Council Minutes - Section A: Procedural Matters - 8 December 2016

Contents | Next Page: Section B – Reports

Minutes of the Ordinary Meeting of the Greater Geelong City Council held at the Council Conference and Reception Centre in City Hall, 57 Little Malop Street, Geelong on 8 December 2016, commencing at 7:00pm.



[Back to Top]

Also present:

[Back to Top]


The Mayor declared the meeting open at 7:00pm.


Council acknowledges Wadawurrung Traditional Owners of this land and all Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander People who are part of the Greater Geelong community today.



Leave of Absence

Cr Fisher moved, Cr Farrell seconded –

That Leave of Absence be granted to Cr Macdonald from 9 December to 7 January 2015, inclusive, and Cr Lyons (Mayor) from 12 December 2015 to 18 January 2016, inclusive.


Confirmation of Minutes

Cr Harwood moved, Cr Irvine seconded -

That the Minutes of the Ordinary Meeting held on 17 November 2015 be confirmed and signed.


[Back to Top]

Declaration of Conflicts of Interest

Cr Heagney declared an Indirect Interest by Close Association in Agenda Item 6 - Managing Future Growth - Further Investigation Areas, in that her husband is considering a business with one of the property owners.

Cr Macdonald declared an Indirect Financial Interest in Agenda Item 7- Adoption of Amendment C324 - 357 & 359 Pakington Street, Newtown – Chilwell Village Shopping Centre, in that he has an interest in a property in the immediate area impacted by this Amendment.

[Back to Top]

Question Time

Question Time is an opportunity for questions to be addressed to Council and while the minutes record the general content, they do not purport to be a transcript of what was said by individuals. Likewise Councillor or Officer verbal responses are in summary form only. Views expressed may not be the views of Council.

Council's practice is to provide a separate document on its website setting out questions and responses including any more detailed written responses which may be provided subsequent to the meeting.

Con Alevras asked at the February 2007 Council meeting on the adoption of the current Ocean Grove local structure plan and following detailed review of formal submissions Council sought to define a population limit and therefore growth to the north west of the town in order to sustain a range of services. The key directions and strategies included nominating a settlement boundary and clearly identifying a longer term boundary. Accordingly, with the commencement of the request for formal submissions why is Council predicating the deletion of the long term settlement boundary including the wording “protect long term growth option” that affects our land on the west side of Grubb Road? This was a Council initiative in 2007 supported by stakeholders and there were no calls in 2015 for its removal other than this report.

Cr Farrell responded she had been involved in the Ocean Grove Structure Plan since 2007 and indicated she had met with Con and his consultants as well as other developers and their consultants. As you would know, the State Policy has changed since 2007 and this Structure Plan goes out as a draft addressing these changes. You will have an opportunity through this process to provide a submission. Exhibition will be longer than normal and will come back to Council for discussion and then is likely to go onto an Independent Planning Panel.

Fiona Threlfall asked if Councillors are aware that currently there is no netball amenity of any kind at our Club, as concluded in the G21 and AFL Barwon regional strategy in April 2015?

The girls of all ages from both clubs currently change in out-dated public toilets or in an open marquee with insufficient privacy which is set up and packed up for each game. This is also used for office and admin purposes on game days. Our all-abilities team will also be able to use the new facility.

Cr Irvine responded that he appreciated and was aware of the lack of facilities and would do whatever he could to support the application to have it rectified.

Fiona Threlfall (on behalf of Sue Cormack) also asked if Councillors were aware that the Club is 100% committed in establishing female AFL football teams for 2016, catering for 8-12 and 13-18 years age groups? This is a key strategic initiative for the club, and I am pleased to say that planning is progressing very well. All teams for both clubs will be able to fully utilise the new facility for change rooms and toilets, and also for medical care in case of injury.

Cr Irvine advised he understood the participation and growing support of establishing female AFL football teams and indicated his appreciation for the Club’s efforts in this regard.

Rob Threlfall asked are aware that the Club has always contributed funds to infrastructure developments at Drew and Walker Ovals, and this project is no exception with the Club guaranteeing a commitment of $100,000 to the Wedge project.

