Council Representative Capacity 1

While tempted to include this section in the chapter on governance, I have included it here because the individual focus of Council representatives lends itself more to a discussion on capacity, with inhibitors and facilitators more a factor of the capacity of individuals, and not the more general forms of governance employed by the GCC. In this sense, the capacity and commitment of Council representatives exerts a major influence on the

ability of the Precinct Program to increase levels of community capacity.

It is noteworthy that the main instigators driving the development and implementation of the Community Precinct Program, GCC community development officer Lindy Mackey, and the then General Manager David Lovell, have since left the organisation. The capacity of the GCC to continue supporting the Program in the absence of its architects is a question integral to assessing the capacity of the Precinct Program to incorporate and enhance sustainability concerns in practice.

7.2.2.1 Council staff

Council staff use the precinct committees as a consultative tool. Planning schemes, proposed developments, policies, and capital works are put out to

the community for comment, with the Precinct Program serving as an

important avenue for such consultation to take place. The utility of the precinct committees for consultation is recognised by GCC staff, and yet there is an underlying suspicion about their effectiveness. Staff often speak at precinct meetings, particularly when an issue of concern is raised within a

precinct area A GCC representative discusses the effectiveness of some

consultation exercises:

I mean you have got all these issues that are being raised and you have managers that have to go and give these presentations to the precincts, five people. I mean I just looked at the Tolosa minutes just before I came inJ five people turned up. And you had three people from the Glenorchy Council, I mean you had eight people there and three Council employees. I have had Council officers tell me, 'I have got to go and speak for one hour to a group of four people'. Now these people are having to leave other work to spend [tiine talking] to four people, and it goes right up to the manager level. Managers have huge responsibilities, that is why they get so much money and I just look at this and say, 'how is this whole thing working?' (GCC representative).

Such experiences instil in Council staff a sense of futility. The lack of faith in

the Precinct Program is evident at some meetings, with guest speakers

consistently withdrawing, despite repeated attempts by precinct committees to initiate a forum to address local concerns. In one instance, a staff member was due to speak at a precinct meeting after having previously pulled out

twice; this led to precinct members jokingly labelling the speaker as 'yellow'.

Such experiences suggest, in the estimation of precinct members, that some

Council staff are frustrated by the Precinct Program as an avenue to

obtaining valid community feedback. Thus, relations among precinct committees and Council staff are undermined by a lack of confidence by staff in the Precinct Program, and the related interpretation by precinct members that Council does not value their opinion.

Chapter 7 Capacity

7 .2.2.2 Aldermen

Each precinct is assigned an Alderman, who is to serve as a representative of the Council. Aldermen are links between precinct committees and Council.

'

Aldermen exert a significant influence on the workings of precincts, acting as facilitators and inhibitors. When a precinct is assigned an Alderman who lacks ability, or exhibits disinterest in fulfilling the required role, the precinct conununity is at a distinct disadvantage. In this regard, one community member recounted a case in which the influence of an Alderman directly effected the capacity of a precinct committee to function:

They had one of the, say, more difficult Councillors as their

Council [representative] and I am not saying that he set out to

destroy the precinct, but he certainly didn't improve the situation, and as a result it more or less died. I think a lot of that is directly attributable to the fellow's negative attitude to everything that

happened and I think that was very wrong (community member).

If Aldermen fulfil the role of linking Council and precinct committees, the benefits to the precincts, and the therefore the Council, are tangible and significant. A community member here discusses the history of their Precinct in terms of the assigned Aldermen:

So I mean [ a specific Alderman] did attend every meeting but then it was a liaison between him and [the Council Liaison Officers] so the last six months has been really good with things drifting back to us . . . and they were quite good but the two before the that, well it's only the last six months that those issues have been sort of resolved (community member).

The influence of Aldermen as individuals directly acting as inhibitors or facilitators of precincts is overt. Of particular interest in the case of the GCC is the political make-up of the Council. I have addressed this issue elsewhere (see section 2.4) and here I will examine the influence of the developing debate in terms of its effect on the Precinct Program.

