Mt Cotton, Sheldon and Rochedale residents have objected to proposed new boundaries for the Springwood electorate
Proposed new electorate boundaries for the state seat of Springwood have proved unpopular with Redlands and Logan residents who say that their community connections have been ignored by the Queensland Redistribution Commission.
View from West Mt Cotton Road
Redlands residents living in Mt Cotton and Sheldon want to be included in a seat based on part of the Redland City local government area instead of being transferred to the Springwood electorate.
A petition from 156 Rochedale residents says they want to keep their suburb in the one electorate by being put back into Springwood instead of being pushed into Waterford.
The final phase of public consultation about the 2017 state electoral redistribution is now under way.
People have until Tuesday 18 April to submit comments about objections received by the Queensland Redistribution Commission.
A report listing all 1,546 objections received in response to the proposed new electorates is available on the Commission’s website.
All of the submissions received by the Commission are available here.
What the Commission proposed
Changes to the state seat of Springwood were proposed by the Commission in an effort to top up the numbers after shifting some voters into other seats following the creation of an extra seat (Macalister) between Brisbane and the Gold Coast.
In the proposed redistribution Springwood loses the Loganholme and Cornubia suburbs to Macalister and part of the Rochedale South community is given to Waterford. To make up for this the Commission proposed to move Redlands residents living in Mt Cotton and Sheldon into Springwood.
In proposing this solution the Electoral Commission has ignored the possibility of keeping residents in the Redlands local government area together in three Redland City based seats. The feasibility of keeping Redlanders together is discussed further by Jeff Waddell who says the Commission’s proposal is “horribly wrong”. (Jeff Waddell Objection 1431)
Public consultation about electoral redistribution
There are four phases of public consultation for this electoral redistribution and the final phase is now under way.
It’s possible that comments from just a few people may influence the Commission to make changes to its original proposal.
An example of how this can happen was documented by Redlands2030 in a story about changes to electoral division boundaries for Redland City Council elections. Here’s a link: A murky tale about land development and electoral redistribution in Redland City
Make a submission
If you want to make a comments about the objections to the proposed electoral redistribution you can do so by email, post, personal delivery or through an on-line submission. Here is information about how to make a submission.
Presented below are objections to the proposed boundaries for Springwood, from people in Mt Cotton, Sheldon and Rochedale.
Mt Cotton residents want to stay in Redlands
Current boundaries for the electorate of Redlands include Mt Cotton but not all of Sheldon. A full size version of this map is included at the end of the story.
Objections to the Mt Cotton area being included in the Springwood electorate include:
I am writing to protest the re-allocation of Mount Cotton and Sheldon from the Redlands district into the State seat of Springwood. There has been no meaningful community consultation or development plan. This is an ecologically sensitive district that clearly does not have good representation from government, othe rwise needs of the region would have been explored. The Springwood seat is predominantly high density residential and light industry by and large – I have seen no proposal which indicates how these areas are to be effectively co-managed without negatively impacting Mount Cotton and Sheldon. What a complete failure of governance. As a resident I am entirely against this re-allocation. (Dr Amanda White Objection 26)
I strongly oppose a merger with Springwood electorate. Redlands has very different requirements with the islands and coast and the area ear marked is simply too large to group our specifics needs which are not necessarily suburbia and road infrastructure. Residents choose to live here at a high cost for that priviledge, merging with very left and highly built up region will reduce our services, make us travel to service providers in an area we dont want and lower our standard of living. Services in this region like logan hospital, M1 is already stretched, we dont need to add to the problem. (Erica Objection 29)
Hi, I live in the Redlands area in Mt Cotton and see absolutely no benefit in changing us to the Springwood electorate. Myself and my family do not want to be under Springwood. I will be moving out of the area if this happens. We belong under the Redlands electrical. John Robson (Objection 30)
