Summary of issues

SAVING CAMDEN

Issues with Camden Council

evidenced by reference to timeline entries in

Timeline of Community Issues with Camden Council’s Faction (Term 2012 to 2016) 

The overarching issue with Council is its unwitting or intentional destruction of Camden’s significant Australian  heritage.

This issue arose with the formation of a voting bloc in Council  (September 2012) and subsequent loss of democratic representation. The formation of the voting bloc arose despite

  • an important purpose of local government being to encourage an assist the effective participation of local communities in the affairs of local government (Local Government Act 1993 (s7c));
  • a perception of caucus voting being suggestive of misconduct (Model Code of Conduct March 2013 (s3.9)).

The faction is led by the Mayor (14 April 2015) and supported by political ties with the State Member (31 March 2015, 7 April 2015, 10 August 2015).

In summary the voting bloc:

  • removed an incumbent General Manager without explanation (December 2012).
  • appointed another General Manager (March 2013).
  • transferred a bequest of community land to operational land without explanation (25 October 2014, 5 February 2013).
  • did not engage with the community or all Councillors in devising  an “enhancement package” for the Camden Heritage Conservation Area (Mid 2013, 20 June 2014) of
    • installing traffic lights in Argyle Street (at Oxley Street intersection to facilitate decked carpark traffic), by removing section of median strip and  row of jacarandas
    • installing pedestrian lights
    • widening footpaths
    • paving with grey granite
    • replacing existing street furniture with that of “simple” design
    • building a decked carpark (to take additional deck(s) in future) behind Council Building to be vacated and leased out.
  • engendered unprecedented friction and a rift with the Camden Chamber of Commerce by
    • not consulting before decisions made that affect business and heritage point of difference (23 May 2014, 10 June 2014, 13 June 2014, 27 June 2014, 11 July 2014, 18 July 2014, 27 August 2014, 3 September 2014);
    • withdrawing membership (3 September 2014, 16 September 2014);
    • not responding positively to its concerns in its submission on the works (17 September 2014, 1 October 2014);
    • instigating legal action against Chamber (3 September 2014, 1 October 2014);
    • confrontational Mayoral minute about resignations of Chamber executive (28 June 2016).
  • allocated budgets before community consultation and before heritage and most other consultant reports are commissioned and received (Mid 2013, 20 June 2014, Appendix B, 3 February 2015, March 2015).
  • ignored consultants’ reports:
    • Town Farm Public Hearing ( 5 February 2013);
    • Camden Town Centre Traffic and Transport Study, 2013 (March 2013);
    • Multi-Story Car Park Study (April 2014).
  • casually treated heritage reports which
    • were commissioned after the works were planned;
    • were constrained by terms of reference (March 2015) and 2008 town centre document which was not endorsed by the community at the time and was superseded by legislation in 2010 of Camden township as a heritage conservation area (Mid 2013, March 2015, 28 June 2016 , Appendix B);
    • were not made public (4 June 2014, 3 February 2015, March 2015);
    • must be obtained under GIPA.
  • did not engage the community (including Camden Chamber of Commerce) and accused it of distorting the truth about the works (14 April 2015). The community
  1. has been allowed little or no voice or influence over decisions already made about works in the heritage conservation area (13 June 2014, 20 June 2014, 24 June 2014, 8 July 2014, 10 July 2014, Appendix C, 29 July 2014, 27 August 2014, 3 November 2014 );
  2. is non-accepting of the findings of the “consultation” process which is labelled a “farce” and is accepting of the academic finding that it lacked any meaningful engagement (25 November 2014, 12 December 2014, 16 January 2015, Appendix G);
  3. believes the data sample of community feedback is too small to be representative, and is also non-accepting of the statistics produced, which two independent analyses found to be incorrect (9 April 2015);
  4. does not accept that there is “overwhelming” support for the works (9 April 2015);
  5. has spontaneously risen up in opposition (February 2015, 25 March 2015, 7 April 2015);
  6. does not accept important elements of the “Vision” as reflective of views expressed through the “consultation” process ( April 2015, 14 April 2015);
  7. discounts the Vision as non-evidence based (9 April 2015, 14 April 2015);
  8. calls a public meeting (23 March 2015, 25 March 2015);
  9. requests a moratorium on the works (7 April 2015, 28 April 2015, 1 June 2015, 2 June 2015);
  10. writes an open letter of protest and investigates legal options (May 2015, 14 May 2015, Appendix D);
  11. holds a “Monster Rally” (14 June 2015);
  12. takes to Facebook to share knowledge, vent feelings and sign petition for moratorium on works (February 2015, 9 April 2015, End 2015).
  • acted contrary to the Community Engagement Policy subsequently adopted requiring that community engagement precede decision making (15 May 2015).
  • installed security guards at Council meetings (May 2015).
  • made amendments to the Code of Meeting Practice which are interpreted as further stifling the community voice (19 April 2016, 28 June 2016).
  • would seem to have tried to keep the public at bay by controversial initial omission to the business paper relating to the second stage of Argyle St works (8 December 2015).
  • has not been transparent and accountable about time and budget overruns on the Argyle Street works (27 October 2015, 12 November 2015, End 2015, Appendix E, Weekend 25-26 June 2016).

Decked Car Park

  • promoted a decked carpark and a survey on its fabric without canvassing wider issues or making any heritage assessed design available (November/December 2015);
  • endorsed movement of funds from Narellan parking s94 contributions to build Camden  decked carpark (November/December 2015, 10 May 2016).

Milk Depot Proposal

  • did not notify the wider community about the Milk Depot proposed development;
  • promoted the proposed Milk Depot development which contravenes flood, height and heritage planning controls (29 April 2016, 14 May 2016, 17 May 2016, 18 May 2016, 20 June 2016, 21 June 2016, Appendix F, 27 June 2016);
  • nevertheless expressed concerns about the Milk Depot proposal upon and after meeting with Alan Jones, Mark Latham and community group members (27 June 2016).

Urban Design Framework and foreshadowed amendments to heritage and height planning controls

  • approved the acceptance of a tender from a firm that makes no claim to have heritage expertise:
    • for urban design and streetscape plan for heritage conservation area (after work undertaken in Argyle Street), a main feature of which is its original intact 1836 nineteenth century human scale townscape plan (28 June 2016);
    • to review height and heritage protections of the Heritage Conservation Area, because according to the non-evidenced based “Vision”, and despite the contrary opinion of the Chamber of Commerce they constrain economic activity (10 June 2014, 17 September 2014, 14 April 2015, 28 June 2016);
    • and goes to press claiming that “heritage look to stay” but not addressing above matters (Mid July 2016).

 

 

Last updated 6 August 2016