[talk-au] Local Government Areas without Councils

[Warin]

On 21-Dec-16 09:15 AM, cleary wrote:
> I have been adding administrative boundaries in NSW and SA using the
> Government data for which OSM has been given explicit permission. I am
> currently working on the "Pastoral Unincorporated Area" in SA and
> another mapper commented that it was inappropriate. I responded but my
> response appears not to have satisfied the other mapper.  I then found
> that the same mapper had deleted the "Unincorporated Area of New South
> Wales" because it was not administered by a council.
>
> Both of these "unincorporated" areas are defined and designated in the
> respective government datasets, that is (1) South Australian Government
> Data - Local Government Areas and (2) LPI NSW Administrative Boundaries
> - Local Government.
>
> The issue for the other mapper appears to be the acceptability of the
> form of governance of these areas. While the majority of local
> government areas are administered by councils, this model works less
> well in areas which are sparsely populated. The Pastoral Unincorporated
> Area in South Australia is administered by a designated authority, the
> Outback Communities Authority, which is not a council either in name or
> in the usual sense. I am aware of three other designated local
> government areas in South Australia that do not have councils - two are
> administered by the indigenous residents although they appear to have
> some form of executive committee to make routine decisions. One
> designated local government area does not appear to have a council and I
> have not ascertained the form of governance.  In the Unincorporated Area
> of New South Wales, responsibilities are dispersed and do not rest with
> any one body, for example roads are managed by the Roads and Maritime
> Services (state authority) and there are local advisory committees in
> some isolated communities.
>
> The key issue is whether the form of governance in an area should
> determine whether or not areas should be mapped in OSM. It seems to me
> to be akin to removing Northern Territory and ACT on the basis that they
> have different forms of governance and are not proper states!

The 'territories' are covered in the OSMwiki as equivalent to states.

My view : if it quacks like a duck, walks like a duck ... it is a duck.

So the governance is irrelevant to the issue ... the area is managed by 'something' ..that 'something'  should be treated the same way in OSM for the same function.

So ... my view - change the wiki to reflect 'our' circumstance.