Councillors who take developer donations decline meetings with protesting residents
The Gold Coast’s best hotel beachfront site is about to get the council tick for redevelopment. The untold story here is about councillor conflicts.
Gold Coast
Don't miss out on the headlines from Gold Coast. Followed categories will be added to My News.
The Gold Coast’s best hotel beachfront site is about to get the council tick for redevelopment. Kirra will become a mega upmarket resort. The untold story here is about councillor conflicts.
Read the resident submissions on council’s online planning about the $380m project.
They are not anti-development. Their concern with the three towers is about density and “ruining the laid-back and natural look of the southern Gold Coast”.
But there other big complaint is about “a lack of councillor representation”.
A resident who is a landscape architect and admits to being pro-development, wrote: “It feels like the system is broken when our elected local councillor accepts money from a developer and thus refuses to discuss concerns locals have within her division.”
Cr Gail O’Neill declared obtaining $10,000 from Ganra Pty Ltd a month before the 2016 poll. Planning chair Cameron Caldwell also recorded receiving a similar amount.
The company is directed by former coal baron Brian Flannery and his wife Peggy. They spent about $22m buying the old hotel site opposite the Kirra surf club.
Residents asked both councillors to discuss the project. They declined citing “major conflicts”.
Let’s be clear, there’s no accusation here of any wrongdoing. Councillors have made their declarations. Residents are just frustrated.
Cr O’Neill told your columnist she understood their “dissatisfaction”.
“But due to my conflict I feel it is the right thing for me to declare and play no role in the assessment or decision making for Kirra Beach Hotel. There was already approval for that site for a 10 and 15 storey building before I became councillor,” she said.
New laws introduced in 2020 put wider restrictions on councillors with conflicts.
“It’s really complex. They can talk to residents, if permission has been sought and granted by councillors,” a council source says.
“The councillors are trying to do the right thing by putting it as arm’s length. It’s difficult.”
Deputy Mayor Donna Gates was also approached by residents. She had a minor conflict, but sought and gained the permission of councillors to attend a meeting with residents.
Councillor Hermann Vorster has no conflicts and spoke at length with them. They left happy.
Ask councillors to define “prescribed” and “declarable” conflicts – you will need at least 20 minutes of time to understand a process everyone admits is confusing.
A “prescribed” conflict where you receive a financial benefit greater than $2000, hits a higher threshold than a “declarable” conflict – say simply knowing a friend or relative involved.
The reforms mean you are not just removed from voting and debating, but the lead-up.
A council insider told your columnist: “For better or worse, the former system was far superior. Now prior to a decision being made, a councillor can’t talk to the community.”
A solution would be to allow a councillor with a conflict “to gather” feedback from their community.
Present that information to councillors and officers at a meeting, then leave the room and allow others not conflicted to vote.
The landscape architect is right about the system being “broken”. It’s happened before at council planning, but Kirra is the worst example of it.
These laws need to revisited. Community needs a voice through their area councillors.
Originally published as Councillors who take developer donations decline meetings with protesting residents