THE Labor MP Angela D’Amore did not declare a donation which the development company Rosecorp said it made to her campaign in its returns to the state election funding watchdog for last year’s election, after it got planning approval for a $28 million project in her Drummoyne electorate.

Ms D’Amore had enthusiastically supported the development being taken out of the hands of the local council in a speech to State Parliament, and chaired three community consultations with residents over the development in 2005 and 2006.

The Planning Minister, Frank Sartor, who gave his approval, also did not declare a $1000 donation which Rosecorp Pty Ltd recorded as giving him on March 31, 2006, in its returns to the NSW Election Funding Authority.

This was just one week before he approved its plan – through its company Breakfast Point Pty Ltd – to build four five-storey buildings containing 128 dwellings at Mortlake on the Parramatta River.

“I can only assume that any such donation was paid to the ALP, because my campaign received no such donation,” Mr Sartor told the Herald. He said there was absolutely no link between any donation and any development approval he gave.

He made such decisions “based on merit considerations alone” and it was totally false to suggest that any donation to the ALP had any bearing on the minister’s decisions, he said. He made his decisions following advice from the independent civil service.

Rosecorp is one of the companies named in a Greens dossier being handed to the Independent Commission Against Corruption today alleging political donors receive more favourable treatment when the Government considers their developments after calling them in under Part 3A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act.

Ms D’Amore’s declaration to the funding authority for last year’s election revealed she disclosed $25,875 but this did not include $4000 that Rosecorp reported donating to her last year. Mr Sartor declared $1800 in donations, none from Rosecorp.

In a November 2005 speech to Parliament, Ms D’Amore applauded the Government’s takeover as planning authority for the broader Breakfast Point redevelopment. “I assure Canada Bay Council that the State Government has the expertise, the knowledge and the ability to dictate things to the developer to ensure that those public facilities remain and that we have a world-class development in the state seat of Drummoyne.”

She was at a reception with the company’s executives at Breakfast Point earlier in the year.

Breakfast Point Pty Ltd declared that it gave $164,100 to the state Labor Party for last year’s election, the authority’s donor files show.

Using records from the authority and the Australian Electoral Commission, the Greens have found Rosecorp donated $143,600 to the ALP between March 2004 and April last year. Ms D’Amore could not be contacted.

Labor MP for Lowe Mr. John Murphy will debate Greens Candidate for Lowe Dr Marc Rerceretnam on Thursday 25th October 2007.

The candidates will debate climate change, the environment and other issues.

Questions from the floor will be taken after the candidates’ addresses.

Venue: Canada Bay Council Chambers, 1a Marlborough St Drummoyne.

Time: 7.30pm. Refreshments served after.

(Mr Jim Tsolakis, Liberal Candidate for Lowe, was also invited to the debate but unfortunately could not attend the evening.)

Hosted by Local Agenda 21, chaired by Canada Bay Councillor Bernard Rooney. Contact: 0414 695 323

About LA21:

http://www.environment.gov.au/esd/la21/

“Local Agenda 21 (LA21) is a program that provides a framework for implementing sustainable development at the local level. LA21 aims to build upon existing local government strategies and resources (such as Corporate plans, vegetation management plans, and transport strategies) to better integrate environmental, economic and social goals.

“LA21 was first described in Agenda 21 – the global blueprint for sustainability that was agreed at the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development in 1992 (the Rio Earth Summit). Chapter 28 of Agenda 21 identifies local authorities as the sphere of governance closest to the people, and calls upon all local authorities to consult with their communities and develop and implement a local plan for sustainability – a ‘Local Agenda 21′.”

http://www.canadabay.nsw.gov.au/environment_and_health/natural_environment/local_agenda_21_program.html

“Local Agenda 21 is a program designed at implementing sustainable development at the local level. It comprises systems and procedures to integrate environmental, economic and social development. Founded on a strong partnership between local government and the community, the progress toward local sustainable development is guided by the preparation of a long-term strategic action plan that integrates existing policies and programs and a future direction.”

“The motion to accept the officer’s recommendation (to refuse demolition of a heritage listed item) was very narrowly carried on the voices”, said Greens Councillor Bernard Rooney.

“I accept that heritage items involve some expense and work in preserving. However, this item was already listed when the current owner purchased it. The Concord streetscape in the view of many people is attractive and worth preserving, especially bungalows in the pre-1939 period. The owner retains the option to open up the back of the house and build a two story extension. There are many examples of very successful extensions in this style in Concord.”

