Councillor Chris Harris

Lord Mayor Clover Moore has continued her obfuscation over Barangaroo despite finally resigning from the board of the Barangaroo Delivery Authority (BDA) after sustained pressure from the community and the Greens.  At an extroadinary Council meeting on the 24th of September she blocked my attempt to reintroduce a motion for the City to fund legal action against the BDA (for information on my first attempt to introduce this motion see this previous post). 

I had hoped that being freed from the conflicted position, in which being a Board member placed her, may have made her more interested in standing up for the community.  But alas it seems her first priority is still to the BDA, unless of course she is just refusing to change her vote in order to save face.

Sadly, it is not just Clover and the more compliant members of her ‘independent’ team that are hell bent on protecting Barangaroo from proper legal scrutinty.  Labor Councillor Meredith Burgmann also voted to support the Lord Mayor on this issue and seems to be siding with Clover more and more frequently these days.  Her support has not gone unrewarded however.  Below is a media release I recently put out on this issue.

***

City of Sydney Greens Councillor Chris Harris says that Lord Mayor Clover Moore is in bed with the NSW Labor party and is seeking to expand upon that alliance here at the City of Sydney to make up for her inability to dictate the actions of her own team.  The situation came to a head at a recent Council meeting when elections for a new Deputy Lord Mayor were held.

Cr Harris  “Since the last Council election, when six out of ten Councillors were elected from the Clover Moore ‘Independent’ team, Clover has become increasingly used to getting everything her own way.  This extends to who gets elected as Deputy Lord Mayor each year.  Up until now it’s always been the person ordained by Clover to fill the role. However the team is split over Moore’s cooperation with state Labor in the gross overdevelopment at Barangaroo”

At the meeting Moore’s chosen Deputy candidate Cr Tornai was rolled by a member of her own team, Marcelle Hoff, who was supported by Greens Councillors Chris Harris & Irene Doutney, the Liberal Councillor and Clover Moore Party Councillor John McInerney.  Labor Councillor Meredith Burgmann sided with Moore and the rump of her team, leaving the vote tied. A draw from the hat secured the Deputy Lord Mayor position for Cr Hoff.

Clr Harris: “The Lord Mayor was relying on the vote of the Labor Cr Burgmann to shore up support for her candidate and I wondered what the pay-off would be. We didn’t have to wait long to find out – the day after the meeting Cr Hoff was sacked from the Board of the Sydney Festival and she was replaced by Cr Burgmann. I am tingling with anticipation about what further goodies will be offered to the Labor councillor to secure her ongoing support.

“The new Clover Moore/Labor alliance previously saw the Lord Mayor appointed to the board of the Barangaroo Delivery Authority by Premier Kristina Kennealy and now she has gained the support of the Labor Councillor to give her the majority in crucial votes at the City of Sydney Council.

“In the past few months, Clr Burgmann has sided with The Lord Mayor and the more faithful members of her team to support the interests of state Labor and Lend Lease over those of the public in relation to Barangaroo, including in a recent decision to block funding to the Environmental Defenders Office for legal action over the project.  Presumably Cr Burgmann is just following instructions but it’s less clear what Clover’s motivation is in supporting a terminal Labor government” said Cr Harris.

Post Script - following the media coverage surrounding this issue, Cr Burgmann has declined to accept the position on the Sydney Festival board, perhaps not keen to draw attention to her alliance with Clover. 

Council last week made the sensible decision to suspend the giving of grants under the laneways revitalisation scheme, pending a full review of the program.  While the idea of enlivening disused laneways is a good one the current program, which focuses almost exclusively on financially propping up small bars, has been a complete waste of ratepayers money.

Under the program Council doles out tens of thousands of dollars every few months to businesses, mostly bars, that in many cases could get along fine without the money.  It is basically a form of corporate welfare and I have long opposed it in Council.

Two recent examples that highlight the misguided nature of the program are those of Berta Bar and the Moran Arts Foundation, which were each given $30 000.  Berta Bar was already open, receiving rave reviews and filling close to capacity most nights before the grant was awarded.  They were operating at a cracking pace without Council assistance and the $30 000 would likely have gone straight to a private entrepreneur’s bottom line.

The Moran Arts Foundation applied for the grant to assist an art gallery and coffee shop.  The coffee shop is located in a building owned by the Moran Group of companies which is worth over $286 million and pays commercial rent to the group.  The coffee shop was a private business venture by a very wealthy corporation and would have opened whether or not they got the grant.

In a third case a grant to establish a bar was given to a person who made a living running gambling tips websites.  When Council investigated this person’s business background at my request they reported that the online gambling business was “less than successful”.  I think most people will agree that giving a person with a poor track record of business management public money to run a business is not the best use of that money.

The review into the laneway scheme was prompted by questions over the latter two cases and I hope Council will use this opportunity to come up with more useful and innovative ways to activate the City’s lanes.

