Cr Heidi Seitz seconded this motion as she has recently purchased solar (electricity) photovoltaic system. This allowed some good discussion on the topic in the chamber, however the motion was not carried after all. A gross feed-in tariff would mean that households generating their own solar electricity would receive financial return from the state government for whatever they produce, rather than for what they produce but don't use (net feed-in tariff).
A gross feed-in tariff would help make solar PV much more attractive to more households, especially those on lower incomes. Such a gross tariff may also subsequently kick off our domestic renewables industry (as has happened in Germany and other European countries).
Geraldine
To: Chief Executive Officer
Please note that it is my intention to propose the following motion at the Ordinary Meeting of the Council to be held on 24/2/09
Subject: Feed in Tariff Scheme
Motion
That Council
a) write to the Premier, John Brumby and the Minister for Energy, Peter Batchelor, expressing disappointment with the recently announced Feed in Tariff Scheme that will only provide financial return on excess energy fed into the grid, that such a scheme provides minimal and uncertain financial return and does little for the development of the solar industry in Victoria. Further to that Council supports a Feed in Tariff Scheme that is based on Gross Production Metering Systems, which has a mandated price over a guaranteed time period to provide certainty for investment and provides fair financial returns to solar panel owners and does not discriminate against families, the elderly and those at home during the daytime (home businesses) who consume electricity during the day.
b) Request the MAV as a matter of urgency to vigorously pursue the resolution passed by Victorian Councils at the MAV State Council meeting in May 2008 that 'The MAV call on the State govt to set the feed in tariff for small scale photovoltaic and wind generated electricity at 60c/kwh for the gross amount of electricity generated, rather than the net amount after deducting on-site usage
Tuesday, February 24, 2009
Development Assessment Committees (DACs)
This motion did not get seconded. Minister for Planning Justin Madden attempted to set up Development Assessment Committees to strip planning controls from councils, whilst wanting councils to pay for the running of these DACs. The State Government is continually saying how it wants to support local government. The DACs, however, reduces the opportunity for local communities to have a saying in what sort of development they want in the city they live in.
Geraldine
To: Chief Executive Officer
Please note that it is my intention to propose the following motion at the Ordinary Meeting of the Council to be held on 24/2/09
Subject: Development Assessment Committees
Motion
That Council writes to Premier John Brumby and Minister for Planning Justin Madden, congratulating the State Government on dumping the DACs
Background
The State Government proposal to introduce legislation to establish Development Assessment Committees would have stripped local governments of planning powers and given planning authority to a body of unelected, unrepresentative and unaccountable people behind closed doors.
Critical to this initiative to fast-track developments by establishing DACs, make non-government schools and social housing exempt from a planning permit and for the Minister to become the Responsible Authority for these projects is the abolition of appeal rights for residents and ratepayers –a denial of democracy in our local planning system.
While some of these actions may not directly affect our community right now, what it signals is a Government apparently intent on incrementally eroding democracy in the planning system, removing from the process the level of government which knows its local municipality and planning issues best.
Geraldine
To: Chief Executive Officer
Please note that it is my intention to propose the following motion at the Ordinary Meeting of the Council to be held on 24/2/09
Subject: Development Assessment Committees
Motion
That Council writes to Premier John Brumby and Minister for Planning Justin Madden, congratulating the State Government on dumping the DACs
Background
The State Government proposal to introduce legislation to establish Development Assessment Committees would have stripped local governments of planning powers and given planning authority to a body of unelected, unrepresentative and unaccountable people behind closed doors.
Critical to this initiative to fast-track developments by establishing DACs, make non-government schools and social housing exempt from a planning permit and for the Minister to become the Responsible Authority for these projects is the abolition of appeal rights for residents and ratepayers –a denial of democracy in our local planning system.
While some of these actions may not directly affect our community right now, what it signals is a Government apparently intent on incrementally eroding democracy in the planning system, removing from the process the level of government which knows its local municipality and planning issues best.
Community Meeting to address key issues in the Ombudsmans' report
This motion did not get seconded. It seems that Brimbank councillors are not interested in allowing people in this community to discuss their genuine and heart-felt concerns about the behaviours described in the Ombudsman Victoria report and the recommendations that the Ombudsman has made. People living in Brimbank haev been failed by their local reps year in year out and their local services have been affected by entrenched poor governance and abuse of power. Some of this has now been independently documented but my fellow councillors in the chamber will not afford us an opportunity to talk through, as a community, how we're best going to confront underlying problems and have confidence that we can get past all this.
Geraldine
To: Chief Executive Officer
Please note that it is my intention to propose the following motion at the Ordinary Meeting of the Council to be held on 24/2/09
Subject: Community Meeting
Motion
That Council hold a community meeting to discuss the key points arising from the Ombudsman Victoria Investigation into the alleged improper conduct of councillors at Brimbank City Council.
