Legislative Council Fifty-First Parliament, Third Session (51-3) 51 3 Parliament of South Australia Legislative Council published Ministerial Statement St Clair Land Swap ST CLAIR LAND SWAP The Hon. G.E. GAGO Legislative Council Minister for State/Local Government Relations, Minister for the Status of Women, Minister for Consumer Affairs, Minister for Government Enterprises, Minister Assisting the Minister for Transport, Infrastructure and Energy The Hon. G.E. GAGO (Minister for State/Local Government Relations, Minister for the Status of Women, Minister for Consumer Affairs, Minister for Government Enterprises, Minister Assisting the Minister for Transport, Infrastructure and Energy) (14:24): I seek leave to make a ministerial statement. Leave granted. The Hon. G.E. GAGO Legislative Council The Hon. G.E. GAGO: On 10 November 2009, the City of Charles Sturt wrote to me seeking my consideration for the revocation of land known as the St Clair Reserve. In order for any council to revoke community land, a proper process set out by the Local Government Act 1999 must be followed. It requires councils to create a report on the proposed revocation and then consult with its community on the report. The report must contain: a summary of reasons for the proposal to revoke the classification of community land; if there is to be a sale or disposal of the land, details of any government assistance given to acquire the land and a statement of how the council proposes to use the proceeds; an assessment of how implementation of the proposal would affect the area and the local community; if the council is not the owner of the land, a statement of any requirements made by the owner as a condition of approving the proposed revocation; a map or plan defining the area of each piece of land for which revocation is proposed. Under the act, the council must adopt a consultation policy, and this policy forms the basis of the council's engagement with its local community. At a minimum, a council is required to publish a newspaper notice describing the matter under consideration, inviting submissions and subsequently advising the consideration by council given to any submissions made. The City of Charles Sturt has provided details of all the steps it has taken to engage with and consult with the community on the revocation and its response to those submissions. It is my role to consider whether the council has fulfilled its statutory obligations and followed the processes required under its consultation policy and other statutory requirements. On receipt of the council's documentation, the application was forwarded to the Office for State/Local Government Relations for its consideration and advice. I have now received that advice and have thoroughly and diligently considered the documentation before me. I note that this matter is the topic of some controversy and that the majority of submissions received by the council were not in favour of the proposal. I am mindful that it is my statutory responsibility not to make judgment of the merits of the project but to assess whether the council has fulfilled the steps required in relation to the community land revocation as set out under the Local Government Act 1999. It is for the council to argue the merits of the proposal and its broader vision for how its community grows. The application before me makes it quite clear that the council has collected feedback, considered it and responded to each of those matters. The application further details the council's consultation process, as follows: sending out over 1,500 letters to landholders and residents living within 500 metres of the St Clair Reserve; letters and information to external stakeholders and community groups; placing a sign on the St Clair Reserve; advertisements in TheWeekly Times and Portside Messenger of 19 August 2009 calling for public submissions; public notices in the above papers; and displays in the civic centre and Cheltenham Community Centre of the proposal. On the basis of the information provided by the council and the departmental advice to me, I can confirm that Charles Sturt council's revocation proposal satisfies the requirements of the Local Government Act, and I have written to inform the council. The council will now need to consider whether to proceed with the revocation, which it will need to approve at a future council meeting.