Mehrtens and Holstein want comprehensive briefing

Peninsula councillors Cr Richard Mehrtens and deputy mayor Cr Chris Holstein are both wanting a comprehensive briefing from council staff before deciding on a course of action for the Ettalong channel.

The other West Ward councillor, Cr Troy Marquart, is currently on leave from his council duties due to an injury.

"A month ago council was presented with a motion that called for the immediate purchase of a super dredge," Cr Mehrtens said.

"The expectation was that the next day Council would go out and purchase a dredge, sight unseen with no budget, with no business plan," he said.

"Council decided on the night we needed more information, wanted to know how much it would cost, what it would look like, whether it was even Council's responsibility to dredge, what the dredge would be doing when it was not dredging the channel.

"We are a new Council and in terms of spending upwards of tens of millions of dollars we need to know what the business plan will look like.

"That staff report will come back to us in the coming weeks and I look forward to voting on a sensible business plan that will resolve the channel problem once and for all."

Cr Mehrtens also restated his Labor party position that the NSW Government was shirking its responsibility to maintain a safe navigation channel at the mouth of Brisbane Water.

"The State Government is not just walking away from dredging our Coastal waterways," he said.

"It is walking away from other waterways that it has always taken responsibility for.

"For instance, this current government has walked away from Port Hacking, which is a port, full of government assets that it has been dredging for 30 years.

"It is emblematic of how this State Government sees dredging, it is a cost shift and the other councillors should see it that way," Cr Mehrtens said.

Cr Holstein said Council needed to explore all available options to ensure it did not end up spending a fortune on equipment that would not solve the channel's ongoing problems.

"There is a still water dredge at The Entrance and hopefully some renovation works are happening on that dredge," Cr Holstein said.

He said he was waiting for confirmation from Council staff that the dredge which belonged to the former Wyong Council was being revitalised.

"If that dredge could be modified to make it more receptive to bigger swells then it might well be the case the dredge could be modified and moved down to Ettalong.

"My belief and that of hydrology experts I have consulted is that we could make the current dredge more viable for open water."

Cr Holstein said he understood that the NSW Government was arguing that Brisbane Water was not a priority location for dredging and so did not qualify for 100 per cent state funding.

"We are entitled to Rescuing Our Waterways funding which is 50-50 funding between Council and State.

"Well I think the NSW Government might need to adjust their legislation or have an argument put to them about why this waterway needs special assistance," he said.

Cr Holstein said he believed Central Coast Council had a strong case for asking the NSW Government to take 100 per cent responsibility for the channel based on the "amount of moorings, private jetties, boat registration and boat licences" from the Brisbane Water area that provided revenue to the State.

Brisbane Water is grouped with the Hawkesbury and Pittwater in terms of state-collected data about recreational boating.

That group of waterways includes 41,000 boats and 103,000 licences.

"Work that out on a yearly registration and we haven't even got to the moorings and what the NSW Lands Dept asks for people's jetties.

"Why don't they create a fund that a small percentage of that revenue would go into every year, that Council could use when the need arises for dredging, or for funding Gross Pollution Traps or improve public wharves without the need to go with cap in hand to the state government.

Other areas, even those on the priority dredging list, have significantly less boat licences and registrations and hence, provide significantly less revenue to the NSW Government.

Botany Bay (Port Hacking), Sydney Harbour, Port Stephens and Newcastle all have less boats registered and less licences than the group of waterways that includes Brisbane Water.

"You've got to evaluate that this is not a level playing field," Cr Holstein said.

He also said the NSW Government's argument that it does not have infrastructure in Brisbane Water and therefore doesn't have to maintain the navigation channels is also incorrect.

"If you go all the way back to the 1950s they build a sea wall at Ettalong and it is still there behind the dunes.

"In 1973 Ettalong point eroded, so the Public Works department put a groyne on Ettalong Point and it is still there.

"In 1979 another big lot of funding was used for waterway infrastructure and then in the 1990s the NSW Government used fill from the Diggers development to nourish the beach.

"If the criteria for 100 per cent funding is the requirement for government infrastructure, there is infrastructure in the area.

"If it is about getting funding, does that infrastructure constitute consideration, if that doesn't let's talk about users of the waterway," he said.

SOURCE:

Interview, 9 Mar 2018

Chris Holstein, Central Coast Council

Interview, 21 Mar 2018

Richard Mehrtens, Central Coast Council

Reporter: Jackie Pearson