Background
The Ombudsman Victoria recently released report into Brimbank council has created much community concern.
While the meeting on the 18th June will enable Council to demonstrate what it is doing to meet the recommendations of the report it does not allow the community a chance to discuss the key points, its concerns, or offer an opportunity for the community to discuss what it would like to see happen to ensure confidence in the democratic process.
Purpose
The aims of the community meeting would be to:
Provide an overview of the key points in the OV report
Provide an opportunity for questions and discussionProvide some suggestions for positive/constructive ways forward
Geraldine
To: Chief Executive Officer
Please note that it is my intention to propose the following motion at the Ordinary Meeting of the Council to be held on 24/2/09
Subject: Community Meeting
Motion
That Council hold a community meeting to discuss the key points arising from the Ombudsman Victoria Investigation into the alleged improper conduct of councillors at Brimbank City Council.
Background
The Ombudsman Victoria recently released report into Brimbank council has created much community concern.
While the meeting on the 18th June will enable Council to demonstrate what it is doing to meet the recommendations of the report it does not allow the community a chance to discuss the key points, its concerns, or offer an opportunity for the community to discuss what it would like to see happen to ensure confidence in the democratic process.
Purpose
The aims of the community meeting would be to:
Provide an overview of the key points in the OV report
Provide an opportunity for questions and discussionProvide some suggestions for positive/constructive ways forward
Gambling - electronic gaming machines (pokies)
This is another motion that did not yield a seconder. Meanwhile Brimbank has reached number one in pokies losses in the state. Pokies (electronic gaming machines) continue to destry families and cause teerrible financial hardship. One mechanism Council can utilise to make running a pokies business for this sort of inhuman profit in Brimbank less attractive is to increase the taxes we demand from them.
Geraldine
To: Chief Executive Officer
Please note that it is my intention to propose the following motion at the Ordinary Meeting of the Council to be held on 24/2/09
Subject: Differential Rate
Motion
That council adopt a differential rate for commercial gaming
properties and that it be levied at twice the commercial industrial rate.
Background
Council recognises that gambling is a legitimate form of leisure and entertainment. Council also acknowledges that gambling can have adverse consequences and seeks to encourage responsible gambling.
Council's Gambling Policy Statement and Gambling Action Plan 2006-2009, details Council's ongoing responses and direct actions that arise from the Gambling Policy.
Electronic Gaming Machines (EGMs) were introduced in Victoria in 1992.
According to the 2006 Action Plan Brimbank currently has 953 EGMs in various locations throughout the municipality. Over the past decade gambling expenditure has risen significantly and community attitudes towards gambling have changed.
Gaming is a significant community problem in Brimbank and affects the entire community, not just problem gamblers. Gambling related problems are mainly associated with Electronic Gaming Machines (EGMs). Brimbank is ranked third on the SEIFA scale of disadvantage in Victoria .Brimbank has more than 950 EGMs and despite a low density rank of 7.3 EGMs per 1000 adults, gaming losses are significantly higher than areas with higher machine densities and are now the most severe of any municipality in the state.
One of the key actions of Council's plan is to:
Integrate the Gambling Policy position into all key Council policies, plans and strategies.
A differential rate levied on this sort of antisocial activity would be one method of integrating Council’s policy position into our strategies and making it less attractive for venues to profit from EGM's in our municipality.
Geraldine
To: Chief Executive Officer
Please note that it is my intention to propose the following motion at the Ordinary Meeting of the Council to be held on 24/2/09
Subject: Differential Rate
Motion
That council adopt a differential rate for commercial gaming
properties and that it be levied at twice the commercial industrial rate.
Background
Council recognises that gambling is a legitimate form of leisure and entertainment. Council also acknowledges that gambling can have adverse consequences and seeks to encourage responsible gambling.
Council's Gambling Policy Statement and Gambling Action Plan 2006-2009, details Council's ongoing responses and direct actions that arise from the Gambling Policy.
Electronic Gaming Machines (EGMs) were introduced in Victoria in 1992.
According to the 2006 Action Plan Brimbank currently has 953 EGMs in various locations throughout the municipality. Over the past decade gambling expenditure has risen significantly and community attitudes towards gambling have changed.
Gaming is a significant community problem in Brimbank and affects the entire community, not just problem gamblers. Gambling related problems are mainly associated with Electronic Gaming Machines (EGMs). Brimbank is ranked third on the SEIFA scale of disadvantage in Victoria .Brimbank has more than 950 EGMs and despite a low density rank of 7.3 EGMs per 1000 adults, gaming losses are significantly higher than areas with higher machine densities and are now the most severe of any municipality in the state.
One of the key actions of Council's plan is to:
Integrate the Gambling Policy position into all key Council policies, plans and strategies.
