Further to the reticent decisions of council in relation to the removal of three mature, National Trust listed Marri trees in Muchea, I find more questions to ask, and more frustration with the lack of accountability by Shire of Chittering councillors.
I have reviewed all the decisions of the Muchea Reference Group minutes, such as they are, and council minutes to find gaps and to seek answers.
My first enquiry to the CEO was in March, followed by questions to council at the Annual Electors meeting. I have since contacted the Shire President, Cr King with questions. On the 22 May, in an email, Cr King referred me to Council’s statement:
“Council’s decision to remove three fully-grown trees was not taken lightly. The Muchea Recreational Centre Redevelopment is the largest capital project undertaken by the Shire up to this point and will exceed a cost of $5.5 million to finish. Aside from contributions and grants, the Council has borrowed from the WA treasury for a 20-year period to finance the project. This project holds significant importance for the community, as numerous generations of rate payers will contribute towards the facility’s expenses, and countless generations of children and adults will benefit from the sports facilities for many years ahead.
“Council established a reference group consisting of representatives from each sporting and community group who use the facility and one community member to work with Architects to ensure the facility design met the user requirements. Through this consultation process, Council made every effort to ensure the best possible outcome for the overall good of the Shire. The site is, unfortunately, restricted and there was no option but to remove three of the 28 mature trees to achieve a layout that was well thought through for the purposes of the site.
“During Council deliberations on this project, all the relevant information was put to Council, and the resolution was carried to progress the project scope as planned. This included the removal of three trees from the site. Please refer to the agenda items relating to this matter, which can be found on the Shire’s website. Since the netball courts and fence represent a structure that has been lawfully approved by Council, the Shire is exempted from the applying for a clearing permit under Regulation 5, Item 1 of the Environmental Protection (Clearing of Native Vegetation) Regulations 2004. Which allows for ‘Clearing of a site for the lawful construction of a building or other structure on a property, being clearing which does not, together with all other limited clearing on the property in the financial year in which the clearing takes place, exceed five hectares…’
“To mitigate the loss of the three trees, Council resolved to plant 30 new trees in appropriate spots on the same grounds. Councillors represent the interests of all people living within the Shire, and sometimes a decision which is popular with a majority group can be unpopular with a smaller group. In years to come members of our community will be able to enjoy a facility that is fit for purpose and will also have the benefit of additional trees.”
Following this, Cr King claims that all councillors are au fait with the content of this statement. However, it was not a decision made at an Ordinary Meeting of Council. There is no accountable debate on the decision within the public arena. Council will not answer questions on the matter. This may be viewed as undemocratic and intimidatory!
Correspondence requested of them has not been provided — correspondence that is not of a commercial nature. Where has accountability and transparency in Council dealings gone?
Finally, in reply to the above statement, Cr King implies that our views oppose the provision of the Recreation Centre. We have always supported the new facility. The site has always been restricted in the size of the area, with the netball courts an added component during the Reference Group meetings —common sense should have prevailed at this time.
The last minute “feel good” decision to plant 30 Marri seedlings does not save the magnificent Marris and the decision was made only as a result of a complaint to the Shire.
Local Reference group members knew that local residents would oppose the removal of the trees. Councillors were made aware of the same, however chose to ignore local values, chose to listen to a small minority and build five courts, instead of four courts.
It is known that Council feels justified here by implying that our group is a small minority. The beginning of this campaign was to save the trees. Council has now exposed itself to dishonesty. More and more community members have become alarmed at the performance of those we should trust. Support is growing to save these trees, and suspicion is increasing, unnecessarily.
