Serendip Sanctuary sits just outside Lara. It is a conservation reserve, an education site, a place generations of local families have taken their kids. The Victorian Government committed $11 million to redevelop it. What residents have not been able to obtain is a clear account of how that money is being spent.
That's the whole campaign. Not opposition to the redevelopment — a request for transparency about it.
01 / What we asked forA petition, then a formal motion.
This week, I had the absolute honour to represent 1,000+ residents and submit a formal request to the City of Greater Geelong for greater transparency and accountability at Serendip Sanctuary. This was a promise I made during my campaign, and I'm proud of what we have achieved so far with the support of many locals.
Figure 01 · The motion
Four things the motion asked Council to do.
None of this asks anyone to stop work. It asks for an account of work already funded.
02 / The Mayor's letterCouncil did write to the Minister.
Earlier, we welcomed a supportive letter from Mayor Kontelj, who raised our community's concerns directly with the Minister for Environment, highlighting the petition. Credit where it's due — that letter asked for exactly the right things.
The letter noted that Council had formally requested a meeting with the Minister in March 2024, that repeated follow-ups had not resulted in one, and that similar letters to previous ministers in 2022 and 2023 had produced no meaningful response. It requested a detailed financial breakdown, a clear timeline for infrastructure repairs including the display pond, a plan to re-engage the community, and a public briefing from Parks Victoria.
It is vital that the residents feel heard and assured that the redevelopment will enhance, rather than diminish, this cherished place.— from the Mayor's letter to the Minister
03 / The night it went missingAn administrative error.
I attended the council meeting to represent ten local residents who had submitted proxy questions. We didn't get the answers we were hoping for — and it was heartbreaking.
Then the phone started ringing, and we finally understood what had happened. The reason our Serendip motion and questions were omitted from the Council minutes was a City of Greater Geelong internal administrative error.
Figure 02 · What went wrong
Followed the process. Papers lost in the system.
| Step | What happened |
|---|---|
| We followed Council's process | The questions were submitted in hard copy at the customer service centre, and date-stamped on receipt. |
| The papers never reached governance | They were lost internally due to an administrative oversight, and so were never placed before the meeting. |
| Council acknowledged the error | The City has been transparent about it and agreed there is an issue in their process. |
| The matter can be re-submitted | Council sought advice on precedent to have the issue raised again, in its entire submission, at the next meeting. |
I want to be fair here: the City owned the mistake quickly and did not try to minimise it. That matters. But it should not take a thousand signatures and a lost file for a community question to reach a chamber.
04 / Where it standsWorks advancing, questions outstanding.
Repairs to the display pond are now under way, and a new sensory garden is near completion — including artwork from a Wadawurrung artist and plantings indigenous to the volcanic Western Plains. Those are genuinely good things and I've said so publicly.
But the pond was closed more than twelve months after significant cracks appeared, and the delay in addressing it has been a source of sustained criticism. Welcoming the progress and remaining concerned about the lack of clear answers are not contradictory positions.
It's a bit like smoke and mirrors. When you've got something like Serendip, you have to try to protect it to best ability as custodians of the land.— David Greenwood OAM, quoted locally
05 / Why this is a Greater Geelong issueNot just a Lara one.
Serendip is managed by the State Government through Parks Victoria, not by council. So a reasonable person might ask what council can actually do. The answer is advocacy — and advocacy carries far more weight when it clearly represents the whole municipality rather than one township.
That's why, when we resubmit, we're aiming to have at least one voter from every council ward present in the chamber. Eleven wards, eleven residents, one question. It's a simple way of demonstrating that transparency over state spending in a regional park isn't a parochial concern.
If you're willing to represent your ward in the chamber when this is resubmitted, get in touch with the name of your ward and confirmation you're enrolled to vote there. And if you haven't signed the petition yet, it's still open. Email david@centrestage.org.au with "Serendip" in the subject.
