by Rod Mitchell | 9 March 2024
Recently Campbell Spence wrote an article on What is Woke in response to a recent open question by a Councillor on the Cook Statue debate. The woke concept of dividing by race, gender and sexuality as opposed to the commonality that unites us, all also seeks an extension of uniformity through group think.
“Groupthink occurs when a group of well-intentioned people make irrational or non-optimal decisions that are spurred by the urge to conform or the discouragement of dissent.” – Psychology Today
Group think in its worst form leads to poor decision making, lack of creativity, resistance to ideas, and believing only facts that support existing opinions.
Group think occurs more frequently in government organisations (including our Councils) due in part through monopoly or market power. When an organisation does not transact in a competitive environment, behavioural change that focuses on group think, uniformity and internal as opposed to external focus tend to dominate.
Decisions made in these environments do not bare the same consequences as the “consumer”, read rate payer cannot seek Council services elsewhere.
Lack of market competitiveness in the context of a Council, will more than likely lead to inefficiencies, greater emphasis on internal staff needs and demands, as opposed to client service (rate paper) outcomes and overpayment for goods and services. Contractors and service providers also see them coming!
In the City of Port Phillip, average salary rates and conditions are higher on average than those in the private sector. Over staffing and working from home appears to also be out of control. The result is a sluggish inefficient workforce that remains internally focused. To exacerbate and consolidate the group think, senior appointments are like a round robin of employment offers from other Councils, where similar thinking is entrenched with staff with little exposure to market forces and the private sector.
Nothing could be more evident in the group think culture of the City of Port Phillip than a recent “self-promoting” LinkedIn conversation while shameless in its public display, is to many, also nauseating.
This conversation of senior Council employees and heads of trading associations talk about the $65 million brought into the CoPP through various events neatly packaged on a Council film promotion entitled “City of Port Phillip – Reflections in 2023”. Incidentally, the price of the film clip and the reason for the film clip beyond unnecessary self-promotion, are not disclosed. Neither does there appear to be much rigour in the film clip with lack of benchmarks and no previous year’s data for comparison.
“Huge thanks to you, your team and the CoPP for the efforts and focus on returning the vibrancy back into our high streets and communities”. The praise goes back and forth and yet it takes little time to work through the fog of low-level sophistry with a dose of unmentioned reality.
- Acland Street with the worst rental vacancy in Victoria,
- Unsettled traders in Carlise Street which made the news throughout 2023,
- The problems within Clarendon Street with homelessness and drugs (along with Fitzroy and Acland streets) and the
- Myth of the rejuvenation of Fitzroy Street- Its more spin than reality.
In relation to Fitzroy Street, a recent walk through and discussion with a local retailer was met with derision on the “vibrancy” of this high street. The self-assessed praise by some on Fitzroy Street is comparable to the Hans Christian Andersen folktale of “The Emperor’s New Clothes.”
Our high streets which are our life blood, remain in various states of anaemia and frankly embarrassing. No master plan, just more playing around the edges with thought bubbles.
What does get discussed in the film is only part of the CoPP story which includes some achievements not driven by Council and cosy non-bread and butter issues (yes, it’s nice that the library is being used.)
Major issues that created a lot of unrest among the rate payers – the Rubbish Collection contract including service standards and the Current Affair expose on street cleaning staff at the CoPP were not touched on. There has been no audit review of the allegations pertaining to the street cleaning staff, and many would argue a breach of Council governance in not having a full independent audit with findings made public. Do not hold your breath on anything happening there. And when rate payers are crying for a return to the traditional Council remit of rates, rubbish and roads, we get poorly maintained infrastructure, graffiti filled streets, litter and rubbish. My home, St Kilda is a disgrace and a testimony to this council failure. A proper plan for rejuvenation of our urban centres and high streets including a focus on the basic remit, sells itself. It would not need a self-promotional film clip to gloss over the reality we currently face.
Under group think, if there is something to see, we the rate payers should not need worry. Just keep paying your rates and please keep the noise down – alternative facts go against the culture!
Read More >
By Josh Szental | 23 February 2024
I am a resident in St Kilda East, and I oppose Council’s proposal to construct a separated bicycle lane on Inkerman Street between St Kilda Rd and Hotham St with the removal of 116 car parks (option A). I spoke at Council on 21 February 2024 in relation to Council’s Integrated Transport Strategy.
Since the Integrated Transport Strategy was written in 2018, and protected bicycle lanes have been rolled out in various locations, residents and traders have widely objected, because these bike lanes have caused safety issues, made driving and parking very difficult, caused economic damage to local businesses and are not used by the majority of residents.
Examples of poorly considered transport infrastructure are unfortunately plentiful in Port Phillip: the introduction of the tram super stop in Acland Street, which resulted in road closure to traffic and loss of car parking which has resulted in economic losses and shop vacancies, is one. Another is Fitzroy St, which suffered from the loss of car parking when the separated bicycle lane was introduced.
