CITIZEN ORIENTED PLANNING IN LAUNCESTON

GO TO https://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/philosopherszone/citizens-and-urban-planning/12244514

Cities develop in all sorts of ways, but at the heart of urban planning in Australia is the notion of citizen participation. When changes are afoot that will influence the lives of millions of people, those people should have a say. But "the people" are rarely on the same page, interests always diverge — and yet we still tend to assume that everyone's a rational actor, and that consensus can ultimately be achieved. Here is the philosophical foundations of a more realistic — and more helpful — model for citizen participation in urban planning.

In Tasmania it is claimed that Council's operate as "Planning Authorities" and under a Council's Interim Planning Scheme 2013, as a 'Planning Authority', Councils control the use and development within a municipality. 

The scheme contains state and local planning policies, zones, overlays and other provisions that affect how land can be used and developed. So, you may require a planning permit for: 

• Construction and works relating to a dwellin
• Development of multiple dwellings Subdivision 
• Demolition or relocation 
• Changing the use of the land or a building 
• Setting up a new business or expanding a new business
• Carrying-out exterior works to a dwelling 
• Installation of signage 

 In the first instance you are required to contact Council to find out whether you require planning approval for any use or development you might be considering. Council should also give you advice on the information you will need to provide.

interestingly in Launceston Council approved a development that a large number of 'representors' objected to on multiple grounds but importantly in many cases because the development fell outside the provisions of the planning scheme. 

Of equal interest, at the same meeting, Councillors overwhelmingly rejected a development that Council's 'Planning Department' recommended for approval.

The class of decision making turns out to totally subjective and arguably 'not authoritative' against the background that the Councillors function as 'reactive approvers and disapprovers' without proactively engaging in planning policy development and certainly not in consultation or collaboration with their constituency.

Clearly citizen participation is not the heart of urban planning in Launceston and the notion that it could or should be, on the evidence, is not even on the agenda nor is it likely to be anytime soon. 

THE MINISTER LOOKS AWAY WHEN THE CHIPS ARE DOWN

DEEP PROBLEMS IN TOWN HALLS ALL OVER TASMANIA

COMMENT

It is patently clear that the local government model in Tasmania has passed its use-by-date by a long shot. 

Jeff Kennett estimated some time ago that something in the order of $2Billion was being spent on local governance. The evidence now seems to be that most of it is not being well spent.

It way past time for a reality check!

By Lucy MacDonald 

When coronavirus hit Tasmania's communities, councils across the state rushed to help by freezing rates and cutting fees but, with coffers bare and staff stood down, it is becoming clear many councils will be the ones in need of aid.

Key points:

• Tasmania's councils have frozen rates and created hardship packages, but it's meant a huge hit to their bottom line
• Many councils are worried about how they'll pay staff and fund services
• The financial situation has renewed calls for the State Government to reconsider its position on council amalgamations

Their financial stress has seen renewed calls for the State Government to ditch its policy of voluntary amalgamations and finally force some councils to merge.

It was mid-April when Premier Peter Gutwein and Local Government Minister Mark Shelton wrote to councils urging them "to do more".

"We strongly encourage all councils to consider their individual packages and provide support to their community as a matter of urgency," they wrote.

"It is vital that all councils agree to measures including rate increase freezes and generous hardship policies."

The state's councils agreed to implement hardship packages — including delaying rates collections and waiving or deferring fees — and freeze rates for the 20/21 financial year.

But not all councils could afford this or agreed with the rates freeze, with some mayors saying they felt forced into doing so.

For Flinders Island Council, the rates freeze is putting some serious pressure on its finances.

"To all councils [the freeze] is probably a big issue, a big burden. To us, it's just off the planet," Mayor Annie Revie said.

The council has been in "a high-risk category financially" since 2018 and entered into the crisis with about $2 million in debt.

The extra hit means the council may be forced to sacrifice some services.

"It's something we're going to have to look at. We're going to have to involve our community in what sort of services can we afford," she said.

This will be a question many councils across the state will now face and, depending on the council, the loss of services could range from a pause on council-supported events and grants to delays on infrastructure upgrades and slower reparation of things like roads and street lamps.

On paper, councils are asset-rich — they own parks, roads and buildings — but few of them can be sold or, as Derwent Valley Mayor Ben Shaw put it, "you can't sell a footpath".

Derwent Valley Council has about $800,000 in outstanding rates for this financial year and as part of the agreed-upon hardship package, they won't be chasing them.

Cr Shaw said with the council's cash flow in "disarray" he was worried about paying staff leave entitlements.

"We're around about the $1 million mark [in leave entitlements] on our books, which is a real concern. We need to have that cash available plus we need to have operation cash as well," he said.

He does not know how they will keep the hardship package and implement a freeze on rates.

"If it all comes in and all our rates come in, we'll be fine," he said.

"It's the fact that there's no incentive for anybody for this next 12 months to pay their rates because we won't be chasing them and there's no interest accrual on them.

"If everybody decides not to pay their rates, we will run out of cash."

THE CREDIBILITY OF PLACEMAKING DECISIONS IN THE CITY OF LAUNCESTON

The  Winston S. Churchill quote “Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all the others” that gets an airing anytime that the quality of democratic decision making is challenged. Well it turns out that Launceston is a great place to begin to debunk democracy in a local governance context.

It turns out that in Launceston at least what passes for democratic representation is anything but 'elected representation' when push comes to shove looks a lot more  like a 'two up game' or a 'chook raffle' at the bottom pub. To read more click on the link below

https://raynormanadvocate.blogspot.com/2020/05/the-credibility-of-placemaking.html

And the graphic below is more to do with 'marketing' than the real life on the ground experiences of ratepayers and residents when the chips are down.