“I was also concerned at how close the vote was on this issue”, said Cr Rooney. “There may be a flaw in the process where extensive time is taken, including professional reports and public exhibition, to declare a Conservation area or a Heritage listed item, and yet Council can vote on a single evening to demolish it. This item was only very narrowly saved, and I believe Council needs a stronger and more consistent stance on Heritage.”

Greens Candidate for Lowe Dr Marc Rerceretnam welcomed Canada Bay’s decision. “Concord is known for its pleasant California Bungalow-style residential streets”, said Dr Rerceretnam. “I have been campaigning on behalf of residents for preservation of heritage. The least that can be done is to defend the Heritage listed items and the Conservation Areas that have already been declared. The community needs to be vigilant in resisting pressures for development at the expense of heritage.”

Dr Marc Rerceretnam contact no: 0414 467 222

“Climage change is real and disastrous sea level rise will occur unless action is taken soon”, said Greens Councillor Bernard Rooney, who moved the motion. “A rise in global temperatures of between 2 and 3 degrees Celsius risks runaway global warming. And a rise above 3 degrees has a very high risk of runaway warming. As an indication of the crisis, we already have a 0.8 degree rise in place, which is certain to go higher due to a lag effect as more gas has already been pumped into the atmosphere.”

Greens Candidate for Lowe Dr Marc Rerceretnam welcomed Canada Bay’s action: “The value of this Resolution is in helping educate the public about the urgency of the issue. All levels of Government must act to address climate change, local government, State and of course Federal.”

“Action is needed now”, said Dr Rerceretnam. “Emissions must be cut by 80% from 1990 levels by 2050, and 30% by 2020. No more coal-fired stations must be built, energy conservation needs to be implemented and renewable energy production needs to rapidly come on stream. Carbon pricing, preferably in the form of a carbon tax or a well designed carbon trading scheme must be introduced.”

Text of Resolution:

1. THAT Canada Bay Council recognises the actual and potential consequences of rising sea levels caused by climate change.

2. THAT Canada Bay Council install tide line markers displaying summer and winter solstice tide lines in strategic points of bays such as Iron Cove Bay, Exile Bay, Five Dock Bay and Brays Bay;

3. THAT Canada Bay Council install signage beside these tide markers specifically aimed at raising public awareness about climate change and the potential for rising global sea levels, explaining that the line will continually rise if we do not seriously reduce our carbon emissions. This tide marker will also show where the line was in 1950, and where it could be in 2100 with a indicators at ground level of where the shoreline could potentially end up. Signage will also have dot points on what councils are doing to address the impact of climate change, and how we can all reduce CO2 emissions.

4. THAT Canada Bay Council highlight in the signage described in point 3;

• The importance of changing to renewable energy, switching to energy efficient light globes and electrical appliances, and preventing energy inefficient habits in the home and workplace.
• Reducing car use
• Using public transport, bicycles and walking
• Using renewable technologies Making representations to all levels of government in Australia pushing for better infrastructure that supports environmental initiatives such as the expansion and enhancement of the public transport system

5. THAT Canada Bay Council calls on Federal, State and Local Governments to ensure their planning and infrastructure guidelines reflect the potential future impact of rising sea levels.

Dr Marc Rerceretnam contact no: 0414 467 222

SMH, 5/9/7: A LABOR-DOMINATED inner city council abandoned its “independent judgment” by signing a $2 million property contract that compelled it to approve future applications lodged by a prominent local developer.Last week, the City of Canada Bay Council lost its second consecutive court case this year in the NSW Land and Environment Court over its dealings in Strathfield’s lucrative “Golden Triangle” with the colourful property developer Antoine Bechara.

As the Herald revealed in June, the council has sold at least 11 public properties to Mr Bechara, or his associated companies, since 2000 – all without formal public tender.

Some sales have come in well below market value, and they have included at least one road, several heritage-listed cottages and both of the triangle’s parks.

In March, the court ruled the council had acted illegally when it sold one of the parks to Mr Bechara to make way to make way for high-rise apartments. Now, after a four-year case, the council’s conduct has been found wanting again.

Last Friday, Justice Peter Biscoe overruled the council’s decision in February to approve Mr Bechara’s latest application to demolish the heritage-listed properties the council had sold him some years earlier.