I live in Mount Cotton and feel moving to be part of Springwood would be a bad idea and make us a forgotten area. We have all of 1 major road connecting us to Springwood compared to the multiple connections to Redlands, in addition to this we are geographically closer to Redlands. Secondly we would be a local council under Redlands but a state seat under Springwood . There is quite a few reason why this is an illogical choice. Please leave Mount Cotton under Redlands. (Kenneth Park Objection 32)
I scott woodford A local resident of the mt cotton community strongly oppose the proposed changes to the electoral boundaries to move my subburb into the springwood electorate. For starters there has been zero community consultation or advertising to make the constituents aware of upcoming proposed changes i see this as a form of corruption as this is clearly not being done to help the constituents of the area this is a decision made by the powers that be so someone can cash in on a potential development if boundary changes go ahead ect ect. What you are proposing is unfair,unjust and unreasonable as the redland city council does a great job of taking care of our community’s needs and springwood doesnt thats clear as day when you drive aroun both areas! I connclude that this proposal is unnecessary and unsupported by the mt cotton family community. (Objection 38)
I want to register my complete DISAPPROVAL of the potential change to make Mt Cotton part of the Springwood Council. Redlands Council has always done a great job for our growing community. We don’t need any changes thanks. (Lorelene Freeman Objection 40)
Mount Cotton residents do not want to become a part of the Springwood electoral catchment! ( Stephanie Cook Objection 42)
Why is Mt Cotton being taken out of the Redlands? What will be the gains for the people of Mt Cotton? All I see is the government yet again playing with something that isn’t broken so they then don’t have to address any real issues or concerns. What a waste of time and tax payers money. (C Luxton Objection 43)
Moving mount cotton into Springwood bad decision and would split the electorate. (Nick ryrie Objection 44)
Please do not move us from Redlands to Springfield. No one in our beautiful hillside suburb wants to be in Springfield. We are proud to be part of the Redlands and there is no reason why it should change. (Chris Aynsley Objection 45)
I do not support mount cotton being changed into the springwood district and wish to remain part of redlands (Leah Ginnivan Objection 46)
As a resident and rate payer of mount cotton I strongly object to the proposal that we will be re-zoned into the Springwood state electrol (Kylie Stekiewicz Objection 48)
No. Just no. I see no justification to change Mt Cotton to the Logan electorate. (Belinda Objection 49)
I object to this change of boundary to Springwood district. Proper consultation withresidents is surely required before this can occur. How has it been decided before anyonewas given the chance to debate the issue? (Janice Rose Objection 50)
Mount Cotton is proud to be part of the Redlands. It’s a beautiful area and it should stay part of the Redlands. People who have been living here for over 20 years will suddenly have to change their details and miss out on Redland area amenities. Keep mount cotton as the Redlands. (Michelle Objection 56)
I definitely don’t agree with the rezoning of Mt Cotton and Sheldon into the Springwood electorate. These areas are completely different to each other. Mt Cotton and Sheldon are known for the bushland, wildlife and acreages. Springwood area has a massive freeway through it. It is obvious what the state will find more important for funding! Our voice will be lost and the issues we find important will be drowned out by the more populated areas in Logan. Not a good move. (Kate Kellett Objection 63)
Sheldon residents want to be in a Redlands electorate
In the initial phase of public consultation residents from Sheldon said that they wanted to be in a Redland City based electorate, they didn’t mind which one. One suggestion said:
For quite some time, we have felt like we live in a little pocket in ‘no man’s land’. We rarely receive communications from elected representatives. (Kerry Harle and Alan Withers Suggestion 9)
Similar points were made in objections received by the Commission:
I notice you have taken us out of Mansfield and put us into Springwood. Brisbane and Logan have nothing to do with Redlands. They are not reported in our paper and the candidates have done nothing for us. They are not scrutinized on their performance as our paper does not report on their activities. We are part of Redlands and should remain somewhere there. I have received no mail from Mansfield only when it is election time. The only way we know what is going on is by our local paper and we do not get Springwood or Mansfield papers. Electorates are about communities not numbers. It is time you grouped common suburbs into their prospective councils so that Candidates can be more focused on their electorate. It makes no sense and is extremely unfair to the candidate to represent two communities with different sets of priorities. (Alex Perov Objection 105)
