From the Gold Coast Council Meeting of 8th August, 2011.
13.9 CENSORING OR INTERVENING WITH COUNCILLORS MAIL
LG211/-/-
RESOLUTION G11.0808.025 Moved Cr Clarke Seconded Cr Young
That the Memorandum be deemed non confidential except for those parts deemed by the Chief Executive Officer to remain confidential in accordance with sections 171(3) and 200(9) of the Local Government Act 2009.
Council notes with concern the allegations published in the local media last Thursday in regard to the intervention of e-mails being received by Councillors (including generic, divisional office email accounts) and resolves that under no circumstances can the Chief Executive Officer or any administrative staff, intervene or censor any mail, be it electronic or standard, for Councillors, as from today, with the exception of any such action or intervention that is specifically requested by an aggrieved or concerned Councillor and that the CEO report back on the appropriate process for this to occur.
That the CEO report back on the process to identify junk mail, “MIMEsweeper” and spam mail within programming software in Councillors’ computers and how to enhance such programs to allow Councillors to determine when and how to deal with offensive emails and that the current spam filters stay in place.
That all policies appropriate to the receipt and distribution of electronic mail and posted mail to and from the Mayor and Councillors be revised to reflect the above policy position. “
Vote was carried eleven (11) to four (4).
Glen Eira Debates 
October 23, 2011 at 9:31 AM
Fab stuff Gold Coast. Desperately need in our dicatorship. councillors too chicken to use their phones cos they know they’re being spied on so they should go whole hog and stick it to newton good and proper by making hinm come clean about everything and putting a stop to his asio set up.
October 23, 2011 at 6:44 PM
The gold coast resolution establishes once and for all that it is councillors who decide on policy and direction. It also says exactly what these councillors think should be the role of officers – subordinate to their (council’s) wishes. Regrettably the reverse is true in Glen Eira.
October 23, 2011 at 7:18 PM
This is a very astute point, in relation between councillors and officers.
Glen Eira fails because of the tribal nature of its community.
We now have an organised minority that run as independents, and they see fit to bargain with the CEO to get what they see as being important for themselves.
What may appear to be complete cock-up by the officer, (one example is the letting of contact with the basket baller’s at GESAC), this was not incompetence or a money issue, it was cleverly crafted pay-back for that group.
October 23, 2011 at 9:33 PM
The GESAC basketball allocation was given to the highest bidder….possibly in the hope of recouping some of the major costs associated with the building.
The concern has always been that GESAC is a community venue and the Glen Eira ethos is based on Community. Why allocate the majority of the basketball facility to a group based in Monash?
Not all totally to do with officer incompetance, just fast grabbing greed.
October 24, 2011 at 2:02 PM
It has alot to do about the CEO hoping to get some sort of award for financial management. The buck stops at the top.
October 24, 2011 at 8:18 AM
Extracted from public questions included in Council Minutes 11 October, 2011
Question:
“asked of each Councillor “Do you formally give consent to any, or all, of the following practices in relation to your council email accounts: – the interception, viewing, logging, archiving, and forwarding on by either named or anonymous council officers of emails you receive or send?”
Answer:
“The Mayor read out Council’s response on behalf of all Councillors except Cr
Penhalluriack. She said “In the annual community satisfaction survey, Glen Eira is rated 1st in Victoria for “responsiveness and interaction in dealing with the public”. One of the reasons is that when residents write or email Councillors, the correspondence is opened by Councillors’ secretary, registered and allocated to the relevant service unit to investigate and prepare advice for the Councillor. This enables prompt responses.”
Leaving aside that the success of this blog site raises questions on the results of the community statisfaction survey, it appears that the Gold Coast Councillors take their role as elected representatives more seriously than those of Glen Eira. Glen Eira Councillors are quite prepared to leave everything in the hands of officers and just tout the admin line. It leaves me wondering why Glen Eira has Councillors.
October 24, 2011 at 8:53 AM
how many communities does glen eira have, we are not one community
October 24, 2011 at 5:26 PM
Gold Coast Council may get itself into trouble. What Glen Eira is doing is probably simply reversing two of the steps. The staff open the letter first rather than the Councillor opening it first and passing it onto the staff. What is supposed to happen? Councillor opens letter and responds with possibly a half baked response that may not take into account all of the facts. Or Councillor opens letter, rings staff and then composes their own response that may mix up some of the facts and outcomes. Some Councillors would invariably make committments that were unable to be upheld down then track. This leads to annoyed residents and extra work. In the end the response has to come from the staff so what’s the problem of speeding it up. If people don’t like it they can always phone then Councillor. Most don’t know and don’t care as long as they get a response. It is the ones that don’t like the answer that pick a fight with the process. Just because someone is able to get themselves elected doesn’t mean they have any capabilities. Two of our councillors were really unelected. They were appointments.
October 24, 2011 at 8:17 PM
My God anon, you sure you ain’t Cr Hyams?
October 25, 2011 at 7:49 AM
No, I am not Cr. Hyams just a person that thinks carefully about issues and tries to remain unemotional in forming a view. I will agree that the pool has been handled poorly.