOGO drop off points worked, they would reduce the landfill bin pickup frequency to fortnightly for MUD's- just as they are for the SUD’s”. 

Port Phillip’s new waste proposal contradicts their 2019 declaration of a climate emergency and exposes it as just virtue signalling. If Port Phillip Council was serious about climate change, they would implement kerbside FOGO to MUDs and collect landfill bins every 2 weeks, just like Bayside and Glen Eira. Instead, we have an overly complicated system, which will be difficult to administer and hence presumably require more employees. They have not even publicised a list of which properties are designated to receive kerbside FOGO bins and hence pay the 50% waste levy surcharge. 

One resident who attended Council’s Deliberative Consultation in February said he “was shocked that Council had ignored community feedback that the most people living in MUDs would not be motivated to take their food waste and other organic waste to communal bins up to 300m”.  

Economic Impact
All properties will pay $176.20 in 2022-23 for the standard landfill/recycling bin services, which comes with access to community FOGO bins. 

SUDs will be charged an extra 50% ($88.10) for kerbside FOGO bins and will revert to fortnightly landfill bin pickups. 

The new waste charge is revenue neutral in the first year, meaning Council will not be raising additional revenues in 2022-23 i.e. the total amount of rates collected will reduce by the total amount of waste levy collected. But it is forecasting an additional $25 million in waste charges over the next 10 years. It can do this because the waste charge will not be constrained by the Victorian Government rate cap that was brought in to protect residents and ratepayers. 

One concerned resident said “Glen Eira and Bayside have determined that all properties can have FOGO bins yet Port Phillip hasn’t. Is this to save money? Council have been telling us that MUDs are not able to use FOGO bins for years. I contacted them about 5 years ago asking why we don't have FOGO bins- their answer was that over half the residents (those in apartments) can't use them. As if half the residents don't have food waste?”

You can have your say on this proposal which is part of the Draft 2022-23 Budget, Neighbourhood conversations 2022 | Have Your Say Port Phillip and you can attend the following Pop-up sessions to provide feedback:  

• Sunday 1 May 2022 10:00am – 1:00 pm, 50 Albert Road, South Melbourne 
• Friday 6 May 2022 10:00 am – 12:00 pm, Ripponlea, Glen Eira Road, cnr Quat Quatta Avenue
• Saturday 7 May 2022 09:00 am – 12:00 pm St Kilda / St Kilda West Veg Out St Kilda Farmers Market
• Friday 13 May 2022 10:00 am – 01:00 pm, Balaclava - St Kilda East, Carlisle Street, Balaclava Station
• Saturday 14 May 2022 11:00 pm – 12:00 pm, Albert Park / Middle Park, Canterbury Place Reserve, Armstrong Street
• Sunday 15 May 2022 10:00 am – 01:00 pm, Port Melbourne, Bay Street, outside Coles entrance
• Friday 20 May 2022 10:00 am – 01:00 pm, South Melbourne, Market Street, outside South Melbourne Central entrance
• Sunday 22 May 2022 10:00 am – 01:00 pm , Elwood, Ormond Road cnr Docker Street

By Matthew Fagan

Middle Park residents may be interested to see how our suburb has changed since 1857. I have  overlaid maps from 1857 on Google Earth, with a little adjustment for size, orientation and varying the transparency of the old maps. This is a middle level transparency overlay from 1857.

Middle Park residents may be interested to see the extent of the lower lake which bordered the park and no longer exists. You can see the lower lake bordering Canterbury Road and Park Street on this plan. The map shows planned development indicating that a good number of the houses were built on what was a lake. You can see also the historical boundary between the City of St. Kilda and the City of South Melbourne which explains the dog leg in Fraser Street. If you look at the 1857 map the diagonal line was in fact at right angles to St. Kilda Road and joined to the old Fraser Street which was at right angles to the shoreline. This created the kink in Fraser Street with the bent section across the now non-existent lake. 

And Fraser Street is still the boundary of St. Kilda West and Middle Park.

