Yep, here we go - crazy plans time! It's been a while

I was thinking about this SEQ planning commission that they're starting up and thought it would be a good idea - rather than, for instance, melbourne be made up of 30 local councils, they should cut it down to six or seven and have the whole area controlled by a County Government or Commission.

I've been reading a lot about Counties in the US lately and what I would propose is not the same, the US style is a duplication of government, Counties are set within the states, Cities and Towns are incorporated inside the counties, both have police forces, planning, garbage collection etc, a lot of it makes no sense.

My counties wouldn't be a government as such so much as a planning body and a link to the state government. They would be an arm of the state and they would be able to allocate state funds for Health, Education, Transport and Policing. They would exist to report Local Issues to State Governments.

I'll give you an example of what I mean:

Here in Geelong, planning is underway for the Ring Road, it has come to light that many roads that link Corio with Lovely Banks, Geringhap and Bannockburn will become deadends, this has typically concerned residents and coucillors will write to the government, which will no doubt be met with the response too bad - so sad!

A County commission would be able to bring these things directly to MPs and Government Departments as a matter of course and would be able to co-ordinate State and City activites.

My counties would be apolitical administrative bodies, but I would allow the City governments and their mayors to be popularly elected at the ballot box or postal vote at the same time as the state elections.

More to follow...

Here's my outline for the counties in Victoria based on existing Local Govt boundaries...

http://www.imagestation.com/picture/sraid145/pecac428432888cd93fa72469625817de/f66ddc34.jpg

Also one of my wishes was to simplify Melbourne's ridiculous number of councils (around 30!) into just a handful - check it out...

http://www.imagestation.com/picture/sraid145/p5939cbd07cfc7bdb919f0236d946202a/f66ddc0a.jpg

aieee, keep local government the way it should be: local!

it'd become like the 'City v Suburbs' cases in North America. I much prefer the current arrangements of the state government being the semi-metropolitan government for Statistical Divisions.

If by 'City vs Suburbs' you mean White Flight the phenomenon back in the 50's where people abandoned inner cities for the promise of suburban homes and automobiles, that was motivated by a lot of different factors, not the least of which was that quality of life in the inner cities was pretty poor in comparison - nowadays it's even money depending on your preference.

Or is it that you mean that the suburbs would be underserved in comparison to the CBD - that's always a possibility, certainly I've never seen a great deal of council activity in Corio - whereas they're all over the waterfront and the Bellarine Penn. But I wonder, if your local council (Cardinia right?) is developing your area, say the way Brisbane City Council is building freeways through their city or the way the ACT government is building the cities 5th hub - Gunghalin and already planning it's sixth. whether you like it or not, large councils provide so many more opportunities for cities, I'd rather see (though it doesn't affect me much) Melbourne's many councils pool their funding and their talent into a body that can develop and grow the city and attack the cities problems head on without relying on the state government. Think about it - A Melbourne City with over 2 million as it's tax base would've already duplicated the Westgate, and would've expanded the tram network to it's borders without the frequent dicking around that takes place between Local Councils and Yarra Trams, just a few thoughts.

As for the counties - I see them more as a liason between Local and State government to direct where funds are required.

There are county councils in NSW, designed to deal with specific issues. However although they have alot of determination and good people behind them, usually they have no legal power and only make recommendations or encourage changes/progress to be made.

Sydney used to have the Country of Cumberland which was basically a Sydney-based body made up of Councils and State Govt, who headed up strategic planning for the Sydney basin. They went belly up.

There's a Sydney County Council, which is basically in chanrge of electricity supply. Check your meters Sydneysiders (especially those who live in slef-detached dwellings), it should say somewhere 'Sydney County Council' on it.

There's also a Hawkesbury County Council, which made up of I think councils within the Hawkebury River's catchment. Eg Hawkesbury, Penrith, Balcktown, Blue Mountains, Baulkham Hills, Hornsby, etc. They basically aim to coordinate management of the river ecosystem. Lately, theyve been dealing with introduced species - the Salvinia weed and Alligator weed.

If by 'City vs Suburbs' you mean White Flight the phenomenon back in the 50's where people abandoned inner cities for the promise of suburban homes and automobiles, that was motivated by a lot of different factors, not the least of which was that quality of life in the inner cities was pretty poor in comparison - nowadays it's even money depending on your preference.

Nope. not that.


Or is it that you mean that the suburbs would be underserved in comparison to the CBD - that's always a possibility

yep, that's what I'm talking about.

But I wonder, if your local council (Cardinia right?) is developing your area, say the way Brisbane City Council is building freeways through their city or the way the ACT government is building the cities 5th hub - Gunghalin and already planning it's sixth.