7.2.2.3 Conflicts among Aldermen

Since the GCC has embraced new forms of governance, a split has developed between two groups of Aldermen about the role of local government. The split has manifest in opinions about the utility of the Precinct Program. Where a minority of three Aldermen was opposed to the new forms of governance between 2000 and 2002, the Council elections in October 2002 resulted in this minority of three increasing to five. The increase in opposition to the new role of Council, and the Precinct Program, occurred during the research period. That the disagreement among Aldermen must have some influence is recognised, "the way the political argument occurs within the media and out there in the community, does and must have a sign�ficant influence on the outcome" (GCC representative), although identifying the nature of the influence is not clear:

I think it has also had a negative impact on some individuals who have been involved in the Program as well, however, having said that, I think it is also possible that it may have the opposite effect; it may result in those people who are currently involved in it, believe in it, actually standing up and agitating for its continuation in a way that they may not have done if that political difference wasn't there (GCC representative).

Debate has been heated and public, most notably in the 'Letters to the Editor' section of Hobart newspaper, The Mercury. I have introduced these in direct relation to the Precinct Program in section 2.4. Events in which a group of Aldermen has risen in opposition to the Mayor, and against the new forms of governance initiated by the GCC (section 2.4) illustrates the nature of the situation Debate has centred on the value and legitimacy of Glenorchy's new direction, and Council's financial debt. These events culminated in the minority faction within Council walking out of the Chamber. Such infighting generated much debate, with the editor of The Mercury stating, "it is no

l

Chapter 7 Capacity

(The Mercury, 20 February 2003a, 16). Debate has seemingly divided the conununity, attracting comments such as:

The Mayor presides over a Council that is a shambles and is clearly close to collapse (The Mercunj, 22 February 2003b, 24).

Mr Clarke says the Council is a shambles and clearly close to collapse. Since when? Since the appearance of Mr Mav and his cobbers, that's when (The Mercun;, 25 February 2003c, 16).

Aldermen are also engaging in debate through the newspaper, with Alderman Nigel Jones, one of the minority, responding to Alderman Jim Manson:

While Mr Manson and the other faction members are scared of open public debate on Council community programs, the so­ called rebels are walking the streets, doorknocking, phoning and attending community meetings to hear the people of Glenorchy's concerns about the huge debt and poorly funded essential services

(The Mercury 25 February 2003c, 16).

Another result of the split in Council is the withdrawal of the five minority Alderman from the Precinct Program. Choosing not to participate in the Precincts sends a clear message to the public that the Precinct Program is not a viable, legitimate, or successful program.

7.3

_{Chapter Overview}

While I did not seek to directly measure community capacity in the three communities of Collinsvale/Glenlusk, Rosetta/Montrose, and Tolosa, I did seek to identify facilitators and challenges to the task of increasing community capacity. I achieved this task by examining projects and initiatives attempted by the precinct committees, and evaluated those factors that acted to aid or inhibit projects undertaken. As a result of such investigations, the capacity of precinct communities proved to be increasing, with leaders within the community playing an integral role. However,

various factors serve as inhibitors, most notably, the low level of interest and conunitment from members of the community in becoming involved. The lack of emphasis on education and learning for precin�t members also inhibits the further progress of the Precinct Program.

Local government has an important role to play in facilitating the creation and mobilisation of community capacity (Lowndes and Wilson 2001). In this regard, the GCC does fill a role integral to supplying resources to the precinct communities. However, the direct link to Council also inhibits the precincts' operation by enforcing a strict meeting framework not particularly well suited to fulfilling the precincts' consultative role, and by maintaining Council's sense of ownership over the agenda of the Precinct Program. GCC

Aldermen also play a integral role by providing the link between Council and precincts which can be beneficial, but also negative, as illustrated by the

current split in Council, with five of the 12 Aldermen wishing to end the Precinct Program.

Chapter 8 Synthesis and Conclusion