Residents who rely on their bicycles for daily commuting and recreation are often afflicted with bike thefts. South Melbourne Police earlier provided adivce aimed at reducing the likelihood of bike theft and aiding in the recovery of stolen bikes.

Engrave a License Number on Your Bike

One of the most straightforward ways to deter thieves and increase the chances of recovering a stolen bike is to engrave a unique license number onto the frame. An engraved license number makes the bike easily identifiable and helps police trace it back to the owner.

Register on Bike Vault

Residents are encouraged to register their bicycles on www.bikevault.com.au. This free online platform enables bike owners to document essential details about their bicycles, such as make, model, and serial number. In the unfortunate event of theft, this database can be invaluable in aiding police investigations.

Opt for a DLock and a BikeTag

While cable locks are common, they can easily be tampered with. Police recommend investing in a DLock, which provides a higher level of security. For an additional layer of protection, consider purchasing a BikeTag, a GPS-enabled device that helps in tracking your bike's location if stolen. High-quality locks and tracking devices act as robust deterrents against theft.

Legal Implications: Bike Theft is an Indictable Offence

It's important for the community to understand that bike theft is not a minor crime. It is an indictable offence, subject to serious legal consequences. Knowing the legal ramifications may deter potential thieves and re-emphasise the importance of this issue among residents.

Community Responsibility

The police stress that preventing bike theft is a communal responsibility. A secure bike is a communal deterrent: the more people that adhere to these guidelines, the less attractive our neighbourhood becomes for bike thieves.

Residents are urged to stay vigilant, share this information with their community, and contact the Police to report any suspicious activities or, regrettably, stolen bikes.

In Melbourne’s evolving landscape, the Council of Port Phillip’s recently proposed Inkerman Safety Improvement Project offers a significant, albeit contentious, addition to the city’s infrastructure. Although there are safety concerns that need to be addressed, there is little or no consideration of the impact of reduced carparking on residents and businesses on Inkerman Road and side streets. While the initiative aims to enhance road safety and pedestrian well-being, it also joins a lineage of road and bike lane projects that have sparked heated debates and policy reversals.

The immediate concern tied to the Inkerman Project is the apparent oversight concerning its impact on residential and business car parking. While there are valid safety concerns that demand redressal, the project seems to give little to no consideration to the reduction in parking availability on Inkerman Road and adjacent streets. Such an omission reflects a pattern seen in previous council projects, where practicalities affecting daily life are often sidelined.

Moreover, the council is currently soliciting feedback on two design options for bicycle lanes on Inkerman Road between St Kilda Road and Hotham Street. Option A is a physically protected bike lane which results in the removal of 116 carparks between St Kilda Road and Hotham Street and Option B is a painted bike lane with the loss of 20 carparks.

However, given its track record of nebulous consultation processes, one can’t help but question the efficacy of this outreach. Is this a genuine attempt to integrate community input, or another box-ticking exercise in public engagement?

A glaring example of such oversight is the Council’s recent misadventure with the Kerferd Road plan, a project that faced vehement community opposition and was eventually rescinded. As a resident astutely noted, the council seemed to be “wilfully ignoring” the populace who had earlier advocated against poorly designed bike lanes. The council’s decision to reintroduce the Kerferd Road proposal, despite known public opposition, raises unsettling questions about the Inkerman Project’s community engagement process.

Furthermore, much like the contentious Kerferd Road proposal, the Inkerman Project aims to introduce new bike lanes and reconfigure existing ones. While promoting cycling is commendable, the Council’s previous floundering with similar initiatives calls for a more considered approach. Past projects like “Shrine to Sea” and pop-up bike lanes have been discontinued, creating a state of “bike lane fatigue” among residents. This turbulent history makes it difficult for any new proposals, such as the Inkerman Project, to be met with enthusiasm.

The Inkerman Safety Improvement Project presents a complex challenge. Its laudable goals are overshadowed by a history of failed community engagements and inadequate planning. From overlooking basic necessities like parking to erratic stances on bike lanes, the Council of Port Phillip must rethink its strategy if the Inkerman Project is to avoid becoming yet another footnote in a string of well-intentioned but poorly executed initiatives.

As the adage goes, those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it. The Council finds itself at a crossroads: learn from past failures or proceed on a course that may lead to another planning debacle.

Council is currently asking residents for feedback on two design options for bicycle lanes in Inkerman Road between  St Kilda Road and Hotham Street, St Kilda East”. Provide your feedback https://haveyoursay.portphillip.vic.gov.au/help-improve-road-safety-inkerman-street

We all know that change is difficult for any organisation. It’s even harder when it’s a monopoly that evolved after the municipal restructure of 1994 and now employs up to 850 people.

Let’s start with the question ‘Why?’

The saying “If it aint broke don’t fix it”, is very relevant. The initial batch of responses to the RoPP Council Customer Service Survey suggest that there are some parts of Council customer service that people are quite satisfied with, however there are also several areas that need urgent and profound change.

The other reason for change is ‘perception’. If residents don’t experience acceptable satisfaction in a timely manner when they interact with Council, they begin to build a negative perception about all aspects of Council services. They begin to question the ‘value for money’ that Council provides.

‘How?’ can we influence Council to change

The RoPP survey is focused on ‘customer service’, the ‘front of house’ of our Council where residents form their perceptions. To help Council understand the perceptions held by residents we are measuring two important components – performance and relationship. That is: how well does Council deliver customer service and how closely do Councillors and staff relate to the needs and expectations of residents.

Our intention is to provide both the Councillors and the Council management team with insights into the perceptions of residents with an expectation that they will work together in a constructive manner to address the areas that deserve attention.

‘What?’ needs to be done

The survey will reveal what residents think about Council. It will then be up to Council to embark upon the necessary changes. Below I have paraphrased some guidance from the book ‘Switch – How to Change Things when Change is Hard’ by Chip and Dan Heath.

• Small changes can have a big impact on a big problem.
• People tend to look for the bad, not the good. That leads to ‘problem focus’. We need to be ‘solution focused’.
• The most familiar path is always the status quo. Inertia and decision paralysis will conspire to keep people doing things the old way.
• Change begins at the level of individual decisions and behaviours. To change you have to change habits.
• You must marry your long-term goal with the short-term critical moves.
• Behavioural change happens mostly by speaking to people’s feelings.
• Don’t instinctively look for carrots and sticks.
• If you want to change the culture of an organisation you’ve got to get the reformers together.
• When you set small visible goals, and people achieve them, they start to get it into their heads that they can succeed.
• When change works, people have a clear direction, ample motivation and a supportive environment.

WE NEED YOU TO PARTICIPATE IN THE ROPP COUNCIL CUSTOMER SERVICE SURVEY

Go to https://ropp.org.au/

In the long-ago past, councils didn't care much about customer service. Their 'customers' were captive ratepayers who had zero choice in who provided services in their municipality. You paid your rates and hoped that you received adequate services for your needs.

These days we are still captive to our council, but we have many more ways to communicate our needs and to express our satisfaction (or dissatisfaction). Access to council officers via online channels is now routine, we have social media to express our views and councillors can be contacted directly be email and phone.

As a consequence, many councils now have a Customer Service Charter (sometimes called a Customer Experience Strategy). The City of Port Phillip's is one page, other councils have up to a 37 page brochure with detailed commitments to ratepayers. The Victorian Government now requires that all councils conduct an annual Customer Satisfaction Survey, and the City of Port Phillip participates in a detailed survey that measures some 18 services and apparently samples only 900 people out of 89,500 (over 18) in 2023.

The services include: Art centres & libraries, Recreational facilities, Waste management, Community & cultural, Appearance of public areas, Environmental sustainability, Elderly support services, Sealed local roads, Slashing & weed control, Bus/community dev./tourism, Informing the community, Local streets & footpaths, Traffic management, Consultation & engagement, Planning & building permits, Community decisions, Lobbying, Population growth. It's a little hard to understand how the last two of these are measures of council performance.

The challenge we face is that councils often confuse 'service delivery' with 'customer service'. We recently met with CoPP CEO Chris Carroll and his team and were impressed with the computer system 'dashboard' which enables council officers to monitor weekly levels of service completions. This is important, but it is not a measure of customer satisfaction (despite the frequent use of the word 'satisfaction'). We did note that they also track the levels of service requests and complaints being lodged by residents.

The system appears not to be measuring how satisfied the residents (and businesses) in the municipality are with the 'customer service' they receive when they interact with council. In fact, the survey mentioned above has only one question about customer service: Q5c. Thinking of the most recent contact, how would you rate Port Phillip City Council for customer service? Please keep in mind we do not mean the actual outcome but rather the actual service that was received.  

In my view, the only way to assess the true level of customer service (from interactions with council) is to ask as many residents and businesses, their opinion.

That's why RoPP has just launched its own survey. From today, we'll be delivering 40,000 flyers to homes and businesses asking for your opinion on City of Port Phillip's customer service. There are 16 questions to be answered online that should only take you a few minutes. Your responses will be private.

We intend to publish the aggregated results to everyone, including councillors and council officers. Our motive is to gain a more realistic measure of customer service that should inform council for the future. We look forward to hearing your opinions.

COMPLETE SURVEY HERE

Contact mail@ropp.org.au for any enquiries

In a tale of fiscal mismanagement that has left citizens scratching their heads, Birmingham City Council, Europe's largest local authority, has come under fire for squandering nearly £10 million on a cycle highway that has seen little to no use since its inauguration in 2019. This comes on the heels of a section 114 notice issued by the Labour-run council, effectively admitting that it cannot meet its financial obligations, including an outstanding £760 million in equal pay claims. 

The cycle lane, stretching 2.5 miles along the A34, one of Birmingham's busiest commuter routes, has not only been under-utilised but has also exacerbated traffic congestion. The lane has pushed the bus lane further into the road, leaving only one lane for cars in some sections and causing gridlock during rush hours. This is not to mention the £16 million spent on relocating a National Express bus depot a mere 300 meters, ostensibly for the 2022 Commonwealth Games—a facility that was eventually turned into affordable housing.

The Port Phillip Parallels

While the Birmingham case serves as a cautionary tale of how not to manage public funds, it finds an echo half a world away in the City of Port Phillip. Much like its British counterpart, the local and state governments in Port Phillip have also spent heavily on bike lanes that remain conspicuously empty. Despite the significant financial outlay, these lanes have failed to attract a critical mass of cyclists, raising questions about the efficacy of such projects in promoting sustainable transportation.

The City of Port Phillip, known for its scenic beaches and vibrant arts scene, has been pushing for greener modes of transport as part of its broader sustainability goals. However, the under-utilised bike lanes stand as a testament to a disconnect between policy intentions and practical outcomes. They also raise questions about whether such projects are the best use of taxpayer money, especially when other pressing issues such as housing affordability and public transport could arguably provide a better return on investment and utility to constituents whose money has been spent.

The issues in Birmingham and Port Phillip are symptomatic of a larger problem: the challenge of effectively transitioning to sustainable modes of transport. While the intention behind finding space for cyclists and pedestrians is commendable, the execution and community engagement leave much to be desired. 

In both cities, the local governments seem to have ignored the immediate needs and behaviour of their constituents. The result is a kind of urban planning that appears more ideologically driven than practical, funded by public money that could be better spent elsewhere. 

Lessons to be Learned

For cities like Birmingham and Port Phillip, the road to financial and environmental sustainability appears to be fraught with potholes of poor planning and fiscal irresponsibility. As both cities grapple with their respective challenges, one thing is clear: a more nuanced approach is needed, one that balances the push for sustainability with fiscal responsibility and community needs.

The tale of two cities serves as a stark reminder that good intentions are not enough. Public projects, especially those aimed at altering long-standing behaviour like car usage, require not just investment but also a deep understanding of the communities they are meant to serve. Otherwise, they risk becoming expensive monuments to council/governmental folly.

We are looking for letter box volunteers to help us with an exciting new initiative to improve customer service at the City of Port Phillip. We need your help to distribute flyers in your neighbourhood. Please register your interest and suburb at mail@ropp.org.au

Would you like to contribute an article to Port Phillip Matters? Or would you like to volunteer to help our communications and advocacy work? Send us an email at mail@ropp.org.au

 Thank you to everyone who has helped us continue our advocacy for residents, representing our community and fighting for more equitable and value-for-money rates. It is always difficult asking for monetary donations, but our social media and campaigns must be funded. If you can provide any support, please refer to our webpage at https://ropp.org.au/our-charter/donations/

As regular readers are most likely aware, bike paths (be they standard, separated or pop-up in nature) have occupied a significant amount of council and resident time during the past few years.

One could argue that, with both previous government departments and council decisions made to remove or defer bike lanes, this topic should remain off the radar for some time yet. (In making this statement we refer to the fact that the bike lane proposal was removed for the “Shrine to Sea” project – a Department of Energy, Environment and Climate Action decision; and COPP’s advocacy to the Department of Transport to remove the unsafe pop-up infrastructure). 

However, we feel that it is prudent to make RoPP members aware that at the 6 September council meeting, Cr Nyaguy spent a period of time asking council officers about bike lanes in the COPP area. This starts at 1:13:30 in the following link.

https://webcast.portphillip.vic.gov.au/archive/video23-0906.php

It remains clear to RoPP that certain councillors remain wedded to more bike lanes being installed and it will therefore be incumbent on the community to ensure that if or when council (or the government) proposes more bike infrastructure that it takes the time to properly consult with the community and the community responds appropriately – remembering that silence is taken as acceptance by government, even when you have not been asked to participate!

To our minds, “proper consultation” relates to, in advance seeking to understand what the community wants for transport infrastructure, where it may be best placed and what is the best format for it.

We have seen on multiple occasions that “consultation” takes the form of a few signs on telegraph poles with a QR code, random postcard letterbox drops, or one already needs to be signed up to an email list to ensure that you receive an invite to an event, that generally occurs with limited notice.

Hence we encourage residents, when speaking to councillors, to reinforce the fact that council, government and their staff need to do a much better job of alerting residents to what is being considered and use this as an opportunity to seek feedback.

As we have seen recently, mock consultation ended up by being perceived as a sham process that ultimately led to incredibly strong resident pushback against what was a flawed concept with poor and unsafe implementation. 

Unfortunately the recent pop up and Kerferd Road bike lane issues have also now had the unintended consequence of fatiguing COPP residents on bike lanes and left many with a bitter taste in their mouths, automatically making it far more difficult for any new bike lane concept or proposal to be received with an open mind by residents.

In the heart of Melbourne, the City of Port Phillip Council convened on a chilly Wednesday, 16th August 2023, to discuss a matter that has been making waves—quite literally—in the community. The subject of the day was the feasibility of a Port Phillip Swimming Trail. The meeting was a blend of bureaucratic procedure and impassioned pleas, all set against the backdrop of Australia's rich aquatic culture.

Council Officers presented the four options to Councillors on the findings of a preliminary investigation. The motion for this investigation was initially proposed by Councillor Marcus Pearl on 4th April 2023. The investigation considered various factors such as need, safety, partnerships with other agencies, wayfinding approaches, consultation, and indicative costs.

Four options were laid out for consideration: using existing navigational markers, installing new markers in swimming-only zones, supporting current open water swimming activities, and making no changes. Each option came with its own set of financial and logistical implications. For instance, installing new markers would cost around $700,000 plus project management costs, while supporting current activities would require a more modest $40,000.

The Port Melbourne Icebergs, a local open-water swimming group, were vocal about their preferences. They swim 500m in winter and up to 1km or more during summer, often using smartwatches to track their activities. While they acknowledged that a swimming trail could be helpful, they didn't see it as a necessity. They also expressed that motivational sayings on markers would not influence their choice to swim.

Elwood Life Saving Club had previously advocated for swimming markers to be installed within swimming-only zones. They, along with other stakeholders like Parks Victoria and Victoria Police, supported swimming in the bay as a form of recreation and physical activity.

In the end, the council recommended progressing with the third option: supporting current open water swimming activities. This option builds on the current established groups who have experienced and engaged participants. It also provides an opportunity to provide additional support for 12 months to these groups and to people in the community who wish to experience open water swimming.

Councillors voted to amend the motion to defer the decision on the Bay Trail until next year because the cost of $700,000 was unfunded in the current budget. The City of Port Phillip Council meeting was more than just a bureaucratic exercise; it was a reflection of a community's relationship with its natural resources and recreational spaces. And as the waves continue to lap against the shores of Port Phillip, the debate around how best to enjoy them rages on.

You are welcome to attend a Community Planting Day

Date: Thursday 28 September

Time: 10:00am

Where: Corner Octavia St / Roberston Ave

Local residents have engaged with Port Phillip Council to request reinvigoration of the garden bed on the corner of Octavia Street and Robertson Ave.

We have been rewarded with Council agreeing to the requests, plants to be supplied by Council and the guidance of a Council Parks Contractor to assist with planting (they were only available Mon-Fri, hence the midweek date).

We are seeking volunteers to help so if you would like to participate in the planting, meet other residents in our neighbourhood or bring your kids for a fun school holiday activity, please arrive at the corner of Octavia Street and Robertson Ave on Thursday 28 September from 10.00am.

Not only does this project bring new life to an area that has been neglected for many years, it also brings together our community and gives us all a sense of pride in the part of the world we have chosen to live.

See (5) Community Planting Day (Octavia St / Roberston Ave) | Facebook

The Elwood Foreshore has long been a cherished destination for residents and visitors alike.  It was not surprising that many Elwood residents and sport club representatives spoke at Council on 6th September to express concerns about the City of Port Phillip’s proposed redevelopment project which involves relocating roads, parking, and buildings, while also impacting sporting club facilities, accessibility, and existing vegetation.

Councillors voted unanimously to progress the project and to continue its consultation with residents on the Elwood Foreshore Masterplan after amending the motion to acknowledge concerns expressed by Head Street residents and the Mayor of the City of Bayside and to reconsider the location of the carpark. 

Councillors spoke to the motion to reassure residents that their concerns will be heard during the consultation process. Mayor Heather Cunsolo said, “This is a high-level document (Masterplan) and there will be a lot more community engagement as we go through the detailed plan”.

Reflecting the Mayor's comments during the meeting, Cr Rhonda Clark stated "Much consultation has taken place and the sporting clubs have had their input. The community had a very big engagement and opportunity to say, and some of that feedback was definitely taken into account."

Addressing the concerns that not everyone in the community was happy, Cr Clark went onto say "Not everyone got what they wanted, which is disappointing, but there is more demand on this reserve than there is space and we’ve done our best to increase the facilities where we can and where we can see it’s needed."

The project comes with an estimated cost of $50 million, which seems highly unlikely given the extent of the proposed redevelopment and recent cost escalations. This is particularly concerning in light of the council's struggles to provide residents with essential services such as garbage collection whilst charging one of the highest rates in the State.  

The decision to move roads, parking, and buildings will inevitably lead to disruptions and inconveniences for both locals and visitors and involves entirely wasteful expenditure which will not provide a return to rate payers.

With an estimated cost that seems dubious, the City of Port Phillip's decision to invest in this endeavor instead of addressing pressing community needs raises valid concerns about its priorities and its commitment to the well-being of its residents and the significant cost of living challenges.

As discussions and debates unfold, it is imperative that the voices and concerns of the community are heard and integrated into any decision-making process that affects the Elwood Foreshore. 

The City of Port Phillip (COPP) voted on Wednesday 6th September to consult with the community on development of a live music and performance venue with a 5,000 standing capacity at the St Kilda Triangle; a proposal that could redefine St Kilda's iconic foreshore. Council's decision was made after establishing the commercial feasibility of a multipurpose venue and the development of design concepts. Council will now seek public feedback and funding from private and public business partners. This announcement has reignited a longstanding debate that has polarised the community for years. Councillor Rhonda Clarke, during a Council meeting on September 7, 2022, lamented the current state of the Triangle, stating, "We've spent millions and millions on the St Kilda Triangle to achieve a carpark so far." This sentiment encapsulates the frustration many feel about the site, often described as a "scar on the foreshore." Currently serving as a carpark, the Triangle has long been a point of contention, a blight amidst the natural beauty of the St Kilda foreshore.

The Triangle's history is a tapestry of controversy and missed opportunities. In 2007, a $400 million plan aimed at converting the site into a seaside version of the Chadstone Shopping Centre. The proposal was met with vehement community opposition, leading to its eventual withdrawal. Since then, COPP has treaded carefully, fully aware of the strong public sentiment surrounding any proposed changes to the site. However, the latest proposal seems to signal a new direction. After a year of meticulous planning and an initial budget allocation of $498,000, the Council is contemplating a transformative vision for the Triangle. The cost to date emphasises the complexity of the project and the need for strategic planning and validating a market need for a new multipurpose venue. An additional $80,000 was approved for consultancy support to complete the commercial analysis, for resources to support the community engagement program and additional design consultancy to review and consider feedback and its implications on the design feasibility work.

The proposal also includes a significant reduction in car parking spaces, from the existing 360 to 240. This is a calculated move, backed by a business case that argues against the construction of additional carparks. The document further reveals that the Council has engaged in detailed planning and market sounding, leading to this request for additional funding. It also highlights the need for good upfront planning to support effective delivery, given the project's complexity.

New information published in The Age also reveals concerns about the project's financial feasibility. Trevor White, a member of the Port Phillip resident's group Unchain, questioned the Council's financial plan, stating that any development would also have to address contaminated soil on the site. Music promoters Live Nation, TEG Dainty, Destroy All Lines, and Hardware Group participated in the feasibility study, raising concerns about potential conflicts of interest.

Port Phillip Mayor Heather Cunsolo acknowledged the project's complexity, stating that the Council is in the early stages of identifying a realistic development cost, which would depend on many factors, including community feedback, and potential partners who are willing to invest in the project.

Public opinion remains sharply divided. Some residents view the proposed music venue as a catalyst for economic development in St Kilda, while others question the necessity of another entertainment space, especially one adjacent to the iconic Palais Theatre. This dichotomy is aptly captured in a headline from The Age, which asks, "Do we need another one? St Kilda considers new music venue next to Palais"

Photo by Nick Karvounis on Unsplash

In the annals of local Government, the City of Port Phillip's Spatial Economic and Employment Framework (SEEF) might be remembered as a curious artefact—a document that aimed for the stars but failed to even clear the treetops. While the framework is laden with the language of strategic planning, it conspicuously sidesteps the grim economic indicators that suggest a community in decline. This omission is not just an oversight; it's a glaring blind spot in the council's vision for the future.

The Gross Regional Product (GRP) of the City of Port Phillip offers the first clue that all is not well. After modest growth over the decade leading up to June 2019, the GRP took a nosedive during the COVID-19 pandemic and has yet to recover as of June 2022. This isn't a mere statistical blip; it's a red flag signalling deeper economic malaise. Yet, the SEEF, in its aspirational verbosity, offers no concrete plans to reverse this trend or to stimulate economic growth. It's as if the council is content to whistle past the economic graveyard, hoping that strategic jargon will somehow translate into economic vitality.

The employment landscape in Port Phillip further underscores the urgency of the situation. Over the past five years, the community has lost a staggering 7,372 Full-Time Equivalents (FTEs). The retail sector and accommodation and food services, often the lifeblood of local economies, have been particularly hard-hit, shedding 369 and 1,685 FTEs, respectively. These aren't just numbers on a spreadsheet; they represent livelihoods lost, dreams deferred, and a community fabric that's slowly unravelling. Yet, the SEEF offers no lifeline to these struggling sectors, no roadmap for job creation, and no strategies for workforce development. 

The manufacturing sector and financial and insurance services, traditionally more resilient, have also been battered, losing 1,555 and 1,301 FTEs, respectively. These losses suggest that the economic challenges facing Port Phillip are not confined to one or two sectors but are systemic. Yet, the SEEF remains conspicuously silent on how to stem this tide of job losses or to attract new industries that could revitalise these sectors.

Tourism, once a shining star in the local economy, has dimmed considerably. Over the past five years, the sector has lost 3,816 FTEs, and revenues have plummeted from a robust $2.7 billion to a paltry $1.6 billion. These figures are not just alarming; they're catastrophic for a community that has long relied on tourism as a key economic driver. Yet, the SEEF offers no blueprint for reviving this ailing industry, no strategies for attracting tourists back to the community, and no plans for leveraging the area's natural and cultural assets to boost tourism revenues.

The framework's glaring omissions extend beyond economic indicators to the very quality of life in the community. While the SEEF is replete with lofty goals about sustainability and vibrancy, it offers no concrete plans for attracting new businesses to fill vacant properties in our high streets and improving the streetscapes—better lighting, signage, greenery, and plant boxes—that could make Port Phillip a more attractive destination for both residents and visitors.

The City of Port Phillip's SEEF is a strategic vision in name only. It fails to grapple with the economic indicators that show a community in decline. As residents and ratepayers look to the council for leadership, they deserve more than a document that glosses over the harsh economic realities. It's high time the council took its role as a steward of the community seriously and revised its framework to address the pressing economic challenges. Otherwise, the SEEF will remain what it currently is—a well-intentioned but ultimately hollow exercise in governance, a paper tiger in a city that needs a lion.

Source: Port Phillip - Economic Indicators. https://economy.id.com.au/port-phillip/

Photo by Nick Fewings on Unsplash

There's been much talk about Airbnb, or rather its true term, "STR or Short Term Rental." What drives many to tap into STR? The reasons are endless, but at the end of the day, it's completely up to an owner what they do with their property; it's not for the Council nor the State to weigh in! Responsible hosts provide a service, implement safety measures, work with neighbours and the community, and run a small business to support themselves and their families in a climate of rising living costs. And what of those who simply rent out a room to students and overseas visitors? Is it so wrong to want some company and earn a little extra cash, all above board and legal?

The State is in financial trouble, so doubling land tax and talk of a 'bed tax' is an easy, quick financial fix for them. Are there issues in some STRs? Absolutely! Frankly, there are property owners all over the country who couldn't care less about their neighbors and their right to quiet enjoyment, and the majority of them are renting their properties out permanently. "Minut" noise control monitors are key; in fact, they've saved many a host accused of allowing all-night raves in their tiny apartments when there was no party, but they also provide proof and enable Airbnb to have the unruly guest evicted within hours. Sadly, with a lack of rental reforms, you could be living next to a rogue, permanent renter for months before anything is done, if at all; and that's if the owner could be bothered. The fight at VCAT to evict them is costly and stressful. One complaint about an Airbnb guest with evidence, and they can be legally removed within hours! Some simply put their place on STR to take a secondment or posting overseas or interstate, needing the flexibility of having a home to come to when they return. Some can't accommodate visitors and simply want the flexibility to provide accommodation for family visiting. Or doing friends a favor visiting our vibrant community for live music, car shows, the Palais, triathlons, events at MSAC, Pride,  and St Kilda festival. Or do we want to keep hosting events but not provide suitable accommodation for out-of-towners? Look around St Kilda; with the exception of probably Quest Apartments, there isn't really much suitable for families, or those with disabilities, or special dietary needs, requiring a kitchen or kitchenette. Are there rogue owners out there? Absolutely! Have you lived next to a housing association placing a 'client' next door to you, only to live with the drug dealing, AC/DC blaring 24/7, and a tirade of verbal abuse, all of which falls on deaf ears until your mental health is so affected, you're pleading with the police to show up so you can get back into your property. Does it happen all the time? NO. Is it miserable being a neighbor? YES! What about real estate agents poorly screening tenants and 'letting agents' who take zero responsibility for the welfare of others and wipe their hands when it gets all too hard. The fact is that criminal behavior and noise complaints are a police matter, and it can happen anywhere and anytime. It is a sad situation when you can't live in peace, but STR isn't the problem, and they're a minority. We live in a busy, vibrant beachside suburb. It's a great place to visit.

Council Meeting - August 2023 - Airbnb / Short Term Lets

I’ve been a Superhost for almost 10 years, meaning I’m a 5-star host, and I offer Family-Friendly Accommodation to guests from all walks of life. I’ve provided a roof over the heads of hundreds of families who are visiting St Kilda for appointments at the Royal Children's Hospital, attending football matches, shows at the Palais, Pride, St Kilda Festival, Triathlons, and Medical staff during COVID for those who couldn’t go home, and I’m also an emergency accommodation for those affected by floods and fires. I am exactly who most hosts are, just someone with an investment property who has been so scorned by the permanent rental system, I’ll never list it permanently again. With a non-Australian husband and daughter, the flexibility this offers me ensures our overseas family have somewhere to stay for long periods when we simply don’t have the room to accommodate them in my own home. I’ve hosted many families calling Australia their new home, and I’m proud that ALL eventually settled Bayside. Ironically, I had a guest leave a week early in December because of a permanent renter across the road partying all weekend and police not bothering to show up! Airbnb is much better; you can evict them immediately if they cause a problem!

In 10 years, I’ve had one complaint from a neighbor in my apartment block, and it was a subtle nudge because two young boys with terrible jetlag were jumping off the bunk bed; that was about six years ago.

The simple fact is short term rentals aren’t the problem, humans who lack respect for anyone’s right to a quiet living is the issue and you’ll get that whether you live next to a full time renter, an owner, or I’m sure you’re aware of the disgraceful way property owners were treated by some of the housing authorities who didn’t think twice about who they were placing and where, some with drug addictions, drug dealing or mental health issues putting others in danger.

I commend the report pulled together and point out that 153 complaints over 7 years is minimal and even more confusing that 44 came in one go, coincidentally after it was raised in a Council meeting a couple of months ago! Even more worrying is that many were anonymous! So as a data geek myself I’m going to question the credibility of this information.

The list of complaints which is noise, anti-social behavior, bins left out, tossing cigarettes, New Year’s Eve Parties, excessively loud on balconies (I mean have you heard the abandoned Covid dogs howling all day on balconies in St Kilda) is not limited to short term stays. It’s our neighborhood every day of the week!

My request is that Council do not weigh into getting involved in Short Term Rentals at all, I want my rubbish collected on time, I want trees planted and maintained, I want the Grey Street footpath to be fixed, I want better lighting in are dark alley ways. That’s what I want my Council to look at, not get involved in something that affects less than 1% of the CoPP. Let STR’s be regulated but leave it to the State! If Council weigh in and we start paying more than the eye watering rates we already fork out, something else will have to give in the community.

If Council make it difficult or costly, think about my neighbor who simply rents out a room to young students travelling to Australia for some extra cash and much needed company after being left widowed.

Claire, local resident of Port Phillip

________

Some sound advice, if you're a host, or you live next to an unruly renter/owner, or you're having a problem with an STR, install a Minut noise monitor, its all the evidence you need to act accordingly! Change out your Body Corporate, if they can't instill some basic rules in your block that can be acted upon, they aren't doing their job. These have been a life-saver for many! Minut - Protect your home, rental property, airbnb and short-term rental.

Photo by Chris Bemmerl on Unsplash

My 76-year-old neighbour was mercilessly gunned down by an unknown assailant when he answered his door in Middle Park on the evening of Thursday, 17 August. Thank goodness his wife, who is a doctor, and his daughter, a nurse, were on the spot to provide medical support until the ambulance arrived. Just three doors down from my own home, this incident makes me reconsider our security in this relatively peaceful seaside suburb.

Bad things can happen to good people, perpetrated by individuals who seem to have no moral fibre and nothing to lose. The police are investigating, and hopefully, some CCTV security footage may be found to shed greater light on this unprovoked attack.

However, incidents like this—home invasions, street crimes, and attacks—appear to be worsening nationwide. Just the other evening, the news reported a woman who sprayed a tram full of commuters with pepper spray. Knife attacks seem to be a daily occurrence, and criminal groups are settling vendettas in broad daylight.

What has been happening in our society that allows wrongdoers to get away with such acts with little or no consequences? A slap on the wrist, and they are back on the streets to reoffend. Our courts and judges seem to be out of touch and too lenient on repeat offenders. Meanwhile, our politicians appear to be turning a blind eye, focusing on helping these offenders rather than the victims. The police eventually catch them, but the courts let them go.