And on the North from about Armstrong to Mary Street, the lake continued, explaining much of the deep depression on the North Side of the St. Kilda railway line which was completed only 4 years after the map in 1857 but which is shown, albeit slightly differently, on the map. I have highlighted on the ‘transport’ routes to allow the easy alignment and scaling of the map.  

In the next map you can see more clearly without these modern lines and with no transparency, the map fits perfectly.

In this issue we showcase photographs taken by Teresa, a resident of Port Melbourne. You can see that each image is taken at the time of day when the ambient light serves to illuminate the subject beautifully. Also, the subject of each image is nicely framed within the image. Teresa clearly demonstrates her photographic skills with these shots.

If you would like to participate in our competition please click here to send us your images. We shall publish as many images as possible. However, if we are pleasantly flooded with entries, our editorial team will select those to be published and choose the wining image. If we publish your image, beneath it we shall display your first name and the first letter of you family name as seen below.

Image 1 by Teresa K

Everything but the kitchen sink ended up on a Port Melbourne street in a shocking illegal dumping act last month.

Council are appealing for information to assist our investigation into the illegal dumping of an entire demolished house.

After receiving a tip-off Council Officers found the dismantled house and other building materials dumped at the end of Graham Street, with Port Phillip ratepayers ultimately paying the price to clear the area.

Dumping rubbish is illegal and punishable under our Local Laws.

Additional signage is now in place warning about the consequences of dumping rubbish, which carries a fine from $660 up to $9,900.

Council Waste Management team actions more than 5,900 reports of dumped rubbish every year, from discarded furniture to mattresses and fridges, and collects about 50 tonnes of illegally dumped waste every month. About 70 per cent of all material collected is recycled.

Residents can use the Snap, Send, Solve app to alert Council Officers to public space issues including dumped rubbish.

If you have any information that may help us identify illegal dumpers, council would like to hear from you on 03 9209 6777.

Illegal dumping can also be reported to the Environmental Protection Authority's (EPA) 24 hour pollution hotline on 1300 372 842.

See source statement by council here.

By Cr Christina Sirakoff

The first official Lemnos Gallipoli Anzac Day Service was held today (21st April 2022) at the Lemnos Square, Albert Park. The commemoration of the critical role that Lemnos played in Australia’s participation in the Gallipoli campaign during WWI began with four members of the Presidential Greek Guards marching into Lemnos Square and to then flank the Lemnos Gallipoli Memorial for the duration of the service.

The event was attended by many including State and Federal dignitaries (Ms Nina Taylor MP, The Hon David Davis MP, Mr Steve Dimopoulos MP), President and Members of the Lemnos Gallipoli Commemorative Committee (Mr Lee Tarlamis OAM MP and MC Christina Despoteris, Mr Jim Claven), The Consul-General of Greece in Melbourne, Mr Emmanuel S Kakavelakis, Mr Peter Corlett OAM (memorial sculpture) and representatives from the military sectors and councillors from other LGAs. I was proud to lay a wreath on behalf of the City of Port Phillip on this moving and significant occasion.

The Australian Defence Force’s campaign in Gallipoli in the First World War has long been recognised as a significant part of Australian history. What has not been sufficiently recognised is the critical role the nearby Island of Lemnos played in the Gallipoli campaign, and the specific Australian aspects of this involvement. Lemnos’ role in Australia’s ANZAC legend should not be forgotten:

• Lemnos island Greece was the principal assembly, embarkation, and supply point for the Gallipoli landings.
• The landings at Gallipoli were practiced on Lemnos prior to their deployment at Gallipoli and the islands’ harbour was a major staging post for naval operations in the Gallipoli campaign, including Australia’s AE2 submarine campaign.
• Most Anzac troops spent time on Lemnos – whether preparing for the landing, resting or recuperating at its rest camps or recovering from the horrors of war in its field hospitals.
• Lemnos was the location of the major nursing stations for the Gallipoli campaign, with 130 Australian nurses, led by Matron Grace Wilson - the first major overseas deployment of Australian Nurses to a war theatre.
• The recently formed Australian Red Cross Society was represented on the Island, through its aid depot and in the distribution of aid parcels to nurses and soldiers.
• Several major Australian military figures visited and were photographed on the island, such as Albert Jacka VC and Generals Birdwood and Monash.
• The armistice concerning the allies and the Ottoman Empire was signed on board HMS Agamemnon in Mudros Harbour, Lemnos in 1918. 
• Lemnos is the location of two major but under-recognised Commonwealth War Graves, with 148 Australian graves.

