The hearing apparently went for just under half an hour this morning. Both Council and Penhalluriack were represented by lawyers. The sequence of events went something like this:
- Member asked each lawyer how long they anticipated the full hearing would go. Council’s lawyer said 3 days; Penhalluriack’s 5 to 7 days.
- Council’s lawyer asked (with agreement from Penhalluriack’s lawyer) that the names of Donna Graham and Margaret Esakoff be removed and that Glen Eira City Council be substituted. Penhalluriack is the respondent.
- Penhalluriack’s lawyer then raised some points about how nebulous and vague the 128 page document of allegations presented by Council were. For example: alleged failure to declare a conflict of interest but no precise reference to what the conflict may have been, nor the date, time, etc. Another allegation was ‘interactions’ with Mr. Newton and again no specifics. It was claimed that basically, the allegations lacked detail and substance and therefore council needed to specify their case far more clearly.
- The member ordered that council produce a summary of the allegations that would be far more specific. He also ordered a compulsory conference and stated that there are two possible outcomes – either, the parties agree to some resolution, or if this fails, then the full VCAT hearing to proceed. Council was ordered to have the summary completed by early March and the conference to occur soon after.
- Apparently Penhalluriack has also lodged an FOI application which council are opposing him on. This matter is to be heard before the compulsory conference. More residents’ funds going to lawyers!
- Costs were reserved
COMMENT
Judging by all of the above it seems as if ratepayers are in for a very expensive ride. If QCs are employed for a week then we are really talking major expenditure – and this does not take into account briefing barristers or solicitors, much less the funding that has already gone into this exercise!
It’s also quite laughable that after so much ‘legal advice’, council still cannot get its act into gear and has to be ordered to produce a summary of 128 pages of vague, non-specific, allegations. We simply are left to ponder exactly how much this obviously sub standard tome has cost ratepayers!
Glen Eira Debates 
February 17, 2012 at 2:45 PM
I can’t believe that we’re spending all this money when we’ve got a cash crisis. Wake up to yourselves councillors and start acting like bloody grown ups with real responsibilities to spend our money wisely. I’d also suggest that you sack the current lawyers you’ve got working for you. Sounds like there’s 128 pages of sheer bunkum which you’ve put your name to. Stupid, stupid, stupid!!!!!!!!!!! Let Newton and Penhalluriack fight their own battles at their own cost – not ours!
February 17, 2012 at 2:49 PM
Seems a bit strange to ask both sides for an estimate of time when neither side knew what the case to answer is. In a month’s time 128 pages could shrink to 2. Its a poor state of affairs for anybody to be confronted with vague and nebulous allegations. My expectations are that for each allegation, the relevant documents and specific section/subsections are identified, along with a summary of the key facts being relied upon to substantiate the allegations. Its not good enough to be confronted with such a document for the first time at a compulsory conference either.
Since Glen Eira City Council is now the applicant, it leaves unanswered when Council resolved to do this. Its not in the Minutes of any Meeting. Eventually there will have to be another investigation of Council for repeated breaches of LGA: the hints in the last LGI report were apparently not strong enough.
The FOI comment could be related to the Mulch saga. At 2 Nov 2011 Council Meeting Frank attempted to exercise his right to make a statement, which Jamie repeatedly interrupted and Margaret shut down, citing relevance. The subsequent publication of his statement, that Margaret and Jamie didn’t want read out, revealed he had made an FOI application for documents related to the Mulch heap and which Council is resisting (assisted by Maddocks). I’d like to know their grounds for going to such expense and trouble, and why they believe its acceptable for Councillors to be denied information relevant to the decisions they’ve been tasked with the responsibility to make. There is a suspicion that some documents were tampered with. What are the odds the reasons given for refusal are similarly vague and nebulous?
February 17, 2012 at 3:41 PM
Dear Reprobate,
the Local Government Act specifies what must be included in an application to a Councillor Conduct Panel. We would therefore assume that since it’s gone to VCAT and further assume that it was Penhalluriack who requested VCAT, that he, the Panel, and council would be in possession of the 128 page document prior to today’s hearing – that’s why his lawyer could argue that it was vague, insubstantial, and nebulous.
February 17, 2012 at 3:39 PM
As a long suffering resident and watcher of the Glen Eira Circus, i was treated this morning to the VCAT member trying valiantly to make sense of Glen Eira’s case. To start with, the hearing was apparently listed incorrectly as “Glen Eira CC [City Council] Donna Graham, Councillor Conduct Panel, Glen Eira CC {City Council} Margaret Esakoff v Mr Frank Penhalluriak”
.
