City of Newcastle's public notification of the proposed lease of its inland pools may pass legal requirements, but there are still questions to be answered about its method.
A notice inviting comments on the proposed lease of the five public pools appeared in the Daily Telegraph classified section on July 3, ticking a box that requires the council to give public notice of the proposal.
An issue that has been as contentious as the leasing of the city's pools should warrant more effort to notify the community.
Beresfield pool users have been vocal about their desire for the swimming centre to continue being run by the council, while an internal Labor party war broke out after Wallsend MP lobbied Labor councillors to vote against awarding the tender to a private operator.
Other than the Daily Telegraph ad and a document on the public notices section of the council website, promotion of the notice seems to have gone quiet until the Herald's inquiry on July 10.
The Herald has twice asked the council where else the notice was advertised and why the council did not place it in the local newspaper, where it would surely have more reach with the Newcastle community than a Sydney masthead.
Twice, they have refused to answer those questions.
After ignoring the questions on Monday in favour of responding with a press release about a $10 million pool proposal at Lambton, on Tuesday the council replied: "We won't have anything else to add on this today."
The Local Government Act points out how the community needs to be engaged before a council grants a community land lease exceeding five years. The proposed lease of the pools is seven years, with two more seven-year extension options.
To comply with the act, the council needs to give public notice of the proposal, including on its website, which it did.
It needs to exhibit notice of the proposal on the land itself. A report from the CEO said the public notice would be "made available at each of the five swimming centres", all of which are closed for the winter.
The council needs to notify people who own or occupy the land adjoining it. It also has to alert anyone in the vicinity whose "primary focus" of community land enjoyment is the land in question.
The Herald asked the council how many houses were letterbox-dropped about the lease proposal and why regular pool users and swimming clubs were not notified.
Again, no response.
It's worth noting that if anyone makes a submission objecting to the proposal, the council cannot grant the lease without the Minister's consent.
Previous property and asset notices on the council's website include lease agreements for Merewether, Nobbys and Bar Beach kiosks, which were certainly not as controversial as the pools tender.
The Local Government Act states that before granting the lease the council must consider all submissions duly made to it.
Now more people are aware of the notice, the council should be able to gain a better gauge of community sentiment about the issue than it would have before.