It was therefore encouraging that Council amended their Integrated Transport Strategy at the 21 February 2024 council meeting, changing Action 18 from
“Deliver a network of dedicated and continuous protected bike corridors to create safer routes for all ages and abilities.”
to
“Deliver a range of interventions to build a network of connected, safe riding options, ensuring safety for people of all ages and abilities and continue to explore opportunities for the provision of protected bike lanes in the City of Port Phillip.” and also to “advocate to State government to deliver protected bike corridors on state-managed arterial roads”
The removal of protected bicycle lanes as the only option to create safer cycling routes is a rare win for common sense. Councillors voted along party lines to adopt these changes:
For: Cr Bond, Cr Clark, Cr Crawford, Cr Cunsolo, Cr Pearl, Cr Sirakoff
Against: Cr Baxter, Cr Martin
Abstained: Cr Nyaguy (who walked out of the meeting prior to the vote)
I strongly support this amendment, especially considering the time and cost blowouts reported by council, and wholeheartedly congratulate Council for their sensible amendment to this strategy. Many residents would be aghast to learn that Council now projects that the Inkerman St bicycle lane will cost almost $10 million.
Community consultation is a key pillar of making community-minded decisions. However, the way in which surveys are conducted determines whether the results can be relied upon as a true gauge of community sentiment. The community survey undertaken by Council for the Integrated Transport Strategy change is instructive of how survey results can be biased, and it is promising that the majority of Councillors were able to recognise the flawed results and vote accordingly.
The community survey (Item 10.1 at https://portphillip.infocouncil.biz/Open/2024/02/ORD_21022024_AGN_AT_WEB.htm) had 78 responses, where 87% of respondents said they currently ride a bike. Compare this to the National Walking and Cycling Participation Survey 2021 (https://www.cwanz.com.au/national-walking-and-cycling-participation-survey-2021/) where only 18% of Australians rode a bike over the previous week and 40% over the previous year (and this was during the COVID pandemic where bike riding increased). Why did 87% of respondents say they rode a bike regularly vs. 18% of the Australian public?
Because, Council specifically sought feedback from the Port Phillip Bicycle Users Group who are actively lobbying council to adopt Option A for Inkerman St (https://www.ppbug.org/bug-blog/tag/inkerman+st), which would result in 116 car spaces being removed.
This is a good demonstration of selection bias in a small community survey, where the vast majority of residents in Port Phillip have not “had their say”. The survey responses are not indicative of community support, but of what a dedicated group of bike enthusiasts believe. Residents of Port Phillip know that most of our local roads are quiet and safe for cyclists.
I am happy that council are talking a more holistic and considered approach to the complex issue of transport, and agree entirely with Council lobbying the Victorian Government to fund bicycle corridors along State-managed arterial roads.
Sensible strategies can be implemented if the views of the whole community are taken into account.
Proposals which remove car parking spots from our roads, which the majority of residents use and require, should be voted down by Council. Council should instead promote cycling infrastructure to improve safety only where there is objective safety data to demonstrate risk, and the needs of the wider community can be carefully considered. Balanced approaches to transport in our community will ensure that Port Phillip remains a great place to live and work.
Read More >
Have you ever wondered how Port Phillip rates compare with neighbouring Councils such as Bayside, Stonnington or Glen Eira? Here is your chance to find out with our newly updated 2023 Calculator.
Read More >
At Council’s meeting of 23rd June, Crs Bond, Clark, Pearl and Sirakoff raised a motion to freeze rates. Unfortunately, Crs Baxter, Copsey, Crawford, Cunsolo and Martin did not support this motion. This is at a time Council is forecasting a $14 million operating surplus, an additional $2.3 million of rates revenue from new properties, and a $4.4 million cash surplus.
Our question remains – if not this year, when would a rate relief for all residents and businesses be supported?
After 16 months of living with COVID-19 and 4 lockdowns (now 5) resulting in devastating financial and mental health impacts on residents and businesses across Port Phillip, a rates freeze would have been a sign of goodwill and support to all the community.
Crs Bond, Clark, Pearl and Sirakoff voted against subsequent motions to increase rates and unrestrained spending from the $4.4m cash surplus, as well as a hardship motion because of unclear eligibility definitions and a lack of detailed program costing (as admitted by council officers). Keeping in mind, council only needed to allocate $2 million from this surplus to avoid any rate increase this year.
• Yes, there will be an average increase across 74,500 properties of $27, but not all properties are equal
• If your property value does not change, your rates will increase by 2.4%
• If your property value increases by 2%, your rates will increase by 4.5%
• If your property value increases by 5%, your rates will increase by 7.5%
• If your property value increases by 10%, your rates will increase by 12.65%
AND: If your property value FALLS by 0.9%, your rates will still INCREASE by 1.5%
Why is this so?This is due to a shift in rates revenue raising from commercial/industrial properties to residential properties, which resulted in an overall 4.5% increase in raised revenue from residential properties.
Do You Think Rates Should Have Been Increased for 2021-22?
**The City of Port Phillip have not authorised the use of the images of Councillors**
Read More >
How much would your rates be if you lived in one of our neighbouring Councils such as Bayside, Stonnington or Glen Eira? Here is your chance to find out the real truth. Just enter your property value into the calculator and find out.
