19 August 2026

 

THE Community Environment Network has questioned whether the current structure and conduct of the Central Coast Council’s standing committees are consistent with the Local Government Act 1993, the Local Government (General) Regulation 2021, Council’s adopted Code of Meeting Practice, its Code of Conduct, valid instruments of delegation and committee Terms of Reference.

 

“At its July 2026 meeting, Central Coast Council resolved to delegate authority to standing committees to make decisions that would be binding resolutions of the whole elected Council,” said Mr Gary Chestnut, CEN Chair. “We are concerned about whether the delegations were validly conferred. We don’t think the exact functions and decision-making limits are as clear as they should be.

 

“The committees should not make binding decisions on functions that section 377 of the Local Government Act prohibits Council from delegating, including the making of rates and charges, adopting or altering the operational plan, or voting on expenditure not included in the budget.

 

“A small committee can determine matters affecting the entire Central Coast local government area. A councillor who is not a member of the relevant committee may be unable to debate, amend or vote upon a matter of major importance to their ward or constituents.”

 

CEN has requested the Minister investigate the actions of the Environment and Planning Committee on 4 August 2026.

 

“Four councillors declined to participate in the committee meeting to register their concerns about the structure and conduct of the committee and to leave the committee without a

‘quorum’ – the number of members required to conduct the meeting.

 

“At first the remaining committee members set about postponing the meeting due to a lack of quorum. They then contacted the Mayor, who joined via video link and the meeting continued, without explanation, as if quorum had been achieved.

 

“According to clause 8.2 of the Environment and Planning Committee’s Terms of Reference: ‘A quorum shall be the majority of Councillor members (excluding the Mayor) …’

 

“The words ‘excluding the Mayor’ appear to mean the Mayor couldn’t be counted as one of the required number of councillors. This matter needs to be investigated. If fewer than the required eligible councillors were present, the committee had no authority to transact business. Any resolutions should be invalid.

 

“The YouTube recording of the committee meeting raises matters that warrant formal examination, including whether: adequate steps were taken to establish quorum; the Mayor was incorrectly counted to establish quorum; appropriate advice was obtained or followed; there was a formal ruling on quorum; and whether care, diligence and seriousness were applied to the consideration of important environmental and planning matters.

 

“We have asked the Minister to consider whether the conduct of this committee maintained public confidence in the integrity of its decisions. We believe he needs to examine two resolutions made contrary to, or without adequate regard to, professional advice provided by Council officers.

 

“On the matter of lowering the threshold for the mechanical opening of The Entrance channel, we question whether it was appropriate to depart from the position of the specialist sub-committee without: obtaining a formal report, identifying the scientific, financial and operational consequences; referring the proposal back to the sub-committee; consulting agencies and stakeholders; or providing the public with an opportunity to comment.

 

“The committee also considered the planning proposal concerning the former Old Sydney Town site at Somersby. Council officers explained their recommendation that the planning proposal should not proceed to Gateway Determination.

 

“We believe the Minister must review whether the committee had sufficient strategic, environmental, infrastructure and probity information to support an amended motion that ignored staff advice and approved the proposal for Gateway Determination.

 

“Council should refrain from implementing the disputed resolutions until their validity has been determined and then they should be referred to a properly constituted meeting for fresh consideration.

 

“Council should be required to clarify publicly how quorum is calculated, including the respective status of appointed members, alternates and the Mayor. Council should review the democratic consequences of its committee structure, particularly where committees exercise final decision-making authority.

 

“A public forum should be conducted before every committee meeting at which binding decisions may be made, allowing residents and affected parties to address agenda items before determination.

 

“The Community Environment Network opposes the present delegation arrangements unless they are accompanied by substantial safeguards. Matters of strategic, environmental, planning or significant community importance should be determined by the full Council. Committees exercising binding delegated authority should either comprise all 15 councillors or operate under strict referral, transparency and public-participation requirements.”

Name (First & Last):

Email:

Submitting Form...

The server encountered an error.

Subscription received.

SUBSCRIBE