This morning at Ocean Shores Shopping Centre, a lovely lady by the name of Janet Swain was holding an impromptu ‘Talk to a Councillor’ meeting. She had her billboard and offered tea and bickies. She spent, in my estimation, half an hour talking to one grey-haired lady until it was time for me to go. I had to leave, and I thought that it was a good thing to see that a councillor had the courage to come out and speak to anyone who wanted to speak to her as one of our elected councillors.
As I went past, I congratulated her on her effort. She thanked me very much. I asked her if she was voting for the 57 Station Street development or not, and she said yes, she was voting for it. I said, ‘Oh, a bad decision.’ She said, ‘Well, a lot of people who talk to me are living in their cars, and if we don’t do anything with this, it’ll be another ten years.’
These two reasons she gave to ignore 1,500 submissions from people who have actively submitted written opposition, and instead to listen to a few people who talk to her, are:
- A number of people were living in their cars.
If she had read the DA, she would know that those people living in cars are not going to be helped by this development. Even without a Community Housing representative appointed to manage the development, we already know that it has major restraints that will prevent those truly in need from being eligible. Even if they were eligible, they likely won’t be able to have a car because they won’t have enough parking.
I question the simplicity of her response. Did she actually think it through? Anyone who is living in a car most likely does not have the money required to pay even a minimal rent on the already very small apartments. I too am affected emotionally by the people reduced to living in their cars, for whatever reason, but I do need to look at whether this project will actually help the people she referred to.
- If we don’t do it, we won’t have it for another ten years.
Unfortunately, this has been a repetitive story we have heard from councillors, put around, I believe, by the ex-mayor who sold our car park for $1 to Landcom. It doesn’t make sense to me in any form. It’s really just saying that, yes, it’s really bad, yes, there are lots of problems, yes, it’s not going to affect affordable housing, and yes, we lose a car park and a toilet block, but we should do it because it’ll take too long to do something else.
How does that make the Station Street development a viable idea?
All they’re really saying is that it has taken so long because of our incompetence. Therefore, because of our incompetence, we should say, OK, let’s ignore all the proven faults in its design and the huge opposition, and don’t fix our incompetence. Just plough on.
I’m sorry, Janet Swain. You are the councillor that I saw today, and it saddens me deeply that we can put in so much effort and input so many thought-out opposition submissions when you just say, ‘Oh, well, the people I talk to.’ It doesn’t make sense to me. Come on.
The Station Street issue, I’m beginning to feel, isn’t about the actual development as much as it’s a bellwether issue exposing the outdated, use-by system of representation we are bound and hampered by, called council.
Please tell me why a councillor can act in direct opposition to the largest protest Mullumbimby has ever mounted? It’s the system. A system that allows relative anonymity for the councillors, who can pretend to care, then vote the opposite for their own unthought-out rationale.
Sorry, but it’s time for a change.
Byron councillors include the following:
- Sarah Ndiaye — Mayor (Greens)
- Jack Dods — Deputy Mayor (Bright Future Byron/Independent)
- Peter Doherty (Labor)
- David Warth (Byron Shire Compass/Independent)
- Michael Lyon (Byron Independents)
- Elia Hauge (Greens)
- Delta Kay (Greens)
- Janet Swain (Labor)
- Michelle Lowe (Greens)
So what reason could there be against all of these councillors declaring their voting preferences now? The only councillor I managed to talk to has already declared hers, so I can reasonably expect other councillors may have already chosen how they will vote.
It does not look good for the system’s practicality when votes are already decided without even examining the submissions.
Ian Blair Hamilton, Myocum
For four decades The Echo has printed the stories some people loved, some people hated, and some pretended not to read. If you want us to keep telling the truth, the real truth, not the sugar-coated version. We’ll need your support to keep the presses rolling. 