In our own neighbourhoods, we face rampant street crime, drugs, violence, and homelessness, which have turned most of our retail strips into no-go zones. Our council and politically-aligned councillors seem to be doing nothing to confront these problems head-on. They appear to think that if you live in a house you've worked for, you're evil, and if you've done nothing and earned nothing in your life, society owes you a living. This mindset needs to be addressed. We live in a society where everyone needs to contribute to the community, not just take and take. There needs to be serious, harsh consequences and punishments for crime. An eye for an eye...

This violence needs to stop, and our council must start taking decisive action to prevent further escalation.

Photo by Max Kleinen on Unsplash

The political parties dominated Port Phillip Council until 2020 when Cr Rhonda Clark and Cr Christina Sirakoff were elected. Rhonda and Christina are endorsed by the Residents of Port Phillip (ROPP) and are committed to representing residents and are not beholden to political party policies and agendas. 

Prior to the 2020 election Greens and Labor party Councillors dominated Council decisions with party political agendas. We say let local council be politics neutral and independent from State and National based politics. Our agenda is to support local candidates who have the interests of ratepayers and residents of Port Phillip uppermost and foremost. 

We would like our beautiful and unique environment to flourish at every level both for residents and visitors and be the jewel in the crown of all Victorian Councils.

We believe that the greater good of our community is better served by independent candidates who are in touch with the people within their wards and understand their unique differences and needs. 

We believe that council has not had community focussed leadership from the politically aligned councillors which has seen a disproportionate ballooning in council staff numbers, outsourcing to consultants, inefficiencies, and a general culture to build a larger council rather than efficiencies for  ratepayers and residents. 

We believe that Council has a fiduciary responsibility to ensure ratepayers and residents get the best value for money and that there should be a more honest and transparent accountability of how and where the money is being spent. Straight answers. Not the rubbery figures and weasel words. 

Council voted last night to amend its advocacy plan in relation to the State Government’s Sea to Shrine project. Council voted to remove a proposal to construct a kerbside separated bike lane corridor in Kerferd Road and the removal of two vehicle lanes, following community feedback. 

Kerferd Road residents were caught by surprise when Council put this proposal back on the table when large numbers of residents opposed the same concept presented by the Department of Transport and Planning (DTP) and Department of Energy, Environment and Climate Action (DEECA) the responsible authority for the Shrine to Sea project, at a community engagement activity on Kerferd Road on 2nd April 2022, and following two petitions and representations to the Albert Park Member of Parliament. 

Around 30 residents spoke passionately at the Council meeting with about one third in support and two-thirds in opposition to the original motion. Cameron Smith asked, “is Council wilfully ignoring residents who previously strongly advocated for the removal of poorly designed designed pop-up bike lanes?” 

Karen Hardidge, a Kerferd Road resident said “We have already had robust community consultation. The public spoke out against the separated bike path, by way of petitions and the in-person pop-up with the Department of Transport”. 

“I’m concerned for my next-door neighbour who has two toddlers, having to carry them across a bike path, to load them and a pram into their vehicle. I’m concerned about my nine-year-old who may well forget about the bike path and open her door onto oncoming cyclists”. 

“I’m concerned about the future proofing of charging electric vehicles. Would it be ok if I run a cord across the bike path to charge my car?”

“When the traffic is reduced to one lane, we will be forced to stop all oncoming traffic, so we can park out front of our homes. This will be very stressful for the resident parking, not to mention frustrating for all other drivers”.

The original motion published a few days before the Council meeting and with no community consultation, called for the Council to advocate for the state government to fund and construct a protected kerbside bike lane from Beaconsfield Parade to Moray Street along Kerferd Road and Albert Road/Albert Road Service Road including the:

• reduction of traffic lanes from two to one in each direction on Kerferd Road; and
  
• reduced speed limit to 40 kph on Kerferd road.

In response to residents’ concerns about the lack of consultation by Council, Mayor Cunsolo amended the motion to “advocate to the Victorian Government to work with council to develop a comprehensive community engagement approach for any future project that proposes a bike lane and associated works on Kerferd Road, not within the publicly released draught Shrine to Sea Masterplan”.

Residents advocated for improvement to the existing Kerferd Road bicycle lanes by fixing the confusing arrangement at Richardson Street, removing bluestone which makes the path dangerous (see image below) and improving road markings. 

The original motion was amended to remove the kerbside protected bike lanes and reduction of vehicle car lanes from two to one in each direction. It was voted up by four votes by Crs Cunsolo, Pearl, Bond and Sirakoff, to one vote by Cr Martin. Crs Baxter and Nyaguy left the council meeting for the vote and Crs Clark and Crawford were apologies. 

Our residents and ratepayers of Port Phillip have long relied on our local council to manage essential services such as road maintenance, waste management, and local infrastructure. These core responsibilities are the bedrock of our vibrant community life, ensuring that our neighbourhoods are safe, clean, and well-maintained. However, a recent article published on The Conversation suggests a growing expectation for local councils to engage in broader social and political issues, including climate change.

While this perspective may resonate with some, it raises critical questions about the proper role, scope, and responsibilities of local government, particularly in the context of the City of Port Phillip. Many residents and ratepayers are increasingly concerned about declining service levels and the potential overreach of local governance. 

A resident of St Kilda, Claire, recently expressed her frustration with the City of Port Phillip's services. She highlighted issues such as confusing parking signs, delayed tree replacements, inadequate lighting in laneways, graffiti, blocked drains, and filthy public toilets. Despite numerous requests and complaints, the problems persist, leading Claire to take matters into her own hands by cleaning up her neighbourhood. Her experience echoes the sentiments of many in the community who feel that basic customer service has been compromised. Claire's advice to the Council is clear: "focus on the basics and fix those first. Put confidence back in this community that you can operate efficiently and that someone is responsible for the outcome."

A recent analysis of capital expenditure in the City of Port Phillip has revealed a startling disparity, with wealthier suburbs receiving far more per capita expenditure compared to the St Kilda/Balaclava area. The wide variance in spending, as reported in Port Phillip Matters, explains the visibly failing infrastructure in St Kilda, from poorly developed streetscapes to tired footpaths. The lack of meaningful infrastructure spending and serious rejuvenation of the urban environment has led to calls for greater transparency in postcode spends. Residents and ratepayers have a right to know where their money is being spent, and the current state of neglect in St Kilda underscores the need for the council to refocus on essential services and infrastructure. 

Another great example: the Edward O’Donnell Drinking Fountain in the O’Donnell Gardens, St Kilda has been neglected by the City of Phillip. It has no running water and the water in the base is stagnant. Several residents would like to see the fountain repaired to full operation with both water reticulation and lighting. Also the pond base of the fountain needs to comply with occupational health and safety, keeping the water clear of debris, bird droppings and rubbish.

The lack of focus on essential services is further underscored by the recent controversy surrounding the Port Phillip City Council's endorsement of the LGBTIQA+ Action Plan 2023-26. While the plan's aim to embed LGBTIQA+ inclusion across council activities is commendable, critics argue that it duplicates existing policies and includes sections outside the remit of the Council. The decision to prioritise this Action Plan, despite concerns about its necessity and focus, illustrates a shift in attention away from core responsibilities. It raises questions about the council's ability to balance cultural initiatives with the pressing need to maintain and improve essential services.

The City of Port Phillip has a unique character and set of needs. The focus of local government should remain on fiscal responsibility and efficiency in delivering essential services that directly impact the lives of local residents. Expanding the role of the council into broader social and political arenas risks diverting resources and attention away from primary responsibilities, exacerbating the frustration of those already annoyed by declining service levels.

State and Federal agencies are better equipped with the expertise, resources, and mandate to address complex and contentious issues. These matters often require coordinated national or even international efforts, beyond the scope and capacity of local councils like the City of Port Phillip. By concentrating on core responsibilities, local government can ensure proper governance and avoid potential legal and administrative challenges that could further strain resources.

While some may argue that local councils should reflect diverse opinions and values, this does not necessitate engaging in broader political debates. The City of Port Phillip can and should advocate for the needs of its communities, but this should be done within the context of core responsibilities and without imposing specific ideological stances that may not align with the views of residents and ratepayers.

The evolving role of local councils is a subject of ongoing debate and exploration. However, for the Council, the focus should remain on the core purpose of providing essential services to residents and ratepayers. By adhering to traditional roles, local government can ensure that it meets the immediate needs of the community without overreaching its boundaries or overburdening constituents.

In a time when efficiency, accountability, and community focus are more critical than ever, our Council must recognise its unique position and continue to prioritise the delivery of core services that directly impact the lives of those it serves. The conversation about the role of local government is essential and timely, but it must be grounded in a realistic understanding of what local councils can and should achieve, especially in the context of the specific concerns of our residents and ratepayers.

In a move that has sent shockwaves through democratic circles, Victorian councils have implemented a series of unprecedented security measures in response to disruptions, mainly by groups advocating fringe and conspiracy beliefs. While the need for safety is undeniable, the actions taken by councils—including installing duress alarms, closing public galleries, and moving to ticketed public meetings—have ignited a fierce debate about the erosion of civic engagement and the potential stifling of freedom of speech.

The security crackdown comes in the wake of concerns about the psychological welfare of staff and councillors. Incidents such as threatening remarks and unruly behavior have led to a wave of security measures across various councils. But these actions have raised eyebrows among those who value the democratic principles that allow citizens to engage openly and freely with their local government.

The measures, while aimed at ensuring safety, have been met with criticism and concern by those who see them as an overreaction that may inadvertently stifle the public's most accessible form of government. The decision to close public galleries or require pre-registration and tickets has been viewed by some as a heavy-handed approach that threatens our democracy.

The plaintiff in a case against Yarra Ranges Council, Darren Dickson, passionately argued that the council had overreacted. His words resonate with many who fear that these measures are a slippery slope towards silencing dissent: “No one was there to get aggressive or to threaten... That was projected by the council.”

The challenge facing councils is not merely a matter of balancing safety and openness; it's a fundamental question about the nature of democracy itself. Are these measures a necessary response to genuine threats, or do they represent a suppression of free speech and civic engagement?

Green's councillor Adam Pulford's experience with threatening remarks highlights the complexity of the issue. While acknowledging the need for security, he also emphasized that councils are meant to be welcoming places. The question remains: How can councils maintain both safety and the democratic principles that define local governance?

The peaceful timber industry rally outside Latrobe City Council's meeting in July stands as a testament to the power of free speech and peaceful protest. It serves as a reminder that citizens can express their views without disruption or threat, and that democracy thrives when voices are heard, not silenced.

The situation faced by Victorian councils is more than a local issue; it's a microcosm of a broader struggle to preserve democratic values in an increasingly polarized world. The measures taken by councils, while rooted in concerns for safety, must be scrutinised to ensure that they do not become tools for stifling dissent and silencing voices.

The task is not simple, but it is essential. As councils grapple with these challenges, the focus must remain on fostering an environment that encourages civic engagement, protects freedom of speech, and upholds the democratic values that are at the core of our society.

While other councils have installed duress alarms, closed public galleries, and moved to ticketed public meetings, Port Phillip Council continues to foster an environment that encourages civic engagement, protects freedom of speech, and upholds the democratic principles that are at the core of local governance.

Nevertheless, an alarm has been sounded, and the response will shape not only local governance but the very nature of democracy itself. The balance between security and democracy is delicate, and the stakes are high. The actions taken today will resonate far beyond the council chambers, echoing in the halls of democracy itself. The question we must all ask is: Are we willing to sacrifice our democratic principles on the altar of security? The answer will define our future as a free and open society.

I spoke at Council against this bizarre, ill-conceived Phoenix that keeps re appearing, in various guises, ignoring the wants and needs of locals on Wednesday this week. Over 12 months ago the community rose up en masse to squash the ill-conceived Shrine to Sea Kerferd Road proposal that would have reduced car lanes to one lane each way and moved parking over to the centre of the road to make room for protected bike lanes. Yes! more bike lanes!

I am disappointed that our Council are once again following their own politically biased bike lane agendas, despite this project being dealt with by Martin Foley and the community over 12 months ago, and recent State Government changes that kept the basic structure of Kerferd Road as it was with landscaping and beautification works being proposed. 

The crazy aspect of this latest fiasco is that it is our own Council that reintroduced the single lanes, crackpot centre-point parking and protected bike lanes back into what was otherwise a reasonable State Government re-proposal.

Another WOKE joke from the Council that gave us:

> a rubbish Collection Service that doesn’t Collect

> a pop-up bike lane fiasco that needlessly enraged our community 

> and now a recycled Shrine to Sea proposal that will set the community against Council – even more

There were 30 people speaking on this topic on Wednesday. A topic that was only added to Council’s agenda 4 days before Council was set to vote on it,  and giving little notification time for the community to respond. In any case, there was a broad church of people from both sides of the issue including bike activists from outside Port Phillip, as well as one woman that went on and on at how dangerous it was riding on roads with her infant in a cargo bike. A front load grocery style delivery bike ideal for delivering pumpkins and produce but not a great choice for transporting delicate living human cargo.   

Now the deal at Council is that you can’t interrupt a speaker, unless you are the Council (they make the rules) but I sensed that most people in the room were aghast and biting their tongues at how she was putting her child at such unnecessary risk. 

But everyone is entitled to have their say. Unless you say something that highlights Council’s ineptitude or names and shames a bureaucrat.

My Council monologue continues - April 2, 2022, I along with many others from the community went to a Community Engagement Session regarding this project. I came early and even helped them set up their stand. I spoke at length with a lady and listened to her project sell-in and then gave her my opinions on this concept. 

I said “It's a major thoroughfare in peak periods, it already has wide bike lanes, and road narrowing will cause rat runs past schools and local streets. It will be a problem for garbage and emergency vehicles, a problem for residents to wash and charge cars, it will cause congestion and safety issues, and contribute to a bottle neck at Albert Road and Kings Way”.

I made mention to her that she was not taking any notes and questioned whether this was truly a community engagement session or the presentation of a "fate accompli”? 

I got no response, but fortunately the planned Kerferd Road pop-up bike lanes were then scrapped. 

Confirming my suspicions that “Community Engagement" has always been a way of placating and justifying cockamamy Council ideas - not actually listening and responding to community feedback. 

The upside to this story is that in the end, the majority of Councillors voted  for (Crs Cunsolo, Pearl, Bond & Sirakoff) and one against (Cr Martin) the Mayor’s modified motion which excluded the originally proposed protected bike lanes and reducing car traffic to one lane in each direction  with Crs Baxter and Nyaguy absenting themselves from Chambers. Cr Clark and Crawford did not attend the meeting. 

My message to the bureaucrats and Councillors - don’t forget you’re working FOR the whole community - NOT against it.

In the vibrant neighbourhoods of Victoria, particularly in the City of Port Phillip, a complex and multifaceted debate has been brewing over the regulation of short stay accommodation (SSA) platforms like Airbnb. The question at the heart of this debate is not a simple one: who is responsible for the regulation of noisy and antisocial behaviour of renters using short stay accommodation? Is it the Police, Owners Corporation, EPA, VCAT, or local government? This question has become a focal point for residents, hosts, policymakers, and various stakeholders, each with their unique perspectives and interests. 

Residents have been increasingly vocal about their concerns, expressing deep frustration over the growing number of unregulated short-term rentals. 

These short term rentals, often used for parties and large gatherings, have led to serious issues of personal safety, sleep disruption, and mental well-being. 

The stories are numerous, and the impact is felt across the community. Since 2019, 50 cases at VCAT against SSA disputes have been heard, but not one host has been suspended or fined. The state law, it seems, is not working, and the residents' cries for help appear to be falling on deaf ears.

On the other side of the debate, hosts view short-term rentals as more than just a business opportunity. For many, it's a way to supplement income, support the local economy, and provide unique accommodation options for tourists. Many hosts operate responsibly, adhering to community standards and striving to be good neighbors. They argue that regulations should target the few who do not, without penalising those who are operating within the bounds of decency and respect for others.

The Victorian government's response to these concerns has been mixed. Attempts have been made to address the issues, such as the "unruly party laws" updated in 2021. However, these laws have been criticized as insufficient, leading to calls for more robust regulations and enforcement. The question of responsibility remains unanswered, with various stakeholders pointing fingers at each other, and no clear path forward.

The City of Port Phillip's stance on this matter has been particularly contentious. They have made it clear that they don't want to regulate SSA, citing too few occurrences in the area and a lack of resources – both people and funds. This stance raises serious questions about the accuracy of the statistics provided by the council. Are the numbers truly representative of the situation, or do they misrepresent the issue in the council's favor? The council's reluctance to take action has left many residents feeling abandoned and unsupported.

Councils around Australia and leading cities worldwide have found ways to implement various regulations on short-term accommodations. These regulations aim to balance the interests of residents, hosts, and tourists, creating a framework that acknowledges the complexity of the issue. Yet, in Victoria, the debate continues, with no clear consensus on who should bear the responsibility for regulating SSA. 

The other main issue is the effect that Short-Term Rentals have on housing affordability and long-term rental in our city.

The economic impact of SSA is also a point of contention, and one that cannot be ignored. Data from Insideairbnb.com shows that the top 50 Airbnb hosts in Port Phillip control 543 full-time listings. Some argue that these businesses should be subject to the same regulations as other commercial enterprises, while others point out that SSA contributes to the local economy, filling a gap in the accommodation market. The Victoria Hotel Association Melbourne has confirmed 72% hotel occupancy for February 2023, suggesting that there may be room for both hotels and short-term rentals.

A resident organization called "We Live Here" has formulated actions needed from the government, including empowering councils to strike a specific rate for SSA properties and strengthening the Owners Corporation Act. These proposals highlight the complexity of the issue and the need for a multifaceted approach. They also underscore the urgency of the situation, as residents continue to grapple with the daily realities of living near unregulated short-term rentals. 

The debate over short-term rentals in Victoria is not just a local issue; it reflects broader societal questions about community, responsibility, and governance. While concerns over safety, noise, and regulation are valid, it's essential to consider the broader picture, including the economic benefits, the rights of responsible hosts, and the role of government at various levels.

Under current outdated Victorian state laws, owners Corporates do not have the power to limit short term rentals within their own building.

The question of who is responsible for the regulation of noisy and antisocial behavior in short stay accommodation remains unresolved. The City of Port Phillip's reluctance to regulate, citing limited resources, adds another layer of complexity to the issue. The accuracy of the council's statistics also warrants scrutiny, as does the broader question of how communities can balance the interests of different stakeholders in a rapidly changing world. As the debate continues, the need for a clear and comprehensive solution becomes ever more pressing. The voices of residents, hosts, policymakers, and all those affected must be heard, and a path forward must be found that honours the complexity of this important issue.

Those living in the Port Phillip City Council area would be well aware of the problems associated with Short Stay accommodation. Owners Corporations and VCAT appear powerless to improve the situation.

I have requested COPP to consider using the use of Clause S59 (ie "Commercial premises must not detrimentally affect neighbourhood amenity or create a nuisance (including noise).

A St Kilda resident

In a recent decision that reflects a commitment to supporting local law enforcement, parking permits have been reinstated for the staff at Southbank Police Station by the City of Port Phillip. This decision comes only weeks after the permits were revoked, a move that had sparked concerns among the police force.

Initially, the council had withdrawn the permits for personal vehicle parking as of June 30, citing the availability of all-day paid parking in the area. However, this decision was met with resistance from the police station, leading to a reconsideration by the council.

On August 2, the councillors voted to provide 30 parking permits to the police station, aiming to create a fair parking environment for everyone, including workers and visitors. These permits will enable staff to park personal cars in residential streets, permit zones, timed bays, and ticketed bays during work hours.

Mayor Heather Cunsolo's Notice of Motion

Mayor Heather Cunsolo's notice of motion, presented at the Ordinary Meeting of Council on August 2, 2023, recommended that the council provide 30 annual parking permits for Southbank Police Station staff, at a cost aligned with the cost of a Visitor Parking Permit per year, until the current Parking Management Policy ends in 2028.

The supporting information highlighted that the parking permits were initially removed as part of the Parking Management Policy Review on May 17, 2023. The police station's feedback, which advised that most of the bays in the paid parking located close to the station were reserved, led to the reintroduction of eligibility for parking permits.

By limiting the number of parking permits to 30, the council aims to reduce the impact on other users and encourage efficient use of parking spaces. The introduction of a cost, approximately $126, is intended to offset some revenue loss while emphasizing the value of the permit and ensuring equity in treatment. Benchmarking with nearby councils indicated that only one other council, Yarra, provides police permits at $258 per permit.

Community Support and Opposition

Cr Christina Sirakoff emphasised the importance of the police force in the community, stating, "the Police force plays an important part in our community. This is one way that we can support them when they're going to work and going home, to make it easy for them for accessing permits. I’m in full support of this when they're a critical part of safety on our streets.”

While the decision has been largely welcomed, it was not without opposition. Cr Robbie Nyaguy voted against the motion, arguing that it was not unreasonable to ask workers or visitors without a parking permit to find alternative transport methods.

The reinstatement of parking permits for Southbank Police Station staff represents a thoughtful effort to balance the needs of the police force with the broader community's interests. It underscores the value placed on law enforcement and the willingness to adapt policies to ensure fairness and support for those who keep our streets safe. The decision also reflects a broader trend towards equitable treatment of parking users and a commitment to revenue management within the community.

JWS Research have just released their 2023 Local Government Community Satisfaction Survey with a devastating report card for the performance of our Council.

The report's findings are alarming. The overall performance index score of 45 in 2023 has trended downwards from a peak score of 53 recorded in 2019. This is now at a record low, and the decline is not statistically insignificant. The downward trend is not just a reflection of dissatisfaction; it's a warning sign of a deeper malaise that has set in.

Poor value for money. Ratepayers who receive very poor value from council is at the heart of this crisis. Only 32% of residents rate the value for money they receive from the council in infrastructure and services as 'very good' or 'good'. This contrasts sharply with 27% who rate the council as 'very poor' or 'poor', and a further 35% who consider the council 'average' in terms of providing value for money. These numbers are not just statistics; they are a stinging indictment of a council that seems to have lost touch with the very people it serves.

The dissatisfaction goes deeper. Almost half of the residents (49%) would prefer cuts in council services to keep council rates at the same level. This reveals an increased desire for service cuts over rate rises. It's not just a fleeting frustration; it's a clear call for change, a demand for accountability, and a plea for fiscal responsibility.

Council's performance declines. Key areas such as planning for population growth, lobbying, community decisions, and planning and building permits are at an all-time low. The report highlights that ratings in both lobbying and community decisions are at a record low, and the council's performance in these areas is rated significantly lower compared to the Metropolitan group average. These low-performing areas are not isolated failures but part of a pattern that points to systemic issues within the council.

A few green shoots appear. Council's top-performing service areas include art centres and libraries, with an index score of 71, followed by recreational facilities at 69, and waste management at 67. These ratings have remained stable, reflecting a commitment to maintaining quality services in these domains. The success in these areas demonstrates that the council has the potential to turn things around.

A plea for change. The findings of the Community Satisfaction Survey 2023 are a cry for accountability, transparency, and a return to the principles of good governance. The residents of Port Phillip deserve a council that listens, acts, and delivers value for money. The falling levels of customer satisfaction and the perceived lack of value for money are not mere bumps in the road; they are symptomatic of deeper issues that must be addressed with urgency.

The Community Satisfaction Survey 2023 is not just a report; it's a demand for change, a blueprint for renewal, and a call to action. The residents of Port Phillip have spoken, and their message is clear: They expect more, they deserve better, and they will settle for nothing less. 

ST KILDA, September 3rd – The heart of St Kilda is set to roar to life this Father's Day, as Acland Street prepares to host its 10th Annual Car and Bike Show. From 10 am to 6 pm, the street will be transformed into a motor enthusiast's dream, showcasing an impressive array of classic cars, hot rods, street machines, and bikes.

A Rich Automotive History

The fascination with classic cars, hot rods, and street machines is deeply rooted in Australia's automotive culture. Since the early 20th century, Australians have had a love affair with cars, and this passion has only grown over the decades.

In the post-World War II era, Australia saw a boom in car manufacturing, with brands like Holden and Ford becoming household names. The 1950s and 60s marked a golden age for Australian-made cars, with models like the Holden FJ and Ford Falcon becoming iconic symbols of Australian identity.

Hot rodding too, has a storied history in Australia. Inspired by the American hot rod culture of the 1950s, Australians began modifying and customising cars, turning them into unique expressions of individuality and creativity. Events like the annual Hot Rod Show in Melbourne have celebrated this culture for over 50 years.

Street machines, with their powerful engines and eye-catching designs, have also found a devoted following in Australia. Magazines, clubs, and events dedicated to street machines have fostered a community that continues to thrive and innovate.

A Day for Everyone

This year's Acland Street event promises to be a huge day of family fun, with something to captivate every member of the family. Children will be delighted with face painting, carnival rides, and dodgem cars, while live music and giveaways will keep the entire family entertained.

The event's organisers have also arranged for awards for the best cars and bikes, adding a touch of glamour and competition to the festivities.

Situated right in the heart of St Kilda, the event is perfectly positioned to take advantage of all that this vibrant area has to offer. With the best cafes and restaurants at your doorstep, not to mention the iconic Luna Park, families can make a whole day of it.

In a statement, the organisers said, "We are thrilled to celebrate our 10th year of this wonderful event. It's not just about the cars and bikes; it's about bringing families together for an unforgettable Father's Day. We invite everyone to come and join the vibe, and most importantly, bring Dad along for an action-packed, free family event."

With such a rich program and the unique setting of Acland Street, this year's Father's Day Car and Bike Show is shaping up to be an unmissable event. Whether you're a car enthusiast or just looking for a fun-filled day with the family, mark your calendars for September 3rd and head to St Kilda for a Father's Day to remember.

Head to the Facebook event to see updates and new cars/bikes being listed in the Car Show:

Facebook Event

The latest statewide community satisfaction results tabled by the Minister show community satisfaction with councils has hit record lows. 

This report comes the same week as IBAC’s Operation Sandon report into council collusion with developers, with the State Government now planning to strip powers away from council. 

Vice President Dean Hurlston says “It is clear the current model of how councils operate is fundamentally broken”. 

“The Local Government Act 2020 failed to set any rules for what counsellors should be responsible for and gave the industry a $12 billion a year blank cheque for their activities”. 

“It is no coincidence that since the local government reforms, average council spending and salaries have increased, while transparency in community satisfaction has steadily decreased”. 

“How can anyone be happy with the job councils are doing when nobody can define what they're paying for? 

“What will the minister or MAV do to continued spiraling public satisfaction with councils? This can't be allowed to continue in a cost-of-living crisis. Victorians deserve to know. What they're getting for their money”.

Source: https://www.facebook.com/100070614094188/posts/pfbid02PHodw54dxueSoSdWVv3zDnNULjPkwgwnVcA3t3mnN8roD9txe8131mmg3GsYwFzWl/?_rdc=1&_rdr

In a move that will significantly alter the political dynamics of the City of Port Phillip, the Council has decided to adopt Model 1 (see image) from the Electoral Representation Advisory Panel's (ERAP) preliminary report. This decision, made last night, marks a shift towards a single-councillor ward structure.

The ERAP's preliminary report offered three options for the Port Phillip City Council’s electoral structure. Model 1, which the Council has now chosen, proposes a structure of single-councillor wards. This aligns with the requirements of the Local Government Act 2020, which mandates all metropolitan, interface, and regional city councils to adopt a single-councillor ward structure.

This move represents a departure from the current structure, where residents have been accustomed to having multiple councillors represent their ward. The transition to single-member wards will be a change for both councillors and the community. The Council asserts that this new structure will ensure all voters in the municipality have their concerns and interests fairly and equitably represented.

While the Council's decision is in line with the legislative requirements, it remains to be seen how this change will be received by the community and how it will impact the effectiveness of local governance.

The final report will be submitted to the Minister for Local Government on Wednesday 13 September. Any changes to the Port Phillip City Council electoral structure following the review will apply at the October 2024 local council elections.

This decision by the Council is a significant one, and it will undoubtedly have a lasting impact on the political landscape of Port Phillip. As the community adjusts to this new structure, the effectiveness of this model in ensuring fair and equitable representation will be closely watched.

Source: Local council electoral structure review. Preliminary Report. Port Phillip City Council July 2023. Electoral Representation Advisory Panel

Mayor Heather Cunsolo formally announced on Sunday 30 July that Port Phillip is committed to funding towards the purchase of the Australia Post site for a sports oval and more open space.  The land is located adjacent to the North Port Cricket Ground at the junction of Williamstown Road and Ingles Street and has previously been identified as new public open space in the Fishermans Bend masterplan. [Source: Figure 15 page 55 https://www.fishermansbend.vic.gov.au/framework]

Mayor Cunsolo announced the plan to commit funding towards the purchase of the Australia Post site for a new sports oval and increased open space at a event prior to the VFLW Grand final at the Northport Oval. 

City of Port Phillip are proposing to include a 50-60m radius sub-district size oval to be constructed between North Port Oval and Bunnings. The proposed new oval will contain turf cricket wickets and the Port Melbourne Cricket Club will remain at North Port Oval in the existing facilities with a new playing oval. 

The proposal will see the removal of existing turf cricket pitches from North Port Oval and the Port Melbourne Football Club will get all year-round access to the North Port Oval and AFLW games can be played at North Port Oval from September to December. 

The City of Port Phillip is seeking feedback on its Urban Forest Strategy which aims to increase urban greening over the coming decades. Collectively, all trees and plants on public and private land make up our urban forest, including plants on nature strips, median strips, and roundabouts, in parks and reserves, and in shopping strips, car parks and industrial areas. 

The City of Port Phillip "Have your say - Urban Forest Strategy" closes this Sunday. A link is below.

I have been working on greening and biodiversity for Grey Street, St Kilda and streets that run off Grey Street for a very long time now. I welcome the opportunity has come up to beautify our area. The City of Port Phillip are currently reviewing their “Urban Forest Strategy - Street Trees and Vegetation” and this is a great opportunity for us as a community to make a change for the better and improve Grey Street, St Kilda.

If you support the greening and biodiversity of Grey Street or any other areas in Port Phillip, then you can provide feedback using the link https://haveyoursay.portphillip.vic.gov.au/urban-forest-strategy

Please fill out the form with all your wonderful ideas of how to improve and beautify Grey Street or any other part of the City of Port Phillip. I would love to have at least 100 people complete this, so I really do need all the help I can get.

Please provide feedback ASAP as the deadline is this Sunday August 6th.

In a move that will surely be welcomed by the residents of Port Phillip, the City Council has made the decisive move to upgrade the existing CCTV systems, a decision that was made on Wednesday night. This decision is a part of the Council's commitment to ensuring the safety and security of its residents, and it comes in the wake of a comprehensive review of the Community Safety Plan and Public Place CCTV Policy.

The Council has recognised that the current Public Place CCTV system is nearing the end of its functional life and needs to be replaced. The upgrade will optimise the system in terms of location, take advantage of the latest technologies, and ensure the security and availability of data. 

Despite the Council's belief that funding for such systems should be the responsibility of State and Federal governments, and their continued advocacy for such support, no external funding has been made available. In light of this, the Council has decided to fund the renewal and upgrade of the CCTV systems themselves.

The upgraded CCTV systems will hopefully assist in reducing antisocial behaviour but will also aid in crime prevention. The decision has been well received by residents, traders, and visitors alike, who see it as a positive step towards a safer community.

Victoria Police have also indicated that Public Place CCTV cameras improve public safety and security by helping them identify, locate, and respond to crime more effectively. The upgrade will undoubtedly assist police in their surveillance activities, making Port Phillip a safer place for all.

The Council's decision to upgrade the CCTV systems is a clear demonstration of their commitment to the safety and wellbeing of the community. It's a practical, common-sense move that could have a real and positive impact on the lives of the residents of Port Phillip. It's about time we saw more of this kind of decisive action from our local council.