Property rates calculator
2021-22 Residential rates comparison
| Port Phillip | Stonnington | Glen Eira | Bayside | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Rates | ||||
| Charges: | $0 | $ | $ | $ |
| Total: | ||||
| Percentage difference between Port Phillip and other councils | ||||
Are you surprised? Council have been telling us for years that Port Phillip rates are comparable with other municipalities but here is your proof. We are paying excessive rates; we get poor value for money and they are growing massively every year and are not sustainable. We are paying more and getting less. Our neighbours pay less rates and get green and food waste bins and free parking permits, as shown in the table below.
| Service | Port Phillip | Stonnington | Glen Eira | Bayside |
| Kerbside Waste services | ||||
| · Landfill bin | 120L weekly | 120L weekly | 120L weekly | 140L weekly |
| · Green bin | No | Fortnightly optional* | Fortnightly | Fortnightly |
| · Food bin | No | Fortnightly optional* | Fortnightly optional* | Fortnightly optional* |
| Residential Parking Permits for eligible properties | $84 each | Two free | One free | Four free |
* $98 per year
Council set to raise rates again in 2021-22 Budget!
Council have just published their Draft 2021-22 Budget for community consultation. If you are concerned about Council’s plan to increase rates yet again and you have not already done so, please contact the following Councillors and ask them to not to increase rates in the 2021-22 Budget when they vote on the motion on 23rd
June. Cr Baxter – Tim.Baxter@portphillip.vic.gov.au 0466 495 250
Cr Copsey – Katherine.Copsey@portphillip.vic.gov.au 0466 478 949
Mayor Crawford – Louise.Crawford@portphillip.vic.gov.au 0466 514 643
Cr Cunsolo – Heather.Cunsolo@portphillip.vic.gov.au 0466 227 014
Cr Martin – Peter.Martin@portphillip.vic.gov.au 0435 390 821
Only four Councillors have publicly stated they support a rates freeze. They are:
Cr Bond – Andrew.Bond@portphillip.vic.gov.au 0481 034 028
Cr Clarke – Rhonda.Clark@portphillip.vic.gov.au 0435 098 738
Cr Pearl – Marcus.Pearl@portphillip.vic.gov.au 0466 448 272
Cr Sirakoff – Christina.Sirakoff@portphillip.vic.gov.au 0435 419 930
What else should you know?
We believe Council must become more efficient in delivering services to our community. We are told by Council that a rate freeze means services must be cut but we say Council does not need to prepare reports that nobody wants or reads. Writing a report that is 200 or 300 pages long that nobody reads is not a service. If Councillors vote in favour of a rate freeze then the CEO and his team will need to identify efficiencies rather than cut services. Port Phillip Council denies there is a rate problem in Port Phillip, but ratepayers are only painfully aware they are paying twice, three or more times the rates paid for properties of similar value in neighbouring Councils. Council uses average rates to benchmark Port Phillip to other Councils, but average rates are misleading and deceptive because we have a much higher ratio of units / apartments to houses and that skews to average towards a lower number. Refer: https://ropp.org.au/fact-check-how-high-are-port-phillip-rates-compared-to-neighbouring-councils/
Donations
Donations are so much appreciated particularly if you have not already donated. Donate to https://ropp.org.au/our-charter/donations/ or BSB 063-188 Acc. 10461095
Your donations help fund our activities such as maintaining the website, printing of materials and holding meetings.
What matters to you?
Please contact us if you would like to get involved and tell us what matters to you at mail@ropp.au.au or https://ropp.org.au/contact-us/
Join RoPP & help us create a better council
Snap Pol Do you think your council rates are too high?
Read More >
HELP US STOP THIS RATEPAYER RIP-OFF
Despite covid hardships Council are about to vote on their upcoming budget and are planning to yet again increase rates, to pay for their overstaffing and wage increases.
Council have been addicted to increasing rates to feed their self-serving employment habits, supporting their massive bureaucracy employing 30-100% more staff than other councils. $93M pa, is spent on paying for their massive wages alone that’s 41% of the rates we pay just on staffing costs. Then there is the needless overspending on consultants an additional $10 M pa + to do the jobs that council workers should be capable of doing in-house. Then there is the unabated spending on non-core services just to keep people in jobs that shouldn’t exist at council. Residents expect focus and spending to be on basic services.
Then there is the pointless report writing on projects that serve no purpose other than securing jobs. Council does not need to prepare reports that nobody wants or reads. Writing a report that is 200 or 300 pages long that nobody reads is not a service. If Councillors vote in favour of a rate freeze then the CEO and his team will need to identify efficiencies rather than cut servicesNeedless spending on State & Federal issues outside Councils jurisdiction, just to employ more staff – eg public housing, education, legal services & international grants. Far too much off our ratepayer money goes towards projects that are state and national government responsibilities. Totally unnecessary and uncalled for spending of ratepayers already taxed monies.
The only people who will benefit from the rate increases are Council employees!”