In the contract of sale for those properties, the council had neglected its statutory obligations and cast itself as biased, the court found, because it agreed to a special clause 17: “The council agrees, as consent authority, to accept and approve an application for the demolition of all or any of the properties comprised in this contract”, the document reads.

In his judgment, Justice Biscoe said the rules for councils permit “less than arm’s length dealings between a council and a developer”.

“However, in my opinion, there is nothing in the relevant statutory regime which contemplates that councils may contractually surrender their power of independent judgment to determine a development application,” he said.

While he threw out many of the arguments put by the Bonaccorso family, who are triangle residents who have been challenging Mr Bechara’s growing hold over the area, Justice Biscoe ordered the development consent be voided.

“Special condition 17 of the 2000 contract is tainted with the vice of the council purporting to bind itself contractually … that it will grant development consent,” he said. “The hypothetical observer might reasonably apprehend that council might not bring an impartial mind to the resolution of the question it was required to decide.”

The decision casts a shadow over the future of the triangle. While Mr Bechara has already built several apartment buildings in the area, his grand vision for Chapman Street – where both the illegal park sale and attempted heritage demolition occurred – now appears at risk. His latest application was for a 158-unit complex, which would be built over these properties and even the road.

The council’s Labor mayor, Angelo Tsirekas, did not return calls from the Herald yesterday.

The issue in this development application is whether or not the bungalow ought be demolished. The applicant Mrs Miller, in speaking to the matter at the meeting, reasonably asked Council that it make a decision about the matter which is already prolonged and stressful for the applicants.

It is agreed on all sides that the bungalow itself is not a listed Heritage item, does not have a Interim Heritage protection order, is in a Conservation Area and is within the discretion of Council to determine. The issue is whether it is a contributory item to the conservation area, and whether a pre-war bungalow in a Conservation area is worthy of preservation.

Enough expert opinion has been sought for Councillors to form a view about the issue. The case for preserving the bungalow is put effectively by the NSW Heritage Office in their letter to Council of 5/7/7:

Park Ave demonstrates a range of building periods and styles from the Victorian to the late twentieth century. A mix of periods and styles is frequently a feature of conservation areas….

The Heritage Office considers that 12 Park Avenue is a good example of an inter-war Federation/California bungalow with an external appearance that has not been modified over time. In terms of building style and brickwork, 12 Park Avenue relates closely to the entrance arch of Goddard Park (dated 1926). No similarly strong visual link with the park is evidenced by any of the other houses in Park Avenue.

The Heritage Office also notes that the external appearance of 12 Park Avenue indicates that is has been very well-maintained and that it is currently in very good condition. It appears to be the best example of its period and type of house building in this street. Indeed, its presentation marks it as one of the best maintained houses in Park Avenue.

Based on the above observations and assessments, the Heritage Office considers that 12 Park Avenue is clearly a contributory item to the Park Avenue heritage conservation area…. The Heritage Office contends that 12 Park Avenue is clearly a contributory item to the heritage values of this conservation area for reasons of building style, representativeness, relationship to the park opposite, integrity, intactness and condition (as noted above).

As such, No 12 should neither be demolished nor unsympathetically altered. This office opposes its demolition when the capacity exists, due to its setback and large block, for rear extensions to this building to provide additional accommodation.

This seems to me to summarise the case for preserving the bungalow, and in the course of debate on the matter I urged that Council use the discretion it is agreed it has and make a decision on a matter that is already too long delayed, and therefore moved a Recommendation that the DA for 12 Park Avenue not be approved insofar as it involves demolition of the bungalow. This motion lapsed for want of a seconder, which failure on the part of Council to offer protection to the bungalow one could conclude means that Councillors and Council intend that the bungalow be demolished. This view would seem to be confirmed by the attitude of the Mayor and other Councillors during debate.

During the forum for public discussion, the Mayor effectively gagged the objectors, who have thus not yet had the opportunity to date to address the issue of the demolition of the bungalow, only the question of mediation at an earlier meeting. At the same time the Mayor and other Councillors took the opportunity to criticise Mrs O’Neill and other objectors and campaigners for their views and their opinions as expresssed in the press and elsewhere.

As an elected Councillor and member of the Greens, I expect that I will attract criticism from time to time, whether fair or unfair, however direct criticism of residents on the one side in this matter seems to me uncalled for and an exhibition of bias in the matter.