Photo by Michał Jakubowski on Unsplash

Acland Court Shopping Centre in St Kilda has a rich history. The Centre, including the adjacent former Coles Variety Store, now Priceline Pharmacy, and local retail shops was built in 1937 and designed by noted architect Harry Norris, who was known for designing many Coles stores. The centre is currently being refurbished, redecorated and re-tenanted, to transform it into a “fresh food market” that will provide an attractive tenancy mix for local customers with a one-stop-shop location to obtain their daily food and beverage products. The centre has returned to its roots and harnessed the vibrancy and design quality of its original glory days in St Kilda’s bohemian precinct.

In November 2019, Coles fully renovated their store and rebranded the supermarket into a Coles Local. Coles committed $5M to the renovation of the store in St Kilda. It was one of the first Coles Local in their fleet of stores which under pins their commitment, faith, and support of Acland Street St Kilda. If you stop by try the excellent fresh mushroom ravioli and the unbelievable 400Gradi take home $12 pizzas if you don’t feel like cooking. There is an amazing selection of take home meals pre-packaged to take home and the store even has a Meat Smith Butcher selection.  The Store proudly offers a broad range of high-quality hand-picked products including the staple supermarket product lines.

Through Acland Court Shopping Centre’s exciting transformation, it is believed that the Centre will become an appetising and attractive destination for fine food. More recently, Wholefoods Organics has opened, a specialist organic food and produce store that provides wholefoods and the freshest organic fruit and vegetables to Melbourne. 

Other stores include the amazing Takara Sushi store, our well-known local St Kilda based bakery Woodfrog Bakery, and our long standing but wonderful newly decorated bottle shop Cellabrations. Hello to Mat and his friendly staff from the liquor store. Excellent wines and friendly service. 

Acland Court’s moto is “Shop Local” and this is definitely true. Most of the businesses located in the centre are local family run operations so help support your local traders. Ground Yourself Cafe, based at the Acland Street entry to the Centre, is renowned for their quality coffee and food that people travel all around St Kilda for Dennis’s coffee. Vodafone, a family run franchise, offers friendly personal service. And not to forget, situated outside the Coles Local entry is a range of beautiful flowers from Masons Flower house. Frank’s quality range ensures your flowers last longer. There’s more to come at Acland Court with new exciting stores that will be opening soon.

OMG Decadent Donuts are popping up at Acland Court Shopping Centre, 158 Acland St from July 6th (ground floor). We will be there for four days a week – Thursday through Sunday each week until July 30th. Hours: Thursday and Friday 10am to 7pm, Saturday 9am until at least 4, maybe later (depending on demand), Sunday 10am to 4pm.

Acland Court Shopping Centre is all about providing a convenient and safe environment for local shoppers to come to the Centre and visit Acland Street - to buy some groceries, have a coffee or cake and take in the sights and sounds that the precinct has to offer. The Centre provides a multi-storey car park with the first hour FREE.

Acland Court Shopping Centre is a family run and operated shopping centre. The family, born and bred in St Kilda are committed to the vision to revitalise the shopping centre to its glory days. They have so far done a fantastic job, investing money, time and commitment with a strong vision that will no doubt create a huge impact and positive change to Acland Street and the precinct in general.

Our community have been extremely proactive in trying to address the anti-social issues unfortunately that has recently been present in Acland Plaza – the Barkly Street end of Acland Street. We asked the Council for help, and they listened. The local law team has been able to make a great positive impact on the situation and improve the environment for everyone. It’s good to know that families, locals, and visitors are returning to Acland Street again. A shout out of special appreciation to the local law team officers. They deserve a medal!

Council CEO and his team, safety manager, and the Port Phillip Police have implemented a plan to help improve Acland Plaza. I believe there is more exciting and positive improvements to come in Acland Plaza. Stay tuned.

(Before people comment regarding anti-social people. The group mentioned are not homeless and in fact have homes. We always need to engage and try to help the rough sleepers and ensue we help whenever we can and contact your local council and these people need the respect and compassion to find a safe home.)

COME CELEBRATE WITH US!

• Food & Wine tastings
• Live St Kilda Jazz Band
• Buy & Try from our stores

Saturday July 22nd – 11am – 3pm

https://aclandcourt.com.au/winter-food-festival/

In a move that has raised eyebrows among some community members, the Port Phillip City Council has endorsed the LGBTIQA+ Action Plan 2023-26, despite concerns about the plan's focus and the need for an action plan. 

The contentious Action Plan was only voted up because Mayor Cunsolo used her casting vote when the vote was evenly divided because one Councillor voted against the motion and three councillors abstained which has the same effect as an against vote. See below. 

The Action Plan, which aims to embed LGBTIQA+ inclusion across council activities, was presented for endorsement following community and staff engagement. However, the consultation process has been criticized by some for its perceived bias towards the pride lobby group and the way it was solicited.

Concerns were raised that the action plan is not necessary because it duplicates existing Council policies and State and federal legislation and includes sections that are outside the remit of Council such as the inclusion of policies for schools and businesses. 

Cr Rhonda Clark who voted against the action plan said “I won’t be supporting this plan even though I support LGBTIQA+ community. We don’t need a separate action plan for specific groups in our community. I don’t agree with the procurement policies in this plan because selection of service providers should be blind to gender, race, age, and sexuality. I feel proud for what this Council does for the LGBTIQA+ community and our inclusivity and diversity for all sections of our community but I don’t feel we need this broad and expansive plan and some of the policies of the plan”. 

The council's decision to focus heavily on LGBTIQA+ inclusivity, rather than adopting a broader approach that encompasses other diverse groups, has been met with concern. Critics argue that this narrow focus risks marginalizing other community members and could lead to a divisive "us vs. them" mentality.

Cr Pearl said, “Council celebrates and embraces its diverse LGBTIQA+ community for its invaluable contribution to the social and economic life of the city. I will abstain for voting on this policy because but there are sections that I disagree with including advancing LGBTIQA+ inclusion in schools and businesses which is outside the remit of council. I don’t believe $50,000 spent recently on repainting the rainbow street is good value for money when the initial cost was $18,000 and the purpose was to signal the Pride Centre was coming”.

Cr Sirakoff said “We are all supportive of the LGBTIQA+ community and we are all proud to have the Pride Centre in St Kilda. I am partially supportive of the action plan, but I don’t agree with including procurement in the policy because our tender processes should not favour any one group over another which is consistent with state and federal laws”.  

Furthermore, the council's plan to capture data on the LGBTIQA+ community to inform the development of the next iteration of the Action Plan has raised privacy concerns. Critics argue that this could lead to unnecessary intrusion into people's personal lives and question whether the council has the necessary safeguards in place to protect this sensitive data.

The council's decision to proceed with the LGBTIQA+ Action Plan, despite these concerns, suggests a disregard for the views of a significant portion of the community. It raises questions about the council's commitment to genuine community consultation and its ability to balance the needs and interests of all community members.

As the council moves forward with its implementation of the Action Plan, it must ensure that it addresses these concerns and works to promote inclusivity in a way that respects the diversity and complexity of the community it serves. Anything less would be a disservice to the people of Port Phillip.

Votes for: Cr Baxter, Cr Crawford, Cr Cunsolo, Cr Martin

Votes against: Cr Clark

Abstained: Cr Bond, Cr Peral, Cr Sirakoff

Image: Midsumma Pride March are seen along Fitzroy Street in St Kilda. Source: AAP

We are Australian owned and operated, providing job opportunities, local support to communities, a fair deal for restaurants & cafes and would love your help to spread the word to get people aware of a better and fairer service than the big global players.

Community powered delivery service, BITE LOCAL, continues to expand and thrive, while high-profile competitors struggle to stay afloat.

A true Aussie homegrown food delivery service, BITE LOCAL is expanding and thriving while international and high-profile competitors are struggling to stay afloat. With a focus on providing quality service to local communities, reasonable delivery fees to restaurants and a viable franchise business has managed to outperform larger and better-funded rivals during the challenging economic environment of the past few years. Despite the challenges posed by the COVID-19 pandemic and fierce competition from multinational players, BITE CLUB has continued to grow its customer base and expand its operations.

It's exciting to welcome them to the City of Port Phillip as they soft launch this week along Clarendon St with plans to rapidly expand across the entire area, promising fast, reliable and on-time, every time service.

The secret to its success is a commitment to providing a personalized service that caters to the unique tastes and preferences of local communities. Unlike larger competitors, BITE LOCAL understands the nuances of local communities cuisine and works with local businesses to provide a more authentic and diverse range of options. 

Focused on providing a quality service that puts customers first has earned it a loyal following among locals who appreciate the convenience and reliability of the service. With the expansion of BITE LOCAL into new markets, even more customers will have access to its high-quality service, more restaurants will benefit from a low cost, manageable service and everyone wins.

Whether you're a busy professional looking for a quick and easy meal or a foodie looking for unique and delicious options, BITE LOCAL has got you covered, COMING SOON to South Melbourne & surrounding suburbs; keep an eye out on their socials, jump on their website or simply search BITE LOCAL in the app or google store and download their FREE APP and get ready for Deliciousness Delivered - FAST!

Join the thousands of satisfied customers who have already made BITE LOCAL their go-to delivery service, and let the BIG three multinational players know that it’s time to step up their game because Aussie restaurants & customers expect, demand & deserve more...

www.bitelocal.com.au

Content is translated from the source language using Artificial intelligence.

Following strong community opposition from residents and parents at St Kilda Park Primary School (SKiPPS), Council voted to stop construction of Public Toilets on Fitzroy Street, less than 100m from the entrance to the school. 

More than eighty residents filled the Town Hall chamber at Council’s Meeting on Wednesday 5 July and left Councillors in no doubt about where our community stands on this issue. Over 20 residents including Victorian Government representatives Nina Taylor MP, James Newbury MP,  as well as SKiPPS Principal Neil Scott, parents and School Council members spoke in support of Cr Rhonda Clark’s motion to stop construction of the public toilets. 

Elisa Webb, President of SKiPPS Council said “Our school community is pleased Council has listened and voted to stop the public toilets. It’s taken more than a year of considerable effort to stop the toilet from going ahead”.

Neil Scott, Principal at SKIPPS addressed the safety concerns “On the Council’s own Have Your Say website it says public toilets can attract antisocial behaviour. If the council are aware of this, then I cannot understand the decision to risk building a public toilet next to a place where hundreds of young children attend school each day. Taking this risk within meters of a busy government primary school is irresponsible”.

“I thank those councillors who have listened to the community and will vote tonight to keep our community safe,” said Mr Scott. “My question is to those councillors who continue to support the project – what if you are wrong and we have antisocial behaviours on the doorstep of the school – will you apologise and close these toilets after spending $500,000 or will you wash your hands of the decision and say it’s a decision for Victoria Police?” 

Drug use in public toilets is widely reported, with Council’s own website reporting more than 500 syringes were picked up from Fitzroy St and Acland St precincts in the month of June. The presence of the planned toilet would not only invite those seeking safe haven in which to use substances, but also invite the risk of improperly disposed of drug paraphernalia presenting a real threat of transmitting serious disease to others. We don’t wish to malign people with substance use disorders. But we reject any plans that would increase the risk of children interfacing with users undergoing drug induced  psychotic episodes, a phenomenon we see far too often nearby.

Council sought to rely on design principles to address the community’s safety concerns, but Wednesday's meeting heard from parent and SKiPPS Council Vice President Hannah Lawson “Recent studies indicate that CPTED has many disadvantages and failings. Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) primarily focuses on manipulating the physical environment to deter criminals, however it may have limited impact on individuals who are determined to commit a crime or are not easily influenced by their surroundings. Factors such as socio-economic conditions, personal motivations and psychological factors can outweigh the influence of the physical environment.” 

The school community and locals have been advocating for more than a year to discontinue plans for the Fitzroy Street toilet block in this most unsuitable of locations. Last year 1,319 residents signed a petition to urge the City of Port Phillip Council to reconsider their plan to build public toilets immediately outside St Kilda Park Primary School on Fitzroy Street. Details of the petition can be found at https://chng.it/n8jSpf9B

The school objected to the public toilets because of the Council’s track record of not being able to provide clean, safe, and well looked-after public toilet facilities. There were concerns that these toilets would present a safety risk to our students, families, and wider community members.

Elsewhere across the City of Port Phillip, public toilets have become dirty, unsafe spaces that attract drug users and other anti-social behaviours. We believe that the risks of this happening just metres from the school’s driveway are unacceptable. Kids coming and going to School need a recognised safety zone, an idea we readily accept with low-speed requirements on roads near every School. The particular risks we’ve identified at this site can’t easily be addressed. But moreover, the real need for a public toilet is where people are, which is in the commercial part of the street.

After receiving the petition with more than 1,300 objectors, Council remarkably voted on 15 June 2022 to construct a public toilet facility in the parkland facing Fitzroy Street, immediately in front of St Kilda Park Primary School. 

Since the demolition of public toilets in Cleve Gardens in 1994, there has been no permanent facility on Fitzroy Street. For over 14 years Council has been trying to find a feasible location for public toilet construction in Fitzroy Street. In this time, over 18 different locations have been considered and rejected because of community concerns. It’s notable that Council engaged with local constituents for feedback on each of those earlier occasions. St Kilda Park Primary School was not consulted before Council made plans for this latest controversial site.

The school community is grateful for the support of Cr Clark and Cr Sirakoff who listened and worked with us since last year, and along with Cr Cunsolo backed every Council vote to reconsider the proposed site. Cr Nyaguy provided the necessary fresh eyes this year, and with Cr Crawford’s welcome support we achieved a sensible outcome. We also want to acknowledge local Members Nina Taylor MP, Josh Burns MP and James Newbury MP for their support.

SKiPPS is one of the oldest institutions in the area and has a vibrant and diverse community. We intend to be part of ongoing discussion about ensuring that Fitzroy St is a safe, vibrant place for all.

Cover Image courtesy of The Age 4 July 2023

In 2019, IBAC launched an investigation (Operation Sandon) into alleged developer influence in council planning decisions in Casey. It held public hearings (see notes for scope).

The Casey council was subsequently sacked. Sadly, one former Councillor under the weight of allegations, committed suicide, despite no findings against them. 

Despite the findings being stalled in an extensive legal battle, IBAC will soon release its final report.

According to the Age, it is highly likely that the recommendation will be to remove planning decisions from local councillors. That would mean councils still do the planning work but do not allow Councillors to make public decisions on planning matters.

Instead, the decisions will likely be made by a faceless state panel, that gives little consideration to the local community and their impact by any proposed development.

Local councils continually claim to be the closest level of government to the people.

I have followed this and all planning matters for years, observing and pushing back on the removal of local decisions and local rights of objection. 

It goes without saying that local decisions enable local voices to be heard.

We are at a crossroads, but I don’t wholly blame the state government for likely taking the easy way out, I actually blame all of Victoria’s 620+ Councillors who have sat on their hands for 2 years (with a few minor exceptions).

One of the easiest ways Councillors could have improved governance and transparency was to mandate a developer contact register as soon as IBAC recommended it. 

Some councillors ran in 2020 on the basis that they would do this and have done nothing about it. 

More disastrous is that Council CEOs & Executive Officers have completely FAILED to develop policy to bring this to the forefront and actively manage issues that have been raised already.

In WA, one such Council that has implemented this in 2015, is the City of Vincent.

Publicly Available Council Registers » City of Vincent

In my research I have established the following publicly documented attempts by Councillors or staff to introduce some form of policy or register:

• 2019-2020 – Port Phillip Council officers produced a report to discuss the issue of a developer register, but it was not adopted by Councillors. No action taken since.
• 2023 – Whitehorse Council has developed a DRAFT policy for interactions with developers
• 2019 & 2022 – Monash Councillor Josh Fergeus attempted twice to gain support for a register, but the motion failed both times.

I am aware some councillors choose to disclose any meetings they have conducted and have them tabled in meeting notes; however, this is sporadic and there is no system across councils for this for the public to easily access.

There is little doubt that all Victorian CEOs, Councillors and Planning Staff KNOW about Operation Sandon and are awaiting the final report.

Councils can be a very busy place, for Councillors there is a never-ending stream of reports and information to digest.

All councils have the ability for Councillors to propose a motion, easily and regularly.

We have seen many motions hit the papers and media for their ideological stances on issues that stray well outside the remit of local councils.

It seems we have plenty of time to debate and push the most bizarre things these days!

But we don’t have a collective group of Councillors with the guts to force this into the public realm.

Where are the MAV, LGPRO, and The Local Government Minister in all of this?

Pathetically silent.

Silence is enabling the Developer to ultimately get their way – excluding councils so they can make more profits, at the expense of communities. 

I urge Councillors across the state, to stand up, implement contact registers, and ensure planning remains in local hands as much as possible.

You’ve been silent for 2 years and failed to act!

I’ve even drafted a simple motion to help you get started.

Over to you!

________________________________________________________________

DEVELOPER CONTACT REGISTER – DRAFT MOTION

PURPOSE

To ensure that all Contact between developers, councillors, and staff is recorded, tracked, and published to maintain the highest level of transparency to our community. 

BACKGROUND

Strong lobbying by both proponents as well as opponents of planning and development initiatives is a well-known occurrence and has seen increasing media attention both within Victoria and elsewhere in Australia.

A best-practice model of a developer contact register would give greater confidence in the public domain of perceptions of bias or undue influence being avoided in the decision-making process.

Planning decisions have the power to change our communities, they are not made lightly. We must ensure that all interactions with developers are publicly disclosed to ensure the community can have the highest confidence in the integrity of council decision-making processes. 

DISCUSSION

There has been much media and community discussion around the issue of developers allegedly influencing councillors and decision-making across the state. We are no strangers to this issue in the City of XXXXXXXX. Our residents told us that they wanted more transparency around this issue, so as a council, we have decided to develop a contact register to track and disclose all contact with developers. 

POLICY IMPLICATIONS

The City of XXXXXXXX deals with developers on a daily basis. This policy would require staff and councillors to update a central register of all contact (phone, email, text, messaging applications) with developers in relation to any development or issue in the City of XXXXXXXXXXXX.

FINANCIAL AND RESOURCES IMPLICATIONS

The implementation would require a few policy updates within the organisation but would not incur any additional resources or costs, this would be implemented by staff in current budgetary approvals.

MOTION

1. That Council resolves to implement a “Developer Contact Register” from 1/7/2023. The register will enable all council staff, executives, and councillors to list all contact (phone, email, text, messaging applications) with developers within the City of XXXXXXXXXXXX

2. That the register, whilst not compulsory for Councillors, is highly encouraged to be used.

3. That the register be updated and integrated within all planning departments and staff conduct policies to make recording of contact compulsory for staff.

4. That council update and publish the contact register on the Council Website under the XXXXXXXXXX page (insert link) monthly/quarterly.

5. The register is to be in the format as per Attachment from the City of Vincent WA.

OPERATION SANDON 

IBAC Public hearings

The hearings focused on:

• the transparency and integrity of planning and property development decision-making within Victoria, including but not limited to, the provision of donations and in-kind assistance to candidates at State and local government elections that may give rise to actual or perceived corruption.
• whether public officers involved in planning and property development decision-making have been improperly influenced through donations, gifts, pro bono services or other hospitality.
• the circumstances surrounding any actual or potential financial benefits obtained by any public officer, their families, or their associates, resulting from, or otherwise in connection with, planning and property development decision-making within Victoria.
• whether the use of professional lobbyists or planning consultants to lobby State and local government has resulted in undue influence over planning and property development decision-making within Victoria
• the systems and controls in place within public bodies concerning planning, with particular focus on the existence and adequacy of systems and controls for ensuring the integrity of the planning process, including by detecting instances of public officers obtaining corrupt benefits or being unduly influenced by individuals lobbying on behalf of vested interests.
• if the investigation of the above matters identifies serious corrupt conduct on the part of one or more current or former public officers, the extent to which (if at all) organisational culture and practices have fostered that conduct or hindered opportunities or attempts to detect and eliminate that conduct.

References:

https://www.sterow.com/?p=4699

Operation Sandon | IBAC

Planning legislation

Maddocks | Planning Reform in Victoria – What is the current state of…

Builders report year-long waits for development approvals amid planner shortage - ABC News

[+] State of Confusion: Inside Victoria’s Planning Dilemma (theurbandeveloper.com)

So what does it really mean?

I sometimes get involved with the odd Council Community engagement session as I am interested in what’s planned for our local community. I believe that it is mandatory for councils to engage with their electorate before they roll out any programs. Which is a good thing as the community should have a say in what goes on in their neighbourhood and how their rates moneys are spent. Whether people are renters or owners they all directly or indirectly pay rates, not withstanding the City of Port Phillip charge some of the highest rates in the country. 

When it comes to Council or any level of government bureaucracy I am a self confessed cynic … and for good reasons. As far as Community engagement is concerned my feeling is that Councils are just going through the motions in a game of smoke and mirrors to get their pre-conceived initiatives through the system.

My background is marketing and there is an old adage:- 

“HE WHO CONTROLS THE RESEARCH, CONTROLS THE OUTCOME” 

One glaring example is our Pop up Bike lane fiasco. If the community was honestly consulted in the first place, the program would never have gotten off the ground. The Department of Transport and Planning and Port Phillip Council I believe colluded in pushing this initiative through as a fait accompli.

Rubber stamped within not just our municipality but so many other surrounding councils as though the only form of transport was via bicycles. Bullied through without any consideration given to the impacts to local communities, Motor vehicle drivers and individuals other than bike riders.

Bureaucratic bullying is the only way I can describe what the rate paying public are being subjected to by our Local Council. Time and time again. Council decided to build a public toilet close to St Kilda Park Primary School with no consultation with the school and parents. Fortunately, that decision was reversed this week after a massive outcry from the school community.  

The dramatic community outcry and level of resistance against the dangerous Pop Up bike lanes eventually saw them removed from our local streets. But it was a fight that needn’t have happened if we had an honest council bureaucracy that didn’t constantly go rogue in pursuing their internal cuckoo crazy agendas. Whatever happened to our Public Service? Those that served the community for the greater good, not ignore and work against them.    

These social engineering bureaucrats seem to live in an out of touch parallel universe. A union employment agency for the over paid, underworked, overly woke and overly political. Our own Council employs over almost 900 people. Yes 900… For our small community of just 100,000 people. Too many people making up jobs to employ themselves through crazy initiatives, at your expense. 

So don't be fooled when council seeks your opinion via their Community Engagement programs. They in most cases will most likely ignore them and follow their own agendas. 

PS I Love watching Utopia on TV. If you haven’t done so it will give you a humorous insight into the machinations of how our bureaucracy dysfunctions. And Local Government would be another level or two below… Enjoy the cynicism.  

At his one-off show at Hamer Hall, Russel Morris floored the packed auditorium with a 2 1/2 hour mega show complete with symphony orchestra and with his own son conducting it. The average age of the audience would have been around the 70’s mark making my partner and myself one of the younger ones. The pharmaceutical costs of keeping the 2,500 people functioning would have been enough to run big Pharma for a few days. And the theatre cafeteria would have struggled for patrons as many of these demographics bought their own DIY sandwiches, food, and drinks.

Russell Morris and his own ageing crew seemed chuffed at the response of the sellout crowd and at 74,  I’m sure Russell would have thought he was still very much loved. An amazing feat to still be going strong after so many decades.

The songs with the orchestral backing were at times quite heavenly kicking off with an orchestral mash up of the Real Thing to herald Russell to stage. Absolutely fantastic show which will run at the opera house for another one-off outing. One interesting thing we learned was that the person that kicked off the thought of doing these shows was our own Clive Palmer who volunteered to underwrite the show should it not take off. 

It not only took off it soared.

Council made history by voting to provide financial relief for all ratepayers and businesses in response to cost-of-living pressures at a special Council meeting on 20th June. Rates revenue will increase rates by 2.8% instead of the 3.5% maximum allowed rates cap from 1 July. We understand Port Phillip may have been the only Council not to increase rates by the full amount. 

We understand this is the first time any Council in Victoria has resolved not to increase rates revenue by the maximum amount. Council said “this is the first time we have proposed an increase below the rates cap, introduced in 2016/17. It will not be funded by service cuts. Instead, we will put less into our reserve fund as a buffer for known and unexpected challenges over the next decade”. 

The cost of adopting a lower rate rise is about $900,000 in 2023-24 – a very small concession to property and business owners when Council has a $8.5 million surplus. Council intends to use the surplus to fund the estimated accumulated impact over the next 10 years which is $11 million less in rates collected. 

Cr Rhonda Clark said “an increase in rates of 2.8% is a very modest reduction in the state government rate cap of 3.5%, given the large surplus of over $8 million, I believe the rates increase should have been zero. With a revenue budget of over $250 million, a greater decrease was quite achievable if residents were put first”. 

Cr Christina Sirakoff said “I support a rates reduction to help our residents in these dire economic times because Council has not only an $8.5 million surplus but also $160 million in reserves earning interest and 53% of participants in our Council community survey supported a rates reduction”.  

Residents of Port Phillip (ROPP) have been advocating for a rates freeze for five years because Port Phillip rates are excessive compared with neighbouring councils - see  https://ropp.org.au/property-rates-calculator/

ROPP would have preferred a zero-percentage increase but acknowledge 0.7% reduction in revenue is better than no reduction.

Cr Clark observed “There are many people who turn up to council meetings who want greater expenditure for their personal interests and fail to understand the balance that needs to be struck for the broader community who require relief from council, not more council spending. It's hard to see how a significant amount of the expenditure we're proposing is more important than people's heating food or housing costs because those are just the fundamentals that people need. It's disappointing to me that my fellow Councillors can't support something more substantial for our residents”.  

In the last article, I wrote:

“the divide of Fitzroy Street has become our very own “Berlin wall.”  On the West side, you will find streets that are prosperous, shopping centres that thrive, and landscaping and tree planting abound. Even a fountain that works! – Our side ‘The East” of Fitzroy St, St Kilda, appears not to have the same focus, access, or concentration of beautification by the CoPP. 

When you ask Councillors why they are not spending money on the renewal of urban St Kilda and especially Acland Street, they say either “we do spend money in St Kilda” (usually on the foreshore) or the favourite response of “money is tight”, or “it’s not our responsibility”. 

A recent study unearthed the following Council expenditure and while St Kilda Post code 3182 was not fully isolated in the table, it nevertheless demonstrates the wide variance in expenditure between certain post codes in CoPP.”

Comparison on Capital Expenditure Draft Budget from 2022-24/5 Analysis of 3 areas. 

It is extraordinary that the wealthier suburbs in Port Phillip far exceed per capital expenditure, compared to the poorer St Kilda/Balaclava area, with Port Melbourne spending $1,283 per citizen, Albert Park and Middle Park, $684 per citizen and the St Kilda area $248 per citizen. 

This wide variance explains the visibly obvious failing infrastructure in St Kilda, from poorly developed street scapes, lack of adequate and consistent tree plantings, poor roads and a patchwork of tired footpaths. The argument that money is spent on the arts in St Kilda is all good but where do we visibly see the improvement? “Bread and circuses” are fine, but the rate payers also want to see value in terms of meaningful infrastructure spends and a serious rejuvenation of our urban environment. A good example of neglect is the lack of street curb plantings.  In neighbouring suburbs as part of environmental as well as general beautification, they abound. Not the case in urban St Kilda. 

Need for greater transparency in postcode spends.

Moving forward, Council as a transparent reporting mechanism should table all post code total spends broken down by category and attach a per capita value. Ratepayers have a right to know where the money by post code is being spent to ensure that St Kilda gets its share of rate payer money going forward. After all, its our money Councillors are spending. If they are going to treat us like an ATM, we certainly should demand the receipts!

________________________________________________________________________________________________

Acland Street Update

Lightboxes

This week we saw the installation of temporary light boxes in Acland Street advertising St Kilda’s once proud history of music. Once again, besides the cost of such another ad hoc initiative without a master plan to support it, other issues are relevant:

Firstly, powerlines run along a plastic protection conduit that crosses the Mall from a central power source. It would not be too hard to imagine potential safety issues with people tripping over the plastic protection.

Secondly, temporary light boxes cover the CTV camera that provides a visual line of sight to the problematic area of vagrancy on the large podium seating, where often illegal drinking occurs along with unruly behaviour. This challenging problem has improved with the actions of police as well as local laws personnel who monitor the situation daily, but the question remains. Why cover the direct line of sight of the security camera?

Thirdly, what is the cost of yet another temporary infrastructure for the street? Cannot the council do better with a serious master plan for the street including a proper consultative process?

Patching the Mall

Outside the entrance to the Acland Court, a vital revamp internally is occurring by the owner, turning this part of Acland Street into a destination point. Unfortunately, just outside the Acland Street entrance, the roots of a large palm tree have been spreading its wings and uplifting the stone pavers for over a year. Sadly, Council’s recent response is unfortunately like so much of St Kilda, “a patch job” and also a year too late! Instead of replacing the stone pavers (ordering them well in advance), this is what we got. Enough said.

City of Port Phillip Council Local Laws are reviewed every 10 years and this has now happened!

After several community meetings and feedback, there has been an improvement on the local laws; nuisance, furniture and shopping trolleys. Council will introduce on 1 August 2023, these new local laws including behaviour on Council land, Furniture and Other Items on Council Land and Footpaths and Shopping Trolleys following strong community feedback.  

A proposal for a community consultation to improve camping laws failed in a close 4:5 vote at council.

The new local laws are designed to assist Local Law officers, managing the behaviours of individuals.   The new law defines nuisance behaviours (see details below) that can occur when individuals are camped on Fitzroy & Acland Streets, St Kilda. Contrary to popular belief most of the people camped on the street have housing but choose to camp on the street.   

The new local laws also allow for the removal of dumped furniture including couches, chairs, mattresses, sofa's, rugs, blankets, kitchen goods, electrical goods, etc. which is a problem on our high streets. 

The Camping local law (see below) exempts homeless people and individuals with complex needs from the ban on camping.  

Residents have advocated for better enforcement of the existing camping law and to remove the exemption for people with complex needs to improve safety amenity of residents and protect vulnerable people requiring housing and/or mental health services such as drug and alcohol rehabilitation. Residents have claimed it is not safe to allow people with confirmed complex needs to camp on the street because they often fall prey to drug dealers and violent offenders. These are vulnerable people who should be given care by healthcare agencies.

Residents expect Local Laws to apply the existing camping laws and prevent individuals camping on the street when they are known to have accommodation.

Thank you to Cr Rhonda Clark for holding these community meetings and for all those who were involved in passing these motions, it was very much appreciated by the local community.

Behaviour on Council Land 

The new local law states: A person must not on or in Council land, a road, or a footpath: 

Furniture and Other Items on Council Land and Footpaths

The new local law states:

Camping Local Law 2023 

Council resolved not to change the Camping local law, despite local community feedback for change. The current local law states: 

Shopping Trolleys

Supermarkets will be required to re-fit their trolleys with perimeter locks and have 12 months to do so.  

A glance at the 2021/2022 CoPP annual report gives the reader a great idea of the amount of money it costs to produce a glossy annual report, and which is full of motherhood and self-serving statements. This is how the CoPP summarised St Kilda on page 39 of the Annual report:

Encompassing the suburbs of St Kilda West (east of Cowderoy Street), most of St Kilda and a small part of Elwood, the neighborhood is attractive to residents and visitors for its iconic retail strips, significant open spaces and the foreshore. St Kilda attracts millions of visitors every year, as it is home to many of Melbourne’s most famous attractions including Luna Park, the Palais Theatre and St Kilda Beach. It also hosts large events including the St Kilda Festival and Midsummer Pride March.

Reading the annual Report, you would have thought the place I call home is thriving, and if we go back 30 years it was.  The iconic streets are now known for street violence, drug and alcohol abuse and a gathering place for the homeless or idle. I was recently informed that if you add the upstairs areas of retail premises also available for rent in Acland Street, the number of vacant commercial premises is closer to 40 vacancies! 

More so, the divide of Fitzroy Street has become our very own “Berlin wall.”  On the West side, you will find streets that are prosperous, shopping centers that thrive, and landscaping and tree planting abound. Even a fountain that works! – Our side ‘The East” of Fitzroy St, St Kilda, appears not to have the same focus, access, or concentration of beautification by the CoPP. 

