The whole issue
of the Heritage Kyla Grazing lots began with a non-existent
It was eventually
admitted by Council staff that they had not "had an expression
of interest" re the establishing a vineyard (as advertised)
near the highway - the only interest was a monetary one -
on Council's behalf of course to secure the land by change
in classification and then sell it!
Council really should have been held to account at the time
for deliberately & publicly misleading their employers
- the Community - however the Community chose to move on positively
and as a consequence, and via the subsequent community participation,
consultation and hard work by dedicatioted and passionate
residents the resulting Heriatge land that we have to day
and the Plans of Management ensure the Heritage Kyla Grazing
lots remain firmly in the control of the Community.
records are lost and memories become blurred the following
is an extract of the
MINUTES OF THE ORDINARY MEETING OF THE COUNCIL OF
EUROBODALLA HELD ON TUESDAY 2 MAY 2000 Source
QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE FROM THE PUBLIC
(Minutes of the Public Forum and Questions Without Notice
are a summary only and do not purport to be a complete transcript
of the proceedings.)
Mr Mick Ivory asked the following questions:
“I preface my question in relation to the proposed re-classification
of the Kyla Park grazing lands by advising that I have special
interest in this matter as my property adjoins the grazing
lands, and I ask:
(a) Do councillors realise that there is deep concern among
a large section of our community over the take-over of their
Public Open Space, and that this travelogue into Tuscany appears
to be orchestrated with much suspicious haste and with an
apparent lack of transparency?
(b) So why does Council need to sell this land for temporary
gold when it can be leased for 21 years with right of renewal,
and so remain a lasting investment in our long-term social
and environmental values?
(c) Do soil tests reveal that only a very small area of the
lands is suitable for viticulture, and that if all the lands
should be re-classified as operational, will the existing
1c zoning be exercised to sell off the remainder as 5 acre
lots, each with dual occupancy, covering virtually the entire
approaches to Tuross, and with devastating impact on the water
quality in both lakes?
(d) Where is the “Village Common” to be sited
and will stocks be erected for non-believers to be pilloried,
as well as a maypole whereupon witches may be burned …
or is this to be held in reserve for a future Crematorium
as has been mooted by a current Councillor?
A crematorium at Tuross could be described as Value Adding
to God’s Waiting Room. Ladies and Gentlemen, will this
public relations disaster by Council be stopped today before
it escalates into an unconscionable and misguided exercise
in greed and deceit?
What you may consider to be a valuable asset is to the people
of Tuross priceless.”
The questions were taken on notice.
Mrs Maureen Baker, President of the Tuross Lakes Preservation
raised the following issues in relation to the proposal to
re-classify and rezone the Kyla Park grazing lands.
“We are concerned that this matter is proceeding at
undue haste. The decision to sell one of the largest parcels
of Community Land in the shire is a momentous one and yet
the Report to the Works & Facilities Committee on 11/4/00
and the newsletter to the Tuross community fail to provide
sufficient information or fully consider environmental factors.
We ask, therefore, that you defer the decision on the Recommendation
until the following two points are addressed:
(1) The need to retain at least 100m depth of lake foreshore
in Lot 79 and Lot 78 as Community Land, to be revegetated.
Together with Lot 88 and Lot 84 this would then provide a
reasonable foreshore buffer zone to filter runoff from whatever
development may occur. Leaving only Lot 88 and 84 as foreshore
protection for our lakes would be just a token gesture. Here
is an opportunity for Council to act on its own Clean Waters
Campaign and lead by example.
(2) The need to provide for the record and the benefit of
the community a comprehensive report which includes the following
information: · The options available to Council for
management of this Community Land and what effort, if any,
has been put into investigating these, and the reasons why
Council considers them inappropriate?
· If we are to lose a community asset we at least need
to know to what use will the proceeds of this land sale be
allocated - will they be reserved for capital improvements
and will any be carried out in the Tuross area?
· Is Council intending to come to an exclusive arrangement
with the potential developer of the vineyard or will all the
lots be offered for sale to the general public?
· Will public access be provided through this land
so that the lake foreshore can be reached?
Will any form of Development Control be imposed to ensure
the visual amenity and environmental values of the land and
the lakes is protected? We urge you to seriously consider
The questions were taken on notice.
Mr M Graham, a resident of Kyla Park,
said the proposal to re-classify and rezone the Kyla Park
grazing lands is a moral and political issue. The use of the
properties is restricted by a Deed of Agreement and S88B instrument.
With the prospect of a change in use of these properties would
Council make a clear public statement as to which parties
agreed to a change in the Deed?
The question was taken on notice.
Mr Michael Taylor, representing the Tuross Lake Oyster Farmers
asked the following question in relation to the proposal to
re-classify and rezone the Kyla Park grazing lands:
“Regarding the proposed land changes at Kyla Park, and
given that Council are in a unique position to protect the
environment and champion the ‘Nature Coast’ theme,
will Council assure the oyster industry that no reclassification,
rezoning, sale or development of the said lands proceed until
a comprehensive plan of management is implemented to guarantee
the continuing high water quality of Tuross Lake?”
The question was taken on notice.
Mr Max Crisp raised the following issues
in relation to the proposal to reclassify and rezone the Kyla
Park grazing lands:
“(1) As a resident of Cluster 1 Kyla Park which is on
the Bodalla or south side of the said lands which we are dealing
with today, my property views a vast area of Rural Kyla Park.
