QUESTIONS AND RESPONSES TO QUESTION TIME
TUESDAY, 26 JUNE 2012
The following questions were addressed to the above meeting.
Some
questions were adequately responded to at the meeting, however others
required a more detailed response in writing.
This document includes both verbal and written responses. In this instance, no
written responses were provided as issues were adequately addressed at the
meeting.
Peter Linaker asked the following questions in relation to emergency procedures:
1) Are emergency procedures for this building known to Councillors?
The Mayor responded that Councillors are well aware of emergency procedures at all
Council buildings.
The Chief Executive Officer responded that there is a normal procedural process for
all Council buildings. The normal evacuation process is not practised at Council
Meetings, but Councillors are aware of the procedure at the various locations of the
building.
2) What if we had a power failure – what process will be followed in relation to the
position of the glass doors at the entrance of City Hall?
The Mayor responded he would provide a written response.
3) Are emergency procedures known in the municipality for earthquakes and
chemical disasters?
Gary Van Driel responded the City has a Standard Operating Procedure that
addresses Geotechnical Hazards and as such it canvasses earthquakes.
4) Are Councillors aware of CFA emergency procedures for disasters in the Port of
Geelong? It is apparent that elected Councillors who do not ask questions have
no concern for the legal rights and daily welfare of Geelong residents and
ratepayers.
Gary Van Driel responded he is a member of the Ports Emergency Management
Executive Committee and they are currently reviewing the Port’s Emergency
Management Plan. He did not believe Councillors need to be aware of the CFA
procedures associated with a Port of Geelong emergency. As per all emergency
events, the City will undertake its Support Agency role and provide resources to
assist the Control Agency when requested as well as establishing Emergency Relief
Centres if the Incident Controller (CFA) recommends that evacuation is necessary.
A subsequent written response was provided by the
General Manager City Services in the following terms:
Thankyou for your questions posed at the Ordinary Council Meeting of the Geelong
City Council on 26 June 2012.
Your questions:
“1/ Are emergency procedures for this building known to Councillors?
2/ Are emergency procedures known in the municipality for earthquakes, and chemical
disasters?
3/ Are councillors aware of CFA emergency procedures for disasters in the Port of
Geelong? It is apparent that elected councillors who do not ask questions have no
concern for the legal rights and daily welfare of Geelong residents and ratepayers.”
I would like to provide the following responses:
1)
Emergency evacuation plans are established for all Council buildings. Cr
Mitchell responded regarding the arrangements.
2)
The City has a Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) that addresses
Geotechnical Hazards and as such it canvasses earthquakes. A study was
conducted in the late 90’s regarding earthquake risks. The report concluded
that we have a similar exposure level as Newcastle NSW in relation to an
earthquake event. The report also recommended that further studies be
conducted, this would cost in the vicinity of $300K. Council has sought funding
unsuccessfully to progress this work.
We have Major Hazard Facility (SOP). Last December our Emergency
Management Coordinator participated in reviewing Terminals Emergency
Management Plan as a lead up to their Safety Case meeting – Council’s focus
was off-site impact(s).
The Emergency Management Coordinator is currently negotiating with CFA,
Shell and Terminals to roll out the Metropolitan Fire Brigade’s Shelter-in-Place
(chemical incident) promotional campaign. The August Community Update will
contain an article on this which will be the 1st phase of this promotion.
The current re-draft of Council’s Municipal Fire Management Plan has two main
focuses, 1. Structure fires. 2. Chemical incidents. This plan is scheduled to go
before the Municipal Fire Management Planning Committee in early August and
then to the Municipal Emergency Management Planning Committee and to
Council before October 2012 – as per the Fire Commissioners required
timelines.
3)
The Emergency Management Coordinator is a member of the Port of Geelong
Emergency Management Executive Committee and is currently participating in
the review of the Port of Geelong’s Emergency Management Plan
As with all emergency events, the City will undertake its Support Agency role
and provide resources to assist the Control Agency when requested as well as
establishing Emergency Relief Centre(s) if the Incident Controller (CFA)
recommends that evacuation is necessary, in accordance with the
arrangements stipulated under Council Municipal Emergency Management
Plan. Councillors are aware of these arrangements as required under the
Emergency Management Act 1986.
Danica Cliff Brooks asked if Council would advocate for the installation of a
pedestrian crossing in Townsend Road as requested by the people who have signed
the petition presented to the Mayor?
The Mayor responded that he has in the past advocated for a pedestrian crossing on
Townsend Road and will continue to do so in the future.
Gary Van Driel added that the process is to make application to VicRoads because of
the nature of that traffic solution. From time to time we undertake traffic surveys and
supply back to VicRoads as part of the process.
Colin Wallace asked:
1) Would Councillors note that omitted from the published version of my letter to the
editor of the Geelong Advertiser of Wednesday 20th June 2012 are the two
references I made to proper process not being followed by some Council officers
in relation to First Street, Geelong West and also that the name Planning Panels
Victoria was mangled, lessening the chance that a curious reader might find a
copy of the Ropeworks Panel Report and see what it said about First Street?
The Mayor noted the comments.
2) Did the Mayor ever notice that the two times when responding to my questions at
Council Meetings he mentioned me having spoken to Kerri-Ann Hobbs,
suggesting that I was the person who gave Cr Doull’s Copenhagen report to the
Geelong Advertiser and defaming me by doing so, never appeared in the
Minutes?
The Mayor responded he was unable to recall and asked who Kerri-Ann Hobbs was.
Mary Wallace asked the following:
1) I asked questions at the last Council Meeting and the written response did not
arrive before or in today’s post (Tuesday 26 June) but at about 5.30pm there was
in our letterbox a letter from Council which was the written response and I
want to know, who put it there?
The Chief Executive Officer responded the letter was hand delivered.
2) In future, would any letter to my husband or me from Council be sent by post in a
postmarked envelope?
The Chief Executive Officer responded that the request could be arranged.
3) Last Thursday, 21 June 2012, my husband and I received a letter dated 18 June
2012 from the City Development Department and in the window of the envelope
our middle names, as well as our first names and surnames, were visible. I
regard this as improper and find it intimidating and I am asking, why were our
middle names included?
The Chief Executive Officer responded that he was unaware of the particular letter
being referred to but would investigate the issue and provide a written response as to
why second names were used.
A subsequent written response was provided by the
Chief Executive Officer in the following terms:
I refer to your questions raised at the Council meeting 26 June 2012 and provide the
following response –
1. A Council Officer delivered the letter to your post box on 26 June 2012.
2. As you do not wish to have Council correspondence hand delivered to your post
box, future correspondence will be forwarded via Australia Post.
3. Council maintains a property database with the full names of owners to ensure the
following –




Full names are included on the voters roll
Proper identification is made when taking phone calls
Avoidance of duplicate names on the property database
Correct documentation in any court proceedings such as debt collection.
The property database is updated via notices of acquisition and disposition of land,
which includes the full name of vendors and purchasers as required by the Local
Government Act and supporting regulations.
To ensure the correct addressing of correspondence Council officers often refer to
the property file and use the full name.