Group's status changes again

First there were denials that there was a group planning what was to happen to the public land directly in front of the Ettalong Club.

Then when the existence of this planning group was admitted, it was called the Stakeholders' Planning Committee, although only some "stakeholders" were on it.

Then it was "just a working group within Council", was not and never had been a Stakeholders' Planning Committee.

At this point community members asked councillors and Council staff whether Debra and Matthew Wales attended the meetings of this "working group within Council".

The answer was "yes". These two are not Council staff nor councillors.

They represent particular business interests.

So five minutes after Council staff assured the public that it was "just a working group within Council", Cr Peter Hale agreed with my suggestion that it was instead "the Vested Interests Committee".

He said that he attended these meetings, not as a councillor, but to represent the interests of the Ettalong Club.

He said the Club had a $300,000 Deed of Agreement with Council to redevelop the Ettalong Beach Foreshore and he was there to ensure the Club's interests were met.

Since the publication in this paper of these revelations, this planning group appears to have become an "information sharing forum", according to Mayor Cr Laurie Maher.

At the most recent meeting of this "forum", Council engineering staff announced what they proposed to do in this area.

These proposals ignored advice from appointed consultants and their own environmental staff.

It's no surprise that these plans, and the process by which they have come about, are the very actions community members have been challenging for over a year now.

These plans require the destruction of dunes and dune vegetation.

They contravene a stated priority of the Council-endorsed Ettalong Beach Foreshore Plan of Management, to protect the dunes and dune vegetation.

These plans fly in the face of expert environmental advice and best practice.

If individuals destroy trees over three metres in this area, they are subject to fines of up to $1.1 million under the NSW EPA Act.

But it seems Council is immune from this legislation.

Not only that, but you can use Council funds to finance this destruction of public assets.

What role has Council staff played in the process used to come up with these plans? Have subtle or overt pressures been applied to them in carrying out their duties, in a way that compromises their duty to serve the public with impartiality?

It is interesting to contrast the establishment and operation of this Ettalong Beach Foreshore advisory group with that of other Council advisory groups.

With these other groups, a process has been advertised and followed, so that at least there has been the appearance of fair play, of proper community representation and consultation.

Shirley Hotchkiss, Umina