The Mayor responded no Councillor can give support until Council discussed through the budget process.

Mik Aidt addressed Council as follows:

  1. Firstly I'd like to acknowledge and thank you Council and Future Proofing Geelong for supporting the Act on Climate Festival, which took place on 20-23 November in Geelong. Surely, Council would be aware that world leaders currently are discussing climate change and emissions targets in Paris, and that these international negotiations most likely will turn out to be inadequate if we want to avoid messing up this planet's climate systems. Which is why action to limit carbon emissions at local and municipal level now becomes even more important than ever now. My question is concerning how Council invests its funds, and whether its finances are invested in fossil fuel projects. I am not sure if Council is aware that at least 15 Australian local councils including City of Melbourne have decided to stop risking their ratepayer funds and reserves by removing any exposure they have to fossil fuel projects? Or whether Council is actually aware what exposure City of Greater Geelong’s funds have to fossil fuels? Has Council started a process of considering doing the same as these 15 other local councils? And if not, how can local environmental and climate action groups help Council to make this happen?

    Cr Richards responded it was an interesting issue for this Council and for Victoria, Australia and the world. Council officers are aware of this issue and as the Environment and Sustainability Portfolio Holder I have had preliminary discussions about the way forward. At this point in time, Cr Richards suggested a report be brought back to Council for consideration.

  2. Compact of Mayors ( is the world’s largest cooperative effort among cities to fight climate change. City of Sydney, City of Melbourne, City of Adelaide, City of Perth, Lismore City Council and Byron Shire Council are among the members of Compact of Mayors. Is Geelong part of this network of over 170 cities? If not, then why not? Could a process be started to make a consideration about this? How can local environmental and climate action groups assist Council to sign Geelong up for this significant initiative?

    The Mayor responded that the City of Greater Geelong had not been invited to be a member of Compact of Mayors but would endeavour to investigate.

    Cr Richards indicated he has held preliminary talks with the Compact of Mayors and given that many of those people in that space were involved in Paris, communication has been put on hold. Council already comply with Compact of Mayors, however we need to work out costs going forward to be directly involved.

    Cr Irvine added no doubt Council is concerned about climate change and global warming, and would be happy to come along and get involved.

Peter Billings asked the following in regard to the Ocean Grove Structure Plan Review:

  1. Why does Council persist in maintaining such a curiously negative attitude to the designation of this land for future residential development?

  2. Why is Council adamant in maintaining such a mystifying and bizarre position, which wants to remove the long term settlement boundary and the protection of the long term growth option?

Cr Farrell responded that Council has a view of going out with an informal discussion to the community, details of which are brought back for discussion before us tonight. It has provided an opportunity for developers like yourself to have further discussion about the boundary. State planning has changed considerably. There will be a further opportunity to submit during the official draft exhibition and again at the independent planning panel.

John Leen asked that in relation to his submission when Amendment C280 was first advertised, along with our adjoining neighbours, our submission addressed that we were not opposed to C270 but we requested a high solid paling fence across the rear of our property’s northern boundary?

Cr Macdonald responded that Council will be considering Amendment C280 this evening at which time I believe your question will be satisfactorily answered.

Bronwyn Bingham asked what is happening in the Marshall Precinct area over the last ten years?

Cr Richards responded that the issue was not new to him and he understood the problem. Cr Richards suggested that contact be made after Christmas to meet with yourself and other residents to further discuss the issue.

Tim Smyth asked:

  1. What has been done in the past twelve months to reduce carbon emission in Geelong?

  2. What are the plans for the next 24 months to reduce carbon emissions?

  3. How much is the budget allocation for carbon reduction for CoGG in the next 12 months?

Cr Richards responded he would provide a written response outlining Council’s commitment to reduce carbon emissions.

[Back to Top]


Cr Ellis presented a petition from residents of Portarlington expressing their concern regarding the closure of the Portarlington Pool at 84-110 Smythe Street, Portarlington.

[Back to Top]

Contents | Next Page: Section B – Reports