Town of Claremont, City of Subiaco blitz community perception survey but locals leave room for improvement

Two western suburbs councils have been given straight As by their ratepayers, emerging top of the class in a community perception survey comparing local governments across the State.

But it’s not all roses in the leafy suburbs, with Claremont and Subiaco residents using the survey to demand more eyes on their streets to stamp out petty crime and re-igniting calls for the return of a local police station.

The Town of Claremont ranked highest out of 46 metropolitan and regional councils that undertook a Community Scorecard Survey, achieving an “overall performance score” of 80 out of 100. The City of Subiaco was third with 75, beating the industry average of 65.

Councils choose to take part in the survey, run by consultancy firm Catalyse, with their results rated against other councils who have completed their own surveys in the past three years.

Claremont Mayor Jock Barker said it was fantastic to see such strong results from more than 1100 respondents.

“However, there is always room to exceed expectations and we will listen to the community and aim to achieve even better results in years to come,” he said.

Claremont achieved industry leading scores for its leadership, streetscapes and verges, community safety and crime prevention, and as a governing organisation.

The council’s leadership was rated excellent, good or okay by 85 per cent of respondents.

City of Subiaco mayor David McMullen said he was especially proud to see their council’s score for “leadership by the mayor and councillors” increase to a 76 per cent positive rating.

“The cumulative increase from 2021 — when that rating sat below 50 per cent— is substantial,” he said. “This is a direct reflection of how the current council is leading the city.”

Subiaco was an industry leader in 17 areas including its library, local roads, access to public transport, animal management and support for local businesses.

More than 800 ratepayers and business gave local roads a 94 per cent positive score; playgrounds, parks and reserves 94 per cent; and preservation of local history and heritage 93 per cent.

Residents of both councils did little to dispel the western suburbs’ NIMBY reputation, leaving room for improvement in the categories of “managing responsible growth and development” and “planning and building approvals”.

In Claremont, 36 per cent of respondents said planning and building approval process was poor or terrible and Subiaco scored worse with nearly half (44 per cent) of residents rating the council poor or terrible in the same category.

Other priorities for Claremont was focus on the council’s sustainability practices and waste management such as introducing a food organics and garden organics system, youth services and parking management.

Subiaco’s areas for improvement included handling of responsible growth and development, maintaining Subiaco’s heritage and identity, streamlining planning and building approvals, safety and crime prevention, and the development of a distinct town centre.

Residents of both councils called for action on community safety, with one Claremont resident stating they had been broken into three times in seven months.

Subiaco locals wanted more security patrols, CCTV and lighting around the city, particularly at local parks and carparks, and requested the council lobby WA Police for a better street presence and to reopen a Subiaco police station.

One resident said they did not feel comfortable walking around the Subiaco train station and another said they “rarely go out in the evenings for fear of being clobbered by ‘opportunists’ as the street lighting is rather poor in our area”.

Several Subiaco respondents called for a limit to high density and high-rises and for the council to “try to maintain Subiaco’s village feel, which is being eroded by large developments”.

Other residents wanted to see the council take steps to make renting a commercial space more affordable to drive up new business, such rate subsidies or more free parking for visitors.

“Address whatever is driving local businesses to close down after a short time ... free parking in the town would encourage more people to visit and locals to shop there instead of Claremont,” said one respondent.

Another said: “Paying for parking in Subiaco seems absurd when almost every other town centre has reasonable options for parking for free,as long as you aren’t parking for the full day.”