I add my voice to Bob Graham’s and support his call for a modification of Central Coast Council’s boundaries by shrinking Council’s overall footprint (CCN 433).
This would make the Council area somewhat more manageable for councillors and Council staff in the execution of their responsibilities.
My only caveat is that residents of the current remoter suburbs suggested to be allocated to neighbouring councils should not be disadvantaged in the provision of services as a result of any change.
Mr Graham’s suggestion of a reduction in the number of councillors, concurrent with the proposed border changes, I feel also has merit.
However I feel that being prescriptive as to the number of wards and the number of councillors for each may not give the residents the service they are entitled to expect from our councillors.
It is no secret that our region is undergoing significant population growth, and with that growth the councillors will have to service an ever-changing number of residents.
A fairer approach would be to set the maximum and minimum number of residents each councillor is required to service and periodically adjust the number of councillors required to be elected, as area population densities occur.
This would be similar to the adjustments made to state and federal government electorate boundaries after elections.
As we return to having a democratically elected Council, we must ensure that everything is done to help our representatives to do their job.
Equitably managing the sizes of their electorates would be a good start.
Email, Apr 16
Neil Bevege, Kanwal
Be the first to comment on "Let’s shrink Council’s footprint"