(2) In agreement with Council that under Council’s ownership
over the years the land has become degraded.
I have traversed over this property from every angle spraying
blackberry and even they don’t get sprayed at the right
time of the year, meaning from January to March, because I’m
not notified to do so by Council resulting only in nominal
(4) The dams on both sides of Hector McWilliam Drive are not
adequate for livestock let alone a vineyard especially in
our dry periods.
(5) There are big areas of rock on the land which can’t
be improved in any way as well as areas of loose stone and
seepage as well from the rocky nobs.
(6) The 40 hectares that are spoken about in the Tuross newsletter
would have to be ripped for vines so that means more rock
on the surface and more risk of silt in Tuross Lake.
(7) We the people haven’t been properly informed of
what is going on with Kyla Park rural land.
(8) To just leave a copy on the post office counter is just
not good to inform the public.
(9) I would please ask the Councillors present here today
to defer your vote on this matter for at least another month,
until we the people are better informed on your proposals.
(10) I would know this land better than any one in this Shire
and would want to see it cleaned up and a part time manager
appointed to make sure that it remained clean of rabbits,
tussock and blackberry etc with designated areas of trees
especially both sides of Hector McWilliam
(11) Our Council wants to sell it off to developers or who
ever and don’t want the responsibility of it anymore,
forgetting of course that they don’t own it, that said
lands belong to us the ratepayer.
(12) Mr Evans who agists dairy cows on the land pays $530
per month. He doesn’t have a contract and isn’t
obliged to do any maintenance, only pay his fee.
questions were taken on notice.
SUSPENSION OF STANDING ORDERS
WORKS AND FACILITIES COMMITTEE MEETING HELD ON
TUESDAY 11 APRIL 2000 90.1221
MOTION Councillor Pollock/Councillor Brown
RECLASSIFICATION – TUROSS HEAD 82.5897
1. The issue of the proposed reclassification and rezoning
owned land at Kyla Park be deferred.
2. A public meeting be held as soon as possible to provide
on the proposed reclassification and rezoning and all relevant
processes and to canvass all the issues.
(The Motion on being put was declared CARRIED.)
residents were told at that subsequent Public meeting held
in Tuross Head at the Progress Hall (chaired by Rob Pollock)
that changes to Council's Local Environment Plan and NSW State
Government laws meant that the Council now owned these lands
- not the community.
meeting was told the Council would like to subdivide and sell
the lands and the residents should agree to change the classification
of the lots from Community to Operational and the zoning from
Rural 1c to Rural 1a.
planner read out pages 4 and 5 that described what could be
done on Rural 1a land... and for whatever reason, chose not
to tell the meeting of the additional things that would be
allowed on the grazing lots under this rezoning, omitting
on informing the full house of all the additional types of
development that would be allowed such as crematoriums and
minor industry identified on page 17.
room, well aware of the contents of page 17 responded with
a collective shouit of "Read out page 17". When
he chose not to read it , Rob Pollock, the chair, was then
asked to read out to the meeting the text of page 17. This
bought the house down with shouts of "Shame" and
other more expletive comments.
When the community were made aware of the type of industrial,
commercial, residential etc development allowable for these
beautiful lands under the proposed Rural 1a zoning they were
adamant and universal at the meeting in saying
our land, leave it alone!"
full to capacity meeting was then informed by the chair and
that their voice had been heard and the proposal to change
the classification was "no longer on the table'
Then 18 months later..........
Media Releases TUROSS PUBLIC MEETING TO DISCUSS KYLA PARK
Thursday, March 07, 2002
TUROSS PUBLIC MEETING TO DISCUSS KYLA PARK GRAZING LEASES
A public meeting is to be held at Tuross Head next Thursday
night to discuss ways of achieving a long term lease for the
Kyla Park grazing lots. The meeting will be held at 7.30pm
on Thursday 14 March at the Tuross Head Youth and Sports Club
Hall, Kyla Recreation Area
Mayor Peter Cairney said council controls the land
used for grazing at Kyla Park which is on both sides of the
drive into Tuross Head from the highway.“It is classified
as Community Land and has been leased for grazing,”
“However long-term leasing of Community Land
for grazing is no longer possible.”
Following receipt of a petition signed by 450 residents
of Tuross Head, council wrote to the Minister for Local Government
asking that special dispensation be given to allow a lease
for grazing of up to 20 years.
The Minister has replied, saying he has no power
to exempt council from any of the Community Land provisions
of the Local Government Act.
Cr Cairney said the aim of the public meeting is
to determine a course of action that will meet with the wishes
of the community and allow for the proper upkeep of the grazing
The Plan of Management “Kyla Park – Areas of Cultural
Significance” was prepared by Eurobodalla Shire Council
with the assistance of the Kyla Park Steering Committee which
comprised of the following members:
Mrs Criss Higgins Horse Agistment Group
Mr Max Crisp Kyla Park Clusters
Mrs Kay Crisp Kyla Park Sports Area Management Committee
Mr Ted Williams Tuross Head Progress Association
Mrs Maureen Baker Tuross Lakes Preservation Group
Mr David Campbell Tuross Services Organisations (VRA &
Mr Mick Ivory Tuross/Coila Lakes Estuary Management Committee
The Plan of Management was adopted at the Works & Facilities
Committee on Tuesday 9 December, 2003. Plan
of Management No 27.