Airbrushing (and demolishing) history

Q:When is a Council decision not a Council decision?

A: When the CEO disagrees with it.

 

In December 2010, Council voted against a recommendation by the CEO (it would never happen with the current council) to get rid of the historic home known as Zinnecker's House next to the Visitor Centre in Hampton Road. Council decided the house should be retained, and set aside $30,000 over three years to make repairs.

 

Less than 18 months later, at the urging of the CEO, Council has thrown this decision out and resolved - unanimously and without debate or discussion  - to demolish the building.

 

 Normally, to perform such a backflip, Council must consider and pass a special motion to revoke their previous decision. But in this case, the CEO swept that formality aside saying it was "not required as that (previous) resolution has been acted upon - the building has been retained since then (the decision cannot bind Council forever) and funds were included in the 2010/11 budget for the first stage work to the building."

 

Never mind, either, that Council's recently adopted Strategic Plan endorsed as a key strategy 'To enhance and protect our built heritage' and that one of the actions listed to achieve this was to 'Prepare and implement a conservation plan for Zinnekers House.'

 

So what was the reason given for bulldozing an historical building in the main street of a town which sells itself as WA's only National Trust listed Historic Town?

 

The estimated cost of renovating and repairing the building was $175,000 and this money would be better spent on, among other things, improving the Shire staff office accommodation.

 

I'm not making this up.