The statue by Mr Peter Corlett (pictured above) features an Australian nurse on Lemnos, with a wounded Anzac soldier is reflective of the Lemnian earth and motifs, evoking classical Greece. 

Source: Lemnos-Gallipoli-Memorial.pdf (archive.vic.gov.au) 

Residents report failure of the new parking and traffic arrangements for the 2022 Australian Grand Prix. City of Port Phillip and the Australian Grand Prix Corporation (AGPC) trialled new parking and traffic arrangements for the 2022 Grand Prix. The aim was to minimise the impacts of the Grand Prix on local residents and businesses. Information about parking and traffic management is published on the COPP website:
https://www.portphillip.vic.gov.au/council-services/traffic-roads-and-transport/grand-prix-parking-and-traffic 

The new approach to traffic management included replacing the previous physical barricades around Middle Park and Albert Park with temporary parking changes to 2P Thursday 7th April to Sunday 1oth April 8 am to 6 pm to discourage GP visitors from parking in residential streets. Properties within the affected area received two temporary parking permits to exempt them from the temporary parking changes. The trial aimed to provide ease of access to residents and visitors to local businesses, schools and community centres while limiting the impact of GP visitors on our local streets. 

Greg, an Albert Park Families resident made a complaint to the City of Port Phillip of an illegally parking car during the Australian Grand Prix using the Snap, Send Solve app, the COPP informed him that the attending infringement officer was “unable to enforce (the parking restriction) as the signage was not conforming”. The non-conforming sign was actually a temporary sticker placed over a no stopping sign. One resident commented “Port Phillip Council employed contractors to put these signs up and now won’t enforce the 2-hour parking. What a farce!”

Sarah Stone, a Middle Park reported visitors removed the temporary 2P stickers applied to the existing unlimited parking and parked all day in Richardson Street without receiving infringement notices. When Sarah advised COPP that the temporary stickers had been removed, she was informed the signs would shortly be reinstated and infringement officers would be in attendance. Sarah said, “The signs were finally amended in Richardson Street but in some cases were applied so badly that they did not cover the unlimited P sign which we discovered later meant that infringement notices could not be issued”. We understand that every time the temporary stickers were re-applied to the existing signs the stickers were removed and consequently few infringement notices were issued. 

Residents were also impacted by taxis and rideshares dropping off and picking up customers in Richardson Street either side of Armstrong Street. The volume of traffic was enormous compared to prior years when Richardson Street was not used as an unofficial pickup and drop off location for taxis and rideshares and the volume of traffic was not a problem as it was a local access area only.

One resident who displayed permits on the incorrect side of the dashboard was fined. This is just petty and nasty especially when the City of Port Phillip has botched the design and execution of the temporary signs.

During COVID-19 lockdowns, a local Port Melbourne community built a BMX track at RF Julier Reserve. The track was removed for public safety, and Council received a petition for it to be maintained. In response, Council is proposing to build a BMX pump track within the local area.

Council has identified Garden City Reserve near the children’s playground as the most suitable location for the pump track. Port Phillip Council is consulting with the local community on the proposed plans for an asphalt track to maximise safety for bike and scooter riders. For more information refer to Port Phillip Council’s website: https://haveyoursay.portphillip.vic.gov.au/bmx-track-2022 

Residents opposing the proposed BMX pump track in Garden City Reserve, say the open "passive" green space is used daily for family picnics, dog walkers, solitude seekers and young children playing in the dragon playground area and is not suited to an asphalt BMX track. A local resident Ramona Headifen has started a petition which states “This seems dangerous to promote such a track next to a children's playground.  The track is likely to see users riding at high speed, chasing each other in the area, and again this is not conducive near to children playing and family picnics. The track could become a hang out area similar to the skateboard park under Graham St”.

