Council Minutes - Town of Cambridge
Council Minutes - Town of Cambridge
Council Minutes - Town of Cambridge
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
COUNCIL MINUTES<br />
TUESDAY 28 AUGUST 2012<br />
3. PUBLIC QUESTION TIME<br />
Written Questions<br />
Mr Graham Hornel, 93 Empire, City Beach<br />
In the major works item in the August, 2012 '<strong>Cambridge</strong> News' it was announced that the<br />
2012/13 budget allocates $540,000 for the Wembley Golf Course hospitality project. In<br />
response to my question on this to the CEO, an informative response from the Director<br />
Projects explained some <strong>of</strong> the background behind this allocation - and referred me to a<br />
link on the <strong>Town</strong> Web site. The information presented in the linked item states that over<br />
500 <strong>of</strong> us accepted the <strong>Town</strong>'s email invitation to respond to an online survey canvassing<br />
our opinion on the nature and feasibility <strong>of</strong> hospitality improvements at the Golf Course.<br />
Having given <strong>of</strong> my effort and time to respond - and other than an electronic thanks note<br />
at the end <strong>of</strong> this e-survey - it appears that I was one <strong>of</strong> the 500 plus who then heard<br />
nothing further directly until that '<strong>Cambridge</strong> News' announcement some months later.<br />
Question 1<br />
Was a component <strong>of</strong> the <strong>Town</strong>'s agreement with the successful tenderer for that survey,<br />
the requirement to follow up to keep those who contributed fully informed with even a<br />
summary <strong>of</strong> the results - and, if not, then why not<br />
Response<br />
The survey was managed by a sub consultant to the Architect who was awarded the<br />
contract for this project. The sub consultant's brief did not include publication <strong>of</strong> results.<br />
The purpose <strong>of</strong> the survey was to gain some market research to inform the design<br />
process for a preferred concept for future community consultation and does not relate to<br />
a specific decision to be made at this time. The results <strong>of</strong> this work have not yet been<br />
presented to <strong>Council</strong> and the designs have not yet progressed to a stage where<br />
community consultation is ready.<br />
Question 2<br />
Towards avoiding the perception that the overall process is not totally transparent<br />
because there was no formal follow up, is it agreed that all contracts for such surveys<br />
should include provision for programmed follow up<br />
Response<br />
The <strong>Town</strong> has a policy for community consultation and will ensure feedback is provided in<br />
accordance with the policy.<br />
Question 3<br />
Since a response <strong>of</strong> over 500 represents a fairly significant number <strong>of</strong> ratepayers and<br />
residents, is it agreed that is totally inadequate that, in order to obtain further information -<br />
even if this does not include even a summary <strong>of</strong> the survey input and results - the only<br />
source is the few words included in an item that is only accessible through a very long<br />
link to the <strong>Town</strong> web site<br />
H:\Ceo\Gov\<strong>Council</strong> <strong>Minutes</strong>\12 MINUTES\August 2012\A <strong>Council</strong> Front.docx 2