Council staff cover up foreshore plans

Gosford Councillor Peter Hale has agreed that the group implementing the Ettalong Beach Foreshore Plan of Management was a "vested interests committee".

He made the statement during a Council site inspection of the Ettalong Beach foreshore.

The first stage of this implementation is occurring in the area that is in front of the Ettalong Beach Club, where Cr Hale is the general manager.

He said that the Ettalong Club had a deed of agreement with Council for $300,000. He said he was on this committee representing the Ettalong Club, not as a councillor, to make sure that the plans included what the club wanted.

Minutes before his statement, Council staff had categorically stated that the group implementing the plan was a "working group within Council", made up only of Council staff and interested councillors.

They refuted the statement previously made by recreation services manager Mr Peter Hickman, that the planning group was a "stakeholders planning committee".

However further questions from community members revealed that three key members of the local business community were representing business interests on this committee.

No-one was able to answer the questions of why there were no community and environmental representatives on this committee, and no independent consultants providing expertise on dune protection.

At this point, the site inspection was hastily ended by deputy mayor Cr McFadyen.

A brief provided to a landscape architect firm by the "vested interests committee" for public land directly in front of the Ettalong Club includes a four metre cycleway and retaining wall.

These structures would destroy dunes and dune vegetation.

This brief contradicts the plan's stated priority to protect the dunes.

The brief also creates improved views and improved access directly in front of the newly-built Ettalong Club.

A Council officer at this meeting conceded that the current plans were a departure from the Council-endorsed plan of management, and so would need to go back to Council for approval.

Six months ago, a request by a community member to Council's general manager for information about the process being used to implement this plan was denied.

The response said that it "was not possible to provide an outline of the implementation process" and that "public consultation would occur at the appropriate times as funding and priorities allow".

It became clear at the on-site meeting that Council staff were not using accepted governance standards, and that community and environmental interests deliberately have been excluded.

Ongoing attempts have been made by Council staff to conceal the control of this process by vested interests.

Such a process is occurring in a climate where, at the time community input is allowed, the staff culture and procedure is to rebut, ignore or override this input.

Shirley Hotchkiss, Umina