The only decision making that is lawful must occur at full council meetings, special committee meetings, or under delegated authority. The role of Assembly of Councillors is to consider ‘matters that are likely to be the subject of a Council decision” (Local Government Act, 1989). Further, the VLGA states that ‘Briefings are a means by which councillors can ensure that they have all the information and advice required to debate and decide matters.” (Submission to discussion paper on ‘conflict of interest’, February, 2010).
In theory, this works fine. Yes, councillors need to be briefed on important upcoming issues. Yes, they need to be in possession of all the facts and figures prior to informed decision making taking place. This is the theory – but in reality we find that in Glen Eira the so called ‘Assembly of Councillors’ is a defacto decision making forum. Debate obviously occurs, but there is also the unofficial ‘straw vote’ that in the end equates to behind the scenes decision making.
How do we know all this? We’ve received two sets of documents obtained under FOI. The first (uploaded here) is the infamous ‘Frisbee Report’, obviously tabled some time in late November, 2010 at a councillors’ briefing session. The document basically details a number of breaches of the local law by various ‘unauthorised sporting groups’, and its stated purpose is for councillors to ‘consider and approve ‘one of the options set out in the report”. The actual options are:
- “Council can monitor the situation
- Council can uphold reasonable laws reasonably enforced. Council can take the following action for unauthorised groups: issue a warning in the first instance; issue a formal warning in the second instance; issue a penalty infringement notice if the group continues to play,
- Council can do nothing”.
The second document is Version 1 of the minutes of the Sport and Recreation Advisory Committee meeting of 22nd November, 2010. (uploaded here). This document underwent at least three revisions, so that from 735 words, it was reduced to a mere 97 words. What’s important about this document is that the note-taker, whom we assume to be Linda Smith, recorded the following:
“Cr Tang advised that council had made the decision not to take any action with the Frisbee group back in November”.
In the first place, no Council meeting has ever made such a decision and secondly, we do not believe that Ms. Smith misheard or misquoted, or misunderstood the gist of the conversation at this point. If so, then the above November Assembly of Councillors to all intents and purposes did make a binding decision. Such incriminating ‘evidence’ therefore had to be expunged, and that’s the reason we suspect, behind Hyams’ emails and determination to ‘censor’ these minutes.
Readers may also recall that Lipshutz’s son was ‘associated’ with the Frisbee group, as well as some of Tang’s acquaintances. Then there was the instance of Lipshutz’s email to Burke requesting that he ‘look into the matter’, and now Hyams’ request to Burke that the minutes be changed – not once, but time and time again!
Whilst it is true that the Municipal Inspector found no ‘official breach of the act’, in regards to conflict of interest by both Lipshutz and Tang, this is small comfort to residents. The ‘decision’ not to prosecute, or even act, were not made in council meetings – hence there was no ‘official’ vote. But these documents suggest that consensus and de facto decisions are occurring time and time again – but behind closed doors and away from public scrutiny. Even more concerning is the manner in which official documents are pared away so that all context and substance is removed. Yes, this may be ‘legal’, but it certainly is not ethical, or in the best interests of good governance. When there is no transparency, there is no accountability. All that we are left with is a rotten taste in our mouths and the further disrepute that has for a decade dogged this Council.
We urge everyone to read these documents carefully and to ask themselves:
- Do Tang, Lipshutz and Hyams have a case to answer?
- Do these documents promote confidence in the transparency and good governance of this council?
Glen Eira Debates 
May 8, 2011 at 11:08 AM
I’m not surprised, but what is amazing is the extent to which Hyams and many of his group will go to avoid admitting Council’s and their mistakes. What it boils down to is the fact that they don’t want to admit that Varvodic has a point and that their authority has been shown up to be a pile of you know what. Instead of simply changing the law, or even clarifying it, there’s this brick wall of obstinancy. No way should a resident beat council or at the very least show up their stupidity – that’s unthinkable! Fight them every inch of the way and never say we’ve stuffed up!That’s why we get to this ridiculous stage of non answers to public questions, secrecy and protecting your mates at all costs. Tang Lipshutz and Hyams can pat themselves on the back. They’ve successfully ruined any re-election ambitions they might have had but in the process revealed what a rotten bunch they all are.