When you ask Councillors why they are not spending money on the renewal of urban St Kilda and especially Acland Street, they say either “we do spend money in St Kilda” (usually on the foreshore) or proffer the favourite response of “money is tight”, or “it’s not our responsibility”. 

Financial Competency or Just Squeezing the Rate payer?

The CoPP website, whether it be from their minutes, annual statements or budgets, tells a different story when it comes to the financial strength of the CoPP. The fact is, the CoPP are not clever at spending the money that they raise, primarily from ratepayers. For example, Councilors are seeking a rate rise for 2023 – 2024 irrespective of the fact that there is currently a projected operating surplus of $8.4 million in 2022/2023 and $15.5 million in 2024/2025. In 2022, the operating surplus was $26.6 million. While a surplus is good, it is not difficult to achieve, when it comes from a captive funding source, the property owners of Port Phillip, which some ideologically driven Councilors see us disrespectfully, as the local ATM.

We all would agree with a CoPP surplus at the current time over breaking even, if it was not for one quiet, rarely spoken fact. The Council has accumulated over $160 million in cash, financial assets and receivables as outlined in the 2022 Annual Report. We the ratepayers, have been treated like mugs and even more irritating, rate increases are driven from some Councilors who are not CoPP rate payers and hence have no real skin in the game anyway. A classic case of largess with other people’s hard-earned money!

Many questions follow from the Council swimming in cash and the ongoing annual rate escalation.

• Why are rate rises even on the CoPP agenda when we have currently a substantial $160 million plus in cash, reserves, receivables and interest-bearing deposits?
• A zero increase for 2023-2024 would still produce a financial surplus
  
• Why, with the amount of surplus funds available to Council, we still have no masterplan design for Acland Street, including full-time By-laws officers for the retail strip to make a reality of the “Nirvana St Kilda” that they glowingly present in their annual report?

And if spending a small part of the $160 million in current assets and or the surplus on the restoration of Acland Street is a leap too far for some of our Councillors, then why was or is it so palatable for some of our elected representatives to champion: 

• Over the last decade a million dollars plus on a village in Timor Leste
• $300,000 on grants to “pop up art” with a short life span in 2021-2022
• $300,000 on grants to musicians during covid-19 and outrageously,
• $350,000 to the neighboring Bayside Council as a gift for an environmental study.

In regard to the Timor Leste annual payments and the substantial gift to a neighbouring Council, both expenditure items appear to go against the Local Government Act. 

8   Role of a Council - The role of a Council is to provide good governance in its municipal district for the benefit and wellbeing of the municipal community.

Both expenditures appear to be outside the mandate of Council and the other items mentioned above, appear to be “pork barreling” to Councillor sectional interests.

It’s time for Councillors to refocus on the bread-and-butter issues that build successful and prosperous communities. It's time for the CoPP to take a hard look at St Kilda and develop a consultative masterplan, starting with the once proud jewel in Victoria’s crown - Acland Street!

Apartment rents across Australia have increased six times faster than wages and house rents have climbed at triple the rate, leaving many tenants struggling to make ends meet. 

A representative from Ray White Real Estate being interviewed on 7 News said that "rent increases are affected by rate rises." Rates that our Council has been increasing year in and year out regardless of community needs and outcry. The problem is that our council is overrun by political Councillors that are purely there to showcase to their political masters to duplicate services that are the responsibility of state and federal governments.. Rate rises that are simply filtered back into the conga line of vested interests and bleeding hearts groups that have been lining up for handouts for decades.

Our community has a high proportion of renters that are being constantly hit with rent increases that are partly driven by rate increases. Residents in our community are paying the highest rates of all the Councils in Victoria. Rates that are driving out pensioners from their family homes, forced to effectively reverse mortgage their family homes and making rents unaffordable to renters.

The City of Port Phillip is flush with funds and have an excess of over $160 million dollars in their war chest so there should be no excuse for helping our community to cope with the constant inflationary post Covid increases including state and federal taxes and Council Rates.

Politically aligned councillors do not care for the greater good of our community. They are cutting their political teeth in the hope of moving up the ladder towards state or federal  politics.  

The community has had enough of these political Councillors and should voice their opinions directly by email to Councillors prior to voting on the Council Plan and Budget on 20th June.

Rally against the Rise: see email addresses for your councillors at https://www.portphillip.vic.gov.au/about-the-council/who-we-are/your-councillors 

Source: https://www.smh.com.au/property/news/it-s-bleak-why-you-might-be-struggling-to-keep-pace-with-rent-rises-20230529-p5dc8l.html

The City of Port Phillip is the most recent council to show that it hears residents’ fears about short term accommodation.  The CEO has been instructed to prepare a report on how other councils manage short term rentals, with proposals on how they could be regulated.

This directive was the result of a community petition demanding that the council take action to develop and enforce rules on short stay operations in the CoPP. The investigative report will be presented to council next month.

Many councils have now introduced basic regulations. Bass Coast, Frankston, Mornington Peninsula and most recently Warrnambool have implemented registration systems for short stay hosts, charging an annual fee. Yarra Ranges Council lobbied the state government to take responsibility for regulating short stays. 

The petitioners have told PPM that they are not trying to stop small businesses. It’s about introducing registration and making hosts accountable when they are in fact operating an unregulated hotel within a private residential building without any training or safety acts and not caring about the long-term effects on neighbours or community. We are not trying the penalise the responsible operators.

Current state laws are inadequate, and that not one single host has been fined or suspended through VCAT for poor behaviour. Laws introduced in 2019 imposed a three-strike rule, which gave VCAT the power to ban hosting for a period, issue fines for hosts and award compensation up to $2,000 to affected residents.  Since the introduction of the laws, VCAT has heard fifty short stay disputes however, no legal action has been imposed on a host. 

It is also an offence to make unreasonable noise from a residence under the Environment Protection Act 2017 which has been updated to include short stay rental accommodation in the definition of residential premises. Importantly, the regulations apply to agents, owners, and occupiers and seeks to limit noise in residential areas during restricted times. Noise is unreasonable when it occurs during prohibited hours and where someone in a habitable room in any other residence can hear it. 

Regulation of short-term accommodation by council is controversial because short stay hosts have told Port Phillip Matters that CoPP do not have the resources and capability to properly regulate this market, based on council’s inability to enforce noise and antisocial behaviour at late night venues and hotels. 

As the petition organiser stated, “imagine you or your family member living next door to these unregulated business party houses who do not answer to anyone in terms of sound pollution, number of patrons, age limits or operating hours.” 

The petition is asking for owners’ corporations to have the right to decide if a building can have short term stays, and that there should be a limit on the number of days an apartment could be rented. There would also be penalties for those who breach the rules. 

There is also little evidence that short term stays are contributing to the local economy. Where houses and apartments are being used as private party venues, patrons can bring their own alcohol and catering, and therefore not filling local bars and restaurants, which hotel guests are much more likely to do.

Also, the Victoria Hotel Association Melbourne has confirmed that they only achieved 72% hotel occupancy for the month of February 2023, so why are our politicians not making sure accommodation is being maximised in purpose-built buildings by an industry that creates jobs and pay taxes to benefit the community?

Under current state laws, Owners Corporations do not have the power to limit short term rentals within their own buildings.

Are short term Accommodation platforms causing you a problem? 

Don’t suffer in Silence! If you find it difficult to have your say, email the CEO using the Link below.

https://www.portphillip.vic.gov.au/council-services/health-and-safety/short-stay-accommodation or contact  (03) 9209 6777

I live in St Kilda and have for over 26 years. I support the 2.8% rate increase, but I would have preferred it if it was a 0% increase, as the City of Port Phillip has a surplus of $8.5 million.

We are lucky enough to own a house (well the bank owns it) and we, like most people, are paying it off.  

The increasing of council rates is placing a financial burden on residents, especially those with a fixed or limited income.  Many individuals already face a high cost of living due to factors such as inflation and increasing utility bills.  Increasing the council rates can contribute to the overall cost of living, making it more challenging for people to manage their everyday expenses.

Many households are already facing rising costs in food, education, electricity, and amenities.  If the council rates do go up more than 2.8%, this adds to the overall cost of living, which is challenging for people on tight budgets.  

Some residents may argue that if the rates don’t increase there will be a slashing of funds to the arts and essential services.  I don't believe that anyone is asking for the arts or essential services to be cut, funding needs to be spent more efficiently.  I have been on many community engagements with CoPP workshops, and it seems to be run by a lot of consultants.  The CoPP have great staff and they themselves should be running these workshops, it should be run in-house, there is a saving right there.  

I work for the Department of Education, and I am personally seeing work colleagues seeking extra work, mortgages have doubled and it's a struggle, a real struggle.  I have friends that are single, mothers and fathers that are single and families, we are all struggling.  Just because you own a flat, apartment or house, doesn't mean you're wealthy!

I know that we have to pay rates and we all have to, but I am asking that the City of Port Phillip just slow down and give us a break.  $100 may not mean much to you, but it means a lot to me and others.

Port Phillip is currently undergoing machinations over a rate increase of either 2.8% or to a maximum 3.5% as a stipulated maximum by the Victoria State Government. The obvious answer, if Councillors were not so tone deaf to the concerns of the average punter, is for a zero increase in rates for 2023-2024. Constituents have over the last 18 months, seen a massive increase in their cost of living. Some raw data is as follows.

Interest rates and Mortgage and Rental stress

• For those with a housing loan of $500,000, the increase in interest is $908 per month ($10,896 p.a after tax),
• For those with a housing loan of $750,000 the increase in interest is $1362 per month ($16,344 p.a after tax),
• For those constituents classified as poor, on average 50% of household income goes into rent.
• For those constituents classified as middle class, on average 30% of household income goes into rent.

Utilities

• Victorians have a disproportionate use of gas as a fuel source for heating. Gas has risen between 8 and 10% and will increase to over 20% later this year as the new tariffs come into effect.
• The average constituent will pay a further estimated $400 per year on gas.
• Other utilities like electricity are looking to exceed 10% in increases.

Vulnerable Members of the Community

• Pensioners average cost of living in 2022-2023 is around 7.3% increase.
• Self-Funded Retirees’ average cost is around 7.6% increase.

Clearly large sections of the community are doing it tough, while real wages continue to fall as the economy adjusts to supply side constraints.

On the Council budgeting side there is no financial stress, in fact, largess remains the continued narrative. There is approximately $160 million in reserves/current assets. This alone has the potential to generate a further $4 million annually in interest, if properly invested.

The CoPP runs on large surpluses annually. In 2021-2022 the surplus was $26.5 million. In 2020-2021 the surplus was $12.4 million. An estimated surplus of $10 million is budgeted for 2023-2024.

The extraordinary advocacy by some Councillors for surpluses of up to $10 million for 2023-2024 on the back of a full rate rise of 3.5% is more galling when we consider there is $160 million in Council reserves that can act as a cushion during difficult times. After all, what are reserves for? Certainly not for the rainy day that never comes. Also ask yourself why the Council does not have a rigorous reserving policy to cap the amount in reserves that sit on the balance sheet at any given time?

Councillors who argue that a reduced rate rise of 2.8% translates into an $11 million negative impact in revenue over 10 years, ignore offsets of any long-term revenue loss through potential efficiency gains. For example, if a modest $2 million or 0.9% (yes less than 1% based on 2021-2022 actual expenditure) was extracted from an efficiency review, it would more than double the compensation for any reduced rate increase in 2023-2024, extrapolated out to ten years. In the private sector a minimum 2% efficiency gain would be a more reasonable number to work from and if translated into current expenses, we could expect a minimum $5 million in savings, or the equivalent amount of the 2.8% rate increase mooted for 2023-2024.

A modest $2 to $5 million in savings could be found through a combination of measures and could be phased in through a staff freeze, natural staff attrition, or review of non-core activities. Of course, some Councillors will jump up and down trying to equate budget cuts to an attack on community grants. Such an argument is nothing but a disingenuous ploy to effectively maintain the status quo. Effectively, a leaderless call to do nothing. There is plenty of waste, staff under deployment, excessive use of consultants and inefficiency internally without combing through community grants while looking for savings.

Sadly, Councillors tend to only focus on revenue and pay little attention to the expenditure side of the equation. Building up surpluses does of course have a political angle - having a cash surplus means more money to splash on pet projects, pander to sectional interest groups and meeting directives from Spring Street. 

It is even more disappointing that some of the Councillors who are now pushing for the full rate rise, have no property ownership in Port Phillip and hence do not pay rates. A clear case of spending other people’s money, with no skin in the game themselves! If they did have skin in the game, they may be more cautious with their decision making.

The reality of course is that with any rate rise (along with the recently introduced State Government increase in land tax and mandatory utility checks), all will flow back to the punters in increased rents causing further hardship for constituents whose real incomes on average will continue to fall. It is even more dire when we consider that nearly 50% of all constituents in the City of Port Phillip are either in rented or assisted accommodation.

When it comes to spending money in these challenging times, it is not hard to know who needs it and who will utilise hard-earned money the most efficiently.  Is it mums and dads, the aspirational, the young couples buying a home, residential and business owners or alternatively - the City of Port Phillip who for too long have treated the rate payers as the local ATM? 

When I see the breakdown of our once vibrant retail strips of Fitzroy, Clarendon, Acland and Carlisle Streets, the failure to make progress on the St Kilda Triangle, the millions in underutilised funds in Council reserves, I know the City of Port Phillip are not the best managers of the people’s money, nor do they necessarily always have our best interests at heart.

If ever there was a need for Council restraint in rate increases, it is now. Good fiscal leadership looks internally for expenditure reductions, freezing new hires, trimming the budget surplus, and utilising some of the extraordinary build up in excessive reserves. The people need a break and the ratepayers who basically fund the CoPP deserve a break too. 

And to the Councillors sitting on the fence regarding the amount of any rate increase - history tells us that only those that buck the trend, ignore the politics, and listen to a community doing it tough are remembered. What legacy do you want Councillors?

In last week’s addition, we discussed the need to create a safe trouble-free environment as the foundation stone for the private sector to have confidence in investing in Acland Street. 

The CoPP, like government bodies in general, is no stranger to the optics of being seen be to doing something. Hence, we currently have a mapping exercise of Acland Street being undertaken by a consultancy firm and the employment of “business development” officers. These initiatives reek of a public sector mindset for what really is a commercial problem. Create the right environment and retail will invest and customers will come.

On the day when Acland Street is seen as a safe destination and cleared of the street element, then we will have the preconditions for re-establishment of commerce. Hopefully the Bylaws officers and buggy will be a continued daily sight on Acland Street.

Decisions of the CoPP regarding Acland Street tend to be ad hoc in nature. Recent examples include two weekends of ballroom dancing complete with psychedelic plastic adhesive circles on part of the mall, a pop-up golf course, art installations that last no more than a few months and rainbow-colored seating. These initiatives cost money and yet the street remains unloved. I venture to say there was no cost/benefit analysis for any of these initiatives and the general perception is one of poor use of ratepayer money. 

Now we have featured stainless steel wires left over from a previous art installation that will soon be decorated with lights. 


The community signals, if read correctly, indicate one clear message - that we need a combination of strong leadership, de-politisation at Councillor level and a real solid master plan for the street. “We’re looking at this and we are looking at that” needs to be replaced with what is really needed. That is, a master plan fully consulted with the retail strip and residents. 

If you were to have a proper masterplan for the street, it would entail such things as landscaping options and some resolution of the large granite seating. -  Several police officers (some senior) say along with residents, that this seating should be moved to a park and or near the seaside. The granite seating in a park setting would work well. (Maybe a poet’s corner or a speaker’s corner like in London). The seating location is certainly problematic, and I believe there is no community support for it remaining in its current locale. A masterplan could see this seating removed and even partial reopening of the street or changes to car parking off Acland Street.

A master plan may resolve the lighting issue. Instead of putting up lighting straight away, incorporate it into a master plan. Let’s see the big picture of how the CoPP will change the street for the better. In the private sector, a Board would say – “Come back with a comprehensive proposal”, not a piecemeal grab of initiatives.

A masterplan may incorporate another fountain like the famous King’s Cross fountain near the Barkly Street end. The O’Donnell fountain requires repair and re-activation.  Combine these measures with a lighting proposal and outdoor plaza with tables, chairs and umbrellas, winter heating, provided by restaurants and cafes. With these measures, we could very quickly restore Acland Street. 

In any masterplan we also need to change the way the CoPP gathers its information. Too much is weighed in favour of the views of “community welfare groups”. While their views are important, rate payer and business houses must have stronger weighting in Council decisions – they after all, pay for the amenities of the CoPP. Without business, there is no street. That is proposition number one, not a secondary consideration or an afterthought.

Now here is the positive rub for the CoPP. They continually get poor press and criticism over Acland Street. They can manage this by retaking the narrative through instigating a fully consulted masterplan for the street that is pro-business, pro security, and with emphasis on customer and pedestrian safety.

In response to ROPP’s advocacy, Council conducted a cost review to identify options for ongoing cost reductions that would enable Council to consider adopting a zero percentage rates increase in financial year 2023/24. However, the cost review was not conducted in good faith and was an appalling waste of time and money. The process was politicised and disingenuous.

Council undertook a review of spending in 28 service areas over a series of eight workshops and months to identify cost savings. A cost saving of $5M or 2% of total expenditure of $248M was required to deliver a zero-percentage rate increase (i.e. freeze rates) and Council was only able to find $87,000 of savings. The Cost Review was a farce and an appalling waste of time and money. 

Councillors were invited to identify services to be cut rather than cut wasteful spending. Services do not have to be cut to reduce rates. The Cost Review process was fundamentally flawed and politicised. The result of the Cost Review was to propose a reduction in the Cultural Development Fund for artistic and creative projects from $187,000 to $100,000 from the 2023/24 draft budget. The Cost Review 2022 was completed outside of the normal budget process and a temporary agency staff resource was engaged at approximately $70,000 to assist in the Cost Review. 

The $87,000 cut to the cultural development program represents less than 1% of the $17.3 million budget for the Arts, Culture and Heritage which spends $415,000 on cultural development projects and grants. Another $345,000 is spent on Community grants in Community programs and facilities. COPP provides $760,000 of generous funding and grants for Cultural Development across two service areas: 

• Community programs and facilities and 
• Arts, culture, and heritage. 

We disagree with claims that COPP operates efficiently. The Council Officers should have been asked to find 2% efficiencies of total expenditure of $248M (ie $5 million) to deliver a zero-percentage rate increase (i.e. freeze rates).

Often consultants are brought in to do the work that officers can do such as facilitating meetings and preparing reports. Each of the 28 service areas produce a glossy policy document based on a community consultation littered with vested interests. Writing reports is not delivering a service and efficiencies should be made by the reduction in the unnecessary use of consultants.

For example, COPP is seeking community feedback on its draft Housing Strategy which is budgeted to cost $365,000 over two years. Council have spent a lot of time and money on preparing the policy document, but it completely overstates the role of local government in the supply and design of housing. Is that good value for money? Is this another policy document that merely reports and monitors statistics and just sits on the shelf?  

Sources: 

Item 13.1 Cost review in the meeting agenda and minutes of 15 February 2023 https://www.portphillip.vic.gov.au/about-the-council/council-meetings/2023-meetings-and-agendas

Vol 3 Draft Council Plan and Budget https://haveyoursay.portphillip.vic.gov.au/council-plan-and-budget. 

Support St Kilda Park Primary School (SKiPPS) which is hosting a Feel-good winter wellness fundraiser day on June 15th @ the Ian Johnson Pavilion (oval next to the school). Local parents and friends welcome. Experienced facilitators will be hosting a range of wonderful sessions. Choose from a range of activities: 

• Yoga
• Sound bath
• Feldenkrais 
• Hypnotherapy for stress management
• Chakra Dance
• and more 

Cost is $20 a session or $115 for the whole day. Free tasting and info session. Amazing teas & delicious snacks available throughout the day, thanks to our generous supporters!

> Booking link 

Victoria Police invites members of the community to attend the Port Phillip community safety forum on 6th of June 2023.

The forum welcomes local services and community members to talk with police about what is important in your community. The forum will explore a range of topics including:

• current crime trends and crime prevention
• young people
• family violence
• road policing
• drugs and drug related crime

The forum will be run by a Victoria police panel and questions will be taken from the audience throughout the event.  Registration is a must. To register your interest, please send your details to PORT_PHILLIP-NHP-MGR@police.vic.gov.au

Refreshments and food will also be offered. If there are any dietary requirements, please include them in your registration.

Date: 6 June 2023

Time: 9am – 12:30pm

Location: St Kilda Town Hall, 99a Carlisle Street, St Kilda

Rod Mitchell’s series of articles on Acland Street seems to be vindicated by the Sydney Morning Herald report that Acland Street has the highest retail vacancy rates in Melbourne (see chart above) with more than one in four shops empty, while other suburbs enjoyed declining vacancy rates. For example, High Street in Armadale had its vacancy rates fall from 10.3% to 3.6%, while Church Street in Brighton had the lowest vacancy rates of 0.6%.

The SMH article also quotes the owners of the Globe shoe store who decided to relocate to Port Melbourne because their sales had declined by 60% and never came back after the closure of traffic in 2016. Other traders have said that rents have pushed out businesses.

Rod Mitchell has suggested that Acland Street need a Master Plan to restore Acland Street to a thriving business precinct. What do you think? Send your thoughts to mail@ropp.org.au

Source:https://www.smh.com.au/business/the-economy/the-melbourne-tshopping-strip-where-one-in-four-stores-is-empty-20230531-p5dcvj.html

Photo by Mike Stevens on Unsplash

Council employee numbers. It seems the bigger they get the more we pay and the less we get…. Is it time we shrank our council?

The community is getting fed up with the services we aren’t getting from our council (eg Rubbish collection) and the insane programs that they are forcing upon our community (eg Bike Lanes that are unnecessary or poorly designed) as well as the degeneration and safety of our streets. (Eg Acland Street, Fitzroy Street, Clarendon Street). Not forgetting the removal of car parking, our dying iconic palm trees that Council seems to be doing nothing about, the street sleepers, the drug pushers and wasteful spending on consultants and pet projects. 

It seems that the bigger they are the worse they get and Councillors seem powerless or unwilling to do anything about finding efficiencies and cutting wasteful spending. Our senior citizens can remember when our council was much loved by the community - because they simply delivered on their core services. Days back when the council actually did the work themselves instead of paying outsiders to do the work.  Whereas today they seem to be hopeless at delivering, no matter how many more public servants are employed. When you think about it, our council geographic boundaries haven’t changed since June 1994 when the Cities of St Kilda, South Melbourne and Port Melbourne were amalgamated. The merger was meant to deliver efficiencies, but rates were affordable, and our councils were more efficient in the good old days. 

For example, Council spends a lot of time and money on preparing policy documents that seem to exist solely for the purpose of justifying jobs at the town hall. Council allocated millions of dollars to produce glossy reports and to seek feedback from residents. Too many policy documents merely report and monitor statistics and just sit on the shelf.

Our Council administration staff almost 900 of them, seem to be spend a hell of a lot of time outsourcing, report writing and outsourcing work to consultants that can be done and should be done in-house . With so many staff on board and all outsiders doing their work, they are most likely simply BORED out of their brains with nothing to do. Nothing to do but think up ways to secure their high paying jobs by coming up with money wasting ideas that we all pay for like social and affordable housing (which is a Victorian Government responsibility); bike lanes that remove car parking, destroy businesses and cause traffic congestion; massive handouts for the arts, culture and festivals, and construction of the Eco Centre )($6M).

Is it time we shrank our council? Is it time we went back to basics and demanded core services are delivered directly by council workers and not outside consultants? Let’s try cutting our council by 20%, that's 180 highly paid staff, and see what can be delivered. Focus on core services and deliver what the community deserves. We’ve done it before, so why can’t we do it now? 

Editor's note: RoPP believes Port Phillip Council has a role in influencing state and federal governments and advocating for social and affordable housing, welfare for the vulnerable, and net zero carbon dioxide emissions. But RoPP does not support the endless spending of scarce council funds when other key council responsibilities are inadequately funded. If CoPP spent every cent of its budget on these non essential areas, it still would barely make a difference and importantly, these matters are state and federal responsibilities. Wouldn’t it be nice to halve the time it takes to get a planning permit? Wouldn’t it be nice to plant more trees and address stormwater issues in low lying suburbs? If money were not diverted to state and federal responsibilities, Council would be able to properly fund these integral responsibilities.

It is remarkable that both Bayside and Port Phillip councils switched waste collection contractors in July but only Port Phillip managed to stuff it up. Residents are now calling for an independent review by the Council’s decision-making process and implementation of appointing the new waste contractor, Citywide which is wholly owned by the City of Melbourne.  

St Kilda resident Trevor White said on social media “The Audit and Risk committee needs to undertake an independent investigation and get to the bottom of this issue and ensure better systems for the future, particularly when there is a tender process and new service providers appointed”. 

“The City of Port Phillip Audit and Risk Committee needs to undertake an independent investigation into the tender specification, selection process, compliance process and how this ‘Wastegate’ stuff up occurred”, said Trevor White. 

The backlash on social media is profound especially when residents are usually disengaged with local government. Council have reported that about 10% of properties have been impacted. This equates to about 4,000 homes. 

Mayor Heather Cunsolo said on commercial radio that the disruption to waste collection was caused by mapping systems glitch, but the ongoing issues reported on social media suggest the cause of the problem may be more than a simple mapping error. 

An independent review should identify how the error occurred and council staff or Citywide or both are responsible for the disruption to waste services. A review needs to be done to ensure this type of disruption to service delivery doesn't happen again when new contractors are selected and inducted.

The CEO must publish the results of an audit and risk committee (ARCO) review to ensure good governance, transparency, and accountability.

An independent review is clearly the responsibility of ARCO because its charter, clearly states the committee “plays an important role in providing oversight of Port Phillip Council’s governance, risk management, and internal control practices.  This oversight mechanism also serves to provide confidence in the integrity of these practices”. Source https://www.portphillip.vic.gov.au/media/m22f4pbf/13-1-attachment-1-audit-and-risk-committee-charter-2022.pdf

Residents may be surprised that the City of Port Phillip has an audit and risk committee because it does not publish the agenda and minutes of its meetings. By contrast the City of Adelaide publishes the agendas and minutes of its audit and risk committee meetings.  https://meetings.cityofadelaide.com.au/ieListMeetings.aspx?CommitteeId=140

 Follow the story here on the ROPP Facebook page

The City of Port Phillip's decision to proceed with the $15 million redevelopment of the Lagoon Reserve, made at the Council meeting on July 19, 2023, has sparked a variety of responses from the local community. While the project promises significant enhancements to the area's recreational and sporting facilities, it also raises concerns about the impact on daily users of the reserve.

The redevelopment is a response to long-standing issues with the reserve's sports ground. The uneven and potentially dangerous surface has led to a decrease in its usage by sports clubs. Once a home to three sports clubs, only one club currently uses the grounds due to the risk of injury. The project, first identified in 2013, aims to address these issues by providing a high-performing surface with new irrigation, drainage, and playing surfaces.

However, the redevelopment also means that the reserve will be closed to the public for approximately six months, starting from November 2023. This has raised concerns among daily users of the reserve, particularly dog walkers. While the City of Port Phillip has identified nearby parks such as Edwards Park and Gasworks Park as alternative spaces, the temporary closure of the reserve will undoubtedly disrupt the routines of many residents.

Alex Makin, a Port Melbourne resident, spoke at the council meeting on July 19. He said, “I appreciate the dilemma that council has in trying to accommodate multiple users of our reserves. However, we are in a situation where, according to Council's own reports, the number of dog users is growing and the pressure on those reserves for off leash usage of dogs is also increasing”.

The project has also sparked a debate about the use of public spaces. A petition against the redevelopment was signed by 832 residents, indicating a significant portion of the community was not in favour of the project. The petition highlighted concerns about noise pollution, parking availability, and the repurposing of common green space.

The City of Port Phillip has acknowledged these concerns and has committed to mitigating potential impacts during construction. A noise and vibration impact assessment and management plan has been prepared, which includes active monitoring and regular reviews during construction.

The redevelopment of Lagoon Reserve is a complex issue that involves balancing the needs and concerns of various user groups. While the project promises to enhance the community's sporting and recreational facilities, it also underscores the challenges of managing public spaces in a way that caters to everyone. As the project moves forward, ongoing dialogue and engagement with the community will be crucial to ensuring that the redevelopment benefits all residents.

Image: Lagoon Reserve in Port Melbourne provides sporting facilities, playground and off leash area for dogs.

In an interview on Channel 9 this week, Port Phillip Mayor Heather Consolo was hard-pressed to defend the council bureaucrats regarding the complete failure of their rubbish collection services. Some residents are even having to store their own rubbish inside their homes. Whether it's due to a new contractor or not, the question remains: What are the Council bureaucrats doing, besides mismanaging a system that wasn’t broken? In the eyes of most residents and ratepayers, there's one primary responsibility the Council needs to get right, and that's rubbish collection. 

But now, they can't even manage that. 

It seems like all 900 council workers are having an easy time while everyone else is struggling. Moreover, they've messed up the one thing we have supported: our overpaid, underworked bureaucrats. It seems they simply can't be trusted. What exactly are they doing, "working" from home or in their St Kilda Taj Mahal, while ignoring residents and ratepayers' needs?

There are too many people doing too little to support our community, other than creating "fun new projects" to maintain their overpaid positions and those of their unionized colleagues. Remember the bin tax and the FOGO fiasco they keep pushing onto ratepayers, while they can't even get the basics right?

I believe it's time to return to Council basics and eliminate the real rubbish in our community — the inept bureaucrats who supposedly work at the council.

 Follow story here on the ROPP Facebook page

Photo by Gera Kulik on Unsplash

Annually, the South Melbourne Community Chest distributes proceeds from our OpShop, financial donations and bequests as grants to a wide variety of community organisations including environmental groups, after school programs, gymnastics, meal programs, and older persons groups and clubs within the City of Port Phillip.

If your group/club needs funding for a project that will benefit the local community and residents of the City of Port Phillip, you are encouraged to apply.

Applications open: 9am Monday 3rd July 2023

Applications close: 5pm Monday 7th August 2023

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________

Applications can be found at our website https://southmelbournecommunitychest.org.au/grantrecipients/#grantform

OR send a request to grants@southmelbournecommunitychest.org.au

OR drop into our shop and get an application form from our Shop Manager, Anita.

If you have any questions please contact Brenda Forbath on 0425 755 907

Brenda Forbath

Secretary 

 https://www.facebook.com/southmelbopshop

Many of our residents are proud! Proud of their neighbourhood; proud of their little patch they call home. We’ve used Snap Send Solve or called the Council requesting a service, but are we receiving bang for our ratepayer’s buck? I think not! 

Deborah Glass-Ombudsman has announced that most complaints received through her agency relate to Prisons and ... Local Councils!

My experiences are mixed; frustrations over parking tickets because of confusing parking signs, requesting trees be replaced in tree squares (it took 3 years and 6 phone calls plus numerous online requests)!.Weeding in laneways that are an unhealthy nesting places for discarded syringes, inadequate lighting in laneways which means they become dirty (this is usually Powercorp but laneway clean up belongs to Councils), small common gardens on street corners are left a mess, graffiti, blocked drains, dumped rubbish, and filthy and broken public toilets. The list is endless. Council seem to have a lot on their plate, but why should basic customer service be compromised?

We’ve recently painted the fences in our laneway with a standard grey/cream paint from Bunnings, frustrated by the lack of ability to stop the graffiti; our neighbours also agreed for us to paint their fence. To be fair, Council can only act with owner’s approval - it took us 5 minutes to get that - and harmony has returned to the hood. No more endless graffiti tagging!

This weekend was the last of me looking at yet another filthy laneway opposite us, after numerous requests, I grabbed the whipper-snipper and did it myself, followed by 20 minutes of an annoying blower vac moment on a sunny Saturday. I smile with pride, the hood is looking good!