Cardinia only needs one freeway, and it's only a bypass: The Pakenham bypass, which will apparently be funded by State and Federal Governments - why does a council need to take up when it's probably going to go ahead in the short term, financed by the other two levels of government?

whether you like it or not, large councils provide so many more opportunities for cities

Such as what? parochialisms at a local level as well as regional level? No thanks.

I'd rather see (though it doesn't affect me much) Melbourne's many councils pool their funding and their talent into a body that can develop and grow the city and attack the cities problems head on without relying on the state government.

Local Councils don't have the taxing power that state governments do - I doubt they're going to give it up as well.

Think about it - A Melbourne City with over 2 million as it's tax base would've already duplicated the Westgate

Which is what we don't need.

and would've expanded the tram network to it's borders without the frequent dicking around that takes place between Local Councils and Yarra Trams, just a few thoughts.

The #75 beyond the current extension will be stretching into what you call the Yarra Ranges soon.

Moving responsibility among governments is just far too wasteful, laws and constitutions have to be re-written, massive personnel changes & you name it, it'll have to happen: when the same amount of money can just be distributed in the same way that it does now. The thing that does need to change is state government spending on Public Transport: it needs to increase.

Also - I'm not sure if people think that the large City Councils are an Americanisation of our Local Govt - I think nothing could be further from the truth - you only have to look at Los Angeles County - this Map (not current) shows LA County, Ventura County (NW), San Bernardino County (NE), Riverside County (E) and Orange County (Coastal South). Now Take the City of Los Angeles, home to 3 million (the county is home to 10m) the dark yellow area on this map. Big City right...

http://www.imagestation.com/picture/sraid104/pf34646e28c077e7d65c886f594d29214/f991f580.jpg

Now check out all the other cities that make up LA County...


Agoura Hills (21K)
Alhambra (86K)
Arcadia (53K)
Artesia (16K)
Avalon (3K)
Azusa (45K)
Baldwin Park (76K)
Bell (37K)
Bell Gardens (44K)
Bellflower (73K)
Beverly Hills (34K)
Bradbury (855)
Burbank (100K)
Calabasas (20K)
Carson (90K)
Cerritos (51K)
Claremont (34K)
Commerce (13K)
Compton (93K)
Covina (47K)
Cudahy (24K)
Culver City (39K)
Diamond Bar (56K)
Downey (107K)
Duarte (21K)
East LA (124K)
El Monte (116K)
El Segundo (16K)
Gardena (58K)
Glendale (195K)
Glendora (49K)
Hawaiian Gardens (15K)
Hawthorne (84K)
Hermosa Beach (19K)
Hidden Hills (2K)
Huntington Park (61K)
Industry (777)
Inglewood (113K)
Irwindale (1K)
La Canada Flintridge (20K)
La Habra Heights (6K)
La Mirada (47K)
La Puente (41K)
La Verne (& Shirley :lol: - Jimmy) (32K)
Lakewood (79K)
Lancaster (119K)
Lawndale (32K)
Lomita (20K)
Long Beach (462K)
LA (3,695 K)
Lynwood (70K)
Malibu (13K)
Manhattan Beach (34K)
Maywood (28K)
Monrovia (37K)
Montebello (62K)
Monterey Park (60K)
Norwalk (103K)
Palmdale (117K)
Palos Verdes Estates (13K)
Paramount (55K)
Pasadena (134K)
Pico Rivera (63K)
Pomona (149K)
Ranchos Palos Verdes (41K)
Redondo Beach (63K)
Rolling Hills (2K)
Rolling Hills Estates (8K)
Rosemead (54K)
San Dimas (35K)
San Fernando (24K)
San Gabriel (40K)
San Marino (13K)
Santa Clarita (152K)
Santa Fe Springs (17K)
Santa Monica (84K)
Sierra Madre (11K)
Signal Hill (9K)
South El Monte (21K)
South Gate (96K)
South Pasadena (24K)
Temple City (33K)
Torrance (138K)
Vernon (91)
Walnut (30K)
West Covina (105K)
West Hollywood (36k)
Westlake Village (8K)
Whittier (84K)


Now that's a lot of City Councils, only two cities with over 200,000 people - LA and Long Beach! Also look at how many tiny cities there are - basically suburbs which decided to incorporate. If Vernon had any less than 91 people they'd have to rename it Pitcairn! So Americans have cetainly taken to the concept of Local government, I think council consolidations might be more of an Australian Idea!

Cardinia only needs one freeway, and it's only a bypass: The Pakenham bypass, which will apparently be funded by State and Federal Governments - why does a council need to take up when it's probably going to go ahead in the short term, financed by the other two levels of government?


