Dam closure - timing


SW's picture

By SW - Posted on 16 February 2010

One of the many things that bothers me about the dam closure is the timeframe in which events unfolded.

Councillor Laugesen (whom I recognise has demonstrated a willingness to engage in constructive dialogue on the subject) indicates that the Council first became aware of the issue with the Plan of Management at the meeting on 9 February 2010. As I understand it, the Council maintains that the legal position was investigated after that, and so, presumably, the decision to close the track must have been reached sometime between 10 and 12 February.

While all of that may be true, it strikes me as a remarkably short timeframe for Council personnel to have investigated the matter with due diligence, taken legal and other advice, and then prepared a plan for immediate implementation (including an announcement as well printing and erection of all the trail signage).

My experience of Councils is that actvities of this kind do not tend to occur within 48 hours. More usually, Councils operate at a much more glacial speed.

I wonder if this was in fact an issue that the Council has been looking at for some time, but for some reason, was addressed last week on an expedited basis? Does anyone have any information which might could shed any light on this? If not, I might consider filing a Freedom of Information Act request to try to understand the process.

SW

Little-Ditty's picture

The whole thing reeks of some buddy-buddy decision making of a mate, for a mate. This was not a quick, ill-thought-out decision, but one designed to circumvent the normal course of procedure, which also prevented those affected from making an alternative case in time. But I have been known to engage in the odd conspiracy theory before. Eye-wink

HeezaGeeza's picture

Given so far there is a lot of positive noise coming from Council, I'd suggest leaving it be for now to keep everyone onside. Save this in reserve if the team don't get the desired outcomes through the current planned action.

You'd be surprised how an application like that can rattle people, and if you did find something untoward then it's a potential media embarrassment for the Council which puts them defensive towards us.

I suspect that given it involved a potential liability exposure to the Council that is why they acted so fast. Nothing scares a government body more than being sued.....

ido09s's picture

HeezaGeeza hit the nail on the head. If its going to cost them cash it will happen ASAP. To reverse the decision however will always take an eternity

He is also right in that things are sounding quite positive and the last thing we want to do is upset them. Hang tight till after the meetings have taken place and if the decision to close the trail isnt over turned then it might be something to look into

Rob's picture

According to a press release from the Mayor last night (see http://nobmob.com/node/13151) they have known since the Feb 2!

SW's picture

Interesting. That sounds more plausible.

christine's picture

the speed with which those posh new signs have been erected - you can't get those overnight - with measurements on them and everything...

herzog's picture

That's a very good point. How could they have had surveys done and professional signage manufactured in the timeframe, unless this was planned in advance?

hawkeye's picture

According to Virginia Laugesen, the haste was still unreasonable. Apparently 4 options were to be put up to Councillors for voting, and no decision on closing or restricting any track sections were to be implemented until then.

Staff it seems have snookered the Councillors.

Reading between the lines, it seems certain top level staff may be having trouble adjusting to the new regime of being answerable to elected Councillors instead of having free reign under the administrator.

kitttheknightrider's picture

in house and would take very little time to produce.

Making signs just like that one was one my "fun" jobs when I worked at Waverly council as a building cadet many, many years ago. Even back then they had a a vinyl stencil cutter and the parks shed had a heap of blank boards. The slowest part of the process is deciding what the sign should say, and judging by the confusing message on these ones they didn't spend much time on that at all.

Confusing? Well bikes aren't banned, we just aren't allowed to ride them, and whats with the distance, are we banned in that distance or are we banned for that distance?

For the fines to be enforceable don't they need to state the amount of the fine on the sign, just like the road signs that say "penalty exceeds X dollars"?

cambowambo's picture

From a management point of view it seems that Warringah Council has too few resources working in one area, and way too many in another.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Best Mountain Bike