Rather than subsidising individual businesses Council should be incorporating laneways into its events and festivals.  A perfect example of this is the reception to shortly be held in a laneway bar as part of the ‘Art and About’ festival.  This draws the public’s attention to these businesses and will help boost their custom, which is much more sustainable than spoon-feeding them public money.

Or the City could use the money that was previously just being given away to cross-promote these businesses at other City supported events.  This could be done at things like the musical Jersey Boys, which will bring large numbers of visitors to Sydney, many of whom will be looking for a quiet spot for dinner or a drink after the show. 

The options for creating a lively social scene in what were once dark and dangerous laneways are wide ranging.  Council needs to focus on a range of creative, effective and equitable solutions that do more than just give public money to private businesses.

Lord Mayor Clover Moore has voted to side with developers over the community in the ongoing case of the Barangaroo development.  At a Council meeting last Monday I introduced a motion calling for the City to provide $10 000 to the Environmental Defenders Office (EDO) should it proceed with legal action in conjunction with the Barangaroo Action Group if new development plans are approved by the Planning Minister.  As a result of Clover’s vote the EDO may now not be able to proceed with this action. 

The EDO approached the City to contribute to possible action so that it was clear that the EDO was acting in the broader public interest and not just in the interests of a particular group of residents. The Lord Mayor’s actions have prevented the City from genuinely aligning itself with the broader community by  ’getting down in the trenches’ with residents to oppose the massive overdevelopment on Barangaroo. Her actions have also jeopardised the ability of the EDO to act for local residents.

The application before the Minister for Planning is to excavate a giant pit that will house at least four floors of car parking to be used for commercial parking for the foreseeable future. These plans risk spreading contamination into the harbour and onto Council land.  They also fly in the face of claims that the development will be environmentally sensitive by providing commercial parking for over 800 cars and leaving no room for trigeneration systems which would have provided low carbon energy to the development.  Council planning staff say the plans are so riddled with problems that they would never be approved were the decision up to Council. You can read the City’s damning assessment here.

Prior to the meeting I sought legal advice on whether or not the Lord Mayor, as a member of the Barangaroo Delivery Authority Board, would have a conflict of interest in voting on this matter.  The advice indicated clearly that she would have a conflict and should therefore absent herself from the voting.  The advice is attached here.

Despite this advice, which I circulated to all Councilors prior to the meeting, the Lord Mayor did not declare any sort of conflict in the matter.  She chose to remain in the Council chambers while my motion was debated and then to participate in the vote on whether or not it should be adopted. 

The vote came down to a 5-5 split, with fellow Greens Councilor Irene Doutney, Liberal Shayne Mallard and two members of the Clover Moore Party (John McInerney and Marcelle Hoff) voting with me in support.  Labor Councilor Meredith Burgmann, supporting the state government party line, voted with Clover Moore and the remaining three members of her team to oppose the motion.  Moore then used her casting vote as Lord Mayor to vote a second time and defeat the motion. 

Had Moore absented herself, in line with the legal advice, the motion would have passed.  The Council would be standing up for what it has repeatedly stated it believes in and would not be relying on volunteers from the community, such as the Barangaroo Action Group and The Friends of Barangaroo, to fight its battles. 

I have since filed a complaint with the NSW Ombudsman and the Department of Local Government asking them to confirm the legal advice that Clover Moore had a conflict of interest in this matter.

The text of my motion to Council can be found here. The SMH story on the council meeting is here.

Clover Moore should resign from the Barangaroo board. This position with the Barangaroo Delivery Authority (BDA) represents a conflict of interest with her role on Council.

The Greens & other councillors together with many members of the community have major issues with the plans the BDA have for Barangaroo, considering it to be a massive overdevelopment as the artists impression on the right shows.  Unfortunately the Lord Mayor Clover Moore’s membership of the BDA Board is hampering the City of Sydney Council’s ability to represent the community on these issues.

The Lord Mayor has claimed that her role on the BDA has resulted in a number of positive environmental features, such as water recycling, co-generation and zero waste provisions, being added to plans for the development.  However I have serious doubts about these claims.

Progressive property owners are now including trigeneration, full water recycling & capture & zero waste approaches in major new developments. Recent examples of this approach include the Sydney Harbour Foreshore Authority’s “Workplace 6” building on Darling Island and Fraser’s Properties Carlton United Breweries site in Chippendale.  I think the state government, desperate to try to show some green credentials, would have included these initiatives in the project whether or not the Lord Mayor was on the board.

The Lord Mayor has also claimed that her influence on the BDA Board resulted in a light rail connection that integrates Barangaroo with the rest of the City being added to the plan, however, as with her environmental claims, I have doubts about how much of a contribution her presence on the board has made.

