Disadvantaged by council meeting change

On July 8 Baw Baw Shire webpage clearly said due to the Corona 19 it members of the community cannot attend council meetings

We were objectors to a planning permit for a house, shed and works near our business.

An application where the planners had refused. We received an official notice from the shire that we could submit a 500 word objection - as an paper hearing.

We sent in our objections. We contacted the Baw Baw Shire on July 7 to confirm that our letters would be read out. Logged onto the meeting that was live, and the proponents of the application were there live speaking and answering questions from councillors.

We contacted some of the councillors on the night at the meeting, who replied that running of the meeting was in fact open to objectors. We were never informed.

Finally through a search of the Baw Baw Shire, there was a small tick on one section of their Facebook that community members could attend.

Not being Facebook savvy, how would I know to find it there. Why when we were invited to submit out concerns, why weren't we officially informed by either email or phone?

We received an email from Mayor Danny Goss apologising for the lack of advice about this.

He also stated that he thought we would not have made any difference to the councillors’ decision. Is he a clairvoyant? There are two sides to every story and had we been present at that meeting we could have explained why we are objecting.

Everything being equal and fairly run, in a race between two horses, there still can be no certainties.

Kangaroo court at its best.

Thomas Jordan, Longwarry

Scheme than are planning staff. They are, or should be, acting in the public interest, not representing particular interests of constituents. Councillors should not call in applications for the latter reason, either.

John Hart, Warragul $1,000,000 was allocated to shift it 50 metres and restore it. Currently you can hire it through the Baw Baw shire for community meetings etc. It was funded by the Victorian Government.

I think we have enough meeting places as it is without anymore.

Terrence Williamson, Drouin

I write to correct the assertions from Ian Honey (Gaz 7/7) regarding council finances and road upgrades.

Any additional rates received by council goes nowhere near paying for the infrastructure and services needed to provide for new residents. Contrary to Mr Honey’s assertion that “massive bonuses are paid to the shire” I can advise that extra rates would be less than 1 per cent of council’s income.

These new rates would not pay to upgrade one 400m section of Sutton St. They would not pay for one third of a new Early Learning Centre. They would not pay for any new sporting infrastructure – which I surprisingly notice Mr Honey opposes.

Residents of Baw Baw Shire are screaming out for this infrastructure – sentiments not apparently heard by Mr Honey. Rates cannot pay for these necessities alone. Government grants are needed to assist. Even then council is paying the lion’s share of any projects.

And I can advise also that he is incorrect on the issue of the upgrade to Copelands Rd where he asserts that the $2.65m cost “should be provided by developers”.

Bricks to all those people complaining about no hand sanitiser in some stores. Surely you can take the initiative and purchase some for personal use. Why expect the stores to continue supplying. Let’s all take some personal responsibility to fight this pandemic and not rely on others.

I can advise residents that this is exactly where the money is coming from. It is called the Developer Contribution Plan Levy. I am happy to explain how it works should Mr Honey want to hear it.

Before setting out in haste to slam council it might be an idea for Mr Honey to contact me or other councillors first and ask for an explanation. But sometimes it seems it is easier for some people to make wild statements rather than to seek the truth.

Cr Danny Goss, Baw Baw mayor