Grapevine        

Honey, they’re shrinking our industries!

The resource for our local Honey industry, especially Leatherwood, is under threat. Many jobs are at risk; New Zealand is planting Leatherwood; will we have to buy our famous Honey from them in the future? Too many Leatherwoods and other 'minor' species are chipped or burnt as waste. Shouldn’t orchardists be up in arms about the threat of reduced pollination to their industry? Who is doing the unsustainable damage?

          Hardware Holster         

Council Youth Activity-Health Officers developed, with the aid of local youth and Rate/Taxpayers, a ‘Sexual Health Pack for 14-25’ called the ‘Hardware Holster’ with the slogan ‘Don’t use your tool without it’. No one denies that there are problems with teen-age pregnancy in the Huon Valley, as there are everywhere, but does that justify spending large amounts of Rate and Tax payer monies on the development and maintenance of a project that focuses on boys, some under-aged, and hands condoms around? The topic is of community concern and we published this excerpt of a letter (one of several) sent to us;

"The obvious risk to Council, and therefore Ratepayers, is in the involvement of the affairs of parents of under-aged youth and the supply, possibly without their consent, of items that may be seen as encouraging promiscuity. It is fair enough to ask for evidence that this project will prove to be better value for money compared to the projects State Health and Education Departments already have available -with an authority to distribute wisely."    Names supplied

We were invited to a youth forum and received several replies. To make a long story short, condoms are not given without guidance and parent consent is sought were possible. We are now in support of this project and ask that council better communicates with community groups and not just do as one pleases  huonratepayers@yahoo.com.au   http://www.huonvalley.tas.gov.au/

          2004 Local Government Act Review (cont)         

Code of councilor conduct changes are (simply) to have one councilor (and a member of the community chosen by council) to counsel the offending councilor. If that doesn't work, the matter is brought to the Local Government Association of Tasmania (with loyalties to council) and that is where it ends. The disturbing item is that charges to complain will be levied -no matter if you can afford or not. HRA suggests that Local Government ulterior motives are to discourage complaints against 'mainstream' councillors, especially by the public, and to keep complaints at council level (less work for them). More disturbingly, to make it lawful to persuade (encourage or intimidate) a divisive councilor to fall in line with mainstream councilors.

Complaints against council are to be dealt with by a council employee with appeals to the mayor, followed by the general manager with snippets of the Law to help them dismiss 'trivial complaints' like rate and Infrastructure relief for some businesses at the whims of GM and one or two others, bad tap water or dangerous pot-holes. Valid complaints, according to GM, are to be recorded and reported to council twice a year. Councils are given 'User Pay' authority to charge people for copies of documents many would suggest are public property in the first place. Hindering or discouraging public access to documents is suspicious to say the least and we suggest that council, and Local Government, makes documents available free of charge to community groups.

Code for Tendering and Contracting gives councils more power to negotiate major deals with other councils, government agencies, authorities or associations with allegiances to government without having to tender publicly. General managers can still be given discretionary powers by councilors to purchase major items of goods or services exceeding $55,000 ($255,000 in the Huon Valley) without further scrutiny by councilors in a public meeting. Perhaps some would argue that this is 'good management' but HRA is worried that such unbridled access to power makes one blind -and history proves that to be true (power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely).

          Council Meetings Oct 13 and Nov 10         

A clearly upset member of our community gave council heat about, what he described as, unwarranted trespass on his property by council officers. Moot replies from the Chair and a comment from the general manager that 'for legal reasons we can't discuss this in open council' and offered to see him in his office.  We heard of similar 'invitations' and that complainants are then treated as if 'caught smoking in the boys room'. We have been told that this is 'good management' and not an attempt at keeping issues away from the public and sympathetic councilors. The same community member again confronted council in October, this time with an accusation that GM used his powers to obtain damaging personal information which was then used to bully and intimidate him. He refused an order to sit (woof) and council was suspended till police removed him. GM promised to explain the situation in closed council.... wonder why. To make a long story short, HRA will support this member if he wishes to take his complaint further.

A Geeveston member called HRA about safety concerns re- (reticulated) tap-water looking like mud. We helped collect information and understand that button grass tannin, road works and forestry operations are the likely cause, and that Council is probably meeting minimum health standards. The fact remains that council is selling a poor quality product and is obliged to, at least, filter the water. Similar situations exist in Dover and Franklin were people are charged flat rates for poor quality water which, at times, is not even available due to demand. Several residents of higher lying properties (Port Huon) had to install expensive back-up systems, at their expense, while council is unsympathetic to requests for reimbursement or reduced (backdated) water charges. A water metering initiative by council may reduce demand by ~10% but that is like shifting the deckchairs on the Titanic and will only delay the inevitable. Council has to take action to protect catchment areas from logging and chemical leaching, replace an ailing reticulation system and deliver more reliable 'good value for money' water to all residents. HRA is in the process of applying for grants to move things along, contact us if you like to help huonratepayers@yahoo.com.au

          Workbox         

Council's 'Elevated Workbox' won Tasmanian and National awards (by councils for councils). Of course HRA recognises the considerable merits in this 'innovation', however, a reality check quickly exposes a few downsides;

·        Large amounts of ratepayers money were, and more money will be spent marketing the workbox. This is a 'no-risk' venture for council while ratepayers foot the bill.

·        Private engineering firms market similar products.

·        The large, cumbersome and heavy excavator used to manoeuvre the Workbox can not be used on rickety wooden bridges -and they are most in need of maintenance

·        The workbox can only be used on the sides of a bridge -the excavator arm can't fold far under the machine itself. Digging an access through the embankment is asking for trouble at a later stage

·        The cost of floating a large excavator, idle time of the operator and that all traffic has to stop (see picture in Cygnet and Channel Classifieds, issue Nov 25) takes more gloss off this innovation and we wonder if it is worth the trouble when a scaffold or a good ladder can do the trick.

          HRA Meeting Nov 25         

The meeting was interesting, to say the least, with several new members signing up -thank you. Issues and comments came from far and wide and here are some of the highlights;

·        Lack of clarity in council processes -eg, landowners to clear council owned lands of weeds?!

·        Blind support for forestry to the detriment of other small industries

·        Too many councilors happy to be told what to think and how to vote by a few dominant peers as dictated by bureaucrats

·        Minimum of openness at council meetings, little transparency, decisions seem to be made beforehand

·        Council hesitant to acknowledge good new business ideas, lacks vision, obstructive to small business

·        A sample of Geeveston tap-water was shown looking like mud -and amazement that locals tolerate it!

·        High rates for mediocre services -and locals dismissive of 'newcomer' complaints

·        Having to pay for wheelie bins but also at the dump (double dip-tip)

·        Council spending too much on itself with bureaucracy and personal comforts (high wages, new cars for managers, too many sick days)

·        Council continues to dominate their Cygnet 'Township Development Committee' (as was predicted in HRA newsletters). Time will tell if the wisdom of all residents (not only those who have been selected by council to serve on their Committee), will be recognised.