May 8, 2011 at 12:37 PM
This shouldn’t only be about doctored minutes. The minutes come from an advisory committee and not an assembly of councillors where all they have to report is who was preesent and the general topics of discussion. Advisory committee meetings are supposed to be the interface between the community and council. What Hyams has done is to transform advisory committee meetings into pseudo assembly meetings and pull the veil of secrecy across such meetings. This was never intended by the legislation and only goes to show what can happen when we have a council that is so opposed to community participation and openness. If community reps were on all such advisory committees then this would never have happened. We might as well forget about decent and honest minutes from anywhere because Hyams and others will simmply distort the legislation to further their own, or their mates, interests.
Unless there is some drastic change in personnel, then we can all kiss the concepts of transparency in this council goodbye.Or alternatively, the government comes down on these smug so and so’s like a ton of bricks.
May 8, 2011 at 2:38 PM
Thank you Glen Eira for showing us these documents, most interesting, surely a copy is going to the Inspector and Ombudsman?
This cover up is disgusting, and I congratulate Mr Varvodic on his persistence in seeking the truth.
May 8, 2011 at 2:56 PM
This is a rort, this Council should be sacked just for the mere fact of trying to cover this up. You wont be getting my vote next elections, Nepotism at its very best.
May 8, 2011 at 4:37 PM
Well said Marko, that one word sums it all up, NEPOTISM
May 8, 2011 at 3:11 PM
These documents are a brilliant exposure into this Council and what really goes on behind closed doors. I would like to ask if this is happening now, well how many times has it happened before?
May 8, 2011 at 4:17 PM
don’t have to look far – just last week and the C60 decision. All manipulated well and truly before the council meeting. They got their lines together blurted out the corporate spin and there you go. Time this was exposed and lipshits, hyams tang esakoff pilling and newton sacked
May 8, 2011 at 4:35 PM
How do you have Version One of the minutes?
Every meeting I go to at work we have just the one copy, the true version.
May 8, 2011 at 4:50 PM
Cr Tang claims Council have made a decision not to take any action against the Frisbee Group. This leads to two basic questions as they are his “aquaintances”.
1. Where is this documented and when?
2. Did he declare a “conflict of interest”?
May 8, 2011 at 5:33 PM
Just read it again, this is a perfect summation for the whole C60 debacle.
Everything kept behind closed doors, this is GOLD, Erin Brockovich style. Well done to all involved.
May 8, 2011 at 5:47 PM
Now we can all see how the gang of five operate. Despite what Penhalluriack and Magee said in the sports meeting about the stupidity of the local law and that council is to blame for all the questions, there’s Tang and Hyams carrying on for all they’re worth. There is admission after admission in these notes about previous illegal ‘decisions’ and the cover up of Lipshutz’s and tang’s conflict of interest. Even without the Kingmaker present he’s got his little arse lickers doing the dirty work for him – Tang and Hyams. And of course Esakoff just shuts up and doesn’t say a word – only votes with these bastards each and every time. They should be tossed out on their ear and charged with breaking the local laws.
May 8, 2011 at 8:06 PM
Perceptions are important and it even features in legislation that councillors should not do anything to drag down the reputation and perceptions the public might have of a council. Penhalluriack raised this issue in the Sports & Recreation meeting, speaking about what reasonable people would conclude following Lipshutz’s son’s involvement in all this. The law is really an ass if it hasn’t prosecuted both Lipshutz and Tang for definite conflict of interest claims. The perception is there. Even a blind man could see that the decision not to touch this continual law breaking group is a result of a “vote” that was taken way back when – and in secret. Everything that has followed, including answers to all of Mr. Varvodic’s questions and those of his supporters, has been nothing more than a concerted cover up. Lipshutz laid the foundations for this mess with the unequivocal support of Tang, Hyams and Esakoff once can presume.
I am pleased that ratepayers can now see what goes on and how divisive this Council remains. If they have any integrity, then these councillors should resign immediately.
May 8, 2011 at 9:56 PM
Dear Mr Evans,
I am still scratching my head and protesting to this day about the Investigation conducted by the Inspectorate.
My reply says “There is no connection between the Frisbee group and Cr Lipshutz and Cr Tang”
Can you possibly believe this, after reading the evidence presented, the most damning is the e-mail Cr Lipshutz wrote to Paul Burke where he admits it himself.
They way we see it “Father and Son” and “mates” are about as connected as you can get.
May 8, 2011 at 8:53 PM
Gleneira – the non-moderation of an offensive comment like no.9 (Smart Aleck) is inexcusable and further supports my comments last week that in many instances on this blog ,demeaning people takes precentance over real issues.
