Our little weather-o-meter down on the right side of this page is telling us Saturday is going to be cool 18 degrees. Weatherzone is saying it will be 20. Both are in agreement that it will be a bit chilly on the beach for too much nude sporting activity.

Feedback on the forums has suggested we delay the beach cricket day until later in the month when the weather picks up a little more. However, a few of us are still going to get along just to say hi, and chat about the issues facing the beaches and discuss ideas.

If you want to come along for a walk on a nice beach, or a chat with others from the community, please make the effort to stop in and say hi. We’ll probably be clothed, but that doesn’t mean we aren’t nudists – and it is a “clothing optional” beach after all!!

An article appeared in the Werribee/Hoppers Crossing today, by Kirsty Ross, titled “City must face” (Click here to read). Kirsty has written some nicely balanced stories in the past, and this one sticks to the facts – Wyndham has spent some money cleaning up the access and improving the general area, and may have done so on the assumption that they wouldn’t get any resistance to revocation of the clothing optional status.

Interestingly, Wyndham CC’s motivation appears to be related to tourism and redevelopment opportunities – both areas that the nudist community supports, and can integrate into, if there had been some consultation!! This holds true for all the beaches and the three responsible councils – all you had to do was talk to us and we could have actually worked on achieving mutually beneficial objectives!!

One day we hope the councils will realise that clothing optional beaches are identical in their requirements to the clothed beaches, the only difference between the two is the smallest amount of fabric. And a piece of clothing does not change the requirement for well maintained and managed facilities, appropriate monitoring and responses processes, and the protection of the legitimate users from the undesireable behaviour that occurs on ALL beaches, in beach carparks and toilet blocks.

Thanks to Rob for his comments, you’re right on the money as usual – check out the article if you haven’t done so already!!

Despite Cr Humphrey’s best efforts, sanity has prevailed on the Surf Coast!! In a motion passed 6:2 on 17th October, Surf Coast Shire Council resolved to “request the Chief Executive Officer prepare a community consultation framework on the issues surrounding the Pt Impossible optional dress beach and that a report detailing this framework be presented to Council”(Click here to read minutes, it starts on Page 48).

In a way, Council’s hands were tied, with the Minister stating “It would be imprudent to proceed further without appropriate local consultation being undertaken.” The Council acknowledges this with their conclusion “Clearly without undertaking such a process, the Minister will attach very little weight to Council’s request.”

There are a few interesting things to note about this motion that are worth discussing further:

• No timeframes are given for how long the Chief Executive Officer (Peter Bollen) has to prepare the “consultation framework”. This means it might be presented to Council next week, or more likely it will be presented to Council after a reasonable time for preparation, since any framework worthy of implementation needs to be properly developed, so that it will stack up to the Minister’s request
• The motion for consultation was passed 6:2, which is a departure from the original motion that was passed 5:2 in favour of revoking status. This tells us that at least a couple of Cr Humphrey’s supporters in the original motion are now willing to take a more moderate stance. This doesn’t indicate support for the beach per se, but we can probably guess Cr Humphrey is not winning too many friends in the chambers… There were only two people against the original motion for consultation, we believe it was Cr Humphrey and Cr Schroeter – it is surprising Cr Humphrey can find a supporter in Council these days, his activities have not done the image of the Surf Coast Shire any favours!!
• Cr Humphrey tried to get an ammendment to the motion through – even to the last, he’s trying to avoid actually consulting with the real users of the beach (ie true Victorian nudists!!). Cr Humphrey naively suggested that a single public meeting would be sufficient to satisfy the Minister’s request. Cr Humphrey was probably hoping that the only people who would show up at that meeting would be his neighbours at White’s Beach – he probably hoped that clear thinking and well-spoken supporters of the clothing optional beach would not bother coming along!! Well, just so you know Ron, Victorian nudists would have made the trip just for the satisfaction of dismantling your arguments in a public forum. The residents of the Surf Coast community deserve to know, in detail, exactly how well you represent their interests!
• In one statement in the motion summary, Council concedes “the people who legitimately and legally use Pt Impossible as an option dress beach and the broader community were not consulted prior to the Council considering the above action.” This flies directly in the face of the assertions made by Cr Humphrey, who still seems to think plenty of consultation has happened. Perhaps he thinks is neighbours count, since he hasn’t been able to give us details of the nudists he spoke to (we’re betting you could count the nudists who were consulted on zero fingers)

The only other point that’s interesting is the absence of any reference to Southside. Cr Humphrey indicated in one of the media articles that Southside wasn’t being considered as part of this process, so it does appear both Southside and Pt Impossible are safe for the time being. This doesn’t mean we can relax – the next round is probably just around the corner, so those letter writing skills won’t have gone to waste when we need to play our part in the consultation process!!

There’s plenty more in the motion minutes, check them out – we applaud Council for bringing sanity back into the decision making process. It’s unfortunate that it took a trip up to the Minister to make it happen, but we seem to be steering the ship in the right direction again.

Now we need to see how Mornington (Sunnyside) and Wyndham (Campbells Cove) will proceed. Mornington has been very quiet throughout the whole process, so we wait with some anticipation for their next move. Wyndham has indicated informally (via email to one of our representatives) that they have not planned for any consultation at this stage, but concede it will be required in order to proceed past the Minister.

