Another item in the draft Meeting Code stated that Councillors wishing to put a Notice of Motion must personally identify a funding source.
Councillor De Luca moved two amendments to the draft Meeting Code, seconded by Councillor Kylie Ferguson, that Council change Clause 4.14 so it accords with the wording of the Office of Local Government and reads:
A notice of motion for the expenditure of funds on works and/or services other than those already provided for in the council’s current adopted operational plan must identify the source of funding for the expenditure that is the subject of the notice of motion. If the notice of motion does not identify a funding source, the general manager must either:
a. prepare a report on the availability of funds for implementing the motion if adopted, or
b. by written notice sent to all councillors with the business papers for the meeting for which the notice of motion has been submitted, defer consideration of the matter by the council to such a date specified in the notice, pending the preparation of such a report.
The other amendment was that a Public forum will be conducted at each Ordinary Council Meeting - retaining the Public Forum.
Councillor De Luca stated, regarding the first amendment that this had been used in the past to deliberately stop minority councillors from putting Notices of Motion.
"Councillors were unable often to get information as to funding sources or were told that the funding sources they they had identified were inappropriate, and that therefore their Notices of Motion could not go forward. "
"The Office of Local government has recognised that there has been, in some councils, that politics prevails even among council staff, in resisting certain elected representatives desires to move Notices of Motion. There should never be any fettering of an elected representatives ability to raise a Notice of Motion. That is why the Office of Local Government have recommended that very clause that I seek to include and put to the public."
In speaking on the second amendment, to not abolish the Public Forum, Cr. De Luca said;
“ We should not be restricting our community’s right to address us through any avenue available... We are only sitting a mere 10 times a year. It is not an unfair or unreasonable expectation by our community for them to expect us to listen to them every month.
I commend the Amendment Motion to you and ask you to do what our community wants not what we, as elected representatives, feel is more efficient, to shorten council meetings. The perception is, (by the community) is that we are gagging the community for our own benefit."
The Amendment Motion put, was carried.
The other item of interest to Pittwater residents who have stated to this news service they have been missing their own elected representatives at local events and wondering why they were absent when every councillor available turned up to every event in Pittwater prior to being sacked by the state government, as tabled in the February 27th Meeting was the Notice of Motion put by Councillor Kylie Ferguson -11.12; Transparent Governance Post Amalgamation, specifically; 'That representation on behalf the Mayor and/or Council be treated openly and equally and there be balanced representation of Wards, Councillors and Political Parties/Independent when selecting Representatives of the Mayor and or Council at events.'
This Motion was carried.
The Draft Code of Meeting Practice is now on Exhibition for your comments and feedback.