Did you know that you pay more rates, whether directly or via rent, than those in neighbouring Councils? Rates calculator. For a median house, it’s between 22% and 60% more rates & charges than those in neighbouring Councils pay
Did you know that you get less basic services in Port Phillip like no green/food bins and having to pay for all parking permits for those comparatively high rates?( Link to rates calculator section )
Did you know that Council is unable to budget effectively, and refuses to control its spending?
Did you know Port Phillip Council is running the second highest deficit of suburban metropolitan Councils.
Did you know That Council are unable/unwilling to prioritise spending and benchmark themselves against other Councils.
Did you know Your Council has proven time and time again that it will only meet it’s high-spending agenda through raising yet more rates and charges from us all; renters, traders and owner-occupiers alike.
Did you know that Councils prioritise salaries over providing basic service. For example, green waste and food waste bins. If you’d like your Councillors to hold the CEO and Senior Management accountable for their continual reliance on ever increasing rates and charges, ask them to find efficiencies instead.
MAKE YOUR VOICE HEARD & SAY NO TO A RATES RISE IN 2021.CONTACT YOUR COUNCILLOR NOW:-
The Councillors that have already pledged to freeze your rates:
Christina.Sirakoff@portphillip.vic.gov.au 0435 419 930
Rhonda.Clark@portphillip.vic.gov.au 0435 098 738
Marcus.Pearl@portphillip.vic.gov.au 0466 448 272
Andrew.Bond@portphillip.vic.gov.au 0481 034 028
The remainder, who need to understand the importance of this issue:
Heather.Cunsolo@portphillip.vic.gov.au 0466 227 014
Peter.Martin@portphillip.vic.gov.au 0435 390 821
Louise.Crawford@portphillip.vic.gov.au 0466 514 643
Tim.Baxter@portphillip.vic.gov.au 0466 495 250
Katherine.Copsey@portphillip.vic.gov.au 0466 478 949
Start asking questions of your Council and the Councillors that represent you. “IT’S TIME TO FREEZE RATES”
Join RoPP & help us create a better council
Snap Poll – Do you think we need such high numbers of Council employees?
Read More >
We hope you are well and are positive about 2021 after a difficult 2020. Following the recent election, Port Phillip Council has commenced developing its Council Plan for the next 4 years and the 2021-22 Budget. If ratepayers ever have a chance of freezing rates it is now.
Several RoPP members are attending community engagement workshops to help shape the Council plan and we were surprised to see there is no mention in council’s strategic directions that rates should be affordable and sustainable. We pay some of the largest rates in Victoria.
Council has denied there is a rate problem in Port Phillip, but ratepayers are only painfully aware they are paying twice, three or more times the rates paid for properties of similar value in neighbouring Councils. Council have used average rates to benchmark Port Phillip to other Councils. However, average rates are misleading and deceptive to use because we have a much higher ratio of units / apartments to houses than neighbouring Councils and we are the most densely populated municipality in Victoria. Refer: https://ropp.org.au/fact-check-how-high-are-port-phillip-rates-compared-to-neighbouring-councils/
RoPP were successful in getting two RoPP endorsed Councillors elected as a result of disgruntled ratepayers who object to paying massive rates. Our own research shows that ratepayers believe they are getting poor value for money for their rates. We don’t even have free parking permits and green waste bins that are provided by other Councils.
We are advocating for a rate freeze in 2021-22 because of the following:
1) rates were excessive pre-COVID.
2) impact of the pandemic on income and jobs.
The economic shock from the COVID-19 pandemic hit Port Phillip hard in 2020, with local community spending plunging and a decline in the September quarter’s GRP (Gross Regional Product) of 14 per cent across the municipality, exceeding the state-wide fall of 11%.
Council should reduce rates or freeze rates without impacting services by stopping the wasteful spending on services that should be provided by State or Commonwealth governments or do not benefit the residents and ratepayers in Port Phillip. We want Council to focus on the greater good for the citizens of Port Phillip rather than vested interests that currently dominate Council’s agendas. We want transparent and competent financial management to deliver efficiently the services the community expects. We want Council to deliver services to the community and not spend money on report writing and expensive consultants. Council must look after ratepayers and traders who are experiencing real hardship during the current economic emergency caused by COVID.
What can you do to get a rate freeze?
Not all Councillors want a rate freeze, but you may be able to influence them to freeze rates by emailing them or speaking to them or speaking at Council meetings. You can send emails to the following addresses:
Canal Ward
Tim.Baxter@portphillip.vic.gov.au
0466 495 250
Rhonda.Clark@portphillip.vic.gov.au
0435 098 738
Louise.Crawford@portphillip.vic.gov.au
0466 514 643
Gateway Ward
Heather.Cunsolo@portphillip.vic.gov.au
0466 227 014
Peter.Martin@portphillip.vic.gov.au
0435 390 821
Marcus.Pearl@portphillip.vic.gov.au
0466 448 272
Lake Ward
Andrew.Bond@portphillip.vic.gov.au
0481 034 028
Katherine.Copsey@portphillip.vic.gov.au
0466 478 949
Christina.Sirakoff@portphillip.vic.gov.au
0435 419 930
Tell us what matters to you and have your say?