CCOPERATIVE LOCAL PROCUREMENT MAY BE THE 21ST C WAY FORWARD

In Barcelona, things have always been done differently. A city buzzing with creativity, unusual architecture and a rich heritage of participation, innovation and political radicalism, it’s no surprise that their football club, FC Barcelona, is a fan-owned co-operative or that they recently elected a radical new mayor, housing activist Ada Colau. .

Now, Barcelona plans to continue its transformation into a different kind of city, based on co-operation and social inclusion – using a new economic model to support the social and sharing economy and limit the dominance of the big businesses. 

Barcelona City Council spends over €1 billion every year – and they want to turn these public contracts into a tool for sustainable and inclusive growth. While public procurement may not capture the imagination of many, for Barcelona it’s at the cutting edge of creating a stronger, fairer local economy. Working with businesses, trade unions and local communities, the City government has developed a new social procurement guide to make businesses become more responsible, and to boost the co-operative, social and solidarity economy. 

Spain has had a long history of co-operation, even before the Civil War in the 1930s. Now, since the financial crisis, the movement has seen a resurgence. In 2013 in Catalonia there were 4,130 co-operatives – now, in Barcelona alone there are over 4,800, accounting for 6% of the city’s GDP. Co-operative organisations range from consumer and farmer co-operatives, to healthcare and ethical finance institutions, to bookshops and community organisations.

The city’s new approach to how it issues contracts sets out several social measures which are designed to boost the co-operative and social sector further through levelling the playing field between businesses with democratic and profit sharing business models, and others “that pay their taxes in tax havens and offshore production”. 

For businesses that fall outside of the co-operative economy, the new guidelines are intended to reward companies that can demonstrate a social conscience. They are getting community groups to take part in choosing the winning contract, and forcing companies applying to be transparent about wages and costs. Big business will also now have to buy a certain percentage of goods and services from the co-operative or social sector, and introduce additional protections for SMEs. 

Barcelona is one of a growing number of cities showing the way on how we can use procurement to rebalance the local economy. In Cleveland, Ohio, they’re also pioneering a new way of working: by partnering with anchor institutions – such as the hospital and university – they can develop local worker-owned businesses. 

The strategy has created 5,000 jobs from Cleveland’s hospital network alone. In Preston, they’re taking a similar approach, working with public institutions to procure locally and supporting residents to establish and grow new co-operatives. 

Cities like Barcelona, Cleveland and Preston show that through smarter procurement there’s an opportunity to shape communities around co-operation.

CLICK HERE TO GO TO SOURCE

THE CITY OF LAUNCESTON AND SOCIAL ISOLATION

When the constituents of Waverley and Ravenswood ask for a bit of hand up to help their community deal with the consequences of COVID-19 Crisis the Mayor tells them to go talk to the State Govt. Yet, when the Mayor floats a program to help people with, Council funded 'innovation grants' the city's movers and shakers in the know get the inside running it seems.

Perhaps the auditor, the one to be appointed, albeit reluctantly, to look into the innovation grants process and its outcomes will be able to shine a light into those dark and dingy corners at Town Hall.

When the press calls-out the inequity, albeit somewhat surreptitiously, you can put money on a bunch of councillors screaming 'blue bloody murder'  and shouting from the rooftops that they are misunderstood. And that is not to mention the assertion that it is misplaced innuendo feeding of inappropriate social media. You see because they are elected representatives they must be trusted.

The Councillors who are screaming oh so loudly, Cr Soward and McKenzie, and lamenting the $30K to $40K Council is now being called upon to spend on an auditor to deliver an independent assessment of a project and process with an unpredictable outcome stand out. That this money might be better spent there is no doubt but as they say, "justice not only has to be done it needs to be seen as being done." That we will see or not see.

It is interesting to note that the 'Waverley Community Co-op' is mounting a GO-FUND-ME initiative that just might not raise $30K but when they were to apply to Council to get some help they are told to "talk to the State Govt." Oh yes the Council did help them out with a bit of ASTRO TURF to help the aged constituents avoid sliping in the mud at it  FOOD STALL.

CLICK HERE TO GO TO SOURCE

You see these people are savvy enough to have a FACE BOOK site and the Mayor's  'innovation grants' grants are for businesses to take such initiatives and if you are already there what's to be done? As someone has said somewhere, this COVID-19 Crisis is raining on everyone but it is the CBD and 'the deserving' who should get the umbrella. Deciding who 'the deserving' are requires expertise and inside knowledge too it seems.

The City of Launceston's authority in the area of 'social distancing' with a little more effort will be second to none. The distance between the deserving and undeserving is informed and guaranteed by the GM (akaCEO) under Section 65 of Local Govt Act so it is beyond question. 

Interesting this was amplified at Council's last  meeting when the Mayor rejected a call to ban the dumping of food waste in municipality. There is a French law forbids food waste by supermarkets and Launceston couldn't/shouldn't be doing anything like that even in the wake of the COVID-19 Crisis if say people in the outer suburbs need the food.

Town Hall's 'disconnections' and 'rejections' are loud and clear and the only way it seems anyone can get a message to Town Hall is via  SOCIAL MEDIA because it does not require bureaucratic approval to test an idea, to call-out recalcitrance, to point out inequity, to say that something has the oppressive odour of rotten flesh mingled with the stench of mouldy manure so strong that it makes you gasp for breath. 

You see, that sort of commentary is antisocial,  disruptive and untoward and thus unacceptable.

CLICK HERE TO READ THE 

NOTATED EXAMINER STORIES