May 8, 2011 at 9:08 PM
Thank you again for your comment Cr. Pilling. In the first place, we believe in providing a forum for ratepayers to express their views. If you care to check through our comments, quite a few have been ‘moderated’ and indications exist where this has been done. If you object to Smart Aleck’s comments, then that is your right. However, we could not find anything that was beyond the pale in his/her comments. Language such as ‘arse lickers’ may not be to everyone’s taste admittedly, but it is certainly not defamatory. Perhaps ‘sycophantic’ may have been a better choice of words? The same applies to the word ‘bastards’ – now a colloquialism in Australia.
As stated previously, everyone is entitled to their opinion. It’s just a pity that you tend to concentrate on the language of our users, rather than to focus on the issues that these Freedom of Information documents reveal. Don’t you believe that they are an issue after all, or would you like to condone what appears to be behind the scenes decision making?
May 8, 2011 at 9:36 PM
Honestly Neil, is this all you’ve got to say about the issue? What all these comments should tell you is that people are really getting fed up with the performance of councillors and how community views are continually sidelined or totally ignored. You came in full of promises to reform this council. Now you sound like a broken record. Every word you write is going down like a lead balloon, because you’ve done nothing about fixing these problems that anyone with an interest in this council can tell you about. It would just be fantastic if for once a councillor had the gumption to stand up and tell the truth. How about it Neil? Are you up to it? If so, then here’s my question – are straw votes the name of the game in assemblies of councillors? A simple yes or no will do.
May 9, 2011 at 7:56 AM
While I admit to being surprised at some of the wording Smart Aleck used, I was not offended by his wording – rather I recognised his frustration.
In my view Niel your current and previous posting does exactly what you criticise this blog of doing i.e. demeaning people while avoiding the issue. Why didn’t you comment on this sham?. Where is an indication that you will review and publicly comment on your findings?
Since you are following this blog, perhaps you should consider it’s success and the fact that similar websites do not exist in most other municipalities. Then consider your election promises and how well you have not kept them.
May 9, 2011 at 3:25 PM
A bit rich ain’t it Neil? “demeaning people”? I don’t have to do anything. You’re the one (or part of) the group that’s demeaned every democratic principle going around. Instead of transparency and accountability there’s secrecy; instead of fair dinkum consultation, there’s repeated Windsor Hotel consultation; instead of feedback, there’s silence; instead of alerting the community and working with them on such issues as C60, there’s camouflage and let’s keep it all under our hats approach.
I’ll tell ya one thing Neil. I’m disgusted with you and Lipshutz and Hyams and Tang and Esakoff. I promise that I will do everything in my power to make bloody sure that everyone knows what you’ve done and that you don’t get a look in at the next election – that’s if you have the balls to stand again!
May 8, 2011 at 10:03 PM
I cant believe what I am reading. This is a total shonk. Why dont the Concillors just say “Yes looks like we got this one wrong, it certainly doesnt look the best from a public perception view” end of story, we will try to learn from our mistake and move forward.
May 9, 2011 at 10:32 AM
Surely it’s time to have a governing body or independant association look into this. In my opinion we have a conflict of interest that needs to be investigated by an independant body. If foul play, inconsistent decisions or favourtism is found then we should have consequences to those involved. I have already seen enough to see votes go against Lipshutz, but we now have an alleged breach of trust/ethics that should have immediate attention (in the interest of the community) and corrective resolution. Too much has been hidden from the public domain. Where there is smoke there is fire!!
May 9, 2011 at 10:34 AM
As Peter Drucker once said, ‘Efficiency is doing things right; effectiveness is doing the right things’.
Wake up Councillors!!
Who are you kidding?
You are doing nothing right.
May 9, 2011 at 10:38 AM
Lack of Integrity and untrustworthy.
Glen Eira Council Mission Statement.
Fed up with BS!!!
May 9, 2011 at 10:42 AM
Good call Petros.
I didn’t know the council introduced the ‘father and son’ rule.
what next?
May 9, 2011 at 2:52 PM
Having Followed the trail on this for a while I still can’t understand the depth that these councillors go to in trying to smooth the waters and protect themselves.
Hiding the truth, altering the facts, blaming everybody else but themseleves.
As Tony says( 12 ), why don’t they admit that they did make mistakes and try and rectify the situation?