Why am I doing it? Sadly, tickets are raised, tickets are closed, the work just doesn’t get done, if it does, its often a poor effort. We’ve had dumped rubbish piling up for almost a week, as we know it grows overnight and someone kindly dropped bags of household garbage to the pile, day by day the rats got bigger, and that’s where I draw the line in the sand, I’m not going near the rats! After almost a week, we awoke to the joyful humming of the street sweeper, only to find them cleaning around the pile of dumped rubbish, which was eventually removed later in the morning. I hate to think how many employees it took to take those complaints over and over. Tickets were closed, the rubbish was still there. It blocked access for people with mobility issues and it’s now under investigation, but no problem, because it will only take 28 business days to get an answer. 

So why are communities so frustrated with their Council? Because their primary responsibility is rates, roads, and rubbish including supporting our elderly, parks and gardens, and libraries etc. Advice to Council: focus on the basics and fix those first. Put confidence back in this community that you can operate efficiently and that someone is responsible for the outcome, it’s called due diligence. Our elderly neighbours with 50 odd years of living in the CoPP have given up asking for help long ago, it’s now over to us. Most other pet projects put forward by Politically aligned Councillors are the responsibility of State and Federal governments, we already pay our taxes for those! Millions of $$$ on a customer service system……and I’m still slipping on the rubber gloves to clean out the street drains on a rainy day!

Solution? Apart from warnings, fines and collecting it ASAP, we desperately need CCTV and better lighting! 

Claire, St Kilda Resident

Over the 12-15 years we have all watched Acland St, once a jewel in the crown of Melbourne, slip into mediocrity and decay. With over 20 retail outlets now vacant and with low levels of foot traffic, the prospects look dim for the once grand street.

While we cannot pinpoint the exact start of this decay, it is with near certainty that the closure of most of the street (including parking) with the construction of the mall and tram stop, started, or at least accelerated the decline.

This ongoing downward spiral led to a growing street community comprising homelessness, and those with mental illness, or with alcohol and substance abuse.  This in turn has detracted tourists, and shoppers generally have looked elsewhere for their shopping experience.

To revive Acland Street, we need to take back our street. The number one priority must be a combination of measures to remove the street community that has made the Acland mall their daytime living room. People will not come to Acland Street if they do not feel safe. Businesses (existing and new) will not invest if they cannot see a stable street environment and one that is welcoming to customers.

Recent City of Port Phillip intervention with the Local Laws team complete with Polaris type “Buggy” appears to be successful. This initiative, albeit temporary at this stage, is demonstrably working and the CoPP should be congratulated for this. The Local Laws team are uniformed, equipped, well trained in a quiet but firm persuasive manner, and have ready access to the police if trouble emerges beyond their capacity.

What we have witnessed during the short time that this trial has been in operation, the complete dispersal of the street community. The Local Laws team, with calm and passive interventions, have demonstrated what can be done if we take up the challenge to rid the street of problematic elements that ignore current CoPP by-laws.  We have also learned from log reports that the need for the Local Laws team is between 11.00am and 6.00pm, daily.  This is when most likely there will be alcohol and substance abuse present in the street. 

One Councillor argued to me that it’s not the CoPP’s job to maintain security and enforce local laws on the street and that it falls squarely on the Victorian Police (VicPol incidentally, are doing some of the heavy lifting and the Port Phillip Inspector is currently dealing with the street problem with new approaches). In an ideal world the Councillor’s view on demarcation of responsibility has some merit, but this is not an ideal world and the CoPP needs to also step up to the plate.

Similarly, I have heard from another Councillor, the concern is about not wanting to put CoPP staff in danger. While health and safety are always a primary concern, anyone who has had contact with the Local Laws team can see the professionalism that they display. They are very capable of managing risk.

Another criticism by some Councillors is that dispersing the unruly element of the street community from Acland Street only means they will pop up somewhere else. At this stage there is no evidence of the large number that have congregated in Acland St Mall all emerging together on other major commercial streets.

The other area that needs to be addressed is the CoPP bylaws. A realistic approach is a change to the bylaws that allow Council to declare certain commercial areas as “economic zones” with additional ‘move on’ regulations to assist the police and the bylaws’ team in dealing with problematic gatherings. Such bylaws to ensure civil protections, could have sunset provisions where they must be renewed every 12 months. Incidentally the issue of homelessness among the usual street crowd is very small. Police monitoring the situation believe nearly all have homes to go to. They also come in from neighbouring suburbs as far away as Richmond.

Finally, a word on the cost of utilisation of the bylaws’ team. Recently I was told that having the bylaws’ team full-time for a year would cost $200,000. In a CoPP revenue budget 2022- 2023 of $240 million, this additional cost to take back our street would be .08 of 1%! This is money well spent if we get a calm atmosphere for commerce to breathe and re-establish itself in the street. It’s time to acknowledge that the retailers and residents of this precinct have rights too!

The City of Port Phillip has published its CEO Report for Q3 of 2022/23, providing a summary of their performance, project updates, and prospective plans. The council report conveys an effort to prioritise governance, community engagement, fiscal prudence, and cultural development.

In line with its approach to transparency and accountability, the council introduced Councillor Robbie Nyaguy and incorporated new requirements for the Local Government Performance Reporting Framework. In the draft yearly Council Plan and Budget, a $65.3 million capital project investment was included.

In an attempt to take into account the increasing cost of living, a 2.8% rate increase was suggested, which is below the Victorian Government's cap and inflation rate of 3.5%. The council's report highlighted highlighted the identification of $1.1 million in operational savings for the 2023/24 Budget.

The council report talked about the two digital self-help platforms - Snap, Send, Solve, and My Port Phillip, in addition to the availability of online bookings for solid and green waste as well as events or venues. Since the last quarter, the total number of requests has shown a consistent rise every month, with a significant surge seen during the quarter. They highlighted a steady influx of at least 70% of community service inquiries, complaints, and online bookings by customers, of which 20% are received through Snap, Send, Solve, and more than half via My Port Phillip and other online reservation systems.

Significant initiatives in Q3 comprised the engagement of the community on important projects such as the draft Housing Strategy and the Positive Aging Policy, among others. The council also hosted the 16th International Toy Library Conference at Bubup Womindjeka, showcasing their local work.

In April, 46 affordable apartments in Balaclava were made available to tenants, a project realised in partnership between the Council and HousingFirst. This project received partial funding from the Victorian Government and the Australian Government, marking another step in addressing homelessness.

Concurrently, the council has been working on its social and community programs. A free community football event was held at Park Towers, and a special event acknowledging the contributions of multicultural seniors’ groups took place during the Cultural Diversity Week celebrations. Social connectedness among the elderly and disabled has seen a rise in interest post-COVID, with more clients desiring to partake in Social Inclusion Programs.

However, issues with recruitment have impacted children’s services, presenting obstacles to opening additional spots. The council also noted a reduction in state government funding for Enhanced MCH Service delivery, despite an increase in service hours for vulnerable families.

Going forward, the City of Port Phillip aims to enhance services such as children's services, community programs and facilities, families and young people, and recreation. Numerous initiatives are being planned, including professional development programs for staff, increasing family engagement, staff training on domestic violence-informed practice, and community consultations for projects.

The city's Public Space Strategy for 2022-32 continues, with projects such as the TT Buckingham Flying Fox and the Dickens Street Community Pop-up Park now completed. Meanwhile, Transport and Parking Management seeks to improve Port Phillip's “liveability” with strategies such as expanding bicycle parking infrastructure and trialling e-cargo bikes.

Though it encountered some challenges, such as complex VCAT hearings, Development Approvals and Compliance, Council reported a 100% uphold rate of planning decisions at VCAT. The report indicates lower than expected planning applications decided within the required time frames (sitting at a low rate of 39%) due to high profile and complex VCAT hearings.

Among the various tasks and initiatives, the city has given attention to environmental conservation. The South Melbourne Market initiated a recycling project in collaboration with The Nature Conservancy, and named the Shuck Don’t Chuck program, with a focus on reef restoration in Port Phillip Bay.

Other significant updates included the return of the Port Phillip Mussel and Jazz Festival, which was attended by over 50,000 patrons, and the launch of the Carlisle Street Urban Art Project aimed at addressing graffiti and stimulating the local economy.

Read the full CEO Report for March 2023 here

The City of Port Phillip's new housing strategy aims to enhance the city's liveability, diversity, and character by planning and managing housing growth and change. Although the objectives seem commendable, it is crucial to examine the potential drawbacks and negative consequences this strategy might have.

Before embarking on this considerable strategy, I would like to outline some of the high-level arguments against the proposed housing strategy by focusing on the additional costs that residents may face and highlighting concerns about affordability, infrastructure strain, environmental impact, and preservation of neighbourhood character.

Affordability

The strategy seeks to increase the supply of social and affordable housing, but the projected population growth could exacerbate housing affordability issues in Port Phillip. Our area already has high median rental prices and a significant percentage of low-income households. Rapid population growth might lead to an increased demand for housing, pushing prices even higher and making it more challenging for low-income families to find affordable housing. Consequently, residents may bear the brunt of these additional costs.

Infrastructure Strain

The expected population growth and accompanying increase in housing units could put significant strain on existing infrastructure, including public transport, schools, healthcare facilities, and other essential services. The housing strategy focuses on creating 10-15 minute neighbourhoods, but this might be unattainable if population growth outpaces infrastructure expansion. Residents might face overcrowding, traffic congestion, and insufficient access to essential services, undermining the overall liveability of Port Phillip and increasing expenses for the community.

Environmental Impact

While the housing strategy emphasises environmentally sustainable and resilient development, the anticipated population growth could lead to increased pressure on green spaces and natural resources. The increased housing density, particularly in high-rise apartment buildings, could contribute to the urban heat island effect and exacerbate the impacts of climate change on the city. Focusing on high-density development might lead to the loss of existing green spaces, diminishing the overall quality of life for Port Phillip residents and adding further financial burdens for residents in the long run.

Preservation of Neighbourhood Character

The housing strategy aims to develop new housing that responds to and establishes preferred neighbourhood character. However, the rapid increase in high-density apartment buildings might compromise the unique character and charm of Port Phillip's neighbourhoods. Residents may very well face diminishing property values due to the loss of neighbourhood identity, and the quality of life might be negatively impacted by the loss of a sense of community that often accompanies high-density development. Ultimately, ratepayers may need to shoulder additional costs to maintain neighbourhood character.

While the City of Port Phillip's new housing strategy has commendable goals, it is essential to consider the potential negative consequences for residents and ratepayers, particularly the additional costs they may incur. Affordability, infrastructure strain, environmental impact, and preservation of neighbourhood character are all valid concerns that need to be carefully considered before implementing the housing strategy. It is crucial to strike a balance between accommodating population growth and preserving the liveability and character of Port Phillip for its current and future residents, while minimising the financial burdens on ratepayers.

Total rates collected by Council on existing properties are set to increase by 3.5% in the 2023-24 Budget, in a year in when residents are impacted by the highest cost of living increases for many years. In addition, Council will receive millions of dollars in new rates from new properties. 

The Residents of Port Phillip (ROPP) are advocating for a rate freeze following two unsuccessful attempts at advocating for a rate freeze in prior budget years. A rate freeze is only possible if five Councillors vote for a freeze. 

Port Phillip Councillors previously voted to increase rates by the maximum allowable amount (1.5% in 2021 and 1.75% in 2022). Councillors that voted for a rate rise in 2022: Cr Cunsolo, Cr Crawford, Cr Martin, Cr Copsey & Cr Baxter. Those who voted against it were Cr Clark, Cr Sirakoff, Cr Bond & Mayor Pearl.

The only positive for residents was a motion passed by Councillors requesting Council Officers to identify options for ongoing cost reductions that would enable Council to consider adopting zero rates increase in financial year 2023/24. Cr Baxter and Cr Copsey voted against this motion. 

The CEO was required to identify cost saving options by the end of November 2022 for implementation in the 2023/24 budget. Council Officers failed to identify sufficient savings and efficiencies to allow for a rate freeze. The results of the cost review were tabled for the Council meeting on 15^th February. See Agenda of Meeting of the Port Phillip City Council - Wednesday, 15 February 2023. 

Council massively increased its spending by $25M in 2022-23 rather than giving residents rate relief which would have only cost 1% or $2.4M of the budgeted expenditure. Surely Council could have found 1% efficiencies or cost savings to deliver rates relief? 

Port Phillip Council has budgeted to spend $247M in 2022-23, an increase of $25M or 11% from the prior year. Most of the increased spending resulted from employment costs increasing by $6.9M ($92.2M to $99.1M) and materials and services increasing by $13.1M ($83.5M to $96.4M). 

Source: Pages 41-42 Volume 2. https://www.portphillip.vic.gov.au/about-the-council/council-plan-and-budget

Facts

1. Port Phillip rates and charges are excessive when compared to our three neighbouring local government areas. For example, the rates and charges for a median house priced at $1.85M in Port Phillip are $3,252 which is $1,100 more than Stonnington, $900 more than Bayside and $685 more than Glen Eira.  

2. The reason for excessive rates is that Port Phillip Council spends significantly more than surrounding councils, for similar services. Port Phillip's costs are approximately 30% higher than Stonnington and Glen Eira, and 100% higher than Bayside. 

3. Port Phillip does not need to spend more than other local government areas because it is "different”. Port Phillip is like neighbouring areas in terms of size, population, and the number of properties. Bayside has beaches as does Port Phillip. Stonnington has the Prahran Market as Port Phillip has the South Melbourne Market. Stonnington and Glen Eira have swimming pools and golf courses and Port Phillip does not. 

4. Port Phillip spends more than other councils because of the Council’s decisions, not out of necessity.

I don't know if this is real or imagined but I feel like I have been in a coma and since I have re-awoken my world has completely changed. I seem to have entered a parallel WOKE driven universe that looks and feels the same, but all the rules and attitudes and behaviours have totally altered. I no longer know how to think or act amongst people for fear of offending something or someone and I'm afraid to talk because when I do people chastise me for being out of step with their beliefs. 

Even my partner takes a step back when I open my mouth, giving me an elbow in the ribs on the way through. Not that she disagrees with my viewpoint but these new PC bullies some that are our children have now discovered their power and are shoving their delusional, illogical viewpoints down our throats. My partner just doesn’t want to engage and like most people would rather not make a fuss and stay hidden in the crowd. Parental abuse ? Or is there more to it. 

I’m not used to being gagged but the numbers seem to be stacked against me these days. I’m at the stage where pleasing everyone is impossible, but making everyone angry is a piece of cake. I ask myself if my moral compass has changed or slipped or am I just totally out of touch with today’s generation? When did this all start?  From my perspective its almost happened overnight. Perhaps it was it a side effect of Covid that our government bureaucrats are trying to hide from us? Or was it in the vaccinations we were all warned against but went along with for the greater good of the community?

Now, I'm not a conspiracy theorist, but I sense our education system may have something to do with this new gen of angry young adults. Educators have had control of our little darlings brainstems since they could waddle, all wide eyed like malleable sponges ready to absorb all that woke-ness rubbish we are having to live through now. I know my own kids newfound attitudes didn’t come from me as I am a straight up 'swinging voter’ type human that judges things on evidence rather than on emotional, rhetorical presentism. (I’m sure there will be folks out there in that will want to tag me as a leftie or a rightie  - I consider myself a realist and will call it as I see it, without filter) .

I'm reaching out to see if this is all just my bad dream or if this is really happening to other quiet achievers who have helped make this a better world for our offspring. It's time to circle the wagons and make a stand against this noisy, ill-informed, ideological minority that are making a lot of 'big note' noise without actually achieving a thing….

Have I woken to a woke new world this morning?

By Megan Jones

Most of Australia’s suburban and regional Councils have sensibly committed to end discrimination based on race, colour, disability,  gender and age. Yet they have failed to consider one of its most egregious forms of discrimination when setting their rates. Discrimination against the single person household.

As the costs of living and the concurrent price gouging continues, it is time to end insidious Council discrimination against single persons.

Single ratepayers are charged the same rates as couples. Singles earn less than couples when they are employed and then, when they retire, they receive only 75% of a couple’s Federal Aged pension entitlement.

 I use 50% of the services, sometimes even less, than couples. I produce 50% less garbage than a couple. I have not used maternal health care or baby health services because I don’t have children and, as a matter of fact,  neither do the other three long term singletons in my street.

I don’t use the sporting facilities largely devoted to boys/men’s games. I used the library 50% less than literate couples. I use 50% less of the pavements, the roads, the parks and the gardens. I use 50% less of the administrative services offered by the council.

The list goes on. More importantly, single people contribute less to climate disaster and environmental degradation.

Even the travel industry is starting to wake up to the world of single people. Cruises, hotels and other accommodations used to charge a single surcharge or supplement, but  they are rethinking this structural injustice.

Holidays may be an optional luxury, but rates are compulsory.

In Australia 13% of the population is permanently single and on the increase.  Many others enter and leave this state depending on demographic drivers.

I am not asking the Councils to require single rate payers to pay 50% of the rates which would be justified but I think, to be fair, single rate payers should pay only 75% of the Council rates.

Megan Jones

Port Melbourne resident

Council wants to hear your feedback on their proposal to increase rates revenue by 2.8% instead of the 3.5% maximum allowed rates cap, to provide financial relief for all ratepayers in response to cost of living pressures. 

Council says “This is the first time we have proposed an increase below the rates cap, introduced in 2016/17. It will not be funded by service cuts. Instead, we will put less into our reserve fund as a buffer for known and unexpected challenges over the next decade”.

The cost of adopting a lower rate rise is about $900,000 in 2023-24 – a very small concession to property owners when Council has a $12 million surplus. Council intends to use the surplus to fund the estimated accumulated impact over the next 10 years which is $11 million less in rates collected. 

We say, use the surplus to support ZERO rates increase.

You can have your say at https://haveyoursay.portphillip.vic.gov.au/council-plan-and-budget 

There are several ways to provide feedback:

• Complete the feedback form by 18 May 2023.https://ropp.org.au/headline-story/
• Talk to Councillors in person at various neighbourhood street stalls. Click here for details.
• Speak at the 7 June Council Meeting: Click here to register.

The proposed rates increase is significant for two reasons. 

• This is the first time since the introduction of the State Government rates cap that Council proposes rates relief – this is in recognition of cost-of-living pressures due to high inflation and interest rates that are hurting the community. 
• In prior years, surpluses were spent on a range of unnecessary pet projects. 

Residents of Port Phillip (ROPP) are disappointed with the small rates reduction and support a zero-percentage increase. ROPP supports zero rates increase because: 

• Port Phillip rates and charges are excessive compared to Stonnington, Bayside and Glen Eira and we want Port Phillip rates to be brought into line with other councils. See https://ropp.org.au/headline-story/
• Port Phillip rates are excessive because council spends more than the surrounding councils that provide similar services.

We spend:

• More than $100M compared to Bayside 
• More than $50M compared to Stonnington and Glen Eira 
  

$12 million surplus should not be used to fund an estimated $11 million funding gap over the next ten years because the amount is not material in accounting terms. The amount is less than 1% of revenue per year over the next 10 years.  

Why does Port Phillip spend much more that the other nearby LGAs when:

• we have a similar population and number of properties
• we are smaller in area and our roads are shorter in length

W don’t have more assets than the other Councils

• Bayside has beaches as does Port Phillip
• Stonnington has the Prahran Market as we have the South Melbourne Market
• Stonnington and Glen Eira have swimming pools and golf courses and Port Phillip does not
• Stonnington has two town halls, and we have three and ANAM (Australian National Academy of Music) is helping to fund the South Melbourne Town Hall? 

Council proposes to increase rates by 2.8% rather than the maximum allowed amount of 3.5% in the 2023-24 financial year. However, a one-off rate rebate which meant rate rises would be waived for one year from 1 July, was rejected. 

It has been suggested by some residents that Council’s plans to provide modest rates relief benefits to property owners are at the expense of nearly half of Port Phillip residents who rent their homes and rely on council services. (Source: https://news.psmedia.com.au/port-phillip/news/articles/19-04-23-council-rate-debate/ )

Council is not proposing to cut services in order to provide rates relief. The cost of the modest cut to rates revenue will be funded by a large surplus due to revenues from parking fines and investments. The implication is, that Council should increase rates revenues by the maximum amount, to help fix the rental crisis. 

Residents opposing rates relief seek to portray ratepayers as wealthy property owners and landlords. This is far from the truth, as many property owners are paying massive mortgages and other cost of living expenses. 

And in respect of renters, surely people understand that by increasing rates, there will be a flow on via higher rentals over time; though there is an obviously imperfect relationship between the two.

Residents of Port Phillip rejects the nonsensical arguments used as a smokescreen to obscure the underlying issue:  those who want to use rate payer hard earned cash to prop up their pet projects and vested interests. And they don’t care if residents or renters suffer the financial consequences. 

We say it is about time residents get rates relief from the City of Port Phillip.

The City of Port Phillip drafted a Housing Strategy Discussion Paper that will inform housing policy over the next 15 years. You can review the paper and provide feedback at  https://haveyoursay.portphillip.vic.gov.au/draft-housing-strategy

Council have spent a large amount of time and money on preparing the policy document, but it completely overstates the role of local government in the supply and design of housing.  

Council have allocated $365,00 to produce the glossy report and to seek feedback from residents but it glosses over the important fact that someone has to pay for all these things, and no attention has been given to prioritising between the many strategies. Questions not addressed include; what resources have COPP allocated to delivering the strategic goals and what measures will be put in place to measure impact and performance? Is this another report and policy document that will just sit on the shelf?  

The Draft Vision and Strategic Directions contains numerous ambitious goals that are not the role of local government. See table below:  

COPP have authority to issue planning and building permits and can release Council owned land for green spaces or social and affordable housing. Land in Fisherman’s Bend is privately owned and COPP must purchase land for parks and gardens.

It seems that this report is another self-serving exercise to justify council jobs and to create the perception that Council is doing more than it is.  It blurs the lines between state and federal government responsibilities, particularly with respect to social and affordable housing, where the Victorian and Australian governments have underperformed. 

Council allocated $200,000 in 2022-23 and $165,000 in 2023-24 to produce the Housing Strategy. Is that good value for money? In addition, the City Planning and Urban Design staff costs who are responsible for the Housing strategy are $3 million per year, noting they are responsible for other tasks such as updating the planning scheme, the design and engagement on urban projects such as Fishermans Bend, strategies, and policies.  

Yesterday, on a chilly afternoon, I decided to visit the IGA at the end of Victoria Avenue in Albert Park to grab a few supplies. As I was browsing the aisles, a man who appeared to be under the influence of drugs or alcohol entered the store and began to take items without any intention of paying.

The store owner, who was working at the counter, said to the man “‘Hey you, stop that, please put it back”. Instead of complying, the man became aggressive and verbally abused the owner, with “I will take what I like because I am a hard bastard and you will do nothing about, as your people are weak”. Punched in the head no less.   The shopkeeper tried to get him out of the store, and a full on punch up ensued, with both of them ending up on the ground outside the IGA.

So, racially abused, verbally abused, then physically abused.

Concerned for the safety of everyone involved, I suggested that the store owner call the police for assistance. To my surprise, he told me that the police and local authorities often did not respond to such incidents and seemed to have little interest in helping small businesses like his. This revelation was both disheartening and worrisome. This hard-working shop owner is trying hard to make a living, and is not safe in his own business. Neither was I, to be frank.

Another bystander mentioned that incidents like this were becoming increasingly common and that many people causing trouble in the area would simply claim to have mental health issues as an excuse for their behaviour.  All they need to say is “I have mental issues”.

Truth be known, I now have mental issues. It is now unsafe to go the shops in Albert Park. 

As a resident of Albert Park, I am deeply troubled by this experience. It is essential that our community remains a safe and welcoming place for everyone, and I believe that more needs to be done to support those who are struggling with mental health issues, as well as to protect local businesses and their patrons.

I urge the local authorities to take these concerns seriously and to take action to ensure that everyone in Albert Park can feel secure in their surroundings. It is outrageous to pay premium rates in Albert Park and not be safe at the shops.

Yours truly

Frightened in Albert Park Albert Park

The issue of traffic management in our area of Port Phillip has always been a complex matter. With the goal of avoiding rat-running and reducing adverse impacts for other residents, the City Council just approved a six-month trial to address traffic concerns for residents in Cowderoy St, West St Kilda. The trial is for a “No Right Turn” between 4:30 – 6:30 pm, Monday to Friday, from Canterbury Road to Cowderoy Street, St. Kilda West. 

Council officers worked with various community groups, including the West St Kilda Residents Association and the Cowderoy Street Traffic Group, to come up with the proposal. While it is not expected to be a magic bullet solution, the proposal is hoped to minimise the impact of traffic on residents in the area.

During the consultation process, it became clear our community is divided, with results coming to a close 50/50 on whether the trial should proceed. However, there are concerns that the proposed solution may simply cause issues for residents elsewhere. 

The proposed ban will prohibit right turns onto Cowderoy Street from surrounding intersections, with exceptions made for emergency vehicles, public transport, and bicycles. The ban will be enforced by signage and penalties for non-compliance, although some council members noted that enforcement may be difficult given the large volume of traffic in the area.

During the council meeting on Wednesday, concerns were raised by a number of councillors that this proposal will simply shift the traffic to the next street up, which will upset other residents: traffic will turn first at the next intersection and then find their way into Cowderoy Street anyway. 

Cr Bond stated during the meeting “There just isn't a solution here that is acceptable that doesn't just shift the problem to someone else's street and that's why nothing has ever happened here.” Cr Bond went on the say “I can't support doing that, because I'm just shifting the problem to the next street over”. 

Cr Clark said during Wednesday’s meeting “I don't think as council we should be coming up with solutions that just create problems for other residents”. 

Acknowledging the near 50/50 split in the community consultation, Cr Sirakoff stated “… unfortunately with no substantial support from the community for the trial to go ahead, this is obviously a dilemma when some residents want a solution and other residents not wanting the problem to be pushed down to next street with further consequences.”

Nevertheless, the motion was passed Wednesday with a majority to proceed with the No-Right Hand turn trial. Despite considerable disagreement in the community about the best solution, the 6 month trial will move-ahead from August 1 to January 31. Following the trial, the Council will re-evaluate the results and determine where to go next.

Anzac Day has just passed. Each year I sense the words adopted by our Anzac forefathers meaning changes. 

LEST WE FORGET

Meaning “It should not be forgotten” taken from a 19th century poem. Gallipoli was an unmitigated disaster a cluster screw up of the worst magnitude that underscored the futility of war. Eight thousands seven hundred Aussies alone were killed and many more on the blood soaked battlefields of Europe. Far from our homeland they fought and for what? Glory, freedom, god and country, peace? 

Our Anzacs learned how futile wars were and with these three words LEST WE FORGET were reminding us to not forget the ugly lessons learned about wars. Wars that we fought not at home but further afield on foreign soils spilling the blood of Australian soldiers that had been conscripted or volunteered to fight for glory, honor, king and country blindly marching off to war. 

LEST WE FORGET our Anzac forefathers didn’t want us to forget. But we did. They were warning us not to fall into the trap of being sucked into wars by our power crazed politicians obeying our megalomaniac mother Englands wishes. War serves little purpose in the end but encourages hatred, racism and violence and ends in needless deaths on all sides. WW 1 was a disaster that should have been a warning to us all. 

LEST WE FORGET.

There is no glory in war yet we didn’t learn the from the failures of the past and our puffed up politicians have led us time and time again into bloody struggles. Following our commonwealth masters or US ‘allies’ blindly into battle at their beck and call. And our people have been manipulated to heed the call and line up to fight the good fight. 

LEST WE FORGET.

WW I was bad enough. and we took no heed, Then Korea, no heed Vietnam no heed and Afghanistan no heed. Our Defence forces’ thousands of miles from home fought against our concocted enemies in their own countries. We fought against people that were in most cases fighting off foreign invaders. They were fighting for their own countries freedom.

In Korea and Vietnam we were hoodwinked into believing the communists were about to invade our shores so we bombed and buried millions of Korean and Vietnamese civilians and fighters without mercy. And the senseless war raged on and on until we realised it was all for nought and tail between our legs we retreated. 

LEST WE FORGET. 

Then lessons again forgotten our war loving power-lust leaders shoved us overseas again to fight another cluster screw up in the Middle East. Afghanistan we mercilessly killed those ferocious and evil Taliban. Civilians they that took up arms against us the the invaders and we painted them as demons to support and extend the needless slaughter. They were fighting on their own soil for their own freedom yet our spin doctors used the horrendous nature of war as propaganda to enrage further hatred from us at home thousands of miles away. And for what? Another costly embarrassing retreat with yet again nothing to have been gained but the body bags and the physicality and mentality maimed. 

LEST WE FORGET

20 million people killed in WW1, 60 million in WW2, 2.5 million in the Korean War, 3 million in Vietnam, 176 thousand in Afghanistan and the killing spree continues elsewhere. 

Are the bugles of war screeching their call to arms again. We are spending Billions of taxpayer dollars like confetti on war machines. They are built for only one thing. The ugly truth is our military industry, politicians and generals like nothing better than some shiny new killing toys. Our war industry is pushing and getting a big injection but for what? There seems to be a lot of Saber rattling going on of late. Probably highlighted by the Russian invasion of the Crimea and the Ukraine. 

There is an old Chinese saying - When trade stops war starts

LEST WE FORGET is not a call to arms but a call to peace. 

Please God let our leaders have the courage to say no to sending our men and women to another  war. Say no to our power intoxicated politicians and military Allies. Be independent Australia and neutral in how we treat our global neighbors and not get sucked in. 

LEST WE FORGET

Jon from Port Melbourne

Footnote 

I didn’t want to publish my thought prior to Anzac Day as my aim is not to besmirch tor belittle he sacrifices and bravery of our armed forces. I hope we humans have evolved enough and can look beyond these conflicts. 

We need to keep trading and talking with our neighbours LEST WE FORGET the lessons of our past. 

As the next big conflict there may be nothing LEFT TO FORGET. 

Cover of ALBERT PARK Melbourne Playground Albert Park Committee of Management (APCM) Folder published in the 1956 Olympic Games year.

A copy was presented to every contestant, as well as being distributed to Park Users and others. Senator Kennelly presented my copy to me when South Melbourne Council appointed me as its representative on the APCM in 1973 and he was its Chairman. This is Peter Francis' copy.

In the folder is a photo that reminded me of the remnant of Melbourne's cable car system that was then utilized in Albert Park as part of its fencing.

It is no longer evident there, to my knowledge, and was possibly all removed when the Park became the venue for an Annual International Grand Prix event.

Barry Fuhrman was one of many local youngsters who enjoyed utilizing part of it in 1943. Barry has pointed out that this was just before the American Army built their huge military equipment storage sheds in the Park during World War 2.

The photo of the then use cable car cable in the Park, and one of the use that youngsters such as Barry Furhman gave to it shown below.

Barry's photo was taken by 'one of my aunts' he advised, to describe the record of his truly historic photo.

Organised Resident action groups have a long and varied history in Australia, dating back to the mid 20th century. One of the first recorded resident action groups was The Paddington Society, a resident group founded in 1964 in Sydney. The group was established to protect and preserve the unique character of the Paddington neighbourhood, which was under threat of redevelopment at the time.

In the early 1960s, urban renewal was sweeping through many areas of Sydney, and Paddington was no exception. Many historic buildings were at risk of being demolished to make way for high-rise apartments and office buildings. This sparked a grassroots movement among Paddington residents, who banded together to form The Paddington Society.

The Society was founded by a group of concerned residents who were passionate about preserving the unique character of the neighbourhood. They were particularly concerned about the proposed redevelopment of Oxford Street, which was lined with historic buildings and characterful shops.

The Paddington Society quickly gained a reputation as a vocal and effective advocate for the preservation of Paddington's heritage. They organised protests, wrote letters to local politicians and the media, and lobbied for the introduction of heritage protection laws.