Read More >
Ropp did extremely well in Octobers Council elections having 2 out of our 3 candidates winning seats at Council. Unfortunately Sami just missed out having been pipped at the post by Heather Consolo another independent candidate for Gateway Ward. This was very unfortunate for the future power battles making it more difficult to gain the advantage with a 5 vote to 4 needed to get motions across the line.
Your independent Councillors Christina Sirakoff and Rhonda Clark have been extremely busy since the elections coming up to speed with council operations and getting to grips with other councillors. Their biggest challenge will be to work with like minded councillors to bring our high spending Council under control. For over 20 years this high spending Council has been left unchecked governing for political parties and narrow ideological interests and having lost site of its purpose being to govern for the whole community. (Council Officers are required to execute Councillor voted motion but in the past Council was dominated by Labor/ Greens/ progressive independents) But RoPP’s independent Councillors have shifted the balance of power and our councillors will not be bullied and hoodwinked by a council that has previously run anti-community and high spending agenda. RoPP have a small but growing support team of experts that are there to assist our Councillors to make sense and analyse the mountain of paperwork placed in our councillors paths to make their lives more difficult than it should otherwise be.
The power play will be most interesting as our team start to hit their straps and gain confidence in doing battle with the intrenched self interest factions within council that pander to a conga line of vested interest and overly represented minorities. RoPP members can be assured that our team are focused on holding Council accountable to sensible spending and the first core item on the 2021 agenda is RATES.
Read More >
Our Councillors and Council have been making it difficult for our long-term senior citizens to stay in their homes.
There are many residents in Port Phillip, like Tanya*, who face the nightmare of Council demanding exorbitant rates from them knowing that with a small fixed income or pension they will never be able to pay. In most cases, these residents are simply the innocent victims of overspending councils and unaffordable rates.
As example, in 1983 when Adrian bought his first home in Middle Park the rates were $500 per annum. Now they are $5000 but the level of services has not substantially increased. Council’s solution to these struggling residents is to reverse mortgage their property to the council or sell and move elsewhere. Council then has a caveat on their homes.
The measly ‘help’ council provides to those on a pension card
https://www.portphillip.vic.gov.au/council-services/rates-and-valuations/rates-concessions-and-rates-hardship-relief
Many retired residents in Port Phillip are stalwarts of their communities. Many were born and bred in the areas they now live and are proud to call our suburbs home. When council relentlessly increases rates to levels not seen in other parts of Melbourne, questions must be asked about the fairness of a rates system that forces the elderly to reverse mortgage their homes.
The current high level of Port Phillip rates is adding needless stress to our senior citizens in an already stressful year. They just want to quietly live out their lives, on their fixed incomes, in the homes that they raised their families in.
WE SAY- we should not tolerate this appalling treatment of our senior citizens and we demand that rates for seniors should be cut. Council spend millions every year on frivolous ideologically inspired projects that wastes millions of our dollars and only increases the pressure for those who are retired. With almost 42% of all Council income being spent on employing between 800-900 council public servants, many more than neighbouring councils, one reason for our high rates is evident. Many seem to exist to endlessly write reports and are not directly involved in providing services. This is a massive self-serving bureaucracy that has much room for efficiencies and improved productivity so we can better look after vulnerable people in our community. Real charity should begin with our elderly ratepayers who are long-term residents of the City of Port Phillip.
Shame on our Councillors and our Council for putting our residents into debt.
*Tanya’s story is real and is one echoed throughout Port Phillip but her name and face has been changed to protect her identity. Council provides retirees with the option to defer payment of their rates until their properties are sold at which time, they collect the unpaid rates plus interest of 5% p.a. which is effectively a reverse mortgage.
Snap Poll – Do you think our Council are serving the needs of all residents and ratepayers?
Read More >
Out of touch council are removing car parking spaces with little regard for the needs of residents & traders
Council has a massive financial dependence on car parking fees and fines and are on an ideological mission to remove car parking spaces.
Port Phillip Council Sustainable Transport Policy and Parking Rates
“Council is seeking to achieve a reduced reliance on usage of private cars.”
Council are out of touch with residents because we do not expect to pay for a parking permit when we are already paying massive rates and there are not enough car parks. Council are grasping at any opportunity to claw in cash to fund their massive bureaucracy. Parking is on their $$$ radar with little regard for residents or retail business’s needs.
RoPP’s Parking Policies:
- One free permit for all eligible properties.
- Encourage customers to shopping precincts with low cost parking.
- We do not support the unnecessary removal of car parks across the community, especially at shopping precincts.
- Use real-world car ownership and parking data to assess the parking needs of the community and traders, both now and into the future.
- Ensure adequate and fair access to parking for homes.
- Ensure all apartment building developments have parking available on site for all apartments.
Council are out of touch with residents’ needs when it comes to parking and traffic management. Despite the vast majority of residents owning one or more cars*, Port Phillip Council’s ideological focus has been on the removal of parking spaces, even though it is well established that cars are essential to our community. Particularly for families to go shopping, to pick up children from school or sports, to commute to work, or to visit family and friends. This is especially true for the aged.
