There is a push led by Councillor Doug Curran to reduce the number of councillors from 12 to nine.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
On Tuesday council will debate whether or not to hold a referendum on the matter during the next by-election.
In the leadup to the debate The Area News spoke to the councillors to ask what they think of the idea of reducing the number of councillors.
Here are their responses.
RELATED
Doug Curran.
I think that council can operate more effectively with less councillors.
There are a lot of other councils that have reduced their numbers and are travelling very well.
The savings could be spent in the community.
I believe we should give the community a voice.
No one is a target here. I’m in the same boat as everyone else; we’re all up for election in two years’ time.
We’re not voting on the basis of whether we should be keeping our jobs, we should be voting to get the best outcome for the community.
Quite a few people from the community spoke to me [supporting the idea of fewer councillors] before I put the Notice of Motion forward. The message I’ve gotten since the last article [published in The Area News] is that people whole-heartedly agree, that a reduction in numbers is a better way to go.
Simone Croce
I don’t think it’s ideal.
Working as a council is about representing the community; that’s the important thing.
We’re a diverse culture here in Griffith, as I’m sure you’ve noticed.
It’s a very busy job, and I don’t think there’s anyone who doesn’t pull their weight. I think every councillor provides value. They all put in the hard yards, and a lot of people don’t recognise the work they do. It’s a rewarding job, but it can be quite unrecognised. You don’t always get accolades.
The less councillors you have the more work those councillors have to do, and that workload might cut into their employment. If you’re a regular wage earner, that might make it harder and harder. You want anyone in the community, any Joe Blow, to have the opportunity to represent the community as a councillor. That’s why I do it. It’s grassroots politics.
I know I earn my keep. It’s up to council to decide. If we had 9 councillors this time around, we wouldn’t have councillor Longhurst, Mercuri, and Mardon. They’ve done a lot. You can’t discount all the hard work they’ve done; they’ve been very diligent, very busy, you can’t just take it away. In the big picture, councillors work pretty cheap on an hourly rate.
Rina Mercuri
A few people have asked Doug Curran about reducing the numbers. I do understand it. There is a bit of a saving to the council if we reduce to 9 councillors. The only problem is we have so many committees on council. Griffith City Council involves the community in so many things, we don’t make all those decisions without consultation. I don’t know how we are going to spread ourselves thinner than we do.
Some councillors are on a lot of committees. I know personally I can’t take on any more committees. I simply don’t have time. You know it’s always good to have that extra time for the decision making. When something comes up that needs to be debated in council if you have 12 you’ve got more options on the issues at hand. If you can get a diverse 9 it would be Ok, but if you get too many like minded people are we getting the results we want? Those are some of the concerns.
Either way I’m happy with it. We do really need to think about it. We’ll discuss it in council and I’ll listen to the other councillors and I’ll base my decision on that. There are different opinions, different views, and I will be guided by the majority.
Deb Longhurst
I’m of two minds. I can understand his [Doug Curran’s] point, but I think there is some value in having people from a number of different walks of life and maintaining that number. I am still debating that within my own head.
Brian Simpson.
I think it’s a good opportunity to let the people make a decision.
I think it has its merits. I don’t think it’s appropriate to indicate which way I’m leaning, either for or against.
Mike Neville
It think it stands to reason; if you benchmark us to councils with a similar size and large populations they manage better with smaller numbers.
This issue is a matter of what the community’s saying and wanting.
I support considering the option, and the reason being the better value for money.
To be quite frank it reduces the opportunity for factionalism and creates opportunity where councillors are accountable. If you look at the numbers we have something like 9 thousand electors. It’s a thousands of electors per councillor. It’s great representation in terms of the community having more people to have an input.
But the issue for me is value for money. Just because we’ve always had 12 councillors, that’s no justification.
We’ve got to look at continuing ways to respond to the changes in the community.
It’s an opportune time to consider it because we’ve got a by-election. Cost-wise, it’s negligible to hold a referendum, but it provides us information to work with into the next election.
There’s a lot of arguments for and against, but on this occasion let’s let the community decide.
Eddy Mardon
I reserve my decisions at the moment. I’ve got to have a think. I haven’t made up my mind, yet.
I’ll be listening to all the points for and against at the meeting on Tuesday.
If we had 9 councillors, they would have to be full-time.
There are a lot of committees, and I’m worried about the amount of committee meetings each of the councillors undertake.
John Dal Broi.
No thoughts. I would have thought that the appropriate action for that would have been to put it to the council before he put it to the press. If it is endorsed by the council then we would consult with the community. It’s premature and I’m a little disappointed it’s been out in the media before the council had the opportunity to discuss it.
Anne Napoli
Doug Curran is within his right to bring in that motion, and I admire his initiative, but I’m not sure at the moment how I feel about it. I have thought long and hard about it, and I believe we should keep 12.
I’m happy to listen to the views of the community. I have not had anyone mention to me that we should cut back the number of councillors.
Griffith City Council has always functioned well with 12 sitting at council. They’re trying to compare us with other centres, but Griffith is growing and I think 12 is better than 9 or 7 to manage that growth.
It also gives the opportunity to those who want to make a difference to their community. I’d like to hear the views of the community and look for the best course of action.
Christine Stead.
While I believe the community needs to have a say on such matter, I think a referendum is not the most appropriate way to find out what they really think.
I would prefer a community forum. I would imagine anyone that was interested in discussing what the number should be would benefit from a forum. It could give them the ability to put forward their views. If it gets to that, it’s good to know what the community thinks.
It’s also good for councillors to have their say; they’re not always au fait with the work that councillors do, and it’s difficult unless they regularly attend council meetings.