After failing to support my motion, I now believe Council is very much of a mind to permit demolition of the bungalow under delegated authority. This is a matter of concern as the Heritage protections of the Concord streetscape (essentially interwar) are weak under the current Council. If the Concord streetscape is considered of Heritage and aesthetic merit, and many of us would believe so, then this bungalow in a Conservation area at least ought to have been offered definite protection.

Bernard Rooney, Greens Councillor on Canada Bay Council, has today written to the ICAC supporting calls for it to investigate the sale of community land in the “Strathfield triangle” by Canada Bay Council to a private developer.

“I am concerned about a number of issues in regard to the Council’sactivities in relation to the ‘Strathfield Triangle’, which is located adjacent to Strathfield Station. I seek an investigation of certain matters in order to re-establish the community’s confidence in the Council’s governance,” said Mr Rooney in his letter to the ICAC.

Mr Rooney’s letter asks the ICAC to investigate alleged preferential treatment of a developer in the sale of properties and approval of floor space ratios.

Mr Rooney’s call was supported by Sylvia Hale, a Greens member of the NSW Upper House and spokesperson on local government and planning.

“There is a significant level of community concern arising from the sale of that land and the other related decisions by the Council. An investigation by an independent body is the best way for the facts to be brought out into the open so that community confidence can be restored,” said Ms Hale.

President of the NSW Local Government Association, Genia McCaffery, has previously been quoted calling for an independent inquiry into the land deals. (SMH, 14 June 2007).

UPDATE: The Inner West Weekly reports on the issue, covering the reaction from other Councillors to Cr. Cantali’s position.

“Although not itself a heritage listed item, the pre-war Bungalow on the site is in a Conservation Area and contributes to the mix of historical buildings which comprise the Conservation area,” said Cr Rooney.

“Much of Concord consists of inter-war bungalows, which form an attractive and desirable streetscape highly valued by residents and others. There is strong feeling among the community in Concord and among Greens that these features of the area be preserved wherever possible.

“Permitting the demolition of this example in Park Ave sets a poor precedent and makes vulnerable any bungalow in the area when we should be fighting to preserve them.

“The building is in good condition and is capable of being renovated and extended in sympathetic style. Given the size of the block, a large home with modern fittings could be constructed as an alternative to demolition,” Cr Rooney said.

Greens candidate for the Federal Seat of Lowe Marc Rerceretnam has also called for the preservation of the bungalow and a green ban on demolition.

“Although not heritage listed the National Trust has recommended the retention of this house. Further, and perhaps more importantly, I believe that demolition of this house would be contrary to the Council’s own planning guidelines,” said Dr Rerceretnam.

Cr Rooney has recommended that the General Manager and the Mayor (who have delegated authority over the matter) not approve the DA if it involves demolition of the bungalow. At the very least, it should be returned to full Council for consideration given the controversy over heritage, tree preservation and process.

UPDATE: The Inner West Courier reports on our campaign to save the bungalow.

The Opposition spokesman on local government, Chris Hartcher, told Parliament last week that “serious allegations” surrounded Concord and Canada Bay councils.

Antoine Bechara, an Abbotsford developer, has enjoyed a run of success over the past decade as he has picked up about $20 million worth of real estate in a Strathfield development site dubbed the Golden Triangle.

Locals say his arrival has rattled the once-peaceful area. Some of those who have refused to sell and make way for hundreds of high-density apartments are not prepared to come to their doors or even mention his name.

Mr Bechara is known to have close ties to the ALP. He and his associated companies have donated thousands to the MP for Drummoyne, Angela D’Amore, sister-in-law of the Minister for Ports and Waterways, Joe Tripodi.

A Herald investigation into the Golden Triangle has found:

* The sale to Mr Bechara or his associated companies of at least 11 properties, including one road, three heritage-listed cottages and both the triangle’s public parks – all without formal public tender – and some below market value.

* A Concord council contract obliging the council to approve future development applications lodged by Mr Bechara for demolition of several properties. A history of planning decisions relating to Mr Bechara’s properties within the triangle that provide him with particularly lucrative zonings.

* The overriding of a dissident City of Canada Bay councillor who has been forced to use freedom of information laws to gain access documents normally available to elected councillors.

Last Wednesday Mr Hartcher told Parliament the City of Canada Bay Council appeared to be “favouring a private developer, Mr Antoine Bechara, over local landowners”. “Most concerning are the lengths to which council seems to be willing to go to appease its preferred developer,” he said, “even closing a public road that provided access to other privately owned land so that the road too may be sold to the developer.” He told Parliament he had referred the matter to the Independent Commission Against Corruption. In the contract of sale for one of only two green open spaces in the triangle, Chapman Reserve, the Bechara company that completed the sale, was different to the company that appeared on the original agreement. In March the Land and Environment Court ruled the council had acted illegally in this transaction because the land was zoned for community purposes.