We are currently in the Mansfield electorate but with the redistribution we are being transferred to the Springwood electorate. As Sheldon has always been in the Redland City Council area I cannot understand why we are not included in the Capalaba or Redlands electorates as all business, shopping and local interests are all based in this area. The elected member for Mansfield really has little interest in Sheldon and has never visited this acreage suburb. I would think that the Springwood member would also not be interested in our area. The Redlands electorates would be aware of our problems relating to environmental concerns particularly the protection of our koalas which have been driven to extinction by an uncaring council and state government of all political parties. So please consider keeping Sheldon in the Redland council area. (Ron Dunlea Objection 235)
To Whom It May Concern, I understand that Sheldon and Mt Cotton are to be included in the Electorate of Springwood. Except for a very small number of residents who may work or visit the area, we have no real community connection to Springwood. Presently, a pocket of Sheldon residents are enrolled in the electorate of Mansfield, whilst others are included in the Redlands electorate. Several residents have expressed concerns about Sheldon being a part of the Springwood electorate, especially when we are closer in distance and every day affiliations with other nearby electorates, such as Capalaba,Redlands and Mansfield. Further, Springwood has no direct access for Sheldon residents by way of public transport. We risk being isolated from the electorate heartland. It is important for Sheldon to be included into an electorate that is most appropriate to service our community. We have been on the outskirts for far too long. Thanks for your time. (Alan Withers Objection 295)
Rochedale residents petition to stay in Springwood
Current boundaries of the Springwood electorate. A full size map is included at the end of the story.
While many Redland City residents don’t want to be included in the Springwood electorate, lots of Rochedale residents are upset about being shifted into Waterford.
I have been advised that the Queensland Redistribution Commission’s proposed boundaries has moved a small part of Rochedale South into the Waterford Electorate. I have been advised that these boundaries are just proposals at this stage. I am highly concerned about being annexed out of Rochedale South and leaving the Springwood community with its premium schools, services and facilities. I am a staunch supporter of Mick De Brenni in his campaign for the Springwood Electorate and I want to enjoy the benefit of the party’s hard work and plans for the electorate. I live in the area of Rochedale South where the electoral boundary changes are proposed. I believe cutting my home out of the (State) Springwood electorate and including me into the Waterford Electorate with suburbs west of the Pacific Motorway with much lower valuations, would raise insurance premiums and heavily impact on the value of my home. I highly object to cutting this small area of Rochedale South from the rest of the Springwood Electorate. (Kerry Anderson Objection 1008)
A petition signed by 156 people argues for Rochedale residents to remain in Springwood, saying:
We the undersigned are residents of the area bounded by Underwood Road, The Pacific Motorway, and Rochedale Road. We are aware that the proposed redistribution places our area into Waterford, rather than Springwood where we currently reside.
We seek to be re-included in the State Electoral District of Springwood for the following reasons:
- The proposal would split our suburb placing half in Springwood and half in Waterford. We want to keep our suburb in one electorate;
- We associate more closely with the electorate of Springwood because we use the shops in Springwood as well as other services such as schools, major roads, along with sporting and social clubs;
- We feel more part of Springwood and the community to the east of the South East Motorway than we do on the other side of the highway.
- If we were to be put into Waterford we believe that our issues would be lost to the large bulk of people in Waterford based a long way from us.
(Peter May Objection 1159)
Make a submission
If you want to make a comments about the objections to the proposed electoral redistribution you can do so by email, post, personal delivery or through an on-line submission. Here is information about how to make a submission.
Redlands2030 – 9 April 2017
Current boundaries for the electorate of Redlands include Mt Cotton
Current boundaries of the Springwood electorate
Please note: Offensive or off-topic comments will be deleted. If offended by any published comment please email thereporter@redlands2030.net