Council’s ideology has had a detrimental effect on narrowing streets and making it more difficult for drivers and more dangerous for cyclists when bike lanes are placed in the wrong locations. Removal of valuable parking spaces which is destroying business for our traders. Council’s deliberate strategy is changing our growing neighbourhoods – and not for the better.
Fitzroy and Acland Streets once thriving, vibrant icons of our city have been decimated by poor planning. Most street parking has been removed, turning these once thriving and magnetic attractions into quiet retail back-waters.
Planning for growth
While Council expect community numbers to grow, they are reducing our road lanes and parking. The table below shows the revenue from parking fees and fines. The lack of adequate car parking and excessive cost discourages our community and visitors dining or shopping in Port Phillip
https://www.portphillip.vic.gov.au/about-the-council/strategies-policies-and-plans/transport-policies-strategies-and-plans Move – Connect – Live
| Income/Revenue ($mil) | Actual | Forecast | Budget | Projection |
| Statutory Fees & Fines | 18/19 | 19/20 | 20/21 | 21/22 |
| Parking Fines | $ 19.5 | $ 15.0 | $ 15.0 | $ 19.3 |
| User Fees | ||||
| Parking Fees | $ 18.3 | $ 15.8 | $ 16.5 | $ 19.4 |
| TOTAL | $ 37.7 | $ 30.8 | $ 31.5 | $ 38.6 |
Based on the current view from the street, should tell Council officers that 6 months of 2020/21 will pass by and the Budgeted $15M of revenue to 1st January due to Lockdown will be more likely $10M. ****
Council are alienating their constituents by implementing the “Move-Connect-Live” strategy, which is motorphobic that fails to recognise that car use is necessary in today’s society, and their strategy will impinge on collection of 20% of Council’s total revenue.
Resident On-Street Parking
Rates within the Port Phillip Council are amongst the highest in Melbourne*** yet residents still have to pay for their parking permits. Unlike residents of nearby councils, where Glen Eira residents get one parking permit for free, Stonnington residents get two free parking permits and Bayside residents get four free parking permits. One would think that for the exorbitant amount we are forced to pay we would be at least able to park one of our our vehicles for free outside our own homes. But our council needs the cash so they charge an additional annual “Parking Permit” fee. Another ‘Anti Community Tax’
Recently RoPP asked the Council about these fees and here was Council’s Reply:-
“The Parking Permit pricing is not intended to increase revenue but to achieve a cost neutral outcome” Council Staff
We Say – If this is the case then why does Council charge this fee in the first place and not just make on street parking to eligible residents FREE?
Our pledge to ratepayers, should our Candidates gain the balance of power within the Council in the upcoming elections is that we will ensure on street parking for eligible ratepayers is FREE.
Council should maximise parking availability and minimise costs to residents to provide amenity to the majority of the community that rely on convenient car parking. Parking fees for residents should be reasonable and Council should not rely on excessive parking income from residents as a means to prop up its budget**. Residents and visitors should not be prevented from an outing in Port Phillip due to the cost of parking.
Source Documents
* https://profile.id.com.au/port-phillip/car-ownership
** Parking fees, fines and permits are second only to rates as Council’s biggest revenue source.
*** https://ropp.org.au/fact-check-how-high-are-port-phillip-rates-compared-to-neighbouring-councils/
**** https://www.portphillip.vic.gov.au/media/1njpkxws/14-6-att-1-principle-approval.pdf
Snap Poll – Do you think that on street parking for residents should be included in their rates?
Read More >DID YOU KNOW?
Councillors Baxter & Copsey voted against upgrading the Advanced Waste Processing & Sorting of Kerbside…
Read More >
FOGO (Food Organics and Garden Organics) bins are becoming more popular as a waste management…
Read More >
Major Melbourne councils have been slammed as “out of touch” for spending more than half…
Read More >
The City of Port Phillip is the best part of Melbourne (in our humble opinion). Our beachside suburbs, parks, and laid-back neighbourhoods make our city one of the most liveable in Australia. But climate change is affecting our way of life. The probability of bushfires, rising sea levels and flooding threaten our City, our country and our way of life.
How can council contribute to reducing carbon emissions?
Council certainly has a role to play in reducing carbon emissions, but council itself is only responsible for <1% of emissions in the City of Port Phillip. To council’s credit, they are expected to achieve zero net emissions in 2020/21, a fantastic outcome.
Councils can play a small role in helping us all reduce our climate footprint through education and encouragement. However, the big changes needed, like less carbon-intensive energy sources and cleaner modes of transport, can only be meaningfully addressed by state and federal governments. We want our Council to deliver cost-effective, measured actions on climate change. Not write yet more reports nor run ineffective programs.
What is the biggest impact council can have for a sustainable future?
The City of Port Phillip is surrounded by councils that provide food waste and green waste bin services. Port Phillip sends over 70% of waste to landfill[1], whereas the average Victorian council saves 50% more waste from landfill than Port Phillip.
Why hasn’t council provided green and food waste bins to residents in the past?
The option to introduce a green and food waste bins was considered by council in 2018[2] but rejected because it “was found to be extremely expensive due to high set up costs, and would only meet the needs of half of our community.” This decision by our council to deny residents green/food waste bin services has resulted in an extra 8,000[3] tonnes of waste going to landfill per year.
