WHILE a Memorandum of Understanding between South Gippsland Shire Council and South Gippsland Landcare Network was endorsed at Wednesday’s council meeting, that only occurred by the narrowest of margins, Mayor John Schelling casting the deciding vote.
Councillors Sarah Gilligan, Bron Beach, Brad Snell and Clare Williams also supported the establishment of the MOU, with Cr Gilligan the most outspoken, arguing it is an opportunity for council to start doing better in partnering with community groups.
She highlighted the aim of protecting and enhancing the environment, stressing that it is outlined in Council’s Vision and plans, and spoke of the willingness of the many members of the various landcare groups belonging to the Network to help council with its enormous weed and pest control responsibilities along the Great Southern Rail Trail.
Cr Gilligan argued the MOU is aligned to council’s strategies.
“I do not see, when they’re aligning everything they’re planning on doing, and saying they’re going to check it over with us, how this can suddenly be something we’re feeling blindsided by,” she said, in response to comments from other councillors.
Cr Scott Rae was the fiercest critic of the proposed arrangement, arguing the associated costs to council and ratepayers is an example of cost shifting from State Government, and expressing concerns about the impact on farmland that the partnership between council and South Gippsland Landcare Network would have.
Cr Nathan Hersey argued more details of the benefits of the arrangement are needed, she also voted against establishing the MOU at this stage, suggesting further discussions be held.
Councillors Steve Findlay and John Kennedy also opposed the MOU arrangement.
Cr Rae argued the $50,000 a year budgeted towards the partnership between council and the local Landcare Network could be better spent on required sporting facilities, footpaths, roadside weed management and other requirements.
Noting South Gippsland Shire’s strong reliance on agriculture, he stated “I cannot see ratepayers’ money funnelled to an organisation that has openly promoted and encouraged revegetation of farmland with no scope to ever farm that land again; this organisation enables this to happen and I can’t support it.”
“Landcare is a State and Federally funded organisation,” he stressed, adding he can’t back such a cost shift to ratepayers.
He argued the MOU won’t improve on the existing partnership between council and South Gippsland Landcare Network, towards which council contributes $5000 annually for Pedal and Plant activities.
Cr Hersey noted the motion before councillors was to determine the suitability of the proposed MOU arrangement, not to debate the value of Landcare, adding the organisation does great things for the community and contributes to the local area, but questioning the need for an MOU.
“Just as Landcare does great things in our community, so do a heap of other local groups, therefore, why is it that we’re entering into a formal MOU with one organisation, yet not others?”
He said councillors had been told they would be presented with a business case demonstrating good return for investment in relation to the MOU agreement with the local Landcare Network, but that hasn’t happened.
However, Cr Williams argued that establishing the MOU would build on council’s existing relationship with the South Gippsland Landcare Network, praising its volunteers and the services they provide.
“I value our volunteers and we should be giving back to them,” she said, explaining the $50,000 annual amount would create certainty, enabling plans to be made and a budget to be prepared for the projects required, and can help take Landcare’s already valuable activities to the next level.
