Have your say to Port Stephens Council? Don’t waste your breath

DEAR News Of The Area,

PORT Stephens council has devoted considerable effort to radio and newspaper advertising asking for feedback on its new draft Pathways plan.

No doubt Council will attract sufficient attendees to the meetings in Medowie, Raymond Terrace and Soldiers Point to allow them to tick a box for ‘community engagement’ on required documentation.

If you need a night out, or your wishes coincide with those of council, have a lovely time.

If you hope to have your voice heard, or influence a proposed pathway, go to the cinema.

Especially if yours is one of the ‘destination paths’, for which neighbourhood input is scored at 0 per cent.  At least that much is honest.

Still included on the ‘draft plan’ for consultation is the 500m x 3m concrete Halifax to Harwood bike path, which starts construction in two weeks against overwhelming and previously documented local opposition, serious safety and privacy concerns, and no pretence at community input.

Actually, that’s not fair. They did pretend. Council ticked a box on the project website for ‘Community engagement’ after a midweek May meeting in a rainy carpark, hastily convened at two weeks’ notice by a handful of flyers dropped in unattended letterboxes.

The 40 or so mainly elderly attendees were told they were ‘an angry mob’, ‘selfish’ and that this path was going ahead in less than four months, no matter what they said or did.

This approach was justified by council saying that the meeting was to ‘inform’, not consult.

Council inform community about new waste disposal dates, not 400 tonnes of concrete being dumped where it’s not wanted. Why ‘Community engagement’ on the website then?

Attendees felt dismissed, abused and definitely not engaged by that encounter.

All approaches to council since then have met with no meaningful response and usually no response at all.

Users of the park are incredulous at the waste of $1.23 million and destruction of a natural foreshore reserve. This includes many with mobility issues who value the safe, flat grass relatively free from e-bike harassment.

They are confused at the quoted aims of ‘accessibility’ and ‘connectivity’ when beach accesses are being closed along the way and council itself admits that the bike path will never connect to Shoal Bay by this route due to foreshore erosion.

They would love to know who decided to include two new lit up seating areas in a dark park, far from possible surveillance – obvious hubs for antisocial behaviour.

It appears that the overwhelming reason for this pathway is not need, but funding. Funding was sought while the local community was being told there were no plans afoot, a grant was obtained, and now funds can’t be lost – just the valued space and community safety.

It would look bad if Council didn’t use the money now.

Leave it to future councils to regret the damage.

So have a lovely evening out, but don’t expect to be consulted.

If you’re lucky you might not be abused.

Regards,

Anne Ronan,

Shoal Bay.