Residents turn out in force for a meeting about Mitcham Council’s decision to spend $40k supporting the Yes vote for the Voice campaign

It was standing room only at a suburban council meeting after furious residents were left in the dark about a decision to spend $40k on a campaign for the ‘Yes’ vote.

Mitcham Council resident Rachel Trembath says the verges in her area are not maintained, as the council spends $40k on campaigning for the Voice to parliament. Picture Dean Martin

Mitcham Council has backflipped on its decision to spend almost $40,000 campaigning for the Yes vote ahead of the national Voice to parliament referendum.

At a packed meeting on Tuesday, the motion to revoke the decision was won by a majority vote of seven to three.

Ratepayers crammed into the council chambers and two overflow rooms for the special meeting after they were left in the dark about the decision – made in June – without consulting residents of the area.

Five deputations were heard from community members prior to debate on the issue.

A subsequent motion to reallocate $38,700 in funds towards reconciliation was lost six to four. All the funds originally allocated to the ‘Yes’ campaign were returned to the budget.

The original motion, put forward by mayor Heather Holmes-Ross, to allocate the funds was carried by a majority of councillors at a June 20 full council meeting, with the money to be spent on “facilitating a major public information event targeting undecided voters”.

It was also set to be put towards running “smaller community events” and grants to the Blackwood Reconciliation Group or “other community groups”.

Speaking before the meeting, Mitcham resident Neil Baron slammed the decision to support the Voice proposal without consulting ratepayers.

“If you’re going to spend the money it’s a good idea to ask the community,” Mr Baron, who is retired and lives in Panorama, said.

He urged the council to “get back to what they do” such as providing services for the community, instead of becoming involved in the debate.

South Australian Federation of Residents and Ratepayers Associations president Kevin Kaeding said the decision from the council was inappropriate.

“It’s not appropriate unless it was endorsed by the ratepayers,” Mr Kaeding said.

“Ratepayers’ money has gone into just this one vote.

Mitcham Mayor, Heather Holmes-Ross. Picture Dean Martin

“It’s an individual thing and it’s up to the individual to vote the way they choose.”

The decision to put the money towards the campaign angered some residents who argued the money should be put toward maintaining unkempt areas.

Pauline Archer, whose property overlooks Donnybrook Reserve, Bellevue Heights, told The Advertiser there was “a general untidiness in the area”.

“It needs to be maintained a lot better than this but that’s what we put up with,” Ms Archer, 77, said.

Mitcham Council resident Rachel Trembath says the verges in her area are not maintained. Picture: Dean Martin

“Councils should be impartial and they’re there to look after the ratepayers.

“We’ve got some overgrown trees but the council doesn’t believe in pruning.”

Ms Archer described the Voice campaign spending as “unfair” when footpaths and verges in the area need urgent attention.

“A lot of people in that council area would need help with footpaths.”