Seventeen submissions and a gallery full of people was the community's response to the Nambucca Shire Council's controversial draft roadside management policy, which was up for discussion at Thursday's week's meeting.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
Residents were overwhelmingly opposed to the proposed charge $500 charge and $30 annual fee for the establishment and maintenance of a no-spray register of property owners who will control weeds along their frontage themselves.
There was also opposition to the ongoing use of herbicides.
Retired councillor Paula Flack told the meeting the 30 years of roadside maintenance she and her partner had done constituted a saving to the council budget and she strongly opposed the proposed fee.
"Back in 1988 the council voted residents were given the green light to erect their own 'no spray' signs and we didn't have to pay - this proposal is onerous and inequitable," Ms Flack said.
"Why should those who can't afford to pay be prejudiced. I have yet to find another Local Government Area that is doing this."
She proposed the Environmental Levy be used to create the register with GPS co-ordinates of participating landholders and requested the deferral of the decision to allow further community feedback.
Another resident, Matthew McGovern, raised questions about where responsibilities lay in the case of an accident involving someone working on the roadside.
"I don't believe the issue of safety has been properly addressed in this policy," Mr McGovern said.
He also asked about the metrics of the program and whether goals for weed removal had been set.
The mayor Rhonda Hoban took the comments on board when she proposed changes to the recommendations to include a statement that reflected the work done to minimise the impact of chemical use.
She also noted the Council's commitment to continue to monitor best practice and any improvements in technology.
This information is to be placed on Council's website with the current Roadside Maintenance Policy to be deleted.
She further proposed that costs associated with the establishment of the no-spray register be funded by the environmental levy up to the sum of ten thousand dollars ($10,000) for the next 12 months and that both the policy and costs be reviewed after that time.
Cr John Ainsworth foreshadowed a motion requiring organic producers to show their certification in order to be included on the register.
"I feel what we are proposing here is extremely problematic," he said.
Cr Anne Smyth said she completely disagreed.
"You don't need to be an organic grower to have concerns about chemical sprays - what about those residents who are chemically sensitive," Cr Smyth said.
Cr Susan Jenvey said the proposal was the perfect spend of levy funds and was an excellent way to nurture the nascent organic industry in the shire.
The motion including the changes was eventually passed to applause from the public gallery.
Also making the news:
Ute Schulenberg
Journalism was always my plan but plans being what they are, I did not get to realise it until my early 40s ... and have loved every minute since. For me community journalism is the most intimate and honest place to be in this field - telling the stories of people I live with, side-by-side, every day. It is an honour.
Journalism was always my plan but plans being what they are, I did not get to realise it until my early 40s ... and have loved every minute since. For me community journalism is the most intimate and honest place to be in this field - telling the stories of people I live with, side-by-side, every day. It is an honour.
