Council passes zoning motion after realising it would ‘likely lose’ State Administrative Tribunal hearing

A 300-person work camp in Boulder is now back on the cards after a previously shot-down motion was passed by City of Kalgoorlie-Boulder councillors after it became clear the City would “likely lose” if the appeal progressed to a State Administrative Tribunal hearing. Councillors on Monday night voted 7-2 in favour of the officer’s recommendation that workforce accommodation may be consistent with a service light industry zone, despite a motion moving it was not consistent with the zone being passed 8-5 in March. The motion came back to council after the City spent about $10,000 in ratepayer money in mediation with the shareholders of Goldfields Villages, which appealed the March decision which meant the company’s $6.5 million 302-person camp proposal for Vivian Street could not proceed. The council had been invited by the SAT to reconsider the decision before the matter progressed to a hearing. While the council has not been asked to reconsider the development application made for the proposed camp itself, this result will determine the way the second appeal is to be handled. Council’s decision means that development applications for workforce accommodation in a light service industry zone cannot be dismissed based on the zone, and must be assessed based on its merits. A development application may still be refused for several reasons. Mayor John Bowler said the legal advice obtained through the SAT process made it clear the City would likely lose the hearing, which would leave the City with no control over how the development would be completed. Having been among the six councillors who unsuccessfully supported the original camp development application, Mr Bowler said he was pleased to see some councillors change their stance on the matter after a trip to Port Hedland and Karratha to see what other towns had done to combat FIFO. “Clearly there is an appetite within council and a realisation that the accommodation shortage we have must be the most severe anywhere in Australia,” he said. “It is certainly the most severe Kalgoorlie-Boulder has ever faced and it’s only going to get worse. “In a twisted sort of way, this camp will actually be anti-FIFO because it will allow 300 workers who are . . . now in houses we think should be used for families to move into what is single people’s accommodation and then open up those hundred or so houses for families.” However, Mr Bowler did not believe 300 places were enough to meet current demand. “I think the likelihood is we are about 2000 short right now if the companies could bring all the workers they need here,” he said. Murray Leahy of MLG Oz, one of the shareholders of Goldfields Villages, said he was “heartened” by the fact some councillors had looked further into the matter and decided to vote in support of the land use. He said while he was not confident that it would mean there would be a swell of support if the camp development application were to go back before council, he was willing to sit down and talk with the council if the City chose to review the application. However, he said the SAT process was still in progress and he could not comment on the specifics. With 254 vacancies listed through MLG, including 170 Kalgoorlie-Boulder-based jobs, Mr Leahy agreed with Mr Bowler that the situation was beyond something a 300-man camp could completely fix. “The accommodation situation is far more dire than what a large portion of the community truly understand,” he said. “It is not a crisis, it is an emergency.” Mr Leahy said three-bedroom houses that were previously being rented for $350 a week he was now having to pay up to $600 for, with new four-bedroom rentals being listed for up to $2500 a week. He said it put him in a difficult position because he desperately needed to house people, but did not want to be responsible for driving up local rents. “I’m standing there saying to our elected members . . . this is how we can contribute to dealing with this issue,” he said. “But if the elected members don’t support us, there’s not much we can do.” Monday night’s motion was passed 7-2, with councillors Mick McKay and Dave Grills voting against the recommendation. While Cr Grills did not speak about his opposition to the motion, Cr McKay did, raising the possibility the accommodation crisis would not continue to be this much of an issue next year. Deputy mayor Glenn Wilson responded to Cr McKay’s comments, reminding him the motion was not to allow the camp development to go ahead, but purely for the zoning of future workforce accommodation applications. The motion was moved by Cr John Matthew who said he supported the motion based on “very basic principles”. “Firstly, economic growth is based on job creation,” he said. “Secondly, creating jobs, both construction and operation, means people need to be housed. “Thirdly, we have a housing crisis . . . therefore we need to look at all options to assist the local industry to house people. “Next it appears . . . that the appeal is likely to be successful and council will be on the losing end and if that’s the case it will be a costly exercise and we wouldn’t be seen to be supporting local employers and local industry to help to grow this community.” Cr Terrence Winner, who had voted against the land use being consistent at the March meeting, said after being part of the SAT mediation, he was now more comfortable in supporting the motion. Councillors Deborah Botica and Amy Astill also changed their stance, with Cr Astill stating if the SAT hearing was lost, the council would have no control over how long the camp would stay in the community. “I was against the proposal initially a few months ago for sure, but I see it is the only way forward,” she said. “As we learned in Karratha and Port Hedland, you do have to make some tough decision sometimes. “Sometimes with these tough decisions, the community doesn’t like it initially and that’s OK because hopefully we are stepping in the right direction. “If we can get people to live here, get people in permanent accommodation, then we can revisit the workforce accommodations we have in the town.” Only nine councillors voted on the motion, with councillors Mandy Reidy, Wayne Johnson and Suzie Williams absent on the night, and Cr Kim Eckert declaring a financial interest in the matter.