Ed, Many thanks to Councillor Toms for attempting to restore some credibility to Our Council. Councillor Toms ‘Notice of Motion’ reflects the concern felt by many residents after the Mayors inaccurate claims about why IPART rejected Council’s application for a 37% rates rise. Councillor Toms motion reads as follows: “That 1) Council receive and adopt the Independent Pricing and Regulatory Tribunal’s (IPART) Local Government’s Determination of Clarence Valley Council’s application for a special rate variation for 2016-17, noting in particular the 2 criteria; 2) Declare that the other reasons attributed to the Mayor Cr Williamson are not claims adopted or endorsed by Clarence Valley Council” Thanks also to Councillor Jim Simmons for publicly affirming, in The Clarence Forum, IPART’s reasons for rejecting CVC’s mammoth rates rise. Senior staff at IPART also addressed the Mayor’s inaccurate claims. When supplied with the Mayor’s claims, by The Clarence Forum, IPART wrote the following reply: “IPART’s report does refer to the council’s decision to reduce the size of the special variation from 8% pa (47% cumulative) each year over five years, to 6.5% pa (37% cumulative) over five years (pages 5, 16). This decision by the council was noted as background information. The report does not make reference to that decision by the council as a reason for the council’s special variation application not being approved in full.” It is most unfortunate that a recent change in Council’s Code of Meeting Practice has meant that Councillor Tom’s attempts to restore public trust in Council may have to wait until the Council meeting on Tuesday, July 12. We hope that All Councillors demonstrate their genuine commitment to basic honesty and decency and support Councillor Tom’s proposals. John Hagger, The Clarence Forum