More on climate emergency debate
There are more questions than answers from Why shire did not declare climate emergency (Bay Post/Moruya Examiner, August 17).
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
Cr Constable's comment regarding the possibility of "going down the road of a very costly exercise" raises the question of what are the costs we might have incurred by council adopting the emergency motion?
Were councillors advised on what these costs might be for and how much? Were they advised of the potential costs of doing nothing? Did councillors reach their decision without full awareness?
Cr Tait's assertion about not being aligned with any party is superficially good, but councillors are supposed not to be influenced by party politics yet he - and maybe others - seems to have rejected the emergency motion purely because it was raised by a "Green". His statement also begs the question: has he severed his election alignment with the mayor, whose party politics are worn on her sleeve?
Importantly was the matter of the shire's long term water supply security considered to be a critical matter - more than enough to constitute an emergency if things go sour?
Jeff de Jager, Coila
Look how quickly Australia responded in World War II to the threat of invasion by the Japanese.
It was an emergency everyone readily acknowledged. Now the enemy is a colourless invisible gas, but the threat is very real and its presence is biting hard already. By not admitting the severity of the situation, the conservative councillors have demonstrated that they just don't get it. This will be remembered in the September 2020 election.
Nick Hopkins, Malua Bay
Recent state and federal elections were lost on this issue. It is now clear the electorate was wrong. It is time to get over the hip-pocket nerve and think about the world we are going to give our grandchildren.
Peter Reddel, Malua Bay
Coachhouse Marina development
Eurobodalla Shire Council has confirmed that of the 20 buildings proposed, more than 17 are at least three storeys high, with a large number up to five storeys in the development application. The developers' request to exceed height limits by up to 30 per cent as set by council's planning laws has been given the go ahead.
The DA is for a seniors living complex and apartment blocks which local residents have opposed (due to) loss of amenity, inappropriate bulk and scale, loss of views, increased overshadowing, increased traffic congestion and the dangerous precedent this will set for development in the area. It is now up to the NSW Government's Southern Regional Planning Panel to determine the application.
This will occur at a public meeting to be held on Monday, August 26, at 1pm at the Soldiers Club. The purpose is to give interested people the opportunity to speak to the panel before a decision. Any person is welcome to attend the public meeting to observe.
Register on 02 8217 2060 or via email to enquiry@planningpanels.nsw.gov.au
John Harvey, Rosedale
Many of you will have received a notification of the next public meeting (see above). We need everyone to turn up and show support.
The fight is not over, this independent joint regional planning authority will determine this matter. They must take into account the developer's proposal, the legalities of that DA, council's input and also the submissions of all residents.
Numbers count.