Council is trialling FOGO (food organics and garden organics) waste bins, only after the Victorian government mandated these bins to be rolled out by 2030 (‘Recycling Victoria, a new economy’).
Other councils have had these bins for many years and they are highly effective at reducing waste sent to landfill. For a council that has declared a ‘climate emergency’, it is very contradictory that this important sustainability measure was not introduced earlier and even now, it will not be fully implemented for some time yet.
Is the new waste & amenity levy the best response to the Victorian Government mandate?
RoPP is against Council increasing the financial burden on the community. Council ought to be able to fund essential services, like food and green waste, without resorting to a new tax – one that will increase the total amount of rates & charges collected by our Council.
Port Phillip’s current level of services are substandard and do not meet community expectations, as green and food waste bins are long overdue. Council must prioritise spending or find efficiencies to deliver these basic services. Now. Why can’t this Council get the basics right?
Instead, Council’s plan for a “waste & amenity” levy is a double-dip tax, a cynical way to collect yet more funds from us all, under the guise of the waste crisis, which council themselves have contributed to.
When you are voting in the October election, ask yourself:
- Is it acceptable that existing Councillors, who are mostly Labor party and Greens party endorsed, have not already introduced green and food waste services?
- Will this candidate vote for a new tax (waste & amenity levy), over and above existing rates & charges?
- Will this candidate finally bring in food and green waste collection- with no increase to the total amount of rates & charges collected from residents and ratepayers?
- Will this candidate support trialling new services and writing long strategy reports, or just get on with it? There’s no need to reinvent the wheel, just do what other Councils have been doing for years!
[1] https://knowyourcouncil.vic.gov.au/councils/port-phillip/reports/waste-collection
[2] Council meeting 17 October 2018, item 11.1 (http://www.portphillip.vic.gov.au/Minutes%20Ordinary%20Council%2017%20October%202018.pdf)
[3] 21,000 tonnes of garbage per year. 38% is organic and green. Source: http://www.portphillip.vic.gov.au/default/WasteManagementOperationsDocuments/WM_ Waste_Recycling_A4_6PP_0317_PROOF5_Spreads.pdf
Snap poll – Is green waste collection important to you?
Read More >
With 800-900 Council employees plus millions more spent on consultants*.
Council used to be about serving the local community, but it seems that the tables have turned and now we the residents and ratepayers have to bow to the excessive demands foisted upon us by Council. Our Port Phillip Council boasts between 800 – 900 employees at an average cost of $110,000 each. That’s 42% of the entire $237 million council budget or 70% of the annual rates of $132 million dollars we pay each year.
Why is Port Phillip Council such a massive and costly bureaucracy? Why does Port Phillip employ 440 more staff than Bayside, 378 more than Hobsons Bay and 240 more than Stonnington?
Every 4 years we elect new councillors to breath some new life into the council as well as take control and guide the CEO and oversee the direction and running of the various departments within the council. Clearly the last batch of councillors have either neglected this task or lacked the skill sets to rein in the wasteful runaway spending.
The question needs to be asked: “who is running the council?” It is a direct cost to the ratepayers and currently we pay some of the highest rates compared to other councils in the state.
Our council has a fiduciary responsibility to ensure that every hard-earned dollar they collect from us is spent to provide ratepayers and residents the best value for money. They appear to have unfortunately forgotten this and seem to have no accountability to ratepayers.
With so many people employed is it any wonder why there are so many reports written and activities being planned or rolled out, with staff and management creating work to keep themselves occupied and justify their existence.
The question begs to be answered – do we really need a council with so many employees?
We say – it’s time for change and we the residents and ratepayers of the City of Port Phillip deserve a better deal than the overcharging and mismanagement we are receiving from our council. It is time to hold Councillors accountable for their actions and rein in their spending. It is not their money… it’s ours. Ratepayers and residents alike…
* Council does not disclose the amount spent on Consultants, but the amount is included in the $90 million budget for material and services. Seems like a well-protected secret! Source
Snap Poll – Do you think Council needs to spend $93 million or 42% of its budget on employees to deliver the services we receive?
Read More >
8 September update: See below the updated chart for
2020-21 Port Phillip rates compared to rates plus fixed charges of neighbouring councils rates
Spoiler Alert: Port Phillip council has significantly higher rates than neighbouring councils. Read the full article to understand why using average rates per property cannot be used to compare councils, and why more relevant metrics reveal that the City of Port Phillip is a high taxing and comparatively inefficient council.
Some groups in our community are claiming that rates in Port Phillip are lower than neighbouring councils. Let’s fact check that! It is important that you have the facts for the upcoming October council elections.
Firstly, let’s look at how much council collects in income. Port Phillip collects $129 million in Rates & Charges, and $95 million in other charges such as fees, fines and grants, that’s much higher than neighbouring councils (Figure 1).
