A seminar was held on Monday to provide the Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board with advice from police and city council staff on the process of installing crime prevention cameras.
However, due to the level of public interest in the process, community board acting chairman Jake McLellan questioned the transparency of the meeting.
Read more:
Prior to the public-excluded discussion on crime cameras, the meeting was open to the public for two items – the Bay Area Skate and Scooter Park designs and the Heathcote Expressway.
Mr McLellan called the decision to make the crime cameras a private matter “completely and utterly wrong.”
He said nothing discussed at the meeting needed to exclude the public.
Head of community support, governance and partnerships John Filsell said the meeting excluded the public as it was “a confidential staff briefing to elected members” and because there was no decision-making.
There has been ongoing confusion as to who can fund the $20,000 cameras, as community-funded equipment is not an option.
Board members were meant to decide on a recommendation to decline all funding towards the cameras in July – the amount requested by Safer Sumner was $16,187.
However, the application was withdrawn due to confusion over how the item was expected to meet the discretionary response fund criteria.
Mr Filsell said the information will be shared next week with Safer Sumner, which has been trying to get the cameras installed since 2017.
Mr McLellan sent a letter to city council staff on Sunday raising concerns prior to the meeting.
“Given this item already has come to the community board I’m unsure why this would now be removed from the public view for a period of time,” it said.
“This appears to be setting us up for a position where we would be acting on advice not made public, and so I want to get this right at the outset.”
Mr McLellan has not received a written response to the letter.
Community board member Darrel Latham, who has been pushing for the crime cameras, said he is in “full agreement with the sentiments expressed in the letter.”
Mr Latham has been outspoken about the need to involve the public on matters which are of significant interest to the community.
“From my perspective, there is no good reason as to why the public or media should have been excluded from this seminar. The issues have been well publicised with respect to the crime cameras and there is a genuine interest by the public in this matter,” he said.
“We are a community board advocating for the public, we are not a branch of the government security bureau so let’s keep things in perspective and involve our community.’