Firstly, a possible light/heavy rail link to Barangaroo was flagged by the Government long before the Lord Mayor joined the Board in December 2008. Secondly the BDA are proposing a light rail line running from central station to Circular Quay somewhere on the western side of the City – possibly down Sussex St.  There is no proposed integration with the CBD, the shopping precinct of Pitt St mall or Town Hall. The transport proposal is totally inadequate. 

Both my Greens colleague Irene Doutney and I think that we must have a low fare service that intimately links the old eastern and new western sections of the CBD.  It would be like the 555 shuttle buses but would not have to contend with traffic on crowded city streets.  So far, Clover’s involvement hasn’t delivered an integrated transport plan for Barangaroo.

And if a final example of the Lord Mayors ineffectiveness on the board were needed it can be seen in these two documents from the Barangaroo Action Group - a comparison of the building size in the southern section of the site under the original award winning plan and the BDA’s new plan.  Clover herself describes the buildings in the new plan as “too big”, a statement which I completely agree with, yet the plan was released during 2009 while she was on the board and she seems to have been completely unable to stop it.

It seems that the BDA are using Ms Moore’s position on the board to create the impression that the City of Sydney is supportive of what will be a gross overdevelopment of this iconic site.  Since the Lord Mayor joined the BDA board Councillors have not received a single briefing about what is proposed at Barangaroo – confidential or otherwise.  The first time that I had a chance to see what was proposed was at a public presentation by the BDA in the City Recital Hall on 23rd February 2010 and the first time we debated it as a council was on 15th March 2010. That’s a full sixteen months that the other councillors have been kept in the dark about the BDA’s plans.

Ms Moore should resign from the BDA immediately. This would then allow the City of Sydney to better use its resources to advocate in a very public way and demand that the design be revised to reduce the scale of the development, delete the intrusion into the harbour, return the whole of the foreshore to public use and to provide a proper public transport link that would genuinely integrate this beautiful site into the rest of the City.

The City of Sydney Council could be a powerful voice for the community on this matter.  Instead we are being gagged because Ms Moore has to be cautious about not wanting to seem too critical of a project she has helped develop.

I have serious concerns about the tender process that appears to have been designed to place the City’s tennis courts under the management of a single operator. Should the recommendation of council staff be adopted the operator at Ruchcutters Bay tennis courts will be tossed out after 25 years of service to the community. The Greens councillors consider such a proposal to be unreasonable & unfair.  At an extraordinary meeting on Monday 1st March (attended by around 200 people protesting the recommendation, shown below) the Clover Moore Party used their numbers to defer the tender process for a second time.  Councillor Doutney and myself, along with the Labor and Liberal Councillors, voted against the motion.

As Greens we have three key concerns with the tender process: shortcomings with information provided to councillors, inconsistent treatment of individual tenderers during the process and a failure of the tender criteria & process to capture the “community benefit” that councillors had requested.

The level of benefit that an applicant could provide to the community was meant to be the most heavily weighted criteria upon which a successful tender was assessed. However the hundreds of emails that Councillors received from the Rushcutters Bay community have provided information about the local operator that should have been presented to Councillors in the staff report on the tenders at the Finance Committee on 15th February 2010.

There has been no performance review of the current tennis court operators at Rushcutters Bay, despite this being required by local government tendering guidelines. As a result the free coaching, court hire & equipment hire to children from Darlinghurst & Plunkett St Public Schools over the past fifteen years was not reported to councillors and could not have been considered in the tender assessment.

Another piece of highly relevant information was a proposed Franks Family scholarship of $100,000 per annum to provide coaching & court time for 40 children from disadvantaged backgrounds. Again this was not reported to councillors and therefore could not have been considered in the tender assessment.

The Greens are also very concerned about the inconsistent treatment of the two tenderers who made direct contact with councillors in order to lobby for their bid. One tenderer was excluded and the other, who ended up as the recommended tenderer, was not.  I have read the “no lobbying” clause in the tender and the emails from tenderers (see attachment 1 below). I can’t see why one was ousted and the other was not. The decision seems biased and unfair.

I have since sought legal advice from a senior counsel Francis Douglas QC who advised that the email from the tenderer who was not excluded  had indeed breeched the tender guidelines (see attachment 2 below). Further the awarding of the tender to the offending tenderer could see such a decision invalidated by a court and damages sought from the City of Sydney.

Once the legal advice was tabled the Clover Moore Party scrambled to defer the process until a more thorough investigation could be carried out, but this is not a positive way forward.  To simply delay a process with so many flaws in it so that just one of those flaws can be investigated, while ignoring all the others, is not in the interest of the community. 

People have invested significant time and effort in writing to Council and turning up to meetings in order to try to make sure the process reflects their very reasonable desires for their community. They deserve better than to have to wait once more for a flawed process to turn out an unsatisfactory outcome.  The process needs to be restarted with criteria that will accurately reflect the benefits that each applicant will provide, and has provided previously, to the community.

Attachment 1- Tenderer not to Solicit Council Personel

Attachment 2 - Legal Advice from Francis Douglas QC