Moving responsibility among governments is just far too wasteful, laws and constitutions have to be re-written, massive personnel changes & you name it, it'll have to happen: when the same amount of money can just be distributed in the same way that it does now. The thing that does need to change is state government spending on Public Transport: it needs to increase.

These are both Valid reasons for keeping the status quo - but I think you and I have some fundamental differences on our view of the role of state government. I take it that you've probably lived most of your life in the Victorian Metro Area, your view of the state government would be not only as a law making body which controls Police, education and Hospitals, but also a builder of infrastructure in your city, public transport, trams, trains and freeways. Your Local Council is just there to collect trash, stock the library and object to high-rise development.

In country NSW, where I grew up, the State Government provided Schools, Police, Ambulance and Hospitals. Public Transport was definitely private companies - if it existed at all, planning, forget about it, there was no growth, instead there was downsizing, rail lines were shut down, banks closed, stores empty - this is where I'm coming from - not the 12 million that live in Capital cities, no, the 9 million remainder. That's what I have in mind with this crazy plan! (which, please remember, is a CRAZY plan!)

I'd like to see a single coordinating body at the county level for each metropolitan city, e.g. Cumberland County would manage regional Sydney planning, take over Sydney Water, and have a say in provision of regional health services, etc. Below that, keep the local councils to manage local libraries, parks etc. but rename them boroughs, to try and reduce some of the ridiculous parochialism that infests local guvmint in this country. And the mayor of Cumberland would be directly elected (by me), and would appoint the Lord Mayor of Sydney.

Then we could scale down the state governments. As it stands there's too much conflict between SG's role in adminitering the state and providing services to the city that should be managed by the locals for the locals.

Hear Hear - that's what I'm getting at. While there at it they should move the state capitals of the five biggest states - these cities don't need government jobs to sustain them. (Surely we can agree on that)

Bump!

Was interested to know what people thought of the idea of moving the capital (ie: The Government Functions) away from their current homes to other cities.

The Term Capital City has become a bit peverted in Australia as it has been used to describe the Biggest City as this is how our nation has evolved, this points to the fact that a Government presence is a major driver of development - you only need to look at Canberra to see this truism in it's purest form.

At this stage there is absolutely no need for the governments of the 5 biggest states to be based in the 5 metros, Sydney, Melbourne, Brisbane, Adelaide and Perth could all sustain themselves quite well without being the homebase for their state governments. What I'm proposing is that other cities get a go.

I beleive that various cities in these states should bid (much like an olympics) to become the state capital and the vote put to a voluntary statewide referrendum, this would give other cities a chance to develop into powerhouses the way our five majors have.

What does everybody think?

Also one of my wishes was to simplify Melbourne's ridiculous number of councils (around 30!) into just a handful - check it out...

http://www.imagestation.com/picture/sraid145/p5939cbd07cfc7bdb919f0236d946202a/f66ddc0a.jpg


Hope the Yarra Ranges capital is kept in Lilydale - would love to see that place go highrise.

Was interested to know what people thought of the idea of moving the capital (ie: The Government Functions) away from their current homes to other cities.

The Term Capital City has become a bit peverted in Australia as it has been used to describe the Biggest City as this is how our nation has evolved, this points to the fact that a Government presence is a major driver of development - you only need to look at Canberra to see this truism in it's purest form.

At this stage there is absolutely no need for the governments of the 5 biggest states to be based in the 5 metros, Sydney, Melbourne, Brisbane, Adelaide and Perth could all sustain themselves quite well without being the homebase for their state governments. What I'm proposing is that other cities get a go.

I beleive that various cities in these states should bid (much like an olympics) to become the state capital and the vote put to a voluntary statewide referrendum, this would give other cities a chance to develop into powerhouses the way our five majors have.

What does everybody think?


Yeah - if that happened my votes for state capitals would be thus:

NSW - Bathurst. Not too far from Sydney, has a long history and is quite refined.

Victoria - New Capital located just north of Seymore. A brand new Canberra type of capital city for Victoria would be my choice - in a central area. There are some nice lakes around Nagambi which would suit.

Queensland - Toowoomba. Stately and refined the garden city of Toowoomba is elegant and screams agricultural money and wealth, great capital for Queensland.

Not sure about the rest.

Local Governments should be scrapped...I think the expression about teachers "Those who can, do, those who can't teach" can be applied to councils.... These people have no qualifications, didn't have the intelligence, drive or ambition to do something bigger with their lives ie. state or federal politics.... I think councils should be staffed only by QUALIFIED, unelected, government bureaucrats who have expertise in town planning, building, architecture, infrastructure planning etc etc. Then we may see some actual vision for our cities in totality, rather than the petty insular focus of most council these days....oh...i could just keep going and going on this matter.....

^^ That's what this thread is for!