Councillor Karen Renkema-Lang says that procedural rules resulted in last night's rescission motion continuing to authorise the CEO to deal with selling agents McVay on the sale of Blue Haven, while ensuring other options (such as leasing or retaining Blue Haven, and other possible asset sales) will be investigated and calling for greater community engagement.

“To present an alternative motion, it must relate to the business at hand and must enhance the motion that is being rescinded,” she says.

“I worked with Councillors Larkins, Draisma, Keast and Rice on how we could rework the motion to include as much as possible and still make sure it would be debated.

“I would like to acknowledge and congratulate all the other four, but in particular Draisma and Larkins. They have been under extreme pressure, and they have remained strong and stuck to their principles. I have a lot of admiration for them for doing that.”

These councillors want further information on the other options available before making a decision on Blue Haven’s fate.

“I have not seen evidence in the [confidential] Forensic Accounting Report that says we have to sell Blue Haven,” says Cllr Renkema-Lang.

“We have a register of superfluous assets - including the Leisure Centre and Kendalls Beach Holiday Park, where we own the land and the business. Why has a decision been made to sell Blue Haven and not look at what opportunities exist in those other sites?

“I’m not saying we should do either of those, but I am saying we have not seen the analysis of what our options are around disposal of assets to help us sort through this problem.

“Which of those would have least impact on the community, and in fact might have some positive outcomes for the community?”

Councillor Imogen Draisma sees it was important to call for more transparency and consultation on the matter, given that these principles were supported by all candidates in the recent election.

“Ultimately our job is to act as a check and balance against the staff and to articulate the concerns of the community and act upon them. That is what decided my position – what would I expect from councillors if I wasn’t inside the tent?”

She is keen for other opportunities to be considered, and believes it won’t take any more time than a sale.

“We have to try and do everything possible to not relive the mistakes of the past by taking a very measured approach and looking at all the options available to us, because this will shape the future of the Council and the community for years to come.”

While some staff and Blue Haven residents would have preferred to have the possibility of a sale taken off the table, Cllr Draisma doesn’t believe that was possible.

“They first and foremost were calling for transparency and consultation. So that is what we are doing.

“To take the option of sale altogether off the table would be financially irresponsible of us.

“The extent and seriousness of the Council’s financial position is now apparent and this means the Council must start taking action now or face the real prospect of being placed into administration - we are on a timeline.

“The bottom line is that we must take action to correct past years of financial decisions in order to meet our legislative obligations and try to avoid that scenario.”

Cllr Lang says, “I think it is up to Council to present a strong position [to the Office of Local Government and TCorp]. We are nowhere near in the situation the Central Coast was in. Selling Akuna St will put our cash flow in a more positive light until 2024.

“All they want is a plan in place to improve our cash flow.”