Today, the Paddington Society remains a respected and influential organisation in Sydney. They continue to be a vocal advocate for the preservation of Paddington's heritage and character, and play an important role in shaping the future of the neighbourhood.

Melbourne is no exception when it comes to the importance of resident groups. Our groups are made up of local residents who come together to address issues that are important to their community, such as traffic congestion, public transport, or environmental protection. They work to amplify the voices of residents, providing a platform for concerns and issues to be heard by local government officials, and educate their communities about important issues, providing information and resources to help residents make informed decisions.

One of the most significant roles of our resident groups in Melbourne is to hold local government officials accountable. By keeping a watchful eye on local government officials, these groups can help ensure that the needs and concerns of local residents are being addressed.

Resident groups provide a valuable channel of communication between local residents, ratepayers and business and government officials, helping to ensure that their concerns and needs are heard and addressed. These groups also provide local government officials with valuable insights into the concerns and issues facing their communities, helping to inform policy decisions and ensure that government resources are allocated effectively.

Resident groups also play a vital role in local government in Melbourne, providing a valuable platform for residents to voice their concerns and ideas, and ensuring that local government officials are accountable and responsive to the needs of the community. By working collaboratively with resident action groups, local governments can gain valuable insights into the issues facing their communities and work to develop effective policies and programs that benefit all residents.

Get Involved 

It’s hard to imagine there would be too many residents in the COPP who hadn't met Father Bob Maguire over his 38 year tenure at the South Melbourne, St Peter and Paul parish.I was privileged to have a working relationship with Fr Bob as a local journalist for the Port Phillip area on Leader Newspapers, and as I reflect on his passing, what a hilarious relationship it was. It was one also filled with pathos and love as I watched him lose some of the street kids and lost souls close to him, over a 2-3 year period, and its impact on his spirit. He was flat.

Mostly he was a funny bastard so it was not usual to see him grieving. But we did.

I rang former four-time Mayor, Dick Gross, on the news of Fr Bob’s passing at 88, because I knew they had experienced an idiosyncratic, charismatic and joyful friendship.

On the surface it may have appeared unlikely.

A secular Jew and a Catholic Priest. But they were great mates. They talked about religion, the role of Jesus, the architecture of great Cathedrals and their mutual love of their dogs.

And Fr Bob never discriminated.  He lived and espoused the religious values he upheld in the church’s teachings every day. But let’s get back to Dick’s memories for a moment. In everything I’ve read since Fr Bob has passed away, no one has summed it up more eloquently as Dick when he said:

“The leadership of the Catholic Church couldn’t stand him; Fr Bob captivated the world but they couldn’t get over their enmity towards him and wouldn’t work with him.

“And we all know how that played out.

“As we look back, where was the greater Christianity?”

Every weekend Fr Bob would go to the local footy, netball, or cricket and support the kids playing in South Melbourne.

“He was deeply embedded in the community and it must have been wonderful for those young players to see their Priest come and watch their games and really inspire them,” Gross said.

“He was so supportive and such a part of the community; being born in Prahran and attending CBC when it was a very rough school in those days, and then being given the Parish in South Melbourne, when he was 25.

“He was a St Kilda institution.”

Gross says Fr Bob had the power of personality along with the power of personal intervention to change the world.

“He often put himself in harm’s way when he worked with the street kids.

“He nurtured his great friend Costa, who lived at the back of the Parish and was homeless.

“When they died, he was always devastated.

“The work he did is incredibly taxing and someone had to bury them when they died, Fr Bob did that but it wasn’t easy, it took its toll.”

Costa came and went from the parish and he always bought Fr Bob something from the street.

A few days before he died, he found a beautiful butterfly on the pavement. And bought it home for Fr Bob.

The day photographer Jason Sammon and I arrived, to do a photo essay with Fr Bob, he was sitting holding the butterfly in his hand.

“A present from Costa,” he said, admiring its vibrant colour. 

Fr Bob loved to lend a hand to anything that he was asked.

He agreed to launch one of Dick Gross’s books, when he wrote Death by Ellergy in 2011, which explores different aspects of dying.

At the launch Fr Bob said, “It will help me prepare for death, Gross is an undercover religiologist”.

He said to those gathered: “Don’t be afraid of this book.

“We are not arguing about the concept but the delivery and the vocabulary, and you should be able to have this discussion.”

Also in 2011, the Catholic Church, under the formidable hand of then Archbishop Denis Hart, pushed Fr Bob to retire. He was 77.

Yet, the Mornington Priest, Fr Kevin Mogg, was still administering to his flock, at 79 years old.

Fr Bob said the Archbishop was waving a white flag saying Maguire resign, “but I’m not ready to go yet”.

“We are in the middle of something here and have got a good thing going in South Melbourne,” he said.

I suspect Fr Bob would have never been ready to go as such, but let’s hope Dick Gross’s book helped him when the final moments came, from one atheist to a man of God, their friendship spanned, decades of work and discussion together in the City of Port Phillip.

And the final words go to Gross; “He was a great man.”

Thanks to everyone for their great support of the FOGO – food organic and green organic rollout. The kitchen caddies have been so popular that council almost ran out. Caddies can be collected from St Kilda Town Hall or any of our five library branches: Albert Park, Emerald Hill, Middle Park, Port Melbourne, and St Kilda.

Since the introduction of FOGO bins for houses and townhouses we have seen a great improvement in diversion from our landfill from 31.8% to 39.5%. Well done to everyone for reducing our landfill and improving our sustainability. 

Many people who live in apartments have been asking me when they are getting a FOGO bin. Good news is that apartments will start receiving their bins in July 2023. For those that don’t have access to either, there will be communal FOGO locations across the Municipality which will commence in April 2023. Communal Glass hubs will commence in April 2023.

You may remember that the introduction of the weekly FOGO collection meant that the general waste weekly collection was to change to fortnightly. The council has decided to delay that change until January and February 2024. So please make sure you continue to put all garden and food organics to the green FOGO bin so when the general waste changes to fortnightly, you will have plenty of room in your general waste bin.

The waste charge for all residents for next financial year is proposed to increase by $22 to $198.20. The cost of the kerbside FOGO bin charge is proposed to reduce by $22 to $66 for the next financial year. Multi units (apartments) will have no collection charge. 

Please provide your feedback on FOGO and the draft budget on the link below and you have until May 18th, 2023. Council Plan and Budget | Have Your Say Port Phillip

Image of FOGO caddies and liners courtesy of City of Port Phillip

The QLRAG submitted a question to the Meeting of the Port Phillip City Council on the 19th April. This action and the prior 4+ months of advocacy has resulted in the commitment by Council to a review (traffic assessment) and recommendations to be completed by August 2023. Further the Council has committed to engage with QLRAG “in particular” with respect to the findings. Public questions are summarised below. The submissions were made verbally and can be listened to in full. 

The Queens Lane Resident Action Group (QLRAG), representing the  residents in the Queens Lane precinct, is concerned about the lack of a contemporary  traffic assessment and management plan for the lane given the recent Council approvals of developments within the lane and future development that will inevitably be approved  by Council. By its own admission Council recognises the traffic issues that currently exist  in the lane. Traffic congestion will only become worse with current and future  developments planned along the laneway. Traffic flows have been further affected by the  recent closure of vehicles lanes on St Kilda Road to accommodate a wider bicycle lane.

When will the Council recognise and act on the concerns raised by the long-suffering ratepayers in the precinct and undertake a current traffic assessment and introduce appropriate traffic flow controls that will provide reasonable access and amenity for residents living along the lane?

Nellie Montague, Acting Manager Partnerships and Transport thanked the QLRAG for their advocacy and feedback around traffic and parking issues in Queens Lane. Council officers have looked into the request and are progressing an investigation that builds on reviews and  works completed in 2017 and will consider the feedback provided by QLRAG, the current development context and more recent changes to the road network in the area as outlined in the question. The investigation has begun and will be completed by August 2023.

Recommendations from this investigation will then be costed and planned to determine the next steps, which will be communicated to the community in particular the QLRAG.

Separately QLRAG are conducting an independent analysis of the traffic issues we all know so well. Our analysis will insure we are fully advised of all implications for any changes going forward. 

I see this result as substantive given the difficulty in getting the attention of Council and represents the first real analysis of Queens Lane since 2017.

We will continue to advocate on the residents behalf, ensure Council complies with these undertakings and keep you informed of progress.

We are engaged in VCAT currently, appealing the decision to award a planning permit to 448 St. Kilda Road. That action will play out in June 2023. 

Bryan Mears

A visit this week to Melbourne, coinciding with council voting on a rate increase at COPP should have all residents and ratepayers interested in the outcomes of the rate decision.

Because there is another way and Port Phillip representatives should take note, from Wales, the land of the wild and song.

In 2016 Wales appointed its first Commissioner for Future Generations and Well Being, Ms Sophie Howe. She completed her tenure of seven years in January 2023.

Under Welsh Law passed in 2015, well-being was protected.

The public sector was expected to make joined-up, long-term decisions, helping people in Wales live better lives and leave a more liveable planet behind. They have also made a new definition of prosperity.

Ms Howes was in Melbourne to deliver the John Menadue oration at the invitation of the Centre for Policy Development.

Her brief, along with her powers to call out the madness of some policy ideas, was to embark on the biggest cultural change programme Wales had ever seen and protect the rights of future generations.

It included a moratorium on road building; a major transformation on transport, innovations like free bike hire; a transition to a low carbon society and protection for future generations so that they could live in a sustainable society.

Sophie Howes was in fact the guardian of Wales' future generations.

After her appointment, the United Nations Assistant Secretary General, Nikhil Seth, said “where Wales goes today, the rest of the world will follow tomorrow”.

Part of Ms Howes role was to introduce mandatory education on black history, develop ethical and informed citizens through the education system, help people re-connect with nature and to develop capable learners who were emotional and empathetic leaders for the future.

Ms Howes said despite a framework and legislation, human beings do not like change.

“We had to reconstruct or rebuild the society; we needed to turn a piece of legislation to walk a path to the new normal.”

The 'How' of the new legislation meant there were five ways to work; long-term, prevention, integration, collaboration and involvement.

This meant going back to bureaucrats and asking them if their decisions were in line with the goal of resilience, or a prosperous nation, would it damage biodiversity in the area, did it add to a healthier nation and would it add to rising levels of pollution?

Ms Howes said Wales had a passionate Environment Minister who led the legislation but it was all encompassing.

“He worked with NGO's, environment organisations and then cultural and creative communities were included.

“In hindsight, it was important to broaden the conversation to people and equality groups for a cross pollination of ideas.

“We took the community along with us, but you had to have everyone on board, the public servants, the politicians.

“We had community meetings, we had children write postcards to their future selves,... imagine if every single leader across the world, had been through an education system that taught them to be ethical and informed citizens?”

Sophie Howe said within the bureaucratic system there are always frustrated champions, the people in the system who know there is a better way of doing things.

“But the system has frustrated them, because these are the people who have been waiting for something like this and will become the first to use it to do different things to challenge the system, it's important to use them to channel that system and to walk a path to the new normal. 

“The best way is for us to walk that path with them and create it with them,” she said.

Professor Fiona Stanley, who was part of the panel at the oration, said after Ms Howe's speech that citizen engagement is really vital to the success.

“Citizens have not been engaged in Australia, and I think what Wales has proved, is that engaging citizens might increase democracy.”

Another year passes and our community is once again expected to be bitten by rate rises. Council is proposing to increase rates by 2.8% instead of the maximum amount of 3.5%. The final decision will be made on 20 June subject to community consultation. In a time of ongoing hardships the community is once again likely to be forced by the politically aligned councillors to cough up more money for their pet projects. Feeding a regular snaking conga line begging for more and more money looking for $12 Million of our community rates money to go towards social housing, welfare and climate change.

Note that ALL OF THESES ARE STATE AND FEDERAL GOVERNMENT RESPONSIBILITIES and should be funded by them. 

Yet our Local Council continues to support these efforts each year with our Rate moneys thanks to the overbearing numbers of the politically aligned councillors looking to make a name for themselves to their political masters.

One has to question why these local councillors aren’t looking after the interests of the broader community who they are meant to represent, rather than minority factions that are also being funded elsewhere. In any case it’s a lucrative business for this annual conga line and we are to blame for allowing this to happen in our community. 

We are to blame as the majority of us voted for a political party to represent them rather than an independent local that will work for and look after the needs of the community - not spend our money year in and year out on political passion projects. Our independent councillor voting numbers are outnumbered by the political factions of our LOCAL Council

• Does the community want to pay a double tax on things that they are already paying for via State and Federal Taxes? 
• Why does our Council continue to increase our Rates year in and year out when there is no need to do so?
• Are we getting value from our council for the rates we all pay? (remember renters also pay Rates through their rent). When rates ago up … rents go up
• Why do our politically aligned Councillors keep working against the greater good of the community.
• Are the Political councillors toeing the party line and treating COPP as training camp to further their political careers?

The City of Port Phillip are a soft bellied target with these political councillors dictating and doling our moneys out to their snaking conga line of beggars.

Personally I want a fairer deal from Council.  It’s time for our community to became involved in redressing this political imbalance and stop voting for political parties in the next local Council Elections. 

The best way to get rid of this snaking conga line that is choking funding for our local community is to cut of its head by - 

Keeping Politics out of Port Phillip 

Editor's note: 

ROPP believes Port Phillip Council has a role in influencing state and federal governments and advocating for social and affordable housing, welfare for the vulnerable and net zero CO2 emissions. But ROPP does not support the endless spending of scarce council funds when other key council responsibilities are inadequately funded. If CoPP could spend every cent of its budget on these areas and it would barely make a difference and importantly these matters are state and federal responsibilities. Wouldn’t it be nice to halve the time it takes to get a planning permit? Wouldn’t it be nice to plant more trees and address stormwater issues in low lying suburbs? If money were not diverted to state and federal responsibilities, Council would be able to properly fund these integral responsibilities.

My recent experience with the City of Port Phillip (CoPP) in relation to dealing with unsightly graffitit was positive. After working through the issue of what constituted art or murals against normal graffiti, the Council Officer moved quickly and an eyesore in one street of St Kilda was resolved between the CoPP and the landowner. The building has now had rubbish removed and repainted. 

Under the City of Port Phillip Community Amenity Local Law regulations 2023, there is something you can do with unsightly nature strips, rubbish, or buildings that are graffitied, dilapidated or otherwise in your area. Below outlines the regulations which can be sighted in any referral to the City of Port Phillip for actioning.

Dilapidated buildings are covered under Division 2, Section (c)

(c) must maintain any building or other structure in a state of good repair and appearance, including undertaking temporary repairs as required to ensure on-site safety and security and to avoid the appearance of neglect out of character with other premises in the vicinity. 

Graffitied buildings are covered Council local law section 57 3(d)

(d) must not allow any graffiti to remain on any building, wall, fence, post or other structure or object erected on that land

Relevant Regulation: Division 2 – Premises – Unsightly or dangerous 

Dangerous or unsightly land 

(1) An owner or occupier of land must not allow that land to be kept in a manner which is dangerous or unsightly. 

(2) An owner or occupier of land must not allow the nature strip or footpath adjacent to that land to be unsightly or occupied with furniture or other objects. 

(3) For the purpose of sub-clause (2), where the land adjacent to the nature strip or footpath has one or more owner’s corporation, the owner of land includes those owners’ corporation. 

(4) Without limiting sub-clause (1), the owner or the occupier of land on which is located any building or other structure which is unoccupied, unfit for occupation or normal use or not occupied most of the time: 

(a) must not permit any building or other structure to become dilapidated or further dilapidated. 

(b) must take all reasonable steps to secure the building or other structure and the land on which it is built from unauthorised access. 

(c) must maintain any building or other structure in a state of good repair and appearance, including undertaking temporary repairs as required to ensure on-site safety and security and to avoid the appearance of neglect out of character with other premises in the vicinity. 

(d) must not allow any graffiti to remain on any building, wall, fence, post or other structure or object erected on that land; and 

(e) will commit a new offence under this Local Law every month any breach of this sub-clause continues unless effective works have been undertaken to remedy any breach. 

(5) A person is not guilty of an offence under sub-clause (1) or (4) where that person is unable to remove the source of the danger or carry out the required maintenance and repairs due to age, illness, or disability.

The Royal Melbourne Yacht Squadron, with a history of over 140 years, is one of the oldest yacht clubs in Victoria with a long list of historical firsts. Situated at St Kilda most major championships have been held off its shores and the Squadron was the control centre for the 1956 Melbourne Olympic yachting events, as well as the 1999 Laser World Championship.

The Squadron had its beginnings in the early 1870s when a small group of yachtsmen and occasional fishermen gathered at St Kilda beach. Where there are yachts, there were challenges, and soon informal races started.

By 1876 the group became the St Kilda Sailing Club, with approximately 20 members and Robert Hill as Commodore. The annual subscription was ten shillings.

During season 1879-80 and with a bank balance of over seventeen pounds, plans for a club shed were submitted to Council; however strong opposition from St Kilda residents ended that plan.

Membership grew to 44 in the 1881-82 season and with a bank balance of thirty nine pounds, Louis Meyer again took up the question of a clubhouse. But his efforts were to no avail, because the Council again objected to the plan.

At the Annual Meeting on September 1884, with the desire to place the Club in a premier position , it was moved to change the name from St Kilda Sailing Club to the St Kilda Yacht Club. It was also decided to extend the tonnage limits to allow larger yachts to participate in races.

Louis Meyer never gave up negotiations for a club site and in December 1885 his persistence was rewarded when the Lands Minister provided a ‘Free Grant Site’ on West Beach. A weather board club shed designed by Sydney Wilson was later built on the site, at a cost of one hundred and twenty pounds.

By 1890, St Kilda Yacht Club had 200 members and 25 yachts on the register. By weight of members this made it the strongest on Port Phillip. Improvements made at the time included connection to the water main, a cold shower for members and a fence around the premises.

In 1894 it became apparent that the club would have to build a slipway suitable for slipping larger yachts. An application was lodged by Commodore Meyer for a more convenient site closer to the pier. In September 1895 this was granted by the Crown.

In October 1903, at its annual meeting, the Club decided to admit women as members and entitle them to all privileges. 

During 1904 the construction of the Club’s slipway began at the new site. It became necessary to proceed immediately with the erection of a clubhouse.

Designed by a member, J.P. Kennison, the two-storey clubhouse was built by Adams Bros. at a cost of 629 pounds. The clubhouse was formally opened by Past Commodore Louis Meyer on 24th June 1905, making St Kilda Yacht Club one of the first yacht clubs in Australia to have an on-site clubhouse. Eighty two members joined the services during World War I. Six were killed. In January 1920, a tablet was unveiled by the Mayor of St Kilda Councillor T.G. Allen, bearing the names of the members who lost their lives during the War.

In May 1924  His Majesty, King George V, had conferred on the Club the prefix ‘Royal’.

By this time the Club had 284 members and was becoming very cramped so the battle for more land started again.

The erection of an imposing two-storey building was commenced in 1926. The Foundation Stone was laid by the Governor-General Lord Stonehaven. To mark the Club’s Golden Jubilee the new clubhouse was opened on 23 October 1926.

Soon after the opening, more than 1,200 members and visitors were at the Club when the Duke and Duchess of York (later King George VI and Queen Elizabeth) landed at St Kilda.

World War II saw 140 members enlist in the various services. By the end of the War, 10 had been killed in action.

1956 was a big year for the Club. It was the Executive Headquarters for the yachting section of the Melbourne Olympics. The victory ceremony and presentation of medals took place on the lawns on 6 December 1956.

Discussions began in 1961 on the possible amalgamation of the St Kilda 14 Foot Sailing Club with Royal St Kilda Yacht Club. In the meantime the Club was negotiating through the Government for a name change.

The Club was advised through the Governor General’s Office, that from 26 June 1961, Her Majesty the Queen approved the club’s change of name to the ‘Royal Melbourne Yacht Squadron’.

It was agreed that the name change was to be effective from Cup Eve, 6 November 1961, when the club officially amalgamated with the St Kilda 14 Foot Sailing Club.

Women were around the club house from as early as WWII as guests and later on as Honorary members. By 1976, women were accepted as full members with equal rights, making it the first of the Australian yacht clubs with a royal charter to do so. 

There have been many famous yachts based at the Squadron over the years. An equally promising future seems assured as committee and members take seriously their obligation to respect its traditions while striving wherever and whenever possible to improve the sailing experience for generations to come.

A multi-million dollar investment improving an already exceptional clubhouse experience, and the opening of the magnificent floating marina in February 2014 have helped place RMYS as one of the most progressive and forward-thinking clubs to be found not only in Victoria, but in the whole of Australia.

This achievement was recognised when the Squadron won the prestigious Yachting Victoria 2014 Yacht Club of the Year Award.

Victoria Police (VIC Pol) need your assistance. Now is a great time to voice your opinion!

Police play a critical role in communities across Victoria. According to VIC Pol, the duties undertaken by the police force include (but not limited to); preventing anti-social behaviour, dealing with community safety concerns, resolving disputes, attending accidents, investigating crime, enforcing traffic law, dealing with drug and alcohol affected people and attending critical incidents and emergencies.

As many in our community know, residents have been raising safety concerns for some time, particularly around Fitzroy Street and Acland Street, which have been in decline for some time. That’s the message many in the community want to voice to Police, from long and short-term residents, business owners and those visiting St Kilda on holidays, family visits and business trips. 

Whilst the issues underlying homelessness, drug abuse and street violence are complex and require a myriad of services to support those that are legitimately vulnerable, residents hold very real concerns about the slow and sometimes absent Police response to 000 calls, and Police street presence to minimise anti-social behavior, drinking in public and using/dealing drugs in broad daylight. Are there sufficient resources for Police to do their job in the large area of the City of Port Phillip? 

Police, Council and Community need to work together to ensure that residents feel safe and are safe walking the streets, businesses continue to operate without property damage or vagrants blocking their entrances, and our community is able to thrive.

The survey only takes a few minutes and runs for the month of April 2023.

Have your say and share your thoughts through the Victoria Police survey HERE, and click on START SURVEY at the bottom of the page. Of course, you can also use your phone to scan the QR code below.

Claire,

St Kilda Resident.

Annual Victoria Police Community Sentiment Survey – 2023 | Engage Victoria

Apartment rents across Australia have increased six times faster than wages and house rents have climbed at triple the rate, leaving many tenants struggling to make ends meet. 

A representative from Ray White Real Estate being interviewed on 7 News said that "rent increases are affected by rate rises." Rates that our Council has been increasing year in and year out regardless of community needs and outcry. The problem is that our council is overrun by political Councillors that are purely there to showcase to their political masters to duplicate services that are the responsibility of state and federal governments.. Rate rises that are simply filtered back into the conga line of vested interests and bleeding hearts groups that have been lining up for handouts for decades.

Our community has a high proportion of renters that are being constantly hit with rent increases that are partly driven by rate increases. Residents in our community are paying the highest rates of all the Councils in Victoria. Rates that are driving out pensioners from their family homes, forced to effectively reverse mortgage their family homes and making rents unaffordable to renters.

The City of Port Phillip is flush with funds and have an excess of over $160 million dollars in their war chest so there should be no excuse for helping our community to cope with the constant inflationary post Covid increases including state and federal taxes and Council Rates.

Politically aligned councillors do not care for the greater good of our community. They are cutting their political teeth in the hope of moving up the ladder towards state or federal  politics.  

The community has had enough of these political Councillors and should voice their opinions directly by email to Councillors prior to voting on the Council Plan and Budget on 20th June.

Rally against the Rise: see email addresses for your councillors at https://www.portphillip.vic.gov.au/about-the-council/who-we-are/your-councillors 

Source: https://www.smh.com.au/property/news/it-s-bleak-why-you-might-be-struggling-to-keep-pace-with-rent-rises-20230529-p5dc8l.html

Council proposes to increase rates revenue by 2.8% instead of the 3.5% maximum allowed rates cap in the draft Council Plan that goes out to community consultation. The rates reduction motion whilst modest is the first time since the introduction of the State Government ‘Fair Go’ rates cap that Council is supporting rates relief in recognition of cost-of-living pressures due to high inflation and interest rates that are hurting the community. 

Council officers had proposed a 3.5% rates revenue increase and a one-off rates rebate whereby residents get a rate rise waiver this year but must pay it back next year on top of next year’s rate rise. 

Councillors voted against the rebate because while it provides rates relief this year, the benefit is only temporary and potentially punitive if residents struggle to pay the two years of rates increases in one year. 

Although the 0.7% reduction in rates is modest it delivers permanent rates relief.  

Cr Rhonda Clark said “I’m proposing this motion to reduce the rates as a better way to provide rates relief to residents. It is a permanent reduction in rates. We should not lose sight of the fact that rates come from our residents and many in the community are struggling in this economic climate”. 

During the debate some Councillors declared themselves to represent renters and opposed the rates reduction and support for property owners. A group of residents spoke at the Council Meeting and advocated for the $12M surplus to be spent on social housing, welfare, and climate change. All state and federal government responsibilities. 

Cr Andrew Bond said “This outcome will please many in our community who are feeling the cost-of-living pressure. For reasons I fail to fully understand, a number of members of our community also attended Wednesday evening’s meeting and requested Council put our rates up by the maximum amount possible”.

ROPP congratulates the Councillors who supported rates relief and Cr Rhonda Clark who amended the original motion and Heather Cunsolo, Marcus Pearl, Andrew Bond, and Christina Sirakoff. 

The Residents of Port Phillip community association are disappointed with the small rates reduction because they are advocating for a zero-percentage increase when the City of Port Phillip are forecasted a surplus of $12M. ROPP supported zero rates increase because: 

• Port Phillip rates and charges are excessive compared to Stonnington, Bayside and Glen Eira. See Property rates calculator - Residents of Port Phillip (ropp.org.au)
• Port Phillip rates are excessive because council spends more than the surrounding councils that provide similar services.

We spend

• More than $100M compared to Bayside. 
• More than $50M compared to Stonnington and Glen Eira. 

COPP proposes to use the surplus fund to a forecasted 1% funding gap over the next ten year created by the compound growth impact of foregoing revenue in the next year– a gap that is not material in accounting terms.  

Why does Port Phillip spend much more that the other LGAs when we have a similar population, and number of properties and we are smaller in area and our road are shorter in length? We don’t have more assets than the other Councils. Bayside has beaches as does Port Phillip. Stonnington has the Prahran Market as we have the South Melbourne Market. Stonnington and Glen Eira have swimming pools and golf courses and Port Phillip does not. Stonnington has two town halls, and we have three and ANAM is helping to fund the South Melbourne Town Hall. 

In well-run private sector companies, there is usually evidence of very strong key performance indicators (KPIs) that measure the efficiency and delivery of services to their stakeholders. The primary stakeholder is the shareholder, who monitors their investment through the successful (or otherwise) delivery of key performance measurements.

In the case of a government entity like the City of Port Phillip (CoPP), we, the ratepayers (both business and property owners), and those who reside in Port Phillip are shareholders and stakeholders. However, what most of us do not know is what KPIs drive the City of Port Phillip. Without substantive regularly published metrics of ongoing performance against indices based on community expectations, how do we create greater efficiency and service delivery?

The CoPP has some high-performance metrics, but they are rarely published, and if so, usually in the end-of-financial-year statements. Many are concerned that there has been no consultation or engagement with the community stakeholders in how the KPI metrics have been formulated, what should be encapsulated for measurement, and expectations of regular, transparent communication of performance against key benchmarks.

When we consider that the business of local government in Port Phillip constitutes annual expenditure of $250 million, there is an urgent requirement to strengthen performance and governance of funds expended, especially when evidence of delivery failure is becoming more apparent.

The Victorian Community Satisfaction Survey is an annual survey, conducted by JWS Research*, that collects opinions from local people about their community. It provides insight into various aspects of the community's views and has been conducted for 23 years. The survey helps councils measure their long-term performance and improve services to meet the public's expectations. A recent summary of Port Phillip City Council performance by JWS threw up some alarming results, including:

• 64% overall performance
• 56% value for money
• 47% council direction
• 54% community consultation and engagement

Similarly, with large sums of money entrusted by the stakeholders, potential waste and spending on non-core issues also come. “Bread and butter” matters that should form the large bulk of any expenditure and measurement are often in competition with “pet projects” of little economic or social benefit. Councillor “pork barrelling” and, more worryingly, the potential loss of councillor independence through directives from Spring Street that may not necessarily be in the interests of all ratepayers, needs greater scrutiny. Therefore, we can assume that these are some of the reasons contributing to the poor rating for community decisions at 55% in the survey.

Ask yourself these questions

• In the past, CoPP phones were answered almost immediately. However, this is no longer the case, with often many minutes passing before being answered by an operator. The deeper question is why have calls to the CoPP increased significantly? I doubt whether this is a consumer trend, with the likely answer that delivery of services has fallen, and more of the citizenry as a result are chasing up slow, backlogged, or non-delivered services.

• What is the policy of staff working from home in the CoPP? What are the current average days that staff work from home? Is it being properly managed? Should there be a demand that staff return to full-time work in the office, where productivity and on-hand delivery of service can be better measured and supervised? What metrics should be employed and published?

• The basic car park permit: I lodged my application over two years ago and still have not had a response. Others have expressed similar experiences.

• Rubbish collection is another area of concern where household rubbish is often missed on the designated day of collection. While there has been a reason proffered on why (lack of collection drivers), how common is this occurrence, and what percentage of rubbish is collected on time? If there are measurements on rubbish collection performance, the statistics do not appear regularly or transparently.

• Let’s look at a real bugbear of residents: household items dumped on footpaths. Using the ‘Snap Send Solve’ app, how many of us have received an email from the CoPP to rate the collection service that was never undertaken in the first place? During a recent use of Snap Send Solve, the collection was only half completed, requiring a further call. Is there a need for a review of this service, and is there potential for excessive billing? Do we have access to real collection rates and turnaround times? Are the CoPP's metrics on this published?

• Property Planning and Building permitting are also a concern. How many permits are issued or reviewed within the stipulated timeframes, including initial responses to submissions? Are turnaround times being stretched because the CoPP knows that any applicant for a permit will be reluctant to escalate through VCAT with up to 18 months turnaround times for a VCAT decision?

• Are the efficiency metrics of turnaround times accessible?

Moving forward, there needs to be a full community consultation on our expectations for Key Performance Indicators for the City of Port Phillip. Such a bottom-up process that builds a series of metrics and reporting criteria is the first step in determining not only how well the CoPP is performing but also in providing data for the Councillors, executives, and staff to undertake continuous performance review and improvement. With a new CEO now in the seat and inheriting the poor performance statistics, now is the perfect time for a review.

Rod Mitchell

Ratepayer St Kilda

* JWS Research is a research firm that provides advice to the government and business sectors in Australia. They conduct research by listening and exploring the community to uncover strategic insights. The firm has been operating for over a decade and is respected in the industry for providing evidence-based advice.

Council is seeking your feedback on draft Local Laws, including community amenity local laws to deal with antisocial behaviours on our streets. Provide your feedback before 31st March 2023 here Proposed Local Law 2023 | Have Your Say Port Phillip

When completing the survey, you may wish to consider if current local laws are working in relation to community safety and amenity. 

Behaviour on Council Land (Clause 17)

The new law defines nuisance behaviours should be adopted to assist Council officers manage the behaviours of individuals and stop them from being a nuisance. Street campers can create a nuisance when the local community is verbally abused, threatened, harassed, or physically attacked.

Camping on Council land (Clause 42)

Council is not proposing to change this local law Clause 42, but the current law is inadequate and allows for homeless people and those with complex needs to camp on council land. A caring society must do better to care for homeless people and people with mental health and substance addictions. It is not acceptable for vulnerable people with complex needs to camp on the streets where they fall prey to drug dealers. We must do better as a society.

The camping laws must be changed because the number of people camping on the street will continue to grow if nothing is done. The council must consider how it is going to activate business activity and increase tourism on our iconic high street and these economic zones must be free of unacceptable behaviour.

