โฝ๏ธ ๐ข๐๐๐ฐ๐ผ๐บ๐ฒ ๐ผ๐ณ ๐๐ ๐๐ฟ๐ฎ๐ผ๐ฟ๐ฑ๐ถ๐ป๐ฎ๐ฟ๐ ๐ ๐ฒ๐ฒ๐๐ถ๐ป๐ด ๐ผ๐ณ ๐๐ผ๐๐ป๐ฐ๐ถ๐น – ๐ก๐ผ๐ฟ๐บ๐ฎ๐ป ๐๐ฟ๐ถ๐ณ๐ณ๐ถ๐๐ต๐ ๐ข๐๐ฎ๐น – ๐ญ๐ฒ ๐ ๐ฎ๐ฟ๐ฐ๐ต ๐ฎ๐ฌ๐ฎ๐ฏ
In short, Norman Griffiths Oval to proceed but with minimal further consultation.
In the corporate world, decisions are usually made in a careful and considered manner. If there are four options on the table, then all four options are considered simultaneously with their relative strengths and weaknesses compared against each other. The governing body discusses then decides which of the four options to choose.
In Local Government, the Code of Meeting practices requires decisions to be made in a very different manner. Motions are considered and voted on one at a time, and depending on luck of the draw, sequencing of motions / amendments, and the chairperson it results in not all options being considered or debated by the council. This does, at times, lead to suboptimal decision making and results.
At last nightโs council meeting we had four proposals (or options). The third proposal was the one that became โthe motionโ and was voted on, and Iโm disappointed that the first and the fourth proposal never had the opportunity to be voted on.
๐ข๐ฟ๐ถ๐ด๐ถ๐ป๐ฎ๐น ๐ ๐ผ๐๐ถ๐ผ๐ป (๐ฃ๐ฟ๐ผ๐ฝ๐ผ๐๐ฎ๐น ๐ญ): ๐๐ฟ ๐ ๐ง๐ฎ๐๐น๐ผ๐ฟ
๐ง Construction of Norman Griffiths Oval to continue as scheduled
โ Further consultation with community groups and NPWS to explicitly occur, and inform potential design change
๐ข No opportunity to vote, due to local government meeting procedures
๐๐ถ๐ฟ๐๐ ๐๐บ๐ฒ๐ป๐ฑ๐บ๐ฒ๐ป๐ (๐ฃ๐ฟ๐ผ๐ฝ๐ผ๐๐ฎ๐น ๐ฎ): ๐๐ฟ ๐๐ฎ๐
๐ Construction of Norman Griffiths Oval to be put on hold
โ Further consultation with National Parks and Wildlife Service (NPWS) to explicitly occur
๐ณ๏ธ Voted on but defeated 2 vs 7
๐ฆ๐ฒ๐ฐ๐ผ๐ป๐ฑ ๐๐บ๐ฒ๐ป๐ฑ๐บ๐ฒ๐ป๐ (๐ฃ๐ฟ๐ผ๐ฝ๐ผ๐๐ฎ๐น ๐ฏ): ๐๐ฟ ๐ฃ๐ฒ๐๐๐ฒ๐๐
๐ง Construction of Norman Griffiths Oval to continue as scheduled
โ๏ธ Consultation with NPWS not mentioned, but I will be driving it behind the scenes
๐ณ๏ธ Voted on 5 vs 4 and became โthe motionโ
๐ณ๏ธ As โthe motionโ it succeeded 6 vs 3
๐๐ผ๐ฟ๐ฒ๐๐ต๐ฎ๐ฑ๐ผ๐๐ฒ๐ฑ ๐๐บ๐ฒ๐ป๐ฑ๐บ๐ฒ๐ป๐ (๐ฃ๐ฟ๐ผ๐ฝ๐ผ๐๐ฎ๐น ๐ฐ): ๐๐ฟ ๐ก๐ด๐ฎ๐ถ
๐ง Construction of Norman Griffiths Oval to continue as scheduled
โ Further consultation with NPWS to explicitly occur
โฐ Further update on NPWS endorsement scheduled for April council meeting
๐ข No opportunity to vote, due to local government meeting procedures
Iโm not comfortable with local government process that permits only one option to be considered at a time. It leads to suboptimal outcomes. But it is what it is and I donโt see these rules changing anytime soon.
I do wish that there would have been the chance to vote on Proposal 1 and Proposal 4. Both of these options strived to deliver the project without further delay but while also lifting community engagement beyond minimal statutory obligations and towards best practice (or community standards). In fact, a lot of the drama and grief that arose in the last two weeks could easily have been avoided had relevant stakeholders been more thoroughly engaged last year. I wouldnโt be surprised if there are further conversations about perceived gaps in community engagement in the coming months.
But given that Proposal 3 is what we ended up with, it means that the Norman Griffiths Oval will proceed as currently scheduled and we expect completion in mid November.
