YambaCAN fogged with a feather

continued from page 2 TIM HOWARD

“YambaCAN gives a shit about what’s going on in this valley, and I wish more people would be following suit and caring what goes on in council and what goes on in this valley.”

Cr Johnstone shut down further debate, calling for the motion to be put, despite a protestation from Cr Greg Clancy, who had seconded Cr Day’s motion.

Councillors voted 5-3 (Cr Ian Tiley was absent) to put the motion with Crs Day, Smith and Clancy against.

The vote on Cr Day’s motion to reject the report went the same way and debate commenced on the Mayor’s foreshadowed motion.

During questions Cr Smith asked Cr Toms what beneft the community would get from the information in report.

Sponsors

costs.

“You know, there’s money put away for that, but if it’s going to exceed that money, then we need to consider that for future years.”

But he conceded part C of the report was not warranted.

“I do note that the top of this report does mention response to questions with notice YambaCAN and I don’t believe that the cost implications of later Yamba Community Precinct Project really fts in this,” he said.

Cr Clancy was scathing of the NOM and report, saying it had “really dragged council to a low ebb”.

He said he had looked into the number of GIPAs council had dealt with since 2016-17 and the 48 handled between January 2022 and February 2024 was not exceptional.

Cr Toms took hold of the fogging feather and claimed the community would “understand the resources that it has cost from YambaCAN’s continual questioning of council business”.

Cr Day asked what if Cr Toms would ban people from exercising GIPAs.

She described the question as a “little bit off” agreeing she did not have the power to ban people from using legislation.

She said the only action in the report was to note the information in it.

Speaking to his motion, the Mayor backed Cr Toms view that the information was necessary for the council to fulfl its obligations to ensure fnancial stability.

“Cr Toms’ motion is all about allocation of resources,” he said.

“Every year we put in a budget where we budget for the amount of money we going to spend in future years and legal design undertaken.

“We can’t have it both ways.”

Cr Steve Pickering took his turn with the feather to attack Cr Clancy’s argument.

He criticised Cr Clancy for using parts of the report he wanted removed to attack the report.

“It’s an oxymoron to say you don’t support the report and then at the same time, actually use the facts and fgures out of it,” he said.

“It does not make any sense to me.”

Cr Pickering said he had felded many requests from the community for details of what GIPAs cost the council.

“If you divide the 48 into two, that’s roughly equivalent to what the normal annual number of GIPAs was,” he said.

“It’s just wrong to be targeting a community group who has every right to put in GIPAs.”

He also pointed out YambaCAN, which formed in late September 2022, was not in existence for the frst seven months of the period under investigation.

Cr Clancy said the only contributor to Yamba Community Precinct Project cost overruns was the council itself.

He also said the general manager’s report contradicted itself.

“If you look at the cost implications of delays to Yamba Community Precinct, it says additional design consultant costs associated with developing alternative options and estimates,” Cr Clancy said.

“If you go to the business paper on the top of page seven, under Option B, refurbishment concept only, no detailed

“When a GIPA request is put through, it might cost $30 for the request, but it’s also costing hundreds, if not 1000s, of dollars for council staff to respond to it,” he said.

“And once that request has been actioned, that information is now publicly available for the rest of the community. Council are about openness and transparency.”

The Mayor took hold of the feather for his right of reply and defended Cr Toms’ original NOM, despite admitting part C was not appropriate.

He agreed with some of Cr Clancy’s arguments and noted how staff had dealt with some GIPAs in less than a day.

But he said the information in the report would help council’s fnances and aid transparency.

While defending the need to reveal the cost of GIPAs, Cr Johnson did not explain the necessity of tying those costs to YambaCAN.

He called for a vote, which went 5-3 in his favour and council duly noted that council had incurred not nearly as many costs as had appeared in its original report. Ouch.