Bit of a strange meeting tonight.
I blogged about the parking policy already, the councillors on SGS all unanimously voted to approve the recommendation, before them, now strangely the councillor who chairs SGS tonight at full council tonight made a motion to defer the issue for several reasons.
This in itself is got a criticism it is a positive thing that someone can change their mind and think the issue needs more discussion.
The question comes how did it get passed SGS in the 1st place? The questions or issues raise where asked by residents and rate payers who came to speak in public question time. They spoke of fairness and questioned the structure of the policy.
What also came up was why public comments from the survey weren’t include in the attachments, some weak ass savings paper issue was given, that’s not what the agenda said as it used the word confidential as no trees were saved by not digitally supplying it.
Looks like council is realizing how unpopular their anti-car crusade has become and will look for a new angle to spin the policy. The whole argument that more residents in town will take up the car parking bays from business is really crap.
- If this was a real concern why is council selling off car parking areas?
- Why does council not do what most other councils do, require developers to supply parking for its developments, more people in Freo for residential or business, needs developers to supply suitable ADDITIONAL parking, no cost to rate payers, plenty of street parking for the status quo?
- The real issue is they seem to have an anti-car agenda and see this as an opportunity with this policy for their social engineering ideology and not as true representation for rate payer and resident’s wishes or concerns?
It’s amazing the word confidential seems to flow pretty quick lately at council, tonight it was used for a public engagement issue, classic right, confidential public comments, I’m still laughing. Another issue for council business SGS and 504-10, warrawee preferred provider. The other was corrections to the last ordinary meeting. Not sure what it was but it seems a bit sloppy to have nothing in hard copy to read before u agree to it officially at a formal meeting? Oh well its confidential anyway right?
One thing we can be sure about when the word “confidential” is used the word transparency is not!