โฝ๏ธ ๐ข๐๐๐ฐ๐ผ๐บ๐ฒ ๐ผ๐ณ ๐๐ ๐๐ฟ๐ฎ๐ผ๐ฟ๐ฑ๐ถ๐ป๐ฎ๐ฟ๐ ๐ ๐ฒ๐ฒ๐๐ถ๐ป๐ด ๐ผ๐ณ ๐๐ผ๐๐ป๐ฐ๐ถ๐น – ๐ก๐ผ๐ฟ๐บ๐ฎ๐ป ๐๐ฟ๐ถ๐ณ๐ณ๐ถ๐๐ต๐ ๐ข๐๐ฎ๐น – ๐ญ๐ฒ ๐ ๐ฎ๐ฟ๐ฐ๐ต ๐ฎ๐ฌ๐ฎ๐ฏ
In short, Norman Griffiths Oval to proceed but with minimal further consultation.
In the corporate world, decisions are usually made in a careful and considered manner. If there are four options on the table, then all four options are considered simultaneously with their relative strengths and weaknesses compared against each other. The governing body discusses then decides which of the four options to choose.
In Local Government, the Code of Meeting practices requires decisions to be made in a very different manner. Motions are considered and voted on one at a time, and depending on luck of the draw, sequencing of motions / amendments, and the chairperson it results in not all options being considered or debated by the council. This does, at times, lead to suboptimal decision making and results.
At last nightโs council meeting we had four proposals (or options). The third proposal was the one that became โthe motionโ and was voted on, and Iโm disappointed that the first and the fourth proposal never had the opportunity to be voted on.
๐ข๐ฟ๐ถ๐ด๐ถ๐ป๐ฎ๐น ๐ ๐ผ๐๐ถ๐ผ๐ป (๐ฃ๐ฟ๐ผ๐ฝ๐ผ๐๐ฎ๐น ๐ญ): ๐๐ฟ ๐ ๐ง๐ฎ๐๐น๐ผ๐ฟ
๐ง Construction of Norman Griffiths Oval to continue as scheduled
โ Further consultation with community groups and NPWS to explicitly occur, and inform potential design change
๐ข No opportunity to vote, due to local government meeting procedures
๐๐ถ๐ฟ๐๐ ๐๐บ๐ฒ๐ป๐ฑ๐บ๐ฒ๐ป๐ (๐ฃ๐ฟ๐ผ๐ฝ๐ผ๐๐ฎ๐น ๐ฎ): ๐๐ฟ ๐๐ฎ๐
๐ Construction of Norman Griffiths Oval to be put on hold
โ Further consultation with National Parks and Wildlife Service (NPWS) to explicitly occur
๐ณ๏ธ Voted on but defeated 2 vs 7
๐ฆ๐ฒ๐ฐ๐ผ๐ป๐ฑ ๐๐บ๐ฒ๐ป๐ฑ๐บ๐ฒ๐ป๐ (๐ฃ๐ฟ๐ผ๐ฝ๐ผ๐๐ฎ๐น ๐ฏ): ๐๐ฟ ๐ฃ๐ฒ๐๐๐ฒ๐๐
๐ง Construction of Norman Griffiths Oval to continue as scheduled
โ๏ธ Consultation with NPWS not mentioned, but I will be driving it behind the scenes
๐ณ๏ธ Voted on 5 vs 4 and became โthe motionโ
๐ณ๏ธ As โthe motionโ it succeeded 6 vs 3
๐๐ผ๐ฟ๐ฒ๐๐ต๐ฎ๐ฑ๐ผ๐๐ฒ๐ฑ ๐๐บ๐ฒ๐ป๐ฑ๐บ๐ฒ๐ป๐ (๐ฃ๐ฟ๐ผ๐ฝ๐ผ๐๐ฎ๐น ๐ฐ): ๐๐ฟ ๐ก๐ด๐ฎ๐ถ
๐ง Construction of Norman Griffiths Oval to continue as scheduled
โ Further consultation with NPWS to explicitly occur
โฐ Further update on NPWS endorsement scheduled for April council meeting
๐ข No opportunity to vote, due to local government meeting procedures
Iโm not comfortable with local government process that permits only one option to be considered at a time. It leads to suboptimal outcomes. But it is what it is and I donโt see these rules changing anytime soon.
I do wish that there would have been the chance to vote on Proposal 1 and Proposal 4. Both of these options strived to deliver the project without further delay but while also lifting community engagement beyond minimal statutory obligations and towards best practice (or community standards). In fact, a lot of the drama and grief that arose in the last two weeks could easily have been avoided had relevant stakeholders been more thoroughly engaged last year. I wouldnโt be surprised if there are further conversations about perceived gaps in community engagement in the coming months.
But given that Proposal 3 is what we ended up with, it means that the Norman Griffiths Oval will proceed as currently scheduled and we expect completion in mid November.