Meanwhile, there has been a history of discussion between objecting residents, Mr Bechara and the council. One former resident, Helen Lyons-Riley, 56, said at one stage she had the then Concord mayor, Peter Woods, on the telephone, while the developer himself was knocking at her front door. Mrs Lyons-Riley told her son to tell Mr Bechara to go away: “I had had enough.”

Mr Woods said he was only “facilitating” the discussion between the two.

Other residents who have resisted selling their homes say Mr Bechara sought to obtain their properties at low prices. Judy Chin, a retiree who lives alone, has had repeated run-ins with the developer. She said Mr Bechara had laughed and stormed out of her house one night after she had requested $1 million for her home.

Later, after buying some of the surrounding properties, and prompted by an argument in the street, “he said he will keep me here in this house for 20 years”, Mrs Chin said.

At 11pm on Tuesday last week Mrs Chin rushed outside to the screams of her neighbours to find her uninsured Toyota Camry in flames. A forensic investigator engaged by the Herald, Greg Kelly, found it was a clear case of arson.

While the Herald makes no suggestion at all that the attack had any connection to Mr Bechara, it highlights residents’ concerns that overdevelopment is changing the character of what was once a quiet residential neighbourhood.

One of Mrs Chin’s neighbours, not prepared to answer the door to strangers, has said the council is considering reclaiming a substantial section of his land. Monte Wang says the council has not told him if he will be compensated for the loss of 160 square metres, or 40 per cent of his property, that he says has been earmarked for road widening required by yet another Bechara development.

Across the road, Mr Bechara was involved in an incident in which a punch was allegedly thrown during an argument over a concrete slab that Alex Zissis said was poured almost three metres inside his property.

A local real estate agent, who did not want to be named, was asked to provide a quote to another resident as to the value of her home – but the agent says Mr Bechara bullied him into leaving.

Councillors Marion O’Connell, Tony Fasanella, Michael Megna and Helen McCaffrey said many of the planning decisions involving Mr Bechara’s properties had been made before they joined the council and that recent decisions about the triangle were made on legal advice they could not disclose.

Mr Bechara declined to comment, but his lawyer told the Herald his client “denies any wrongdoing or illegality of any description”.

The former mayor, Mr Woods, and councillors Jeanette O’Hara and Neil Kenzler denied any wrongdoing. Other councillors did not respond to inquiries. The council’s acting general manager, Tim McNamara, declined to comment, “given that these matters are presently before the courts”.

A property developer has accused Canada Bay Council of discriminating against him by applying standards inconsistently.

Advanced Properties director John Elias said that when his company lodged a development application with the council it was knocked back without being voted on by councillors.

Staff working under delegated authority last year refused John Elias’s application to build a block of units at 20-28 Leicester Ave, Strathfield, until an investigation of the heritage significance of several of the properties had been completed.

A spokeswoman for the council said the application was refused because it exceeded the maximum height restriction and didn’t comply with the heritage objections set by the council.

Just metres away from Mr Elias’ properties, another developer was given permission to demolish several heritage-listed houses to build a 170-unit building.

Companies owned by Anton Bechara had their application heard and approved by councillors.

The council spokeswoman said there was no reason for Advanced Properties’ application to be heard by councillors.

“The proposed development was within delegation and was determined on that basis,” she said.

She also said that there was a difference in heritage significance between Mr Bechara’s properties and Mr Elias’s.

“Council wanted to assess the heritage potential of these properties (owned by Mr Elias) as it would address the discrepancy that exists with some houses being listed and others not, when all, it could be argued, contribute to the streetscape.

“The heritage aspects of (Mr Bechara’s) applications were assessed independently during the processing of those applications.”

The units Advanced Properties wanted to build would have sat metres away from two reserves the council controversially sold to companies run by Mr Bechara.

Mr Bechara was also given the all-clear from the council to have an application approved to build on a block of land he bought from the council this year.

Mr Elias said it was a great injustice for the council to treat developers differently.

“(Mr Bechara) wants to make a new road through Lord Park,” Mr Elias said.

“They play with the(Strathfield Triangle) DCP like it is a yo-yo.”