Council must find a solution because it is not safe for vulnerable people to camp on footpaths and  campers deter customers and tourists from coming to our iconic high streets. Traders are losing business and many shops are empty. St Kilda was a thriving entertainment precinct when there was no camping on the footpath. The camping laws are not fit for purpose and must be changed. Council should consider two options:

Option 1:

Removal of the exemption “42(2) (b) have complex needs or is in the need of additional assistance because of mental or physical disability or illness” in the camping laws would allow Council Officers to stop most people camping on the street because most of the street campers are known to have housing. 

It is unacceptable for people with complex needs or in need of additional assistance to camp on the streets when they should be referred to drug and alcohol and mental health services. There are few genuinely homeless people in the Fitzroy, Acland, and Carlisle Street precincts, but they are protected under the existing law because they have complex needs.

Option 2:

The council amends the existing law to prevent camping on certain streets such as Fitzroy, Acland, and Carlisle Streets to activate cafes, bars, restaurants, and shops by including an additional clause to the existing law. 

42(2)(a) "A person is not guilty of an offense under sub-clause (2) where that person establishes, they are homeless or in need of secure accommodation" could be amended to include an additional clause such as "Unless the person is camping on any particular street or public land which is designated by Council as a commercially important zone. For example Fitzroy, Acland, and Carlisle Streets"

This proposed amendment would allow the key commercial areas to be declared commercially important zones and allow for Council officers and or police (if required) to move anyone on that is camping. This amendment avoids the need to firstly ascertain who can and cannot remain on our key commercial streets due to their housing status or mental capacity.

To address the problem of where to relocate the existing street campers, Council may consider providing a suitable meeting place or community meeting facilities for these people to meet for social interaction. 

Furniture, other items on Council land and footpaths (Clause 43)

This proposed new law will help Council Officers remove dumped furniture when it is obstructing footpaths and access to properties.  Dumped furniture including couches, chairs, mattresses, sofa's, rugs, blankets, kitchen goods, electrical good is a major problem on Grey and Fitzroy Streets and adjoining streets precinct and often, dumped rubbish is not collected for weeks. 

Council is seeking feedback from residents from Middle Park to St Kilda on a proposed trial to deter commuter "rat-running" traffic in Cowderoy Street, St Kilda West. The trial proposal is a response to residents who are concerned about high volumes of southbound traffic on Cowderoy Street in the late afternoon on weekdays.  

Daily traffic volumes in Cowderoy Street have surged by 80% from 1,235 vehicles in 2014 to 3,092 in 2021. Google Maps directs traffic along Cowderoy street because of the bottleneck at the intersection of Fitzroy Street, Canterbury Road, and Grey Street. 

Your feedback will assist with the decision of whether to proceed with a twelve-month trial to install a No Right-Turn (4:30PM-6:30PM Mon-Fri) from Canterbury Road into Cowderoy Street, St Kilda West. The trial will evaluate the redistribution of traffic to existing arterial roads and local roads in the area.

Council has distributed fliers to properties from Fitzroy Street, St Kilda to McGregor St, Middle Park bounded by Beaconsfield Parade and properties neighbouring Canterbury Road. Council seeks your thoughts on this traffic change on your neighbourhood roads. 

Feedback is required by Tuesday 20 December 2022 to help Council decide on whether to proceed with a trial by:

1. Completing the survey https://haveyoursay.portphillip.vic.gov.au/cowderoy-street

2. Email transport@portphillip.vic.gov.au

3. Call Assist on 03 9209 6777

What if I told you that the average Victorian rates bill could go from $1,810 to $6,364 within 10 years?

What would your view of Councils be if this were the case? How would your expectations of your local Council change?

Well, it’s not just hypothetical. The Victorian State Government has commissioned (but as yet refused to release) an independent report into rate capping and how it is constraining the provision of services and jobs”. The State Government has sought the input of the local government industry but has largely hidden the process from public view. The report was “delivered” to the State government a year ago. They have deliberately refused to release it until after the state election.

The Municipal Association of Victoria (MAV), the Council's “collective union”, has lobbied extensively that Rate capping has prohibited councils from offering high-quality services to their community. It also argues that with such high population growth targets pushed onto councils by the State Government that it cannot continue to deliver high-quality services without drastic increases.

In 2018 The Victorian Auditor General (VAGO) found:

Councils Do not understand the full costs of frontline services, Projects that improve efficiency are ad hoc only, and available data for any benchmarking is inconsistent. 

Alarmingly VAGO found that the government department tasked with providing guidance to all Victorian Councils does not offer any guidance on service planning, reviews, or best value practices. 

Put simply Councils failed to understand what their true costs are, what is causing the costs, whether the costs are appropriate and how to manage those costs efficiently. 

https://www.audit.vic.gov.au/report/delivering-local-government-services?section=

The State Government called for submissions to an inquiry into rate capping. In reading the submissions we are incredibly alarmed to learn that:

The ASU wants rate capping to end because:

• Councils have not shown restraint or any efficiency since it was introduced
• Wages growth is hampered by rate capping
• Women have had their wages suppressed by Rate Capping which is inconsistent with equality
• It kills jobs and is bad for communities and has no redeeming features

https://www.asuvictas.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/20211027-ASUVICTAS-Rate-Cap-Review.pdf

The MAV (MAV represents all 79 Victorian Councils) totally opposes rate capping because:

• It restricts spending and underfunds councils
• It doesn’t allow for CPI and inflation 

Rate capping | MAV website

The Australian Local Government Association also opposes rate capping because:

• Rate capping hinders growing communities to plan for new infrastructure
• Local Government should have autonomy over tax rates to the community

Rate peg ‘hindering councils' ability to build new infrastructure’ - Australian Local Government Association (alga.com.au)

The most damning report is from the Australia Institute (commissioned by the Australian Services Union). The institute claims:

• The rate cap has cost 7425 jobs
• Reduced GDP by $890 Million
• The cap is anti-democratic as councils should decide their revenue increases
• Local Government wages are good value for money

Putting a Cap on Community - The Australia Institute

What is clear here is that the most independent report into councils and rate capping comes from the Victorian Auditor General. The Auditor General states that Councils cannot manage their needs to be efficient, that hundreds of millions of assets have been left to fall into disrepair and that councils have all failed to adequately plan for their assets over time. Councils are failing miserably to do what any private or listed company would naturally do. 

Clearly, councils do not have the skillsets to manage their businesses efficiently, is it because their culture is so rotten, so antiquated and so out of date that their leaders expect revenue to be a never-ending bucket of someone else money? We think so. 

What VAGO and the Ombudsman have also revealed is that Councils don’t know how to define a service, don’t know how to define complaints, don’t know how to handle, categorise and resolve them and do not have any systems in place to adequately manage their assets and spending on them.

What all of this will result in is the Andrews government making a lazy political decision to end rate capping.

Instead of the Local Government Minister (Melissa Horne MP) making councils responsible to live within their means and drive efficiency out of their ballooning staff numbers, we will see rate capping ended to help the state government cost shift state responsibilities even further to councils. We will see councils given a range of say 5-15% that they can raise their rates annually without the need for external approval (as is the case now). We will see inflation and economic pressures as the reasons to do this, whilst ignoring the enormous impact on household cost of living.

A 5% increase, each year, over 10 years, represents a real increase to you of 55% in your rates bill

A 15% increase, each year, over 10 years, represents a real increase to you of 250% in your rates bill.

Sadly, it’s not an IF rate capping will end, it is a matter of WHEN.

Local Councils continue to operate with the lowest oversight of any tier of government, just as they like it. State government is keen to cost shift some of its own responsibilities amid its promise in the recent state elections of “no new taxes”. This makes the rates bill of every Victorian an easy casualty.

For decent hard-working Victorians, lazy policy means that our rates are now tipped to exponentially rise, and there will be incredible bill shock and pain ahead for every Victorian.

Don’t worry though, those local Councils who feel hard done by for being subjected to 6 years of constraint and austerity, will gladly make up for it in the end.

Time will tell, but the local government sector has totally scammed all of us. 

They will have the last laugh.

Attribution: RATE CAPPING FORCED TO END DUE TO LAZY COUNCILS AND LAZY STATE GOVERNMENT (ratepayersvictoria.com.au)

 a concerned Port Phillip resident.

On my journey this morning, there has been a massive car accident involving these confusing and disastrous pop-up bike lanes at the corner of Marine Parade and Glen Huntly Road. Fortunately, nobody seemed to be badly injured, although an ambulance and fire truck attended the accident scene. It has not even been 6 months and the danger these road treatments are causing must be stopped.  THIS IS A FAILED TRIAL

Cars are turning in front of cyclists at Luna Park and causing many dangerous sudden stops, these bike lanes go against every principal we were told when learning to drive.  For example, the rules say don’t turn left from the middle of the road. 

 I read an article in the Age that the Traffix Group made some recommendations about the pop-up bike lanes including the separated bike lanes located on Marine Parade. They recommended the removal of these treatments.

Since I took photos of the incident this morning, I have learnt that Council voted to write to the Department of Transport to remove these dangerous bike lanes on Marine Parade. I hope that there are no more preventable accidents, and nobody is killed before these lanes are removed. 

These lanes are a massive waste of tax/rates money (approx. $4.9M) and the people pushing for them should volunteer for an hour at the food bank, that’s where I want my money to go. We should be helping disadvantaged people, not installing that are unnecessary or unsafe bike lanes that are used by very few cyclists.  Only 3-4% of road users are cyclists even cyclists don’t like the bike lanes. 

I think the city and inner city is overrun by anti-car ideology and a pipe dream of a utopia from fairy land but the reality on the ground is no one wants the disaster that places like Amsterdam have become, their city is dead and there is an undercurrent of good people in their suburbs suffering whilst the city tell them how progressive they are, they can’t afford food gas power and petrol. 

FOGO (Food Organics and Garden Organics) bins are becoming more popular as a waste management solution due to their environmental benefits, such as reducing landfill waste and producing compost for agriculture and gardening. However, some residents and ratepayers of Port Phillip may encounter issues such as increased odours and pests if the bins are not properly sealed or maintained. Additionally, some may find it challenging to adjust to separating their waste into multiple bins. For those living in high-rise apartments or smaller properties such as terraces, where space limitations may make it difficult to manage an additional bin. 

Fortunately, the CoPP offers a process to pick up and remove FOGO bins for those who cannot manage them.

1. Simply click here to access the council service

2. Then scroll down to this button

3. This takes you to some links to fill in. You need to state that either:

• there is no space at the front or rear of your property to store an additional bin OR
• you have alternative methods of repurposing all food and garden organics at your property. Only compost systems that are able to accept food items include meat, dairy, citrus, expired products and garden organics will be considered to opt out. (These are only two reasons – so use what is most appropriate for you.)

RoPP has received feedback from residents and ratepayers indicating that once they submit the form, the FOGO bin is promptly picked up the following day. In addition, there have been anecdotal reports from residents suggesting that a significant number of FOGO bins are being returned. 

This feedback highlights the importance of assessing the suitability of FOGO bins for each individual property and taking appropriate measures to ensure that they are properly maintained and used.

Photo by Edward Howell on Unsplash

The City of Phillip have announced that, “based on feedback from our community, the Department of Transport and Planning (DTP) will be making some changes to the pop-up bike lanes they installed in Port Phillip last year.  Starting from next month, the DTP will be returning some roads - including Westbury Street - to their original configurations and removing trial safety treatments such as speed humps, concrete blocks, bollards and yellow lines”.

Unfortunately, the DTP has pulled rank on the council by claiming that as these roads are gazetted state roads, it has the power to do as it wishes – so much for the heavily touted “partnership approach” that the DOTP was taking with council.

We note that this is unacceptable as this is the roadway where many accidents have occurred – especially at the Glenhuntly Road intersection.

Residents of Port Phillip (ROPP) will continue to advocate for this removal, along with the Park Street, South Melbourne infrastructure that leads to a peak hour jam going all the way back to Clarendon Street.

The removal of most of the pop-up bike lanes is due to the hard work of many people who:

• Attended an initial residents meeting and volunteered to distribute for flyers – thank you to those who attended and printed/distributed flyers.
• Thank you to those who donated specifically to the campaign.
• Influenced and lobbied relevant state (Martin Foley, Sam Hibbins and Nina Taylor) and federal (Josh Burns) politicians – especially by Jan Talacko, Mark Naughton and Westbury Street residents (Una Steele, Adam Blandford, Peter Krashow, Brendan Perera).
• Spoke at several council meetings and information sessions.
• Commissioned and funded the Traffix Group (non-ROPP member) to produce the important and independent report highlighting the poor design and dangerousness of specific infrastructure – this was led by Mark Naughton and Jan Talacko; and
• Ultimately influenced Port Phillip councillors to vote seven to one in December 2022 for COPP to write to the DOT, requesting removal of the infrastructure.

This was clearly a combined community effort, with expense, time and physical effort invested by those parties named above and many others over the past 12 months.

ROPP congratulates everyone who participated in this campaign – members and non-members alike. 

We of course now await the physical removal of the infrastructure which we will continue to monitor.

One of the age-old questions asked of a Rotary member is "What do you actually do?" As you will read in this update, it's anything but idle. Men and women of all ages come together to volunteer their time to help others. These individuals may be residents of our local community who are doing it tough or people through our international connections. It might be a village, such as the two in Cambodia where we are contributing to building toilet facilities.

Four lucky MacRob girls attended the RYPEN (Rotary Youth Program of Enrichment) camp, compliments of Rotary Port Phillip working together. RYPEN is a Rotary-sponsored youth service program for 15- to 17-year-old students from schools across District 9800. Students attend a weekend camp designed to develop their potential through a mixture of lecture-style sessions and adventure-based learning. It aims to communicate a series of ideas, problems, and social experiences that will assist them in forming their own values and moral standards.

We conducted a stationery drive, again through MacRob, to gather paper, pens, etc. bound for Timor Leste. We formed a relationship with the Men's Shed Port Melbourne and were in a position to help them financially to get a beehive project off the ground. Similarly, we are working with Backpacks4kids to help people who have suffered domestic violence get urgently needed comfort packs to kids via emergency services.

Once a month, our volunteers show up at Bunnings Port Melbourne to cook sausages and provide cold drinks. Funds raised are distributed to needy causes. Our biggest event was the Celtic Festival held on St. Patrick's Day at the Seafarers Club, and funds raised will be distributed to Men's Health.

Yet, we can't function locally without members. So come along to one of our club meetings held at The Emerald Hotel, Clarendon Street, South Melbourne, at 6 pm on the first and third Monday of each month and assess whether it's a good fit for you.

Warwick Lloyd

President, Rotary Port Phillip

 Find Port Phillip Rotary on Facebook

The decision to remove the bike lanes resulted from safety concerns raised in an independent report by the Traffix Group, a leading traffic engineering consultancy who provide services to the DOT and Port Phillip Council.  

Traffix Group concluded “the vast majority of the pop-up bike lane infrastructure either offers limited benefit for cyclists or results in an increased risk to road users including both motorists and cyclists”.  

According to the Traffix report, the installed road treatments including concrete blocks, bollards and yellow and green lines and symbols are confusing for both motorists and cyclists and has increased conflict between bikes and cars. The road treatments exacerbate traffic congestion and will inevitably lead to more cycling accidents and injuries.

Jan Talacko and Mark Naughton who are active cyclists spoke in support of Cr Christina Sirakoff’s motion and confirmed they had commissioned the report because of safety concerns for cyclists. Twelve residents other cyclists and residents spoke in support of the motion to remove more of the pop-up bike lanes. 

Julie Clutterbuck who represents a Council funded cycling lobby group spoke to Council in support of continuing the pop-up bike lane trial.  Responding to Ms Clutterbuck who claimed that Traffix report was not independent and was commissioned by an advocacy group, Jan Talacko, a St Kilda resident said, “I am one of the people who commissioned the Traffix report, and I am not a member of ROPP (Residents of Port Phillip) and ROPP did not commission the report. We should think very seriously about continuing the trial to gather more data. The sort of data that would be collected I presume would be injuries or deaths. The overwhelming view in the community is this program has been a fiasco, there was no consultation . The design of these structures was inappropriate and misconceived.” 

Three speakers raised concerns about the safety of the temporary bicycle infrastructure located in Westbury Street, St Kilda East and advocated for the removal of these pop-up bike lane treatments. Una Steele, a cyclist from Westbury Street said “I am a keen cyclist and supportive of designated bike lanes. However, they have to be the right bike lanes and safe bike lanes. These lanes installed without community consultation are neither”. 

Cameron Smith, a South Melbourne resident noted that four Victorian election candidates for the seat of Albert Park committed to removing all or some of the Pop-Up Bike Lanes at a community forum on 10 November 2022 or later in social media posts.

The motion states that the CEO writes to the DOT to request that they immediately implement the recommendations in the Traffix report with regards to the removal of the Pop-Up Bike Lane treatments including all speed humps, bollards, concrete blocks, and yellow lines at those locations and also in Westbury Street, St Kilda East and the intersection of Brighton Rd with Dickens Street. Specifically, Council requests DoT to remove the following treatments:

• Marine Parade Kerb Separated Bicycle Lanes in consultation with Council
• Marine Parade/intersection with Wordsworth Street, Thackeray Street, Meredith 
• Street, Marine Ave. 
• Richardson Street/Withers Street
• Deakin Street/Loch Street/York Street
• Lyons Street/Bridge Street/Esplanade West
• McGregor Street/Park Road & Page Street
• Reinstate Brighton Road and Dickens Street intersection similar to neighbouring 
• roads at Hennessy Ave and Milton Street

This motion follows a Council vote on 7 September to endorse the roll back 4km of the 38 km of installed Pop-up bike infrastructure. 

For most of us 2022 has been a year of recovery from the lockdowns of the two prior years and we look forward to an even better 2023. 

We hope you find our community newspaper interesting and informative. We created Port Phillip Matters to inform and connect everyone in our community. We would like to receive more contributions from you, so if you would like to share a story, promote a community group or school event please email us at mail@ropp.org.au or click on the “Got something to say” button at the bottom of this page. 

We will continue to report on decisions made by the Port Phillip City Council, and we will share information about our diverse community. 

Council has negotiated a deal with the Australian National Academy of Music (ANAM) to undertake up-front costs of $20.5M to renovate the South Melbourne Town Hall. ANAM will lease for 35 years and pay annual rent of $550,000 per year. Importantly Port Phillip City Council will have access to the Town Hall for Council meetings and citizenship ceremonies. The deal is expected to go ahead pending community consultation.

ANAM moved from the South Melbourne Town Hall in 2020 to the Abbotsford Convent, due to the need to undertake building works at the South Melbourne Town Hall with the collapse of internal infrastructure.  

Catherine Sharples, Port Phillip resident, said “This is a wonderful outcome. The town hall has been in deep disrepair since the roof fell in. What a fabulous tenant and contribution to the culture of the local area. Well done to the locals who have been supporting this and to ANAM for getting council over the line”.

The ANAM deal follows extensive discussions over the past two years with the City of Port Phillip Council. The deal will see ANAM contribute $20.5M to the proposed renovation project of the South Melbourne Town Hall. A project that will see the renewal and upgrade of the Town Hall’s public-facing facilities, provide a secure and state-of-the-art home for ANAM for the next 35 years. According to Nick Bailey ANAM General Manager the deal will “ensure the community can access and celebrate this vibrant and significant building for many years to come”.

Cr Christina Sirakoff said “the lease arrangement is a good deal for ratepayers because ANAM will be paying rent and will be responsible for routine maintenance, rates, taxes, utilities and insurance premiums. Council will again be able to hold Council meetings and Australian Citizenship ceremonies along with other civil duties. The Town Hall will once again shine”. 

By a Concerned St Kilda resident 

Is it just me or is anti-social behaviour, graffiti and 'anything goes' on the rise? Whilst we love our vibrant and eclectic community that we've made home, I can't help but think the lack of Police attendance and increase in public drinking, drug taking, drug dealing and 'anything goes because I'm untouchable' is getting worse. 

The State government tells us crime stats are down, has anyone frequented Grey and Fitzroy Streets in St Kilda in the last couple of years? Clearly they're ignoring the plethora of pleas from our community who put up with graffiti/vandalism (unsightly and costly), letterbox theft (identity theft is a nightmare if you've ever been through it), verbal abuse from those drug affected (there's nothing quite like being abused for no good reason when you have a 10 year old with you who actually thinks this is normal), drinking alcohol in public (I thought there was a law against it, or do the rules vary depending who you are), smoking bongs (yep, in broad daylight) and dealing in drugs (they don't even bother hiding it anymore when you pass them in broad daylight). Last time I looked our sidewalks weren't suitable for anyone to live on and this includes anyone vulnerable, but especially those who frequent our community to score and deal drugs and wreak havoc! 

On my morning walk down Fitzroy Street at about 9.30am, just after the school drop off (between Grey St and The Esplanade) last Monday morning, I came across one of the familiar and not so friendly faces who was exposing himself, urinating and like a true multi-tasker found time to ask me for money in the process, of which I replied NO and kept walking. To my surprise he followed me up Fitzroy St, abusing me verbally and using language not fit to repeat, but he's a big lad and it was nothing short of threatening. So, as I 'legged it' and I thanked my lucky stars it wasn't 8.30am, just in time for the school kids to witness this sidewalk mess and abuse! 

So, what next? It was the last straw, we'd called the Police the night before in the same spot when a known offender was screaming outside the 7/11, threatening to kill someone and hurling some poor soul's belongings onto the road. Since when was buying an ice cream at the 7/11 on Fitzroy St such a mission impossible? It was enough for me, so I headed to the St Kilda Police Station to report it. Basically, the offender was still there at 3.30pm that same day, apparently, he was 'driven home' so clearly exposing your genitals isn't a crime anymore, even in broad daylight just after the school run! 

You may ask 'well why did you move to St Kilda'? Well the answer is we love this place, we chose here many years ago and this is where our family has settled, but if Police and Council don't start working together on fixing this problem, I wonder why the hell I pay taxes and rates, because if I can't buy by a 10 year old an ice cream without the threats from the same people 'allowed and enabled' to make the footpath their temporary home, someone will get hurt, and then what?

Just a Dad, another concerned citizen asking the questions!

By Stephen Blair

The Department of Transport has started cutting grass on the median strips on Beach Road and Beaconsfield Parade because of me cutting grass in the media strip along Beach Road and Beaconsfield Parade. I had asked the City of Port Phillip to cut the grass, but they told me it was not their responsibility. So, I decided to cut the grass myself which attracted the attention of the media. 

Tom Elliot on 3AW radio interviewed Mayor Marcus Pearl about the unsatisfactory condition of many of Port Phillip’s key roads and boulevards by DOT. Listen here

https://www.facebook.com/CrMarcusPearl/videos/1193195831266924

Mayor Pearl said the maintenance of major Boulevards such as Beach Road, Beaconsfield Parade, St Kilda Road, and Nepean Highway is the responsibility of DOT  The latest VicRoads contractors are SO SLOW mowing the median strips! According to Mayor Pearl the Council had been maintaining the median strips until the beginning of this year but had stopped because it was costing ratepayer $350,000 per year when the Vic Gov had shifted to cost to Council. 

I had hoped my shaming the authorities into action would result in a better response. It took DoT a week to do Beaconsfield Parade from Port Melbourne Station Pier, starting at the “easiest” spot and mowed 4 times by me to Fitzroy Street. I did it in in 3 days, by myself. There were 8 to 10 of them!

I had another look today (Friday 11 November). I’m going to have to do Bay Street and Williamstown Road myself again, this weekend if the weather holds up. I have avoided Brighton Road, right in front of the St Kilda Town Hall - the Kremlin of Port Phillip.

I can’t believe 800 employees and executives who work at the Town Hall have done nothing to have the grass on the Brighton Road media strip maintained. I accept that it is DOT’s responsibility to maintain Brighton Road but it’s disappointing that the local environment is neglected when Council officers walk and drive past the long grass every day. I couldn’t stand it any longer up this end, which prompted me into action. 

Note I have almost given up trying to influence Council’s excessive rates and budget spending which can only be described as ill-informed profligacy. 

I’m hoping Mayor Heather Cunsolo is a new broom, breath of fresh air. I wish her well.  

Cr Heather Cunsolo was elected Mayor on 9 November 2022. Cr Andrew Bond who celebrated ten years on the Council was as elected Deputy Mayor.  Cr Cunsolo was elected seven votes to two over former Deputy Mayor Tim Baxter, who nominated himself for the mayoralty received a vote from fellow Greens Cr Katherine Copsey along with his own.

Former Mayor Marcus Pearl did not recontest for the role after one year during which, he successfully negotiated co-funding agreement that commits the Victorian Government to contribute up to $12.6 million plus $18 million from the City of Port Phillip to ensure the operation of six Port Phillip childcare centres requiring significant renovation or replacement will be made fit-for-purpose. 

Mayor Cunsolo’s profile states “My vision is for unity in the community. When Council works together with residents, businesses, and organisations, we will get the most successful outcomes serving the most people. Vibrancy back in our high streets. Beautify our public spaces. Ensure sensible development in our municipality. Bounce back from COVID-19. Increase trust and satisfaction of Council”.

Queens Lane divides two rows of high rise apartment buildings wedged between Fawkner Park and Albert Park Lake in the City of Port Phillip. The residents enjoy spectacular views and a vibrant inner city lifestyle, but in recent times they have become increasingly concerned and frustrated with the consequences of poorly managed developments and the resultant loss of amenity, congested road traffic, and lowered safety and security. 

As motorists seek to avoid congestion at the Toorak Rd junction, they spill into Queens Lane creating gridlock for residents. Motorists often speed, drive onto the narrow footpath to navigate past congested traffic, and park illegally, creating chaos. This is a major safety issue and is poorly policed. The recent closure of St Kilda Rd due to Metro Tunnel works has only added to the congestion, and the bike lanes will congest the Lane further.

Many residents feel that Council have failed to adequately plan, did not create a management plan for traffic during the Metro Tunnel works, and have ignored the problems faced by residents. The community reasonably expects Council to act for all its constituents and protect residents’ safety and amenity.

As a result, the Queens Lane Resident Action Group (QLRAG) was formed to represent residents’ views to Council on the likely 7 developments in various planning stages along Queens Lane. Whilst the residents accept the fact of continued development and have chosen an inner city lifestyle, there is a lot more that could be done to make the lives of the thousands of residents living in this strip a lot more bearable.

QLRAG approached the Councillors elected in the Gateway ward, Mayor Heather Cunsolo, Cr Peter Martin and Cr Marcus Pearl in order to partner with Council and formulate a plan to mitigate the impacts of current and future developments. In early February 2023, I met with Mayor Cunsolo and Cr Martin to discuss our concerns which centred around:

1. A Traffic Management Plan for the Arthur Street Precinct

2. A Construction Management Plan for 448 St Kilda Road development

Traffic Management Plan

QLRAG does not purport to be expert traffic engineers and are looking to Council to propose solutions, and to consult with us to reach an agreeable outcome for all. However, QLRAG has arrived at some possible solutions which would start to address our concerns. 

In order to dissuade rat runners from St. Kilda Rd, trial converting Queens Lane to one way traffic running from Toorak Rd to Arthur St. Whilst this would be inconvenient for some residents, it is preferable to the chaos which ensues during congested peak hour traffic. This change would also mitigate much of the impact of construction vehicles fighting for limited space. Whilst “Restricted to Local Traffic” signs may work, we are concerned about how this would be enforced. 

Traffic calming installations are impracticle, because the Lane is so narrow now that any installations would make the Lane impassable, but a review of Clearway times is needed, considering the constant movement of removalist vans, rubbish collection, tradesman's vehicles etc. A review of the number of parking/loading zones in the Arthur St Precinct is also needed to cater for one way traffic and building exit points (there are 29 driveways between Arthur St and Toorak Rd junction) to provide adequate visual warning of exiting vehicles to oncoming traffic.

Construction Management Plan

QLRAG is seeking the agreement of Developers and Council to ensure demolition and construction works occur through St Kilda Road access points. Queens Lane is incapable of handling the traffic for residents and developers. QLRAG is seeking the implementation of all elements of the Traffic Management Plan into the Developers Construction Management Plan for current and future developments. We are seeking timely consultation with us as key stakeholders going forward.

The community rightly expects that Council will respond to issues and concerns as they arise in a timely fashion. As stated during our meeting with Councillors, we are not the first to raise these issues.

Councillors Cunsolo and Martin acknowledged the traffic issues and have received numerous emails and phone calls from QLRAG. However, communication has been poor. To many in QLRAG, it appears that residents in Gateway Ward are being ignored, disrespected and abandoned by Council.

We deserve better.

 Find Queens Lane Residents Action Group on Facebook

I am extremely frustrated that the Department of Transport & Planning (DTP) has not acted on a request from Port Phillip Council to remove the pop-up bike lanes almost 16 weeks since Council voted to remove the pop-up bike lanes.  

I am one of a group of concerned Port Phillip residents who commissioned the report by respected traffic engineering consultants Traffix which concluded that the pop-up bike lanes infrastructure was misconceived, unnecessary and posed a danger to both cyclists and drivers alike. 

I have written to Melissa Horne (MP, Department of Transport & Planning and Local Government) and Nina Taylor (MP, Albert Park) to express my extreme frustration with the total failure of the Department to act on the resolution passed by the City of Port Phillip on 8th December to remove portions of the dangerous and unnecessary blocks of concrete and other ‘pop-up bike infrastructure’ installed by DTP. Below is a copy of my email to Melissa Horne, Nina Taylor and Josh Burns (MP, Macnamara) sent on 6th March.

__________________________________________________________________________________

Dear Melissa, Nina & Josh

I have received no response at all to my email sent on 26th February, so I am writing to you once again to urge you to act to remove the pop-up bike infrastructure.

Frankly, I am astonished at the utter lack of response from any of you in circumstances where:

The Council resolution was passed 13 weeks ago

Nina Taylor made the following pre-election commitment to the community.

__________________________________________________________________________________

Here is an extract of Nina Taylor’s letter to me in November 2022. 

__________________________________________________________________________________

I have read the Traffix report with interest, and I believe it provides a thoughtful and thorough assessment of this temporary infrastructure. As the Labor candidate for Albert Park, the safety of residents is of utmost importance to me. 

Since the installation of the pop-up bike lanes, I have had a great many conversations with constituents who are advocating for their removal. I share the concerns of residents regarding the safety of cyclists and road users, as well as the lack of community consultation by the Council and the Department. 

That’s why, on multiple occasions, I have relayed the concerns that residents have raised with me in meetings with Minister Ben Carroll, which has led to the removal of several of the most problematic bike lanes. 

My commitment is absolutely clear: if I am elected at the upcoming state election, I will work with the City of Port Phillip, the Department of Transport and the Minister to remove the remaining pop-up bike lanes. I support active transport infrastructure that is properly designed and developed in consultation with the community.

More accidents have occurred  directly because of the hard infrastructure the Department installed in our streets – refer to the Facebook post below from Reg Crawford as yet another example.

 “We need to get rid of the concrete blocks. They are dangerous to cyclists as well. My good friend, a very good cyclist brushed the edge of one of the concrete blocks yesterday, went over the handlebars and ended up in trauma with fractures to ribs, collarbone and scapula”. 

These installations have caused several accidents already so it is mystifying that you have not yet acted to remove this junk from our streets particularly since both of your ALP colleagues elected to represent our community agree with the overwhelming sentiment in the Port Phillip/Albert Park community that this experiment has failed and the concrete blocks and other items must go.

You should all be ashamed - there is no credible explanation for your collective failure in these circumstances!

Nina –the promise you made to the Port Phillip community is now ringing very hollow indeed – are you going to continue to remain silent?

Melissa & Nina: I once again urge you to take action before more accidents occur.

Please confirm when removal of the infrastructure will take place.

Three weeks have passed since I sent the email above but I have still not received any response.

