This isn’t unusual, it has been the same for budget submissions in the past, and for red-hot issues such as the proposed closure of Andrew Fairley Ave in Shepparton.
Council’s own media release on the process on March 3 made no mention of the hearings being closed to the public or the media.
It waxed lyrical about how council was listening and engaging without mentioning the format.
Despite a residents’ group publishing an advertisement on Friday encouraging people to attend, there was no attempt to clarify.
Monday morning, only a few hours before the hearings starting, ratepayers were informed that the public was not welcome.
In libel law, the public interest is a test not of whether the public is interested in something being published, but whether it is in the public interest to do so.
These public hearings pass whichever way you look at it, given the disposal of a ratepayer asset, potential loss of parking and the nature and scale of the development.
Council is actually a party to the proposal — even more reason for there to be full transparency.
Reasons of COVID-19 safety, undue pressure on presenters, or privacy, could all have been dealt with simply.
A proper process could have listed those who wished to give evidence privately for an “in-camera” session while everyone else spoke publicly.
Rather than an audience, the hearing could have been live-streamed, eliminating COVID-19 and potential intimidation of presenters.
And, the public would be able to see and hear the thoughts of fellow ratepayers.
Council would have been able to demonstrate a clear and open process.
Viewers would have seen them listening, heard them ask questions and may well have gained some confidence in a process that so far has been poorly conceived, and received.
While there is a commitment to release a video of the proceedings sometime later this month, it is no substitute for an open public hearing.
The worst reason for the shut-out is that it wasn’t a formal council meeting, and therefore was never open to the public.
Blaming the residents’ group advert for the confusion is just muddying the water.
This is an issue of huge community concern, evidenced by the volume of submissions.
The rate-paying community deserved better.
32°C