AI Image
In short:
Wyndham Council has approved a $372,000 private security patrol in Truganina despite 42% of residents opposing it. The controversial trial passed as part of the citywide budget, with attempts to stop it voted down by the Mayor and her allies.
Patrol to begin later this year
Wyndham City Council has voted to proceed with a $372,000 ratepayer-funded security patrol trial in Truganina, despite widespread public opposition, councillor attempts to remove it from the budget, and growing concerns about political motivations behind the decision.
The patrol, to be operated by a private security company, will run for 12 months and cover parts of Truganina and Tarneit. It is set to begin later in the 2025–26 financial year, following the passing of Wyndham’s $329 million Annual Plan and Budget at Monday night’s meeting.
While the trial has been framed by proponents as a response to resident concerns about safety and visibility, critics argue that it was pushed through in defiance of the public consultation process and benefits the electoral wards of two key councillors — Cr. Preet Singh and Deputy Mayor Josh Gilligan.
Public Said No — But Council Said Yes
During the consultation period for the Annual Plan and Budget, Council received 4,797 responses, one of the highest levels of engagement in recent years. When residents were specifically asked about the Truganina patrol trial:
42% opposed it outright
23% supported it only if changes were made
Just 35% supported the trial as presented
Despite this, the initiative remained in the final budget — prompting community members and councillors alike to question whether the consultation was genuine or simply a formality.
Cr. Larry Zhao, who opposed the patrol, criticised the process, stating:
Pushback Blocked, Budget Passed
Three different proposed amendments — including motions to remove or alter the trial — were put forward by councillors concerned about equity and accountability. However, none of the amendments succeeded due to the opposition of Cr. Shannon McGuire, Cr. Jennie Barrera, Cr. Maria King, Deputy Mayor Josh Gilligan, and Mayor Mia Shaw.
The full Annual Plan and Budget passed 8–3.
Because the patrol was embedded within the broader financial plan, councillors who objected to the trial were faced with a dilemma: vote down the entire budget — which funds roads, libraries, parks and core services — or accept the patrol as part of the package.
Trial for One, Funded by All
The trial is set to benefit a limited area of Wyndham, yet it will be paid for using citywide rates. This has drawn sharp criticism from residents in other estates — such as Jubilee, Mambourin, and The Grove — who already pay for private patrols out of pocket and will see no Council contribution to those services.
Council budget papers admit that the project may raise “equity concerns” and could set a “precedent” if other communities begin demanding similar treatment.
The security personnel will have no police powers and will act in a visible, community-monitoring capacity only. No formal performance framework has been published, and the success of the trial is expected to be measured largely through perceptions rather than outcomes.
Tensions Boil Over
The council meeting itself was marked by heated exchanges, including an explosive moment in which Cr. Josh Gilligan accused Cr. Peter Maynard of drinking during the meeting — a claim that triggered uproar in the chamber and forced Mayor Mia Shaw to raise her voice to regain control.
The patrol has long been associated with Cr. Preet Singh, who made the initiative a key election promise. The trial route will fall largely within areas represented by Cr. Singh and Cr. Gilligan, leading to further accusations of political favouritism.
Where To From Here
With the budget now adopted, Council will move ahead with engaging a private security provider to run the trial. The rollout is expected to begin later in 2025, with a review after 12 months.
Yet for many in Wyndham, the controversy isn’t just about a patrol car — it’s about whether public consultation means anything at all, and whether a single suburb should receive an exclusive trial using shared public funds.
As one resident put it during consultation:
The patrol may now be inevitable — but the political and community divisions it sparked are likely to linger long after the trial ends.
FOLLOW US