HOW MANY MORE INCIDENTS WILL IT TAKE TO GET OUR 'REPRESENTATIVES’ TO ACT IN THE COMMUNITY INTEREST?

Yours sincerely

Jan Talacko

Council is consulting the community in relation to new local laws including behaviour on Council land (Clause 17) and Furniture and Other Items on Council Land and Footpaths (New Clause 43). Residents have until 31 March to provide feedback on the proposed changes at https://haveyoursay.portphillip.vic.gov.au/proposed-local-law-2023

When completing the survey, you may wish to consider if current local laws are working in relation to community safety and amenity. 

Behaviour on Council Land (Clause 17)

The proposed new local law states: A person must not on or in Council land, a road or a footpath: 

1. create a nuisance. 
2. behave in a manner which unreasonably interferes with another person on or in the Council land, road or footpath. 
3. behaves in a manner which unreasonably interferes with another person occupying premises in close proximity to the Council land, road or footpath. 
4. harass any person using the Council land, a road or footpath. 
5. defecate or urinate except in a toilet or urinal (as the case may be) in a public convenience. 
6. act contrary to any conditions or signs that contain conditions applying to the use of the Council land, road or footpath. 
7. fail to comply with a reasonable direction of an Authorised Officer or Council staff member whilst on Council land.

The new law defines nuisance behaviours that occasionally occur when individuals are camped on Fitzroy and Acland Streets in St Kilda. Contrary to popular belief most of the people camped on the street have housing but they chose to camp on the street because the Police turn a blind eye to drinking alcohol, selling, and using drugs.  

The proposed local laws are designed to assist Council officers manage the behaviours of individuals  and stop them from being a nuisance. Street campers can create a nuisance when the local community is verbally abused, threatened, harassed, or physically attacked. 

Furniture and Other Items on Council Land and Footpaths (New Clause 43)

The proposed new local law states:

1. A person must not on a footpath or access way, place or cause to be placed any furniture that obstructs that footpath or accessway. 
2. Council may direct a person to remove any of the items in subclause (1). 
3. If a person fails to remove any item after being directed to do so, Council may seize any item and impound it in accordance with clause 78.

Dumped furniture including couches, chairs, mattresses, sofa's, rugs, blankets, kitchen goods, electrical good is a major problem on Grey and Fitzroy Streets and adjoining streets precinct and often, dumped rubbish is not collected for weeks. 

Furniture is sometimes used by the street camping groups and it is not helpful when volunteer groups hand out camping gear, doonas, pillows, rolled mattress, food parcels in plastic bags to the street campers.  

Clause 43 will Council Officers to remove dumped furniture when it is obstructing footpaths and access to properties.  

Camping Local Law 2023 (Clause 42)

Council is not proposing to change the Camping local law Clause 42, but the local community has been asking for this law to be changed for 10 years. 

It has been acknowledged that the council local laws management have not been enforcing the current illegal camping local laws. The existing exempts individuals with complex needs and those claiming to be homeless from camping restrictions. This loophole has allowed camping on footpaths when individual falsely claim they have no housing.

There are currently few genuinely homeless people in the Fitzroy, Acland, and Carlisle Street precincts, who would be protected under this local law if it were to be strictly enforced.

As reported by council officers the other campers have allocated housing, but choose to camp on the streets, generally because they can perform criminal and anti-social behaviours.

The Local Laws must apply the existing camping laws and prevent individuals camping on the street when they are known to have accommodation.

St Kilda was a thriving entertainment precinct when there was no camping on the footpath. 

Matador (pictured) led the fleet and won our short race. 

The Royal Melbourne Yacht Squadron (RMYS) opened the sailing season on Saturday 1 October and by all accounts those who participated had a wonderful day, and sailors are looking forward to the rest of the reason.

Matt Solly, RMYS general manager, prepared for the opening of our opening sailing season by dressing the building in traditional bunting. Members and guests who joined the festivities enjoyed lunch, the sail past and racing.  

Squadron Awards were given and had the burgee was unfurled by Councillor Andrew Bond and Councillor Christina Sirakoff, who joined us on our traditional Sail Past aboard Margaret Pearl. 

The Royal Melbourne Yacht Squadron, with a history of over 140 years, is one of the oldest yacht clubs in Victoria with a long list of historical firsts. Situated at St Kilda near the Melbourne central business district, it is regarded as the centre of aquatic events in Victoria.

Membership information can be found in the link: 

https://www.rmys.com.au/members/become-a-member-yacht-club-membership/

By Warwick Lloyd 

After years in the planning a pocket of land next to the Stokehouse on Jacka Boulevard has been rejuvenated. 

Rotary Playground was officially reopened on 21 September by Mayor Marcus Pearl. First opened in 1954, the playground will give families many years of happy playtime. Rotarians were well represented with Warwick Lloyd President of Port Phillip, Mark Davies and partner President of Albert Park and Dennis Tarrant past President of Melbourne South in attendance. Support from Federal Member Josh Burns was appreciated.

Following a massive community backlash, Port Phillip Council voted on Wednesday 7 September to endorse an amended Department of Transport proposal to roll back 4km of the 38 km of recently installed Pop-up bike infrastructure.  Cr Andrew Bond made several amendments to ensure that Councillors were given the opportunity to review alternative designs that may necessitate the removal of car parking in Bridge Street, Port Melbourne  and Westbury Street, St Kilda East. 

 The roll back includes 

• End the trial on Nelson Road in South Melbourne and reinstate to the original road condition
• Reinstate the left turn traffic lane into Williamstown Road from Bridge Street in Port Melbourne
• End the trial of the central bike lanes at Bridge Street and reinstate the original Road condition and explore alternate safe bike lane designs and request that any concepts requiring the removal of on-street parking spaces would be brought to Councillors for community consultation to be undertaken prior to any implementations
• End trial and reinstate the left turn traffic lane at the intersection of Bridge and Bay Street
• Improve visual amenity at Lyons Street, between Bridge Street and Esplanade West, with a focus on kerb and bollard removal
• Improve visual amenity at the intersection of Dickens Street and Glen Huntley Road on Marine Parade
• End the trial on Armstrong Street in Middle Park and reinstate to the original road condition
• Continue to monitor the current trial treatments on Westbury Street, St Kilda East, and to explore alternative designs, and request that any concepts requiring the removal of on-street parking spaces would be brought to Councillors for community consultation to be undertaken prior to any implementation.

Several Councillors voted against the proposed changes, claiming that the roll backs are unsafe for cyclists. Other Councillors supporting the motion said they were compelled to listen to residents who said the new infrastructure caused safety problems for cyclists. 

Cr Andrew Bond who made several amendments to the motion stated “This is a very good start to undoing the bike lane mess, and a victory for common sense in our city. Thanks go to all the residents and cyclists who contacted me to express their concerns with what was installed. Keep advocating for the areas near you that still need to be removed or changed. The State Government is listening and should be congratulated for doing so”.

Cameron Smith, a South Melbourne resident said, “Whilst the DOT proposal is a positive start, we need to continue to influence the Victorian government and Council to remove or modify the other 34 Km of these dangerous and unnecessary road treatments because they will remain unchanged until to end of the trial in late 2023”.

A resident Adam Blandford, a regular bicycle rider “is very concerned about the safety of cyclists in Westbury Street and is disappointed that DOT have not proposed to reinstate the original road”.  DOT propose to monitor the Pop-up bike treatment in Westbury Street and work with COPP to explore alternative treatments.

Residents receiving rates notices may be surprised to learn that City of Port Phillip (COPP) have introduced a separate charge for waste collection.  COPP have introduced a two tired waste collection charge effective from 1st July 2022. All properties have been charged $176.20 for waste collection and an additional waste collection charge of $88.10 has been levied on properties eligible for kerbside Food Organic and Garden Organic (FOGO) collection which include houses, terraces, and town houses.  

COPP have stated the new waste is being introduced to help pay for the introduction of new FOGO and glass recycling streams will be introduced from January 2023.  

Kerbside FOGO collection will be offered to about 18,000 properties, mostly terraces, freestanding houses and town houses, while residents living in multistorey apartments ( approximately 50,000 properties) will be required to walk up to 300m to use communal FOGO bins. 

Campbell Spence asked the following question at the Council meeting on 7 September “why are residents required to pay an $88.10 surcharge for a service that is not expected to be delivered until after January 2023? How can the COPP justify charging a full year's fee for a service that it is planning to deliver for 6 months or less? Can the CEO provide the dates that residents will receive the new kerbside FOGO bins and when will kerbside FOGO collections commence?

A Council Officer advised the delivery of kerbside FOGO bins and collection services are on track to commence in January 2023. The Officer also said that cost of delivering kerbside FOGO collection exceeds $88.10 and residents are not being over charged. However, the question remains how it costs $88.10 for 6 months when this is similar to what other councils charge for a full year. Does this mean that the FOGO charge will double for the first full FOGO bin service year, 2023-24?

Source: COPP press release 

By Dean Hurlston

There is little doubt that Victoria’s 79 Councils want to be an inclusive and healthy workplace, legislation makes sure of that and has for many years. We have anti-discrimination, sexual harassment, and workplace safety laws to ensure just this.

Since the 2020 elections, we have seen a huge push into LGBTQI+ activism driven by a small minority of activist-councillors and rarely challenged by the rest of the establishment. This may appear noble and inclusive, but as always there is an agenda and a cost.

During the elections, the Pride lobby asked candidates to pledge to progress an LGBTQI+ advisory committee and pursue rainbow tick accreditation of Councils services. 

But let’s look at what the cost of these actually are:

1. LGBTQI+ rainbow tick accreditation – this costs about $200,000 per Council

2. LGBTQI+ inclusion training – Provided at a cost of $1,500-3,000 per workshop

33 LGBTQI+ Advisory Committees – this involves selecting locals and staff for a regular panel – we estimate about $25,000 of councils’ resources would be used by this 

Let’s run some numbers on that as a state-wide hypothetical.

• 79 Councils – $200,000 each for Rainbow tick accreditation = $15.8 Million
• 54,000 staff – 540 workshops for 100 staff at $1,500 minimum = $810,0000
• 79 Councils - $25,000 each for Advisory Committees = $1.975 Million

That is a potential spend in Councils of over $18 million.

Of course, the spending is hypothetical and it will take time for all Councils to do this, but rest assured they are all being placed under enormous pressure to do this, by a lobbying group that is fastidious in getting its way. In Victoria, the Pride centre secured about $50 Million worth of land and funding from Port Phillip Council and the State Government. 

This is BIG BUSINESS.

What is driving this is a fundamental base belief that somehow Councils are not actually inclusive and LGBTQI+ friendly and perhaps that somehow Council needs to provide services to LGBTQI+ people in a more inclusive manner.

As an openly gay man, I have dealt with a lot of Councils, the staff, and Councillors – Victoria-wide.

NEVER once have I ever been demeaned or ridiculed for my sexuality, never once have I felt the level of service provided to me is any different, and never once have I felt the need to identify my sexuality and share it like a badge of honour to connect with staff. Disclosure – I am probably just as unhappy with the poor service Councils give as most of the population, and it has nothing to do with who I sleep with. Further, in the thousands of complaints we deal with, our volunteers have never had a complaint about any council treating a resident poorly because of their sexual orientation or gender identity. 

(Yet I know people who are hearing impaired that Council has ignored for decades)

Political correctness is becoming BIG business these days, with an LGBTQI+ industry that could gain tens of millions from councils to help them be more inclusive and a climate change lobby already securing tens of millions in funding for carbon credits from other countries and spending on buying more expensive renewable power only. The squeeze on council budgets has never been more real. We hear councils bemoan they can’t raise enough revenue – but only a few years ago these items were not even in a council’s budget, now they take pride of place (pardon the pun)

So why aren’t CEOs and Councillors pushing back? Some Councillors have and have been labelled homophobic and been given threats of harm, how inclusive.

In politics and councils, the photo opportunities to “appear to do good” are too enticing to resist. They make CEOs more employable and Councillors more electable, regardless of whether they actually make any improved benefits to the community. Photo opportunities for Councillors and CEOs that ultimately cost millions of ratepayers’ money.

There are NO business cases for any of this spend – just rhetoric and feel-good motherhood statements. These days it seems anyone can create a lobbying business and activist model that can usurp tens of millions of ratepayers’ money from council coffers. 

We are in a time when truth easily gets lost in virtue signalling and tokenism.

The attached picture is the intro to a recent Council job ad – the wording proves my point, Councils have become infected by an all-inclusive, feel-good, rhetoric that would make a communist country’s propaganda machine envious.

 I for one am sick of this. Council's service standards are falling, and they are cutting service delivery – aged care support services are being abandoned by the truckload and many vulnerable residents are out in the cold.

It’s time someone took a broom to councils and literally stopped this madness.

After all, it’s our money they’re abusing whilst neglecting those who need support, imagine what $18 million could do for aged services and in-home support.

This isn’t at all about inclusiveness, it’s about money. Our money. Money that should be better spent on the potholes in our roads, the cracked footpaths, the blocked drains, and the quality of councils’ services. Apparently, those photo opportunities are too dull and boring for mayors, councillors, and CEOs. 

We are being had, and only we can stop it. 

It’s why I refuse to support this tokenistic approach and also refuse to use pronouns in my email signature

Attribution: PRIDE or PC overload? https://www.ratepayersvictoria.com.au/post/pride-or-pc-overload 

ROPP is a community focused association that advocates for all residents, businesses, and ratepayers on local matters. ROPP are here for you, and they have a name refresh.

Campbell Spence, President of ROPP said “We are passionate about maintaining our heritage, diverse community, and we want Council to serve their community rather than serving the Port Phillip bureaucracy, minority vested interests and political parties”. 

We are active informing and assisting the community on issues often related to council matters as they happen, and as such the more people we help the more friends we make.

When ROPP was first established in 2018 we advocated for affordable rates, better core services, less wasteful spending by our Council. We represent a broader community, which while seldom heard or seen, are also often in the majority on many council matters.

Frequently members of our community need assistance and feel alone and helpless when faced with a council that will not help them.   These are ratepayers, businesses, residents, and property owners that are not resident.

As such ‘Residents of Port Phillip’ better reflects the assistance we offer all those who reside here in one form or another.

If you would like to help or contribute or learn more 

Email: mail@ropp.org.au

Web: https://ropp.org.au/

Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/groups/RoPP

By the Friends of Gasworks Arts Park

At the Council meeting on the 6th July, Council voted to request the Victorian Schools Building Authority (VSBA) to brief Council on the development of the Victorian Youth Arts Precinct (VYAP) on the former Multinet depot site next to Gasworks Park.

Despite numerous requests, it has been very difficult to get information from the Council, the local member Martin Foley or the VSBA.  Residents remain ill-informed and it seems there will only be consultation when everything for the VYAP is in place. The VSBA does not need any planning permits and construction is scheduled to commence later this year.

To maintain the Park’s amenity we are asking Council to protect the brick wall between the Park and this new development.  We have been told the wall is jointly owned. The plans on the web site “Victorian Youth Arts Precinct” don’t show the wall. 

This development is not only a large arts facility, but a campus shared by two schools with over 2000 students. If the complex is open to the Park there will be no way to control the use and flow of students (and visitors/audiences) all over the Park. In other words, it will be a school ground with a consequential detrimental effect on the enjoyment of the Park by other users. If Council is not going to stop the wall being demolished then a new fence should be built to define the Park land from the school campus and to control unlimited access.

Cr Louise Crawford at the Council meeting said the VYAP development had nothing to do with the Council and if residents had any questions, they should contact VSBA. This is not good enough. 

Council does have a responsibility to look after local resident's interests. This development is on a commercial scale. The proposed fifty performances a year will generate considerable traffic and require a lot of staff. This development will create parking and traffic problems as well as impacting detrimentally on our local open space.

A theatre for the school is acceptable, but this large development is being squeezed into a small site and is in the wrong place. It should be in the Arts Precinct near the College of the Arts High School not in a residential area which should be catering for local high school students.

Please ask your Councilors to save the brick wall and address the parking and traffic problems this inappropriate development will create.

Email or ring your Councilors and CEO, click here. 

And sign our petition on change.org, click here.

Council voted on 7 September to undertake a feasibility study for a new performance and live music venue at the St Kilda Triangle car park next to Palais Theatre. The study will investigate how a new performance/live music venue could be delivered within the spirit and intent of the St Kilda Triangle Masterplan. 

The study is expected to test viability of the live music venue from a commercial, spatial, community and financial standpoint and enable Council to make an informed decision about future investment.

The study is estimated to cost $378,000 results will be completed by mid-next year, at which point councillors would decide whether to progress the project or abandon it. The mayor will seek a funding commitment from the Victorian Government for this project. 

Patrick Donovan, a live music industry consultant said “Melbourne is the music capital of the world with over 650 live music venues but there is one glaring deficiency. We need a purpose-built live music venue with a 3,000-5,000 capacity. Melbourne is crying out for a new standing live music venue following the sale of Festival Hall to a religious group and the Forum is too small. The triangle is the perfect location for a new music venue. It has music history at the site with ample public transport and parking. Some people have questioned whether two music venues can exist next to each other, but the Palais offers a very different music experience offering sit down shows”. 

The proposal represents a significant departure from the St Kilda Triangle Masterplan developed by Council in 2016. Serge Thomann former Councillor and Deputy-Mayor and President of unChain Inc. said “We believe that the feasibility work that is suggested is too narrow and does not address what was approved by Council in the previous Masterplan. We also believe that what is recommended is ill conceived”. The Masterplan aimed to create a new cultural institution that could include an art gallery, live music venue or performance space, and carparking. Masterplan information is included in the Council Meeting Agenda papers for 7 September in the link https://www.portphillip.vic.gov.au/about-the-council/council-meetings/2022-meetings-and-agendas

Plans to develop the St Kilda Triangle in 2007 attracted controversy when an ambitious $400 million development proposal described by opponents as a “Chadstone by the sea” was abandoned following a massive community backlash. A proposal to locate the NGV Contemporary at the site was rejected by the Victorian Government in 2016. 

The St Kilda Triangle has a rich history of buildings and entertainment venues including Palais de Dance , Palais Pictures, The Palace Entertainment Complex, the Palais Theatre, the Stardust Lounge, and a casino.

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 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

A group of concerned Middle Park residents have formed the “Preserving Middle Park Village, Inc.” community association to oppose a Middle Park Hotel development proposal that will adversely affect the amenity of a very peaceful community. The hotel operators (AVC) want an open-air rooftop nightclub, with additional 200 patrons operating until 1 am, 7 nights a week. 

Residents have lodged an objection to VCAT to stop the development based on concerns about noise emanating from the rooftop night club and patrons leaving the hotel and antisocial behaviour in the early hours of the morning will disrupt Middle Park residents. Residents and traders can also expect to lose car parking. 

To find out more come to our community meetings over the next two weeks.  

• Saturday 19th Nov. 8am to 12 noon at Armstrong Street
• Tuesday 29th Nov. 7pm at Upstairs at the Middle Park Library 

The association is seeking your support and we look forward to meeting more residents in person and sharing our concerns.  

If you would like to contribute to help fund our legal representation and experts at VCAT please donate via our GoFundMe Preserve Middle Park Village or bank account: 

Name: Preserving Middle Park Inc.
BSB: 083 004
Account No: 93 340 9318

We estimate costs to be in the vicinity of $100,000. Any leftover monies will be refunded pro rata to those contributing $1,000 or more. 

Please support the effort to stop this nightclub by sharing this email with fellow Middle Park residents. 

Sign the petition https://www.change.org/p/stop-the-middle-park-hotel-from-building-a-nightclub

Contact us at preservingmiddleparkvillage@gmail.com

Join our Facebook group https://www.facebook.com/groups/1441330309711812 

Many thanks - "Preserving Middle Park Inc." Adrian, Odette, Helen, Paul, Matthew, and Joanna

 By Mark Naughton 

The new pop-up bike lane infrastructure installed across inner suburban Melbourne is failing to keep cyclists safer and in many places is putting them in greater danger, a new study shows. See report attached below. 

The independent review of the program in the Port Phillip local government area, part of a $13m road safety scheme across four zones in Melbourne, is scathing in its assessment of the rollout, recommending the lanes be removed or significantly modified. 

 “The vast majority of the pop-up bike lane infrastructure either offers limited benefit for cyclists or results in an increased risk to road users including both motorists and cyclists,” the report by leading consultants Traffix Group concludes. 

 The report, commissioned by a group of concerned Port Phillip residents, raises significant red flags about how cars and cyclists can co-exist on key stretches of road where the new lanes have been installed.

 Along Marine Parade, for instance, the pop-up bike lanes are applied inconsistently, leading to traffic uncertainty. 

 “The treatment has caused confusion for some motorists, with the community reporting instances of vehicles driving in the separated bicycle lane,” it says.

 The report warns that motorists are unclear about how to turn left across the new bike lanes. 

 “This is likely to increase the risk of collisions as left turning motorists will be unaware of cyclists approaching from behind them,” the report says.

 The report also notes an existing bike path completely separated from Marine Parade traffic has already been in place for many years, raising questions about why new infrastructure is needed.

 Overall, it recommends “the majority of the temporary treatments should either be removed or significantly modified.”

 Mark Naughton, a spokesperson for the Port Phillip residents’ group who commissioned the report, said the State government and local authorities who jointly funded the scheme should heed the expert advice and start again.

 “The lanes are doing the exact opposite of what they are supposed to. It’s wasting taxpayer and ratepayer money, and worse than that it is unnecessarily putting lives in danger,” he said. 

 “The devices installed are confusing for both motorists and cyclists and will increase conflict between bikes and cars. They exacerbate traffic congestion and will inevitably lead to more cycling accidents and injuries.

 There was no community consultation on this before the pop-up bike lanes were installed. What is the problem they are trying to solve here? We’re not sure, no one can articulate what the problem is.”

Readers could request a copy by sending an email to mail@ropp.org.au

By Cameron Smith

Concerned residents have heard candidates for the electorate of Albert Park at a ‘Candidate Forum’  state their position on the recently installed pop-up bike lanes prior to the start of polling on Monday 14 November. Three of the candidates have provided written and firm comments, reflecting community feedback and an independent Traffix Group report on the safety of the pop-up bike lanes.

The four candidates speaking at a community forum last Thursday were provided with the Traffix report three days prior to the event, ensuring that they had time to understand the findings. Concerned residents also attended a Candidate Forum last Thursday to hear four candidates respond to the following question: 

“You have all been provided with an independent risk assessment of the pop-up bike infrastructure installed throughout the electorate. The study concludes that what has been installed is unnecessary and will inevitably add to the risks for cyclists – the exact opposite of what was intended. If you are elected, will you support the removal of all of the pop-up bike infrastructure from the streets of Port Phillip?” 

Please see table below for a summary of candidate positions on the pop-up bike lanes as of 14 November 2022:

The City of Port Phillip and the Victorian Government announced on 14 October 2022 an agreement to fund upgrades to six of Port Phillips early years education and care centres.

Port Phillip Council will provide more than $18 million and the Victorian Government is contributing up to $12.6 million under this agreement.

This welcome news for parents and childcare operators who lobbied to stop the sale of the centres. Funding was secured following Port Phillip Council’s decision in August to not sell three ageing community-run early years education and care centres (Eildon Road Childcare and Kindergarten, St Kilda, The Avenue Children’s Centre and Kindergarten, Balaclava, and the Elwood Children’s Centre), subject to this funding agreement.

Over the next seven years, this partnership with the State Government will ensure all six Port Phillip centres requiring significant renovation or replacement will be made fit-for-purpose and accessible for generations to come, whilst staying at the same locations. 

The six centres are 

• Eildon Road Childcare and Kindergarten, St Kilda

• The Avenue Children’s Centre and Kindergarten, Balaclava

• Elwood Children’s Centre, Elwood.

• North St Kilda Children’s Centre, St Kilda

• Clarendon Children’s Centre, South Melbourne

• Lilian Cannam Kindergarten, South Melbourne.

Port Phillip Council was slammed by parents, state, and federal politicians over its plan to sell the centres because of funding challenges to upgrade the 100 years old centres which do not comply with building codes and the Disability Discrimination Act. 

Mayor Marcus Pearl said, “we are pleased this announcement provides certainty to both the operators and the families and caregivers using or planning to use these community resources is our council will continue to work closely with the centres including consulting on design and providing support to minimise disruption to operations when consultation is underway”.

By Peter Anscombe

Image of new Bicycle Lane in Park Street, South Melbourne after waste collection 

I am a resident of Park Street South Melbourne (City Edge 79-139 Park St) and I have major reservations about the newly constructed bike lanes between Kingsway and Moray Street. I am informed these bicycle lanes are a “trial” and not “final”.

Background

These works created a dedicated bicycle lane adjacent to the existing kerb in both directions and a relocated parking lane beyond that towards the centre of the prior wide carriageway, about some five lane widths (approx. 18m) from kerb to kerb. This means that there is now only a narrow central two-lane width carriageway remaining for traffic in both directions. 

These two lanes are the major road connection directly to St Kilda Road and Kingsway from the South Melbourne precinct. As such they are heavily used by through traffic from the South Melbourne precinct, especially accessing Kingsway. They are used by emergency vehicles, construction vehicles, tourist buses and residents.

They are also used by garbage trucks which of course now hold up all the traffic as they do their collections and replace emptied bins on the footpath. This significantly increases the time garbage collection now takes, along with associated delays to traffic.

There are no turning lanes at street intersections and driveways other than the existing right hand turn into Kingsway, despite 3 intersections, and 4 driveways serving multiple unit developments.

All parking arrangements have been revised with much reduced both timed and resident parking. There has been a significant loss of parking spaces.

No loading zones have been provided nor pedestrian crossings mid-block.

Access to about 90 dwellings in the precinct, plus another 54 approved for construction, fronting or adjacent to driveways or accessing streets from this section of Park Street does not appear to have been considered. Most properties can only be accessed from Park Street.

Many turning movements in both directions are generated by these residences and as I mentioned above there are no turning lanes provided to access these streets and driveways.

Road space apart from through traffic is needed for furniture vans, deliveries, trades and other servicing of these properties and parking along with taxi and ride users.

Owing to the space taken for the bike lanes, there is now not sufficient road width buffer to accommodate these needs.

Local cyclists have not embraced the bike lanes and still ride on the footpath. I suspect difficulty of crossing to the lanes and navigating the Kingsway intersection might have something to do with it.

These works have now been in full operation for several months now and I would like to make further comments in the light of my experience. The issues are:

1. Speed of cars and cyclists. The 40 km limit is rarely observed. 

The speed control treatment of the through lanes differs:-

West/East. North side. Small 40km sign but reasonably visible at the exit into the lane from the roundabout at Heather Street and a speed control hump at this point.

East/West, South side. Small 40km sign only at entry to the through traffic lane (or the exit of the intersection with Kingsway). Line of sight could be obscured by adjacent poles, especially when turning left from Kingsway. 

• Restricted vision and speed of oncoming traffic.
• Speeding cyclists appearing from nowhere while halted across the bike path for access on the main lanes.

• Restricted vision of the driveway and other vehicles which may be using the driveway because of vehicles parked towards the centre of the carriageway. 
• Virtually no vision of cyclists using the lane because of vehicles parked towards the centre of the carriageway. 

By Dean Andrew Hurlston

I’ve talked to a lot of councillors and community groups over the last 5 years.

The constant theme in Local Government from the Communities’ point of view is that Councils have somehow lost their way and don’t align with the expectations of ordinary people.

What many struggle with is the Direction of Councils, indeed according to the Statewide Local Government Survey for 2022, this is the ONE area that ALL councils are struggling with. Other Key areas that continue to perform badly across the sector are “community engagement and lobbying”.

So, what do these topics really mean?

The Direction of Council put simply is “what is your council focused on, in the media for and generally known for pursuing?” Community engagement refers to how the council is consulting with the local community when it comes to making changes that affect large groups of people. Lobbying refers to how effective ordinary residents feel they are and in turn, their councillors are at expressing their community needs and priorities.

In researching for this article, I have also spoken to several ex-Council employees, to better understand the changes in Councils that they have seen (from a staff perspective) in the last 20 or so years.

What is very clear, is that decades ago councils were actually consumer-focused in delivering services and projects to their communities, it was all they were interested in. Whether it be cleaning the streets of retail precincts, mowing the grass, weeding in parks and gardens, upgrading sporting facilities, or opening new or refurbished libraries and pools, Councils were firmly focused on these items. 

There was always strong discussion about the need to expand services over time as the population increased, especially in the inner suburban councils which had enormous population growth and density thrust upon them by the constant weakening of planning laws and frameworks. I make no judgement of how well councils were doing this, but they only seemed to know how to do "local things".

Today, it seems that much has and is changing and the pace is lightning fast. Councillors now regularly push ideology like climate change, sexual identity, gender affirmation, trans activism, free bleeding, sex workshops, welcome-to-country ceremonies, healing ceremonies, moving Australia Day, Nuclear disarmament, giving trees legal rights, and the list goes on. The list is exhaustive and incredibly hard to keep up with.

So why has this political activism surged within our councils? 

Is it because as a society we have demanded this and that most of us really want these items addressed by our local Council?

Whilst there is a younger generation at play, who want us to address every issue, the answer is a resounding NO. 

There is no evidence, not a shred that ordinary residents, ratepayers and businesses are pushing these ideological agendas, rather, it is the Councillor groups that are acting more like political activists than councillors as defined in the Local Government Act 2020.

The role of a Councillor is to make decisions in the best interests of the municipality in which they find themselves. Those decisions are meant to be around planning, infrastructure, services, and value for money for the rates dollar. In any ordinary business, the satisfaction of the customers would be directly linked to the CEO and executive remuneration. Not Councils, not at all.

Instead, many Councillors are tying the performance of the CEO to how well they are supporting and recommending all those ideological items that don’t actually improve the service or infrastructure that growing communities really need.

CEOs are now acutely aware that they are much more a political activist than a traditional CEO.

The problem with this is that the CEO and all Council officers and executives are meant to be always apolitical. Alas, they are not. I hear almost daily from a different Councillor how the actions of staff and especially the CEO and directors have become much more political and biased than ever. Whoever the “ruling faction” of Councillors are in Council, the more the “recommendations” from officers and CEOs will be skewed to the political narrative suitable to that faction.

The further inner city the council, the higher the percentage of left-leaning Councillors, be they greens or left labor. This is causing a fundamental shift in the focus and attention of inner Melbourne Councils.

Whilst services like rubbish collection continue to slide, be reduced or be subject to dramatic change, the focus from Head office is firmly on gender identity, trans rights, climate activism and the like.

We are in a battle for the souls and identity of our Councils. A very real fight between the role of a council to provide excellent services, amenities and good governance and an ideological war to spend council resources on minority representation, and controversial issues that really belong in national or state conversations.

For all the cries from CEOs that they simply can’t raise enough revenue to run councils these days, they are sure quiet when Councillors create volumes of new work in these ideological trenches.

Why?

Simply put, CEOs face the most obvious conflict of interest in a broken Council system.

They are employed by the Councillors – and if the majority faction wants to push these agendas, the CEO better lead by example (even if their organisation is imploding with record staff turnover, bullying accusations and dysfunctional departments) or they can easily be replaced by many Council executives who are happy to horse trade all ideologies to be the next CEO.

It’s time to break this nexus before the entire house of cards comes crumbling down.

The Local Government minister needs to firmly define what the role of a Council is (to ensure they are unable to stray into federal and state issues) and it is time for the Councillor group (a politically motivated group) to not have control of the CEO in a manner that really distracts the business of the council. Perhaps it’s time for a model where the business of the council is totally subject to full and extensive community consultation. 

Perhaps it would be better for CEOs to have their performance reviews decided by the public.

Given how much the Local Government Act 2020 blocks Councillors in daily operational matters, and ultimately managing the CEO properly, perhaps it's time to hand this over to the community. 

Wouldn’t that be something? 

A community rating and rewarding CEOs who listen to them, and deliver, rather than those that play politics!

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.

 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