Dear, oh dear, oh dear. Looks like the old adage of ‘practice makes perfect’ is humbug when it comes to running a Special Committee Meeting and adhering to the rules of conduct for such meetings. To put it bluntly, poor Mayor Esakoff, got it wrong – not once, not twice, not three times, but an incredible 4 times this evening.
To begin with, Penhalluriack assumed his normal position within council.
ESAKOFF: ‘Cr Penhalluriack we’re about to start a Special Council meeting. If you wouldn’t mind leaving this part of the chamber please”. (NOTE: this wasn’t a Special Council Meeting but a Special Committee meeting). Stuff up #1
Esakoff read out the tribute to indigenous peoples, oath and apologies and then corrected herself to state :”I’m reading out the wrong agenda” (Stuff up #2). ‘Presentation of Officers’ reports’. We don’t have any tonight’ . Esakoff then went straight on to ‘consideration of confidential items’. (Stuff up #3 – Agenda items clearly stated: CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES OF PREVIOUS SPECIAL COMMITTEE. No motion was put to accept previous minutes! – Hence the minutes are still ‘unaccepted’ by the Committee/Council.
Hyams moved and Lipshutz seconded the ‘confidential’ recommendation – ie meeting be closed to members of the public. Esakoff then said ‘All those in favour’. 8 hands went up – ‘Carried unanimously’. (Stuff up #4 – Esakoff did not call for further speakers, objectors, etc. as stated clearly in the Local Law – “the Chairperson must call upon any Member who wishes to speak against the motion” [234(6)].
DURATION OF OPEN MEETING – APPROX 2.5 MINUTES.
ANNUAL REPORT: Special Council meeting
Move to accept annual report: – Hyams/Lipshutz
HYAMS: ‘a very good document….good reading….highlights are at the front….sets out areas where we hope to do better which are fewer than they were last year….details performance against community plan…shows a generally good result….shows overall that this is a very strongly performing council…we have a habit of winning or getting nominated for awards for our annual eports….tells a very good story in the way it is presented…
LIPSHUTZ: ‘sets out a great story…it shows council (does a little bit more than) collect rubbish….sets out very clearly what council does….a real picture and an insight into our council…I think it’s a good report….
PENHALLURIACK: ‘it seems to be an annual report’s function is to communicate…this does it well…enquiry as to cost,….question is ….a more economic way of producing (the report)….
PILLING: Spoke of need to highlight disappointments and ‘one of the disappointments is the state of the Elsternwick Child Care Centre….(will be) ‘closing in two months time. I can’t see that mentioned in this report….should be highlighted…
MOTION PUT: Carried unanimously.
DURATION – 5 minutes.
Glen Eira Debates 
October 25, 2011 at 10:41 PM
Should go into Guiness Book of Records. 4 stuff ups in 2.5 minutes is pretty amazing! .
October 25, 2011 at 11:43 PM
Esakoff’s failure to call for other speakers that oppose the motion, or simply wanted to say something tells me exactly how much these public performances are fully orchestrated beforehand. She obviously knew that no-one else was going to say anything and thus forgot to say ‘anyone else wishes to speak’. Also, after the last fiasco, councillors were probably too scared to open their mouths and anyway, this was only about the performance assessment so it was fit that it be in camera. The worry is, that this happens all the time and things are arranged carefully in those secret backroom meetings. I also think that to call a point of order over this would just have been putting the spotlight again on the shambles that these meetings are becoming. That’s why Hyams didn’t pipe up as he usually does. He didn’t want to embarrass her even further.
October 26, 2011 at 10:35 AM
I checked council’s website this morning to see if the annual report was available there. It wasn’t. Pretty sad I’d say when other councils have had theirs up on the website for weeks already. I keep asking myself if this is just plain old sloppy management or whether it’s deliberate to prevent the wider and easier access for residents and to try and avert any possible pre adoption criticism. Whichever, it says plenty about how much the public are considered in anything this council does. Residents are always bottom of the pile.
October 26, 2011 at 2:15 PM
Good to read that Pilling and Penhalluriack at least raised some concerns about the cost and thoroughness of the Annual Report. Shame that they didn’t take it further.