Jade Jungwirth
The monthly meeting of council on Tuesday was an emotional rollercoaster. There was tension, tears, debate, disagreement and in stark contrast, a celebration and a round of applause.
Items raised during public time included the controversial FOGO bins, a desperate plea for a renewed lease for the local childcare cooperative, a question about land purchased to build a McDonald’s and a citizen concerned about illegal vape sales.
The agenda covered topics ranging from a levee bank in Newstead that won’t be able to prevent flooding to nine houses, the council’s groundbreaking housing trust being assigned a trustee and renaming Campbells Creek to an indigenous name.
The controversial and highly divisive Camp Reserve redevelopment, argued ad nauseam by previous councils over many years, was also back on the agenda – this time as a planning application.
The councillors quickly split into two camps: those who had served previously and the first-timers.
Newcomers, Crs Lucas Maddock, Phillip Walker, Rosalie Hastwell and the mayor Toby Heydon, were on the side of advocating for the heritage values of the property and trying to find alternatives to suit all parties.
Long-termers, Crs Tony Cordy, Matthew Driscoll, Rosie Annear and Bill Maltby, argued that a planning application motion was not the appropriate time for debate about a master plan that had been previously discussed and decided on by two previous councils.
Maddock presented a motion to defer the application to enable exploration of an alternative location for the netball courts and pavilion to minimise heritage impact.
“I’m concerned that the conclusion of the heritage impact statement appears to be predicated on the notion that there are no other feasible locations for the pavilion and netball courts. Despite acknowledging an impact on the heritage of Camp Reserve and environs,” he said.
“Where there are notes in there about it being cost-prohibitive, I’d like to see the costs. How much would it cost to do this project… and could we save some of these heritage values as well?”
This amendment was defeated five votes to two.
Walker then offered an alternative amendment, an attempt at a compromise between the heritage advocates and the sporting clubs. This long amendment essentially proposed to move the netball courts over, move the parking, shrink and reconfigure the oval (still maintaining AFL standards) and save some of the trees.
The altered substantive motion was rejected by the mover and seconder, Crs Annear and Maltby.
Annear argued that the Master Plan was adopted by a previous council in 2020 and a motion in 2023, following community feedback, and that changing an adopted master plan “by stealth” was bad governance.
“I feel very uncomfortable about it,” she said.
“We should not be discussing the master plan; it is not in the spirit of what we are deciding today, and it is not the proper way to make a decision.”
Walker said the amendment was an attempt to preserve some of the flora of the park, heritage trees that were extremely important and to retain some of the original heritage appearance. He referred to the changes as being minor, which Cr Cordy strongly disagreed with, saying that reshaping the oval had already been debated at length by the previous councils.
“As elected councillors, it is our job to question. It is our job to explore these issues, and we need to explore further,” Cr Walker said.
Driscoll said he lived and breathed Camp Reserve for six years and had seen the amendment for the first time just before the meeting.
“I think it is dangerous to be making decisions on the fly, and I don’t accept it,” he said.
A split vote against the amendment resulted in the mayor using his casting vote in favour of the amendment.
In the debate that followed, Cordy said the amendment killed the endorsed Master Plan and referred to it as a “total disaster”.
“It’s a stuff-up and the sporting clubs haven’t been consulted. They don’t support it, they’re never going to support it, and what we have before us now I am not able to support in the reduction of space of the playing surface,” he said.
Among the varied arguments that were presented, Cr Maddock strongly alluded to an unjust decision by a previous council.
“I watched the original 20-20 debate by the previous council, which we had changes to the officer recommendations, then really highly favouring certain user groups of the Camp Reserve to the exclusion of others,” he said.
“What we have is, I think, a proposal that fits the needs and desires of these groups very succinctly and is quite unsatisfying to many others in the community, and it is really not an ideal situation.
“We can do better in this design, and we have the ability to bring more people along.
“If it takes another review of the master plan and another planning application, then so be it. It’s better to do it now, get it popular, and it will have a better chance of getting funding,” he said.
“This is literally our last chance.”
Asked what would happen next if the motion failed, CEO Darren Fuzzard said the officers would bring the matter back to councillors, asking what they would like done about it.
“If the permit application fails, the implications of the master plan and the rework of that is a matter for another day.”
Put to the vote, Crs Annear, Walker and Heydon voted in favour of the amended motion, and Crs Maddock, Driscoll, Cordy and Hastwell voted against.
In a strange twist, no official decision was made regarding next steps, leaving council executives to figure out how to ensure correct procedure. They decided to take a break, confer and tack the item on the back of the meeting as special business. Seven councillors then voted to defer the Camp Reserve planning matter to a future meeting to allow time for council officers to prepare grounds for refusal, with Annear abstaining.