May I wish everyone Happy New Year for 2022. Covid is really upon us, and I should advise that my wife and I are triple vaccinated. Regardless of that I am laying low and avoiding crowded events in order not to expose anyone who needs to meet with me from time to time to any unnecessary risk and to ensure the Mountain is always able to be represented at Council meetings.

It has become a precarious situation in that if I am away, or any other councillor, in a tied vote 3-3, the Mayor can use his casting vote to decide the matter. That is how Cr Michael Enright was elected Deputy Mayor when Cr Marshall Chalk was on leave.

THE MAJORITY DECIDED NOT TO RENEW THE CEO’S EMPLOYMENT CONTRACT FOR ANOTHER FOUR YEARS
The first time that councillors were asked to decide this matter was in early September last year. After a lengthy process to ensure we were fully informed to make this decision, the matter was put to a vote on 9 November 2021 meeting of the Council and the decision was made to not renew the contract. It was passed on a vote 4-3, with the Mayor, Cr Enright, and Cr West voting against.

The decision was made, and media informed, and the CEO was verbally advised. We learned some nine weeks later the legalities to carry out the decision had not been carried out. This omission opened the door for the Mayor to call a Special Meeting of Council for 12 January to rescind the decision of 9 November.

The Mayor opened the meeting last week, declaring I had a conflict of interest, and after a four-hour debate it was resolved by a majority vote that I had no conflict of interest. With that out of the way, the meeting could commence. After another two hours of debate, nothing was resolved because at the end of the meeting a declaration was made that all councillors had a conflict of interest. The meeting was abandoned as enough uncertainty was generated, and it was voted five votes to two to refer the impasse to the Minister to resolve.

This raises a lot of issues that are yet to be unpacked. Many who listened to the meeting's audio stream are calling it a mutiny and a failure to respect the democratic process, some are saying it is an abuse of power, a failure of the administration or both.

GROWTH MANAGEMENT STUDY PROPOSES TO ALLOW MORE SUBDIVISION ON THE MOUNTAIN
The Ordinary Meeting agenda of 18 January has an item on Council’s Growth Management Study. The State Government requires this report to demonstrate how its planning scheme will cater for an extra 11,000 dwellings in the next 20 years and address its housing needs etc.
I don’t agree with the report as it pertains to Tamborine Mountain.

The study suggests some subdivisions should be allowed on the Mountain when this is not the will of the majority. It is contrary to the existing scheme which says no subdivision is permitted for the Mountain.
If it is allowed, coupled with a dual occupancy, building unit plan subdivisions, secondary housing, and dual occupancy, it is my assessment the population would be headed for close to 10,000 by 2041.
My views are that our existing crumbling road infrastructure, lack of water security, lack of government services, shortage of recreation facilities, a pool not-fit-for-purpose, a single arterial road across the Mountain, increased congestion and noise from traffic, lack of footpaths and recreation trails, terrible drainage issues, habitats and wildlife degradation from tree clearing, and light pollution of our night sky from more housing are threats to our amenity that was not sufficiently considered by the consultants or Council strategic planners in preparing the report.
These are likely to be front and centre issues at the 2024 elections should we not be voting in the GCCC elections instead.

I also disagree with the accuracy of some of the figures in the report relating to Tamborine Mountain. For instance, it has a table showing that in 2041 the Mountain will have a projected 3087 dwellings, when in fact we have over 3,500 already. 

 I have personally delivered brochures to every dwelling a half-dozen times over many years.

The document says the current permanent population of the Mountain is 8344, Scenic Rim’s largest population centre. We are landlocked, whereas Beaudesert and Boonah have land to expand around their towns where we don’t.

A Tamborine Mountain population increase will increase our density, and our amenity will likely decline. This is not the case in Beaudesert and Boonah where the density can stay the same or decrease as their footprint increases into the available surrounding land.

The Mountain’s footprint is just one-third of one per cent of the total footprint of the Scenic Rim’s total area.

It is also noted that councillors have been advised that even without any changes to the planning scheme it is likely the Scenic Rim could reach its housing quota in 20 years without any further subdivision of the Mountain.

 So why is this being thrust upon us?
This "one size fits all" policy is a failure of the Scenic Rim and costly for Tamborine Mountain. It represents a dangerous turnaround and complete disregard for our values or the wishes of the people.

Please make your views known during this consultation phase and let Scenic Rim know we want our lifestyle and liveability protected. No more subdivision under any circumstances!

Derek Swanborough
Councillor Division 1
derek.s@Scenicrim.qld.gov.au
Ph 0436 351 567

These are my personal views. I do not purport to speak on behalf of the Council. Decisions of Council are made only by majority vote, the legislative authority or under authority delegated by Council.