Figure 1: 2019-20 Budget. Total Council Income
So, what is the reason for this? There are a few reasons why Port Phillip might need to collect higher rates, let’s look at each:
- Coverage area & length of local roads
- Population
- Total number of properties
1. Coverage area
The larger a municipality is, the more money needs to be spent on maintaining roads, footpaths, parks, street lights, stormwater pipes etc. Does this explain the high rates?
| Port Phillip | Bayside | Glen Eira | Stonnington | |
| Coverage area (km2) | 20.7 | 37.2 | 38.7 | 25.7 |
| Rates ($mil) / km2 | $6.24 | $2.63 | $2.95 | $4.48 |
| Length of local roads (km) | 215 | 355 | 433 | 261 |
| Rates ($K)/ km | $602 | $276 | $264 | $442 |
No, it doesn’t. Port Phillip has the smallest area and the shortest length of roads, but the highest rates. Port Phillip spends more than double some neighbouring councils based on these metrics. See Table 1.
2. Population
Council services are most fairly compared based on population. This is because council provides services like libraries, parks, activity centres, childcare, customer service centres, parking permits etc. based on how many people they need to service. Does this explain the high rates?
| Port Phillip | Bayside | Glen Eira | Stonnington | |
| Population | 110,634 | 104,274 | 151,439 | 113,737 |
No it doesn’t. Port Phillip has higher rates & charges per resident than neighbouring councils (see Figure 2), and there is an interesting reason for that. City of Port Phillip employ more staff than neighbouring councils, and pay their staff more than neighbouring councils. The cost to ratepayers is huge at almost $100 million (see Figure 3):
| Port Phillip | Bayside | Glen Eira | Stonnington | |
| Staff numbers (FTE) | 883 | 440 | 860 | 642 |
| Average staff cost | $109,442 | $106,619 | $94,477 | $104,850 |
| Total staff cost | $96.6 million | $46.9 million | $81.3 million | $67.3 million |
Each resident in the City of Port Phillip pays $873 for council staff costs, whereas for the other three councils, the cost ranges from $450 to $592.
See Figure 4.
The City of Port Phillip say that because they choose to provide services that others may not, that this is an unfair comparison. And yes, we agree to an extent.
Port Phillip state that the extra staff they employ are for council-run childcare centres (85 staff), parking enforcement (45 staff), for street / beach cleaning, and for teams to run South Melbourne Market and major festivals like St Kilda Festival (70 staff). But even when these additional staff costs are removed, Port Phillip remains the most expensive and inefficient council compared to its neighbours.
3. Total number of properties
For a minority of services, like collecting rubbish, the number of properties does influence cost. But in the City of Port Phillip, waste management only accounts for 5.3% of the total spend, according to the Essential Services Commission.
Some groups with vested interests in keeping rates high (often because they have their hands in council’s pockets), have claimed that average rates per property should be used to compare the rates charged by different councils. Let’s look at why that is not a valid way to compare rates (and why those groups use this metric to deceive the public):
Reason 1 – Port Phillip has a higher number of residential properties
We know that most services council provides depend on the number of people they provide services to and the infrastructure they service (see sections above).
Port Phillip has a high number of residential properties. Or alternatively, you could say that there are less residents per property (see Figure 5):
Whether residents live in large properties together, or in small properties alone, this doesn’t change the total amount of rates being charged by a council; it only changes the average rates per property. That’s why average rates per property is a poor measure of whether council rates are comparatively high or low. The fact is, that given we have so many residential properties in a small area, rates should be a whole lot lower!
Reason 2 – Not all properties are the same
We have a progressive rates system whereby the level of rates you pay is proportional to your property value. While there are many small apartments paying rates similar to neighbouring councils, the brunt of high rates is borne by those with higher property values, many of whom may not have the propensity to pay (the value of your property does not always indicate your income).
The reason average rates per property in Port Phillip are the same, or even slightly lower than, neighbouring councils, is because of the positive skew distribution in property values. Port Phillip has a large number of apartments which are lower in value than the median (middlemost) property value. This results in a statistical deception – the average rates per property does not reflect why rates are so expensive overall, especially for many ratepayers in Port Phillip.
Conclusion
Port Phillip council has significantly higher rates than neighbouring councils based on all relevant metrics except average rates per property, which are not useful in making comparisons between councils. Groups with vested interests will try to convince you that there is no problem with Port Phillip council rates. Hopefully this article explains why you shouldn’t believe their deceptive claims!
What more can we say? If our rates were truly the same as neighbouring councils with the same level of services, our community group wouldn’t need to exist at all.
Disclaimer:
All figures stated in this article are taken from the 2019-2020 council budgets. Rates & Charges quoted include the fixed per property charges that almost all councils charge (75 of the 79 Victorian councils charge for waste services on a per property basis).
Sources:
Snap poll – We should not pay higher rates to live in Port Phillip municipality
Read More >- « Previous
- 1
- 2
DID YOU KNOW?
Councillors Baxter & Copsey voted against upgrading the Advanced Waste Processing & Sorting of Kerbside…
Read More >
FOGO (Food Organics and Garden Organics) bins are becoming more popular as a waste management…
Read More >
Major Melbourne councils have been slammed as “out of touch” for spending more than half…
Read More >
Recent Comments