Split vote
By Deanne Jeffers
GREATER Shepparton City Council will not proceed with purchasing the former Dhurringile Prison site, after voting in a four-way split to withdraw its tentative Expression of Interest to the Right of Refusal Process.
The motion came after the council-commissioned Dhurringile Estate Options Assessment Report by independent consultants Urban Enterprise was made public on Thursday, April 17.
While the report recommends the purchase, highlighting that the long-term benefits outweigh the financial risks, council management says there are too many risks. The executive recommendation was that council withdraw its EOI, but support where possible any suitable private investment opportunities that could benefit the region.
Before the motion was put forward, Cr Geoff Akers declared a conflict of interest, making him ineligible to vote on the matter and exited the meeting.
The motion was forwarded by Cr Sam Spinks and seconded by Cr Anthony Brophy, who cited cost issues are being the main reason for their dissent. Cr Spinks said the issue had snowballed and given the community false hope of the former prison becoming a council amenity.
“At no point has council had an aspiration, a direction, or a strategic justification to pursue the purchase of a new asset,” said Cr Spinks.
“The initial figures that have come back is that it’s going to cost $2.5 million to buy, another $3 million to repair the heritage buildings that are there, $400,000 ongoing to maintain the property and then miscellaneous other costs,” she said.
Cr Anthony Brophy agreed with Cr Spinks, saying costs would ultimately be passed on to ratepayers with no clear gain.
“Unknown costs are in the purchase, in maintenance, all the upgrades and that we have here, and is the state government really cost shifting the responsibility potentially on to local government?”
“Some are saying it’s a gold mine, but … it is about as viable as a prize-winning racing greyhound with only three legs.”
Cr Fern Summer and Cr Rod Schubert, whose ward includes the Dhurringile Estate, spoke against the motion, saying the opportunity to purchase the historic site was an opportunity not to be missed and that backlash from the community would be severe.
“If we do not proceed with the EOI process and allow Dhurringile to go to open market, it will likely become unaffordable,” said Cr Summer.
“I might remind councillors that we are not a profit-driven entity. If profit was our focus, the only thing left standing would be the sale yards, because everything else runs at a financial loss.”
Cr Summer wanted to proceed with the purchase, highlighting opportunities in tourism, equine and more at the site. She also highlighted its proximity to Tatura Park, which would benefit major events like International Dairy Week, while adding heritage value to Greater Shepparton.
“There’s plenty of money in equine that is untapped with our current resources,” said Cr Summer. “We are quite happy to fund upgrades to an existing basketball stadium, but not invest in basic infrastructure for a more lucrative sport.”
“I’m really struggling to understand why we go against the recommendation in our consultant report and sincerely hope it’s not because equine is predominantly a female sport.”
Cr Rod Schubert said council needs to take more time to consult with community.
“Some local residents have stated to me that … if Dhurringile were in Shepparton, council would have voted to express an interest and or purchase Dhurringile. I want to prove them wrong by opposing the motion today.”
“I am not here to argue that we need to purchase Dhurringile or spend any further monies, rather, I urge you to heed the advice of our independent consultants to look into the merit of the use cases, engage with the community, private and public stakeholders, to take our time to make this decision.”
“Let us also pay attention to how the community must feel that they, at best, received the uploaded Urban Enterprises Report on Thursday from the Council website and on Tuesday we move on the matter.
“That is effectively, given the Easter holidays, less than one working day to digest what the report has found and what we should do. Realistically we need six to 12 months to explore the merit of all options.”
Cr Schubert also said it has been less than four months since council decided to investigate the potential purchase. “I cannot see any procedural justice and my constituents cannot see it either.”
Cr Threlfall and Cr Wickam spoke against the motion, while Cr Eddy and Cr Sali spoke for the motion. Mayor Sali said his position was simply economical.
“I feel at this particular point … we shouldn’t be entertaining assets that come with a significant cost, and adding those assets to our books when we’re trying to upgrade and maintain our current assets across our municipality,” he said.
Council voted, with Cr Sali, Cr Brophy, Cr Spinks and Cr Eddy voted for the motion. Cr Schubert, Cr Threlfall, Cr Summer and Cr Wickham voted against.
Because there was a tie, Mayor Sali got the final call, and the motion passed. Many people in the gallery left following the vote, frustrated by the outcome.
Representatives from Destination Goulburn Valley, an independent tourism advocacy group, were amongst those that left. DGV Chair, Eugenie Stragalinos, expressed disappointment over the decision.
“We would have hoped that Council would have wanted to maintain a position at the negotiating table with the State Government as to the future of the site,” she said. “There was no financial commitment required from Council at this time, just a commitment to do some further work as recommended by their own report.”
Following the vote, Cr Sali assured the community that council would continue to advocate for the future of the former prison site.
Cr Rod Schubert said council needs to take more time to consult with community.
“Some local residents have stated to me that … if Dhurringile were in Shepparton, council would have voted to express an interest and or purchase Dhurringile. I want to prove them wrong by opposing the motion today.”
“I am not here to argue that we need to purchase Dhurringile or spend any further monies, rather, I urge you to heed the advice of our independent consultants to look into the merit of the use cases, engage with the community, private and public stakeholders, to take our time to make this decision.”
“Let us also pay attention to how the community must feel that they, at best, received the uploaded Urban Enterprises Report on Thursday from the Council website and on Tuesday we move on the matter.
“That is effectively, given the Easter holidays, less than one working day to digest what the report has found and what we should do. Realistically we need six to 12 months to explore the merit of all options.”
Cr Schubert also said it has been less than four months since council decided to investigate the potential purchase. “I cannot see any procedural justice and my constituents cannot see it either.”
Cr Threlfall and Cr Wickam spoke against the motion, while Cr Eddy and Cr Sali spoke for the motion. Mayor Sali said his position was simply economical.
“I feel at this particular point … we shouldn’t be entertaining assets that come with a significant cost, and adding those assets to our books when we’re trying to upgrade and maintain our current assets across our municipality,” he said.
Council voted, with Cr Sali, Cr Brophy, Cr Spinks and Cr Eddy voted for the motion.
Cr Schubert, Cr Threlfall, Cr Summer and Cr Wickham voted against.
Because there was a tie, Mayor Cr Sali got the final call, and the motion passed. Many people in the gallery left following the vote, frustrated by the outcome.
Cr Sali assured the community that council would continue to advocate for the future of the former prison site.
