By Candice Boyle
YARRAVILLE Community Centre services have continued this week in the lead up to the vote that will determine the future of the iconic Francis St building.
City of Maribyrnong councillors are expected to deliver a decision on the fate of the building at the ordinary council meeting tonight.
The decision was deferred at last month’s meeting due to the absence of Sheoak Ward councillor Janis Rossiter, and following a month of campaigning to save the building, the issue is back on the agenda tonight.
Councillors will now consider the council officer’s recommendation to resign from the committee of management and hand back the responsibility of the building to its owners, the State Government.
Instead of resigning, community members have called on the council to create a working party to formulate a plan to ensure all possibilities to save the building have been considered.
The proposed working party would consider alternative funding options, including community and business support, to help raise the estimated $5 million needed to repair the building.
The presentation to councillors and staff at last week’s community access and strategic policy meeting marked the peak of the residents’ fervent campaign.
With doubt hanging over the future of the building and the possibility of services being disbanded, community member Catherine Hamm said the council and community must work together to save the building.
“The centre is an intrinsic part of our community.
“It’s not just the building, it’s not just the programs — it’s the combination of both we need,” she said.
The centre employs 50 staff to ensure 1500 users can access more than 830 hours of programs every week.
Ms Hamm said during the presentation last week that the centre was historical, iconic and an invaluable community asset.
“It is a venue that is easily accessible and adds to the vibrancy and engagement of the community,” she said.
Despite the building’s 118-year community history, it is likely the lack of government funding for repairs will weigh heavily on councillors when they consider the motion to stand down from the responsibility for the building.
Centre user Tina Soumbassis said the council shouldn’t wait any longer and needed to commit to the building’s future.
“We seem to be going around in circles and we are just waiting for someone to commit the money needed,” she said.
The general manager for community wellbeing, Jenny McMahon, said no definitive answer had been given to the council on the pending funding applications.
Ms McMahon told residents that if funding was not confirmed and the building was returned to the State Government, the council had considered a number of scenarios.
Most of these involved the temporary or permanent relocation of the services.
The scenarios included:
IF funding were received, building and repairs would begin on the site, which would possibly require the services to be moved during the period of the repair work;
IF the State Government decided the building was unsafe or evicted the centre, the services would need to be relocated;
IF funding were received to build a new building for the centre’s services, an alternative site would be needed in the interim.