A differential rate levied on this sort of antisocial activity would be one method of integrating Council’s policy position into our strategies and making it less attractive for venues to profit from EGM's in our municipality.
Destruction of Melbourne's Green Wedge
Cr Marion Martin seconded this motion. Cr Martin currently holds the Council portfolio for sustainable environments. The motion was not carried. The green wedges are the lungs of Melbourne and its been incredibly difficult to protect what we have left. The expansion of the Urban Growth Boundary allows open slather development between Brimbank and Melton (which began as a satellite town), without any consideration of the impact on our rainfall, grasslands, schools, public transport, public housing, ecological sustainable design, cycling and walkability etc. For so many reasons this is just a short-sighted move that will further exacerbate the damage to Melbourne's diminishing natural assets.
Geraldine
To: Chief Executive Officer
Please note that it is my intention to propose the following motion at the Ordinary Meeting of the Council to be held on 24/2/09
Subject: Destruction of Melbourne’s Green Wedges
Motion
That Council writes to Premier John Brumby and Minister for Planning Justin Madden, condemning the State Government plans for a green wedge land grab of nearly 23,000 ha to be handed to property developers, following the December Melbourne @ 5 Million report.
Background
The State Government is expected to release the plans in June, which will show a draft expanded Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) around new growth areas. These plans pose the most serious threat to the green wedges since the Bracks Government introduced an UGB to protect them in 2002 and possibly since the green wedges were introduced by the Hamer Government in 1971.
The green wedges are, as successive premiers and planning ministers have said, the lungs of Melbourne. With a city already gasping for breath, Melbourne's lungs are about to be choked with urban sprawl. This government land grab will be a cancer, not just in the proposed new growth corridors but in surrounding areas, where developers are expected to buy up environmentally and agriculturally significant grasslands.
Brimbank Council calls on the government to call off this plan for gross unnecessary destruction of the environment and of fertile farmland which provides food for Melbourne. It contradicts:
· promises by the former Planning Minister Rob Hulls that the 11,500 ha of land taken from the green wedges after the Government’s Smart Growth Committee process in 2005 would last until 2030;
· promises by the present Planning Minister Madden not to undermine his predecessors’ achievements,
· recommendations by last year’s Melbourne 2030 Audit group (accepted by State Government) that no further change to the UGB should be considered for at least five years.
· Letters from Planning Minister Madden in November 2008 saying the UGB was not under review.
This destruction is unnecessary as analysis by Jenni Bundy of the Green Wedge Protection Group demonstrates that the Government has miscalculated its land supply figures and that there is enough land within the current UGB to last until 2030. Increasing the development density in urban growth areas would also make housing more affordable. Instead, the Government is prepared to hand green wedge land that makes Melbourne a liveable city to developers for McMansions and suburban sprawl and the destruction of our precious remnant grasslands.
Geraldine
To: Chief Executive Officer
Please note that it is my intention to propose the following motion at the Ordinary Meeting of the Council to be held on 24/2/09
Subject: Destruction of Melbourne’s Green Wedges
Motion
That Council writes to Premier John Brumby and Minister for Planning Justin Madden, condemning the State Government plans for a green wedge land grab of nearly 23,000 ha to be handed to property developers, following the December Melbourne @ 5 Million report.
Background
The State Government is expected to release the plans in June, which will show a draft expanded Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) around new growth areas. These plans pose the most serious threat to the green wedges since the Bracks Government introduced an UGB to protect them in 2002 and possibly since the green wedges were introduced by the Hamer Government in 1971.
The green wedges are, as successive premiers and planning ministers have said, the lungs of Melbourne. With a city already gasping for breath, Melbourne's lungs are about to be choked with urban sprawl. This government land grab will be a cancer, not just in the proposed new growth corridors but in surrounding areas, where developers are expected to buy up environmentally and agriculturally significant grasslands.
Brimbank Council calls on the government to call off this plan for gross unnecessary destruction of the environment and of fertile farmland which provides food for Melbourne. It contradicts:
· promises by the former Planning Minister Rob Hulls that the 11,500 ha of land taken from the green wedges after the Government’s Smart Growth Committee process in 2005 would last until 2030;
· promises by the present Planning Minister Madden not to undermine his predecessors’ achievements,
· recommendations by last year’s Melbourne 2030 Audit group (accepted by State Government) that no further change to the UGB should be considered for at least five years.
· Letters from Planning Minister Madden in November 2008 saying the UGB was not under review.
This destruction is unnecessary as analysis by Jenni Bundy of the Green Wedge Protection Group demonstrates that the Government has miscalculated its land supply figures and that there is enough land within the current UGB to last until 2030. Increasing the development density in urban growth areas would also make housing more affordable. Instead, the Government is prepared to hand green wedge land that makes Melbourne a liveable city to developers for McMansions and suburban sprawl and the destruction of our precious remnant grasslands.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)