Another resident, Megan Jones who also opposes the desecration of the Garden City Reserve told us “There already exists two purpose-built BMX Pump Parks in Port Melbourne. One is located at Turville Reserve which is gravel and neglected but could be revived by COPP. Turville Reserve is adjacent to the Port Melbourne skatepark on Station Street. The other is a newly built BMX park is in Westgate Park but not part of COPP purview, so it is ignored even though it is within 1 km of the proposed new venture”. Megan Jones also said that “the Council’s project manager did not appear to know the Council has a signed contract with the Hobson's Bay Obedience School for dog training in area promised to the BMX park”.

If you don't want Garden City Reserve to become home to this track, please sign this petition.

https://www.change.org/p/no-bmx-track-garden-city-reserve 

 Rising Sun Hotel

 Prince Bandroom

 Middle Park Hotel

 Prince Alfred

 Esplanade - St Kilda

 Inkerman Hotel

 George Lane

 Iddy Biddy

 Republica

 Cornerstone

 Jimmy ONeils

 Captain Baxter

 Palais Theatre

 Memo Music Hall

 Recital Centre Melbourne

 Alex Theatre - St Kilda

 Arts Centre - Melbourne

 Crown - Southbank

 Astor - St Kilda

 Palace Dendy - Brighton

 Classic - Elsternwick

 Hoyts - Docklands

 Palace - Brighton Bay

 Village - Jam Factory

 Gasworks

 Whats On in St Kilda

 Jewish Museum of Australia

 Whats On in Port Phillip

 Events @ South Melb Market

 Markets in the Area

 Special Events

 Middle Park Bowls Events

Author Emma Cutting

Hello Lovely Local!, My name is Emma Cutting and I have been a resident of City of Port Phillip for 20 years. I am also the Founder of The Heart Gardening Project, a community initiative that brings humans and nature together through street gardening. We turn barren, undernourished pieces of public land into gardens of wriggling, buzzing beauty for everyone to enjoy (around 70 so far and counting!).

I am writing to let you know (if you didn’t know already!) that the City of Port Phillip’s (CoPP) new draft Nature Strip Guidelines (NSGs) have just been released for community feedback and, if there isn’t a strong community response to change them, these would mean the end of street gardening for the vast majority of residents in the City of Port Phillip.

There are so many issues with this document but the main two are that…
• Tree squares are not allowed to be planted in
• ‘Clearance areas’ are so enormous that only a few plants at the most can be planted in even the hugest of nature strips

Not only that, but CoPP declares that gardens which don’t adhere to the new guidelines are also subject to removal. This means that, again, the vast majority of existing street gardens, many of them decades old, would be subject to removal at council’s whim.

While there is a definite need for updated, clear and safe Nature Strip Guidelines in the City of Port Phillip, CoPP has demonstrated overblown, short-term thinking around the safety of council assets. These new NSGs effectively deny residents the many positives that can come from street gardening including community cohesion, the ability to contribute to the natural beauty of our city and also individually respond to climate change and declining urban biodiversity.

We need to act now and tell our Councillors and Council Officers that this is not good enough. We need these draft NSGs rewritten to be inclusive, researched properly and empowering. Basically, if you love street gardening, are appreciative of your local street gardener, enjoy walking around your local street gardens, think that street gardening is more beneficial than not for your community, think we need more beautiful gardens, believe that increasing biodiversity is important and/or think we need to do more to fight climate change then please do the following…

• Read council guidelines at
  https://haveyoursay.portphillip.vic.gov.au/nature-strip-guidelines 
• Sign the petition at
   https://www.change.org/keepourstreetgardensgrowing 
• Contact your local ward Councillors directly
• Get out and create a street garden!!
• Place the small sign below (or something similar!) in your front window

Thank you! Love Emma

For more info on street gardening:
www.theheartgardeningproject.org.au 

For lots of pics of street gardens: Instagram
@theheartgardeningproject 

Email The Heart Gardening Project at:
info@theheartgardeningproject.org.au