Five councillors voted against Cr Daniel Mackrell’s rescission motion at Tuesday’s meeting, upholding the June resolution to keep Aquatic Reserve as it is.
It means council will only complete maintenance, restrict vehicle access and address pedestrian access, outraging councillors Leigh Wilson, Leanne Pentreath, Neil Pankhurst and Daniel Mackrell, who vehemently believed the funding should have been accepted.
“This motion is about council having the opportunity to reconsider, it isn’t about the merits of the project but about flaws I feel have occurred in the decision-making process,” Cr Mackrell said at the meeting.
“It’s doubtful all councillors understood the ramifications of the decision.”
Cr Mackrell said councillors possibly misunderstood the motion due to technology issues with video streams dropping out, confusion as to whether the council commitment would be $1.5 million or $500,000 and that councillors did not have time to read 49 attachments presented to councillors “mere hours before the meeting”.
But councillors Adrian Weston, Kristen Munro, Vicki Neele, John Zobec and Annie Vickers rejected Cr Mackrell’s reasoning.
“The concerns expressed are not valid. And even though (the 49 attachments) were requested two weeks prior, they only appeared on councillor portals hours before the meeting,” Cr Neele said.
“This was information primarily including councillor briefings and minutes.”
“I don’t believe it’s necessary to rescind the decision, the mayor was generous with time, the debate was robust and I don’t believe the concerns in this rescission are justified,” Cr Vickers said.
“After reviewing the online recording I feel my ability to follow the meeting was not hindered and I am confident in my ... vote,” Cr Munro said.
“I was not the only councillor with internet problems throughout the night.”
Cr Leanne Pentreath said refusing the funding was a "slap in the face to council staff and the long hours they put in".
“The mayor (Cr Weston) and deputy mayor (Cr Neele) are looking at (projects in their ward) that would get funded by turning the state government funding down,” she said.
“It’s accepted that in the future the ratepayer will have to pay (for Aquatic Reserve infrastructure).”
Cr Mackrell urged councillors to look at "process" and "protocol".
“Please don’t be emotive and please look in favour (of the rescission),” he said.
“Cr Neele said it takes several hours to get through the 49 attachments; personally, I had two I had not seen, which were prior to my time as a councillor.”
Cr Wilson said the decision would hurt ratepayers.
“Our obligation is to approach everything with an open mind. It’s an opportunity for councillors to refocus on their role,” he said.
The discussion was so heated Cr Weston called a recess for “councillors to calm down”.
Cr Pankhurst said he did not believe "the reputational consequence was considered in the debate".
“Last month Cr Neele suggested a lack of information or time to consider information yet tonight she is suggesting she spent hours looking at documents,” he said.
“One of the most telling things is where councillors suggest to rely on information that is incorrect,” he said, referring to the confusion between the $1.5 million from council in the Victorian Government announcement and council’s $500,000 listed in the agenda.