spreads (26).gif

Blasé or responsible

Dear Beagle Editor,

Have you noticed how when footballers shove each other, the other players not involved come in for a group cuddle?

That’s what ESC are like when someone asks a valid question, they all come in for a huddle to protect the person being asked, instead OF LISTENING TO THE RATEPAYERS WHOM ARE ACTUALLY PAYING THEM.

Ah, so the community were invited to COMMUNITY CONSULTATION for the Batemans Bay claytons pool concept plans, with an overabundance of Staff present, but WHERE WERE THE COUNCILLORS?

Ratepayers paid Consultants to prepare for a one off funding submission that as yet has not been agreed, nor approved and won’t go before Council until next week. The deadline for the application is only a couple of weeks away, which may not allow time for changes.

At a community meeting, one would normally expect to see the plans displayed for perusal, but what was presented is an almost unreadable, on screen slide projection of a couple of minutes, as the Consultant flicked quickly through slides bombarding with hypothetical figures.

So, it appears the Consultants were given a brief of requirements, including requirements of TWO NON APPROVED STRATEGIES for pools and arts that are yet to be completed, and have not been before Council for discussion or approval.

Option one was for a facility crammed onto the current pool/mini golf site, leaving the Freehold Bowls Club site vacant possibly for Developers etc.

During question time it became quite clear that IF the Bay gets a facility, it will get what Council staff have decided.

  • During questions on the concept a request to have the plans put back up on screen was denied

  • Some Perfectly valid questions/concerns were ignored and some people cut off.

Council seems blasé to think they can go and request a bucket load of public funds and decide what to do later.

Overall, a very disappointing session that left more questions unanswered than what it answered. Name and address supplied


COMMENTS : Due to the risks associated with comments from unidentified contributors that expose The Beagle to possible legal actions under the NSW Defamation Act 2005 No 77 anonymous or Nom de Plume comments will not be available unless the author is known to the editor by way of a verified email address or by association.

Others who provide their REAL NAME (first name AND Surname) and a verifiable email address (it won't be published) are invited to comment below. (yes it is a pain but please comply - it would be a  shame to see your comment deleted)

Those contributors KNOWN to us and verified may continue to use their First Name or Nom de plume for ease. The primary need for all of this is due to traceability should a legal action arise.

If you need anonymity email us via our normal or encrypted email accounts

Please note that if you are looking for a previous comment that is no longer visible please contact us.