AFTER receiving my invitation to join the Green Waste Bin Service early in June it crossed my mind that of the three options, the third, No Green Waste Bin Service was quite superfluous, especially seeing that a reply paid envelope was enclosed.
What sort of commercially responsible organisation would want to pay for a negative reply?
Not wanting the service, I did not reply, saving my rates the cost of the reply paid postage.
How wrong I was, as this non reply then prompted a reminder from our mayor that I had not replied and extending the deadline from 22 June to 6 July, not wanting another reminder I have now replied.
I did wonder why it was so important that I give a written notice that I did not want the service.
Some more light was shed on the matter with an article (Mail, 3 July) stating that of the 20,311 responses received, only 8687 residents required the service. Now I don’t know how many surveys were sent out, but I do know that the reply paid postage alone, for the 11,624 “no” responses cost we ratepayers at least $5812.
The unknown number of recalcitrants like me, who stupidly thought we were saving our rates the expense of the reply postage, have in fact incurred significant additional cost for the reminder letter from our not so economically minded mayor.
This all comes of course from our cash strapped shire that can’t find a few dollars to keep our indoor pool open or who require the sports clubs to pay for mowing the ovals or procrastinated over the cost of drainage to relocate the soccer club.
The need for the follow up letter became more apparent after collecting a copy of the “Improving Burning off in the Yarra Ranges” options discussion paper, this rather daunting 30 page document, if genuinely seeking community input, could have been presented in a more user friendly form.
The document makes many references to the “Green Waste Bin Service” as an option to burning off and yet the shire survey letters refer to the service as a proposal. It appears to me that the provision of the service is a fait accompli that will exist no matter what the cost, as it is integral to the planned changes to the open air burning local law. Does this mean that if insufficient residents take up the option, the service will be subsidised by all ratepayers?
This whole exercise has just reinforced my long held view that the effective governing of a shire as diverse and large as Yarra Ranges is beyond the capability of a single administration. This view is supported after wading through the options document and while a creditable effort has been made to address issues unique to specific areas I hope the final result will reflect those special needs and not be high jacked by any anti open air burning pressure.
This shire promotes and often insists on the planting of indigenous native trees on private property, which year round shed branches large and small and to think that the control of the fuel load generated on any reasonably sized property without burning would show a complete lack of understanding of what happens outside of suburbia.
John Anwin
Healesville
Dollars and sense
I WRITE in response to David Blair (Mail, 3 July).
To say that Puffing Billy runs at a loss each year is nonsense and shows a lack of understanding of the organisation.
To say that PB’s losses are covered by the taxpayer is also a distortion of the facts. PB only receives money for capital works or for improvements to infrastructure. It is run by two separate boards, the Puffing Billy Preservation Society and the Emerald Tourist Railway Board.
The ETRB runs the day to day operations of the railway and does report losses in some years. The losses that you refer to do not take into account the activities of the Puffing Billy Preservation Society that generates millions of dollars each year for Puffing Billy.
Some of PBPS activities include Night Trains, Puffing Billy Fun Run, Luncheon Trains, Thomas the Tank Engine days, Commissioner Specials (in the past) and Driver Experience Trains.
Other alternative avenues of funding also include The Andrews Foundation. The PBPS raises so much money that it recently restored the line to Gembrook and restored the Garrett Steam Engine. Both projects cost millions of dollars to complete – hardly the actions of an organisation going under in debt.
If you were to combine the bottom line of these two organisations you would find a healthy profit was made each and every year.
Every dollar in ticket sales and associated activities such as restaurants, Healesville Sanctuary, wineries, food, cafes, accommodation, petroleum, hospitality, technicians, IT and electrical, building, transport and logistics also attracts 10 per cent GST. For every dollar that the government donates to a railway an amount of tax will be paid in future returns. If the railway is as popular as PBR then you have a 100 per cent certainty that every $1 will be paid back in full!
While PBR itself generates about $1.3 million annually, there is also another $20 million-plus being spent in associated and non-associated industries.
Remove PBR and you remove the catalyst or the reason for those dollars and the local networks and economy.
In any good and decent economy view, PBR is not just a good investment, it’s also the backbone of one giant economic cycle of added value.
This too could easily be applied to Yarra Valley Tourist Railway, not only would another catalyst be created but a new area of economic value added.