May 9, 2011 at 5:45 PM
I would suggest Smart Alex that those without the ‘balls’ as you describe are those who hide behind anonymity in expressing their views. The same can be said for Glen Eira- At least your predessor Mary Walsh had the honesty and courage of her convictions and put her name to her postings- the same cant be said for yourself Rosetta
May 9, 2011 at 6:03 PM
Thank you again for your contribution Cr. Pilling! As we’ve stated on several occasions, anonymity is the choice of the individual and we do not intend to change this policy. What should be the focus are the issues and not who writes the comments or the posts. The validity of the respective views should be judged on the facts and the evidence, as well as opinions, since everyone is entitled to express a viewpoint. As to the moderators, you are also entitled to assume whatever you like as to who we are. When the culture of Glen Eira changes, then perhaps we will consider revealing our true identities. Sadly, this appears to be a long way off as yet!
May 9, 2011 at 6:51 PM
Cr Pilling, I know we have spoken about this issue on your blog site and I commend you on at least saying something but its just incredible you bring it up again, and for those who dont look at your blog site, well it goes like this;
This is your comment on here.
Cr Pilling Says:
May 8, 2011 at 8:53 PM
“Gleneira – the non-moderation of an offensive comment like no.9 (Smart Aleck) is inexcusable and further supports my comments last week that in many instances on this blog ,demeaning people takes precentance over real issues”
So just so I have this right, your saying instead of “demeaning people” you should focus on the real issues.
Well why dont you and your fellow Councillors practice what you preach, you did not do that when I asked a public question did you?
Do I need to remind you of the comments by a fellow Councillor of yours in the December 2010 minutes who asked me “when did I last bash my wife”, and then justify it by saying it was asked in rhetoric.
I didnt see you say anything then, or take the moral high ground?
I asked all the Councillors if they found the comments acceptable and only Penhalluriack and Lobo did not.
Why didnt you say anything on my behalf back then if your so offended by Smart Aleck’s comments now?
Seems very hypocritical dont you think?
May 10, 2011 at 11:51 AM
The above(councillor comment “when did I last bash my wife”) reflects the mediocre governance this council has to offer.
Cr Pilling-do you uphold these comments made by your fellow colleague?
Based on your demeaning people v real issues stance, please advise.
May 10, 2011 at 12:32 PM
Cr Pilling,
I too would like to know your opinion on this issue since your my public voice. What is your stance on this comment made by your fellow colleague?
May 10, 2011 at 1:41 PM
Here Here, I think you and your fellow Councillors have some explaining to do Cr Pilling, please explain or excuse yourself, cant wait to here this?
May 11, 2011 at 2:09 PM
Still waiting Cr Pilling….
May 9, 2011 at 8:38 PM
More than happy to catch up in person – ditch your mates, the gang of four, Newton, Burke the incompetent independent members of the audit committee being Gibbs and Mclean and I’ll be there with bells on.
May 9, 2011 at 10:28 PM
Sure Pilling, talk about “balls” (not a lot different from arse in the offensive stakes) without mentioning your intentions of undertaking a review and public disclosure is easy and also indicates exactly where yours “balls” are. I suspect they are some where in the garbage along with your election promises.
As for your posting under your own name it does nothing to espouse your integerity or “balls” – in case you haven’t noticed this council administration does every thing it can to silence dissenters (another gripe of residents). Heaven forbid, you really should listen.
Get a grip, you are loosing it.
When you comment on or address the issue I promise to listen (something you unbeknownst to you). By consistently refusing to address or comment on the issue you are only holding yourself up to disrepute and ridicule.
Goodbye Greens endorsement, federal and state parliament. Quite frankly the Rosstown ratepayers have a lot to answer for.
May 9, 2011 at 6:44 PM
a very timid sidestepping response on your behalf Glen Eira- Mary was fearless and open in advocating whilst you seem to be fearful and happy to lurk well out of any personal accountable scrutiny!
May 10, 2011 at 1:34 AM
ANY THINKING CHILD COULD ANSWER THESIMPLE QUESTIONS ASKED IN THE PUBLIC QUESTIONS IN A MORE ACCURATE WAY THAN Mr BURKE currently dsoes. It would seem that as councillors and the Mayor sit and listen to the very hurried parrot-like question and answer session there is no opportunity for our representatives the councillors to add to or reduce the reply. THE PARROT LIKE presentation speeds on so fast, without the parrot, drawing breath, to read and “answer” the questions which are usually asked many times and never answered… and always posted out without any interaction because of very intimiditary behaviour which the gang seems to meter out to any form of contrary view. Most electors in Glen Eira are having their rights stiffled by a few.
May 10, 2011 at 7:56 AM
“timid sidestepping response”… “lurk well out of any personal accountable scrutiny”.
It’s obviously getting to you, bro. Time to switch off and refocus.