Today’s Caulfield Leader – Page 7
OPEN LETTER TO THE PEOPLE OF GLEN EIRA
RESIGNATION FROM COUNCIL: FORMER MAYOR HELEN WHITESIDE EXPLAINS
Dear fellow citizens and ratepayers of Glen Eira,
Helen Whiteside resigned as councillor of Camden Ward and Deputy Mayor in July 2010. Council decided not to make public my resignation letter. Many people have contacted me with questions and support seeking more details, so I feel the need to explain.
After 5 years on council, elected twice, it was with sincere regret that I felt I had to resign. The reasons were an accumulation of council decisions which in my opinion were not in the long term best interests of the City of Glen Eira, including, among others:
CEO reappointment: poor governance, excessive legal costs, and biased decisions during an extended process to reappoint our high performing CEO
Open Space: the decision to rescind a S173 agreement exchanging public open space land, now resulting in open space being removed from public use;
Conflicts of Interest: In my view some councillors did not make decisions based on merit and objectivity in the interests of all
Subsequent to my resignation some councillors with whom I worked closely for 5 years took objection to my questioning of these matters of principle and their standards of ethical behaviour. In the interests of transparency I am willing to send the text of my resignation letter to anyone who contacts me by email hmwhiteside@bigpond.com
Yours sincerely
Helen Whiteside
31 October 2010
Glen Eira Debates 
November 9, 2010 at 10:26 AM
Whilst it is ‘noble’ of Whiteside to attempt to explain her decision to resign from council and to make her reasons known to all, there still lingers the obvious question of why weren’t these issues made public well and truly before the situation came to this? As other comments have recently stated this council operates on ‘secrecy’. What residents need is for this veil to be ripped down and this can only be achieved via open and transparent debate within council chambers and where minutes accurately record the discussions. Residents do accept differences of opinion; they do accept well reasoned and lucid argument; they do accept concrete facts and logic. What we don’t accept is the continued practice of this council to make questionable decisions behind closed doors and without community input. This is the root cause of all that has gone awry with this council for over a decade. It is well and truly time that this hornet’s nest of backstabbing, collusion, and distrust was swept clean and government dismissed all senior executives as well as all councillors. Only then can there be a fresh start.
November 9, 2010 at 2:05 PM
Couldn’t agree more Mr. Evans. Whiteside is simply the latest incident in the sad, sad history of this council. After three municipal investigations (all involving Newton in some way) it is time for some real action. And I don’t mean another municipal investigation. Ten years of infighting is plenty for this community to cop. What must happen is a thorough investigation by the ombudsman. He must be given the powers to investigate not only this council but the role/actions/reporting of the inspectorate itself. It’s a joke when time after time we get told that there is ‘no breach of the act’. Technicalities should not save those responsible for the secrecy and possible mismanagement of this council.
November 9, 2010 at 11:06 PM
The Inspectorate got this report WRONG, we all know that including the Councillors who are chuckling with their back teeth right now having dodged a bullet. And the Ombudsman should investigate why they got it so wrong based on all the evidence presented to them. Just because for some strange reason there is “no breach of the Act” it does not mean that the Councillors have done nothing *ethically* wrong, because they have. Just like every day in our great legal system, people get off when they are 100% guilty!
November 9, 2010 at 11:42 PM
It’s almost impossible to comprehend the stupidity of this council and the monumental egos that are so entrenched therein. First, the stupidity – the refusal to publish the inspectors’ report online; then the refusal to publish Whiteside’s letter. But what takes the cake is the sheer arrogance and stupidity of Lipshutz and Tang in publically denigrating Whiteside – ie ‘not a team player’. After this, did they really think that Whiteside would slink off into the night without a parting shot?
It will be fascinating to watch this council squirm once the letter is made public (and hopefully up on this blog). It will be great to see Lipshutz bumbling his way through another catastrophe and not prepared to listen to saner heads because of his arrogance. Then there’s Tang. I wonder if he’ll follow his master once again. Makes for interesting times.
I’m not a fan of Whiteside, but she does have a right to state her case. Nor do I think her blind allegiance to Newton is doing anyone in this municipality a favour. As someone has already pointed out, at the core of each drama we have the shadowy figure of the CEO. It’s become a habit it seems. His history with Glen Eira is dotted with division and disharmony. The greatest stupidity was not to see this and to reappoint him again. We, as Whiteside says, are left to pick up the bills, and to continue paying for councillors ‘re-education’. Anyone know how much this latest little exercise is costing us? All I can say is that when ego and stupidity mix, then we have disasters. Yes, bring in the ombudsman and for once, let’s have transparency.
November 10, 2010 at 3:01 PM
My, my, my! What a turn of events! The dearly departed rises like a ghost to haunt those remaining. The possibilities are absolutely endless. More lawyers, more investigations, ombudsmen, more bullshit from the incumbents. It’s really a scene out of the Keystone Cops. Two and a half lawyers, 2 businessmen, one banker and they can get it all so horribly wrong – not once, but time and time again. When will they ever learn as the song says? Yet, they’ve accomplished the dreaded deed. The section 173 went through at last council meeting, though of course we weren’ ever told that this is undoubtedly what Whiteside was complaining about. Nor were we told the real reasons behind this decision. If you believe that it’s all about ‘useless’ open space, then god help you. If memory serves me right the original ‘agreement’ and history goes back as far as 1988 and who put the mess together then if not our wonderful Mr Akehurst? Ah, the twists and turns, the skullduggery, the behind the scenes antics, deals, and promises. Fabulous stuff. Bring it on guys. This will be fun.
November 10, 2010 at 11:00 PM
Dear Smart Aleck,
if you’d like to elaborate re Section 173 and items 9.2 and 9.3 of the last council meeting, we would be happy to put it up. Anything that sheds more light on the antics of the backroom boys would, we’re sure, be of interest and concern to everyone. Our ‘invitation’ extends to anyone else out there who happens to know more on this issue.
November 14, 2010 at 7:45 AM
Has anyone received a copy of The Letter from Mrs Whiteside as of Sunday am.