Be it the case or otherwise, but rumour has it that Thursday’s meeting, as advertised, is to be held:
• Behind closed doors;
• In deadly secret;
• In the dark;
• Well away from any kind of community scrutiny; and
• With a secret agenda.
Whatever the agenda, clearly its going to be about backing the GM/AKA CEO’s personal agenda whatever that may be.
Speculatively, and as is widely rumoured, on the agenda, is his bid to 'compulsorily acquire' the Myer Carpark site. Put another way, endorsing his ‘power thrust’, so far unsuccessful apparently, in the hope of generating a ‘vicarious buzz’ perhaps to infect ‘the entire council’ – who knows.
But why the secrecy?
- Yes, the carpark site would be a good site for a transport terminal and well yes, the city’s CBD is dying as are CBDs nationally and internationally too apparently.
- Yes, every development project directed at reviving the CBD as gone way over budget and has fallen short.
- Yes, tenants are apparently fleeing the mall.
- Yes, property values in ‘the city’ are falling as are rents but not rates.
- Yes, the carpark owner’s investment in ‘his property’ is almost without doubt delivering a return pretty much unachievable elsewhere.
- And yes, there are other venues in the city for a 21st C transport terminal.
Likewise, the supposed ‘co-developer’ comes with compromised credentials and is apparently proposing to embark upon an enterprise laden with risk and in a fiscally struggling city.
If they, as developers, were truly serious and focused on an appropriately credentialed operation they would be spoilt for alternative sites currently. If they were really looking for anything more than a ’free kick’ from Launceston’s ratepayers, what might that be?
Given that it seems that it would be highly unlikely to be ‘ratepayers’ who would willingly endorse such a project/development, why meet in camera otherwise?
This ‘development’, most likely, as widely rumoured, is that which is being deliberated upon. It looks like it will be in its totality a lose, lose situation for ratepayers, so is that the rationale for secrecy?
The level of transparency in the decision making here might well be equated with that found inn solid concrete. Not as the Premier when Minister for Local Govt. advocated for, transparency and accountability.
Why isn’t the city ‘collaborating’ with the owner rather than, as it seems, bureaucratically bullying the owner into submission via council’s – given the GM/AKA CEO’S SECTION 62/2 of the Act – extraordinary powers to compulsorily acquire property for the ‘greater good’.
What is the greater good here? In fact, is anything like the ‘greater good’ the case here? It does seem however that ‘the deal’ as discussed/rumoured has anything but the greater good driving it. Winning an aspiration maybe, but the ‘greater good’?
Ratepayers and residents are to be locked out it seems as it seems councillors too apparently. This meeting is, apparently, all about the assertion of ‘power’, nothing more, nothing less.
Ratepayers, in the rumoured scenarios, will be victims rather than beneficiaries, but who cares? It is widely rumoured that the operational wing think that if you, as administrators/managers, make a mistake you can always tax the ratepayers. It is in-house wisdom apparently.
What seems to be missing at every turn is the ‘social licence’.
However, is it being sought? SECTION 62/2 of the Local Govt. Act is careless of such things. Does anyone remember the social licence Gunns assumed that they had, or should have had, or indeed they said they were entitled to, for a pulp mill on the Tamar?
This missive might well be peeing up wind into a force10 gale, but that’s the lot of hapless ratepayers. And, the ‘elected councillors’ will quite probably not see ANY veracity at all in the rumouring that is being passed on here or indeed have a concern for ‘the citizenry’.
Council’s civic accountability will inevitably reveal itself as such things do. That famous quote about truth ... “The truth is like a lion; you don’t have to defend it. Let it loose; it will defend itself” ... is as reliable as it has always been down the centuries. Will anyone confront the lion?
The fear of judgment is the mark of guilty knowledge and the burden of insecurity which is why shonky decisions are made in the dark, and murder trials take place in the light of day out in the open with citizens determining guilt or otherwise.
Yours sincerely,
Ray Norman
For and on behalf of the Launceston Concerned Citizens' Network
No comments:
Post a Comment