Great work everyone – the game’s not over yet, but at least now we have some breathing space!! Don’t forget the beach cricket day (weather permitting), tell your friends!!

In the Meeting Agenda released by the Surf Coast Shire for the council meeting to be held Tuesday 17/10, item 4.3 on Page 48 introduces the next step in the process being folowed by Council to clean up the mess initiated by Cr Humphrey. You can donwload the entire agenda from the Surf Coast Shire website, just scroll to Page 48 to read the detail (Click here to see the agenda)

There’s a couple of things that are interesting in the agenda that are worth pointing out, as follows:

• The council acknowledges that the Great Ocean Road Coast Committee (GORCC) did not support the council motion in the early stages of the process
• Although we have not seen the actual letter sent by the Planning Minister to the council, the agenda does quote the Minister as saying “It would be imprudent to proceed further without appropriate local consultation being undertaken.”
• The council acknowledges that “there has not been a broad ranging and structure [sic] consultation process undertaken. For example, the people who legitimately and legally use Pt Impossible as an option dress beach and the broader community were not consulted prior to the Council considering the above action.” This is the first time (as far as we are aware) that the council acknolwedges the community was not consulted, contrary to what Cr Humphrey would have you believe
• Council has requested the Shire CEO (Peter Bollen) to prepare a community consultation framework
• Council suggests there will be “considerable political risk to Council if it maintains its current position in relation to
  its request to Minister Hulls to revoke the optional dress provisions at Pt Impossible without undertaking a
  structured and open consultation process.” – That’s a bit more than a public meeting, Cr Humphrey…
• Finally, council acknowledges that “consultation may inform Council that its current position in this matter is justified or alternatively it may return that further thought needs to be given to this issue”. The nudist community is of the belief that much further thought is required, preferably based on facts rather than the emotive rhetoric and specious assertions that put council in this position in the first place

The Victorian nudist community supports the notion of open and reasonable discussion of the issues within a consultative framework that allows for the contributions of all interested parties to be considered. The community also welcomes any opportunity to be involved in the process that defines the consultative framework, in consideration of the unique ways the community communicates internally throughout the state and nationally.

It is our view the Cr Humphrey’s suggestion to hold an open forum to resolve the issues “once and for all” (as quoted in the Geelong Advertiser 16/10 and referred to in a previous post on this site) is a naive and short-sighted view of how appropriate and comprehensive community consultation should be undertaken. Cr Humphrey’s poorly researched original motion and subsequent behaviour (particularly in the media) has only served to highlight his unwillingness (or inability) to present verifiable facts and remain impartial on these issues, and has not served the interests of the community or the council as a result.

We’ll keep you informed of the outcome of the meeting, and urge everyone to be ready with the letters and comments for submission

An article appeared in the Geelong Advertiser on Monday 16/10, titled “Planning Minister demands more… Nudist beach views”, by Lauren Pike (Click here to read). In the article, Cr Ron Humphrey plans to suggest that “a public meeting would settle once and for all the community’s stance on the issue and fulfil Mr Hull’s requirement [that the council undertake proper community consultation]“.

Who is Ron kidding? In this article, Ron stays true to form with a slightly naive view of what constitutes “due process”, his idea falling so far short of “proper community consultation” that it’s laughable in the extreme. Hoping to back himself up, he throws in the usual specious statements intended to be taken as fact at face value (anyone here get consulted since last October that the beach was under threat?? Hmmmm, didn’t think so…). But to top it off, he even goes on the attack against the Planning Minister, stating “what the community wanted was never taken into consideration when decisions were made”!!

Wow, that looks like 2 faux pas in a single breath – Not only has Cr Humphrey taken a shot at someone higher up the political food chain (which is always a bad look in Government, particularly if you had aspirations to work at levels higher than local council), but he’s also managed to make himself look short sighted and not representative of the Surf Coast Shire Community in general, suggesting that community views are not important in the political process – I wonder how many supporters Ron will have at the next round of Council elections with that kind of attitude???

The nudist community of Victoria calls for the Surf Coast Shire Council to reject any motions, ideas, suggestions or undertakings from Cr Humphrey, given his history of unsubstantiated emotive rhetoric, incomplete and innacurate research on the issues, and the fact that he got the Council into this mess to begin with. Instead, our community would appreciate being involved in reasonable and intelligent discussion about the issues that face not only the clothing optional beaches in the Surf Coast Shire, but also anti-social behaviour on beaches in general. After all, the only difference between Pt Impossible and Torquay is a pair of shorts!

Thanks to John Bartlett for representing the interests of the nudist community so well in his comments in the Geelong Advertiser article – Like John says, keep those letters rolling in to the Councils, they now have an obligation to hear us!!

(Oh, and for those of you reading this at Mornington Shire, feel free to commence community consultation about Sunnyside anytime – we’re watching closely, and look forward to your proactive invitation to the discussion table. The Mornington Shire has had the benefit of lower media attention than the Surf Coast Shire, but that is sure to change quickly as state interest in the issue grows).