In the event, neither Donna Graham (Glen Eira’s Corporate Counsel) nor former Mayor Esakoff appeared.at the hearing.
First, the VCAT Member had the name of the “applicant” amended, by removing both ladies’ names. Then the spelling error in Councillor Penhalluriack’s name was corrected. (You will note the council lawyers apparently even incorrectly called Councillor Penhalluriack, “Mister Penhalluriack”).
.
After a few more legal technicalities, the VCAT Member (Senior Member Proctor) commented on Council’s massive 128 page case document. He commented to the effect that there was a lack of specific allegations in Councils case. The Member decided a Compulsory Conference between the parties might help, and hopefully “narrow the dispute”. Noting that usual conferences took only half a day, he decided to allow a full day in this case.
The result dear Fellow Resident, is that a Compulsory Conference has been set down for VCAT hearing, for Thursday 12 April 2012.
The legal costs of BOTH SIDES are to be borne by Council. So I see this shambles costing us, the ratepayers, tens or hundreds of thousands, at a time when Council is definitely financially strapped over GESAC. But trying to shoot the messenger by silencing Penhalluriack won’t solve the Council’s financial crisis, nor stop the truth getting out.
February 17, 2012 at 4:10 PM
Penhalluriack deserves all the plaudits he can get for taking on Glen Eira Council at VCAT and more specifically Andrew Newton. Instead of quaking at the knees and being bullied or intimidated into grovelling as past and current councillors have, Penhalluriack is tackling the issues head on. 2005 saw a huge cave in under threat of legal action. That’s been the strategy since I’d bet and that’s what’s got him reappointed in 2011 thanks to Lipshutz and the gang. It’s now time to call a spade a shovel and let everything out into the open. Let’s really see who is the bully and who are the self serving sycophants!
February 17, 2012 at 4:35 PM
The money maybe well spent if the ruling click get there well deserved comeuppance
Not that VCAT is going to come to any earth shattering finding/s or will even shine a light to illuminate this local shit-fight. This is what the Glen Eira lawyer are for, there job will be to make sure the lid on their misconduct remains firmly hammered down
How could anyone that hasn’t witnessed the long running power abuses that have become council business and community relations in Glen Eira, understand the path that has led to this sorry saga ending up in VCAT, if indeed it will be an end
Its hard to know why the CEO just doesn’t do the right thing and leave. We can only assume his qualifications and methods are so outdated, that he wouldn’t have a snowflakes, chance in hell of getting other position anywhere else, and he knows this.
February 17, 2012 at 5:02 PM
If Penhalluriack loses will I get my mulch back?
February 17, 2012 at 5:32 PM
The most telling sentence in the post by GE from my perspective is:
The member ordered that council produce a summary of the allegations that would be far more specific.
How unusual for our Council to produce a statement that was long on filler and short on detail. 🙄
February 17, 2012 at 8:24 PM
I hear that the council’s lawyer came from Maddocks. Doesn’t Tang work for them? Interesting if he voted to send Penhalluriack to a conduct panel or whether he declared a conflict of interest. Aw shucks! I forget. Everything is real secret in this joint.
February 17, 2012 at 10:19 PM
Always tough to beat City Hall. But if there’s one bloke who has the resolve and endurance to do it it’s Penhalluriack. Remember the Sunday trading issue when he took on the State Government and ultimately won. He’s like a dog with a bone – just won’t let go.
BTW. Notice the Glen Eira Leader still hasn’t picked up the story. Still featuring toilets in Bentleigh. What a sad excuse for a newspaper it is.
February 17, 2012 at 10:40 PM
Knowing Frank, he will sell the members of the panel a whole lot of stuff from his hardware shop, and make a good profit too. I wouldn’t vote for Frank in a pink-fit, but I did buy some cement and paint from him, either way he wins.
Is that my conflict of interest, or just a conflict of un-interest, or just not worth mentioning, what do you reckon?
Three cheers for Frank the Fearless, Fighter, with a hard to spell and totally ill-weird last name. They say the word Orange rhymes with no other word, I think you can add Penhalluriack to number 2. What crime did his great great great grandfather commit to get saddled with that nightmare of a name. He has to have big shop so he can fit his name on the hoarding
Win or loose Frank walks away with his integrity, the others will be remembered as a vacuous bunch of frauds
Shit, I’m short of mulch as well, better nick down to Franks and get some tomorrow, Smart Aleck give us a reminder tomorrow will you.