Nick Doensen
Woori Yallock
Think again!
I READ in the paper about an undisclosed warehouse to be built on the Maroondah Highway at the entrance to our beautiful town of Healesville (Mail, 10 July).
We should have trees and more picnic areas for people to enjoy our magnificent scenery here in Healesville. Please think again!
Angela and Bill Rose
Healesville
Suburbia arrives
I RECENTLY read an article on the Yarra Valley in Best Drives Magazine from 2003, in which the author described Yarra Glen as a “… quaint town that, given the growth in the valley, has an almost suburban feel”.
Now four years later, with council approval of a large shopping complex for Yarra Glen, the transformation to suburbia will be realised.
A key objective of the Yarra Ranges planning scheme, the protection of the rural character of small towns in the region, has been yet jettisoned again.
Yarra Glen will get its own equivalent of Healesville’s monolithic East End development with a massive roof top car park to boot.
This was never just an argument about a supermarket. If you take out the landscaping of a small area of non-useable flood prone land, you are left with a grossly oversized architectural eyesore.
Even at the height of the “greed is good” era of the 1980s there was a more sympathetic and coherent approach to township development.
The “this development or no development” claims of supporters of the plan were disingenuous and reducing the debate to simply one of people disliking change is patronising and naive.
Yet again we have allowed developers to drive planning, and we have missed the opportunity for a really sensitive development outcome for Yarra Glen.
I am really grateful to the minority action group and Yarra Ranges councillors Jeanette McCrae, Monica Keane and Samantha Dunn for their commitment and effort in trying to protect Yarra Glen township from an inappropriate development that is overpowering in its scale and design.
Jacqui Feagan
Healesville
Save the pool
A RESIDENT of Seville, I have always used the local pool. I have always looked at the pool and thought why doesn’t the shire do something about the condition of it.
One year they put up a sail for the toddler pool and it got ripped so it was never replaced.
They spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on paths and putting a playground that hardly is used.
Why not have some kind of fundraising for the pool, along with the council grant and make an indoor pool?
There are five schools within the vicinity of the pool and they all could use it for swimming lessons.
It makes me sick that they spend millions on pamphlets about councillors that I don’t want to receive and not only that, they send two if there are two adults at the one household. What a waste of money.
Stop this advertising that most people don’t want and put it into the pool and I’m sure you will be halfway there.
Please don’t get rid of our pool. It is an icon and we deserve to have it there for now and forever.
Michelle O’Dea
Seville
ANOTHER election is coming around and we see Liberal Fran Bailey talking about health services in the Upper Yarra.
At the last election Ms Bailey promoted an after hours service to the Upper Yarra, then immediately changed her tune when re-elected.
This has been the pattern for the past 11 long years and yet we still don’t have an effective service in this area.
No doubt money will be touted as available and “Chequebook Bailey” will attempt another election swindle by claiming to secure funds for a service but what will the detail really reveal?
At the last election, our communities worked hard for this and were led to believe a service would be established in the Upper Yarra, but as sure as the sun comes up, a quick sleight of hand and the usual twist of words and the community was thanked for delivering a service to Healesville, not the Upper Yarra!
It is time that Ms Bailey stopped playing games and delivered the service that our communities deserve.
Rob Mitchell
ALP candidate for McEwen
Ward fund objections
IN AN article (Mail, 10 July) a Shire of Yarra Ranges spokesperson was quoted as saying that the council had not received any complaints or concerns raised over the ward funds.
It was said that all five submissions were related to the rate increase. Not true!
The Lilydale Chamber of Commerce objected to the increase of ward funds. And the council’s reply? Nothing.
Apparently direction from council is required. That means nothing.
In another submission, an individual in Lilydale objected to the increase in ward funds.
The council dealt with her quite harshly stating it was a matter for council consideration.
In other words, the council told her in no uncertain terms that they can raise ward funds to whatever amount they want and we, the people of this shire who fund the money, can not and dare not question the council regarding this matter.
This is a disgrace.
The council swears by transparency but the only thing that’s transparent is the council’s intent to hide what it is really doing.
The spokesperson conveniently forgot to say that two councillors objected to the increase.
One can only imagine the terrible consequences that may arise because of their objections.
Their wards may feel the repercussion by being denied funds for projects by the rest of the councillors.
C Buckley
Healesville
