This is my second attempt to create a post on this article. My first attempt was disconnected.
The article is inaccurate, it fails for the same reasons it purports to accuse opponents of.
The overlay previously published in the Mercury is accurate. It sets out the total area that the SAP relates to.
There has been no DA submitted by the proponent so no-one knows what is proposed within the SAP area if it is passed. The proponent has released a concept plan, that is all.
DSRA committee does not represent the views of members in the published article, the article represents the views of a number of committee members, not the membership.
There has been no consultation by DSRA committee of membership as to their views on the proposal. All that has occurred is a rather "shonkie" survey of members , with a limited response to some very vague and slanted questions. It appears based on these responses certain elements of the committee have seen fit to advocate on behalf of the proponent to the detriment of the community they were elected to represent.
I note that it is proposed to hold an AGM sometime in October to consider changes to the Rules of the Association. This meeting may well be an appropriate forum for the Committee to properly ascertain community views on the Cambria Green proposal.
In the absence of the committee being prepared to properly embrace community views then a motion of no confidence and a spill motion would be appropriate.