The decision of MidCoast Council to endorse the financial strategy for the move to Taree and consult the community on its planned relocation followed heated debate from councillors at the October meeting.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
The Taree council chambers were attended by about 20 members of the public, who engaged in conversation with councillors before the meeting commenced.
Resident, Edward Harvey made a submission to councillors in opposition of the recommendation to endorse the strategy.
Mr Harvey said the lack of transparency that had surrounded the process thus far was not in the public interest.
“Only now has community consultation been brought up, there has been a lack of opportunity for the concerned members of the public to get answers,” he said.
Speaking for the recommendation, Councillor Len Roberts emphasised what was being approved was the decision to exhibit the plan to the community.
“After this consultation period, the draft plan will come back to us for consideration, we are not approving or rejecting it here today,” he said.
Cr Peter Epov spoke against the recommendation, saying council needed to “get this right so it is something the community can be proud of”, adding the design had not been “future-proofed.”
Cr David Keegan moved an amendment to defer the decision until a peer review had been completed.
“The peer review could uncover shortfalls,” he said, “I don’t want to vote on this until we know the strategy is the best value for money.”
“We need to move forward,” Cr Brad Christensen argued against the amendment. He continued, saying it had been discussed in previous workshops that the peer review could happen at the same time as the community consultation.
Cr Epov argued for the recommendation, saying council should “do it once and get it right.”
Cr Katheryn Smith spoke against the amendment, saying she was reluctant to push back the community consultation into the Christmas period.
The amendment was lost and Cr Epov moved a new amendment, suggesting the engagement strategy be extended from six weeks to three months. The amendment was seconded by Cr Jan McWilliams.
Cr Epov argued there was not a budget for the engagement strategy in place.
Cr Roberts spoke against the amendment, agreeing with Cr Smith’s reluctance to have the consultation period over Christmas.
The amendment was lost, and the original motion, moved by Cr Troy Fowler and seconded by Cr Roberts was carried with a 7-4 majority.
While you're with us…
Did you know the Manning River Times is now offering breaking news alerts and a weekly email newsletter? Keep up-to-date with all the local news: sign up here.
