Crozier Hill / Stock Road Floodplain – Governance Concerns, Public Safety, and the Need for Independent Oversight.
1. Public Safety is Paramount
Flood risks associated with Crozier Hill / Stock Road are real, documented, and publicly acknowledged by Council. Residents were at one point contacted due to “risk of isolation during storm and flood events”, confirming Council’s operational knowledge of exposure. Where development intersects with human safety, transparency and preparedness are non-negotiable responsibilities.
Council Watch asserts:
• Residents must be informed of all relevant risk information.
• Appropriate emergency planning must exist and be demonstrated.
• Public safety must take precedence over reputational management or risk containment.
2. Prolonged Secrecy Now Presents a Governance Risk
Council has held key components of the Crozier Hill / indemnity matter in extended confidential status for close to four years. While confidentiality may initially be justified, its prolonged continuation now creates governance risks. It undermines public confidence, increases exposure for decision-makers, and risks appearing to protect institutions rather than the community.
Council Watch believes time is no longer neutral. Prolonged secrecy now harms governance rather than protects it.
3. Independence Is Essential
It is a matter of public record that elements of Council’s handling of related matters were shifted under the control of Council’s Insurer. Insurers exist to manage liability, not to undertake independent governance or integrity investigations. While insurers play a valid role, they cannot replace external public-interest oversight.
Ratepayers deserve certainty that any investigation into this matter is impartial, external, and free from liability-driven influence.
4. The Community Deserves Clarity
Council Watch does not assert findings of guilt, wrongdoing, or criminal liability against any individual. That is the responsibility of appropriate statutory authorities. However, risk remains unresolved, governance questions remain unanswered, and the community has waited long enough.
A functioning democracy requires that serious matters of risk and governance ultimately be tested openly.
5. Position and Call to Action
Council Watch Fleurieu Inc. believes it is now firmly in the public interest that:
(a) A genuinely independent investigation be commissioned, external to Council and independent of insurers, with full access to all documentation.
(b) Confidentiality surrounding Crozier Hill indemnity matters be urgently reviewed, with maximum practicable disclosure made.
(c) Council formally account to the community regarding what has occurred, what risks remain, and what protections now exist.
(d) Oversight authorities be formally engaged where appropriate to ensure governance accountability and public confidence.
(e) Affected residents, including Mr Blatchford, be treated respectfully and in accordance with natural justice, irrespective of all past disputes.
(f) Residents, such as Mr Blatchford, are allowed to ask the Council Questions from the Gallery, and also to make Deputations.
Conclusion
This issue is no longer simply a dispute; it is a matter of public governance, public trust, and public safety.
Transparency strengthens institutions — silence corrodes them.
Council Watch Fleurieu Inc. will continue to advocate respectfully, lawfully, and firmly for truth, accountability, and community protection. We wish you all a very happy new year, and can assure you that we will continue to represent your best interests for this coming year. Please help us to do this by telling your friends about us, and letting us have their contact details so that they can go on our mailing list.
Council Watch Fleurieu Inc.
Terry Andrews – Chair
Authorised by Council Watch Fleurieu Inc.
PO Box 1753
Victor Harbor SA 5211
Email: councilwatch44@gmail.com
Web: https://councilwatchvictorharbor.com
Council Watch Victor Harbor 