Hyams selective with facts
Re Cr Hyams’ letter (“VCAT will make decision”, September 4), Cr Hyams says the matter was referred to VCAT following the report of a legal expert. He does not mention that neither he nor then-mayor Esakoff made any effort to require the CEO to go through mediation (normally the case) before engaging the expert.
Cr Hyams does not say he and other councillors have refused to provide me a copy of that expert’s report nor that only one incident of bullying is not alleged against me – comments I made in a private letter to Cr Esakoff.
Secondly, Cr Hyams says legal costs will be determined by VCAT. Whatever the VCAT decision, council will have to pay its legal costs, and most likely my legal costs as well.
Thirdly, Cr Hyams refers to the minister as saying councillor conduct panels are the appropriate place for matters to be dealt with. But they do not give parties the opportunity to properly test the evidence. Once the 40 or so allegations against me were subjected to the VCAT spotlight, they were reduced to four.
Glen Eira ratepayers require explanations from the mayor as to:
- Why he and Cr Esakoff did not require the CEO to go through mediation?
- Why he continues to assert I am responsible for the waste of ratepayers’ money?
I am confident voters will have faith in my integrity, and return me to council office.
Cr Frank Penhalluriack
+++++++++
The Hyams’ Letter from September 4th
VCAT Will Make Decision
Regarding “Council coffers take hit” (Leader, August 22) some points need to be made clear to understand Glen Eira Council’s action against Cr Penhalluriack at VCAT.
The council made applications to the Councillor Conduct Panel alleging misconduct by Cr Penhalluriack, following recommendations by an independent legal expert on workplace behaviour and by the Ombudsman after lengthy investigations. The council chief executive took no part in any council discussion or decision on the referral of Cr Penhalluriack to the Councillor Conduct Panel.
Cr Penhalluriack exercised his right to refer the case from a Councillor Conduct Panel to VCAT.
Whether the council or Cr Penhalluriack will ultimately be responsible for payment of legal costs will be decided by VCAT. The council’s directors and offer’s insurance may also cover a claim for costs.
There is now a Bill before Parliament that will require councillors to pay their own costs if they refer a conduct matter to VCAT.
The Minister has stated that a Councillor Conduct Panel is the appropriate place for matters of this kind to be heard.
Cr Jamie Hyams
Mayor, City of Glen Eira.
COMMENT
Our view has consistently been that it is high time that the machinations that are endemic in Glen Eira be brought out into the open. That can only occur under cross examination and in public. When we have an administration that has been involved in investigation after investigation, when charges of bullying rear their ugly head time and time again without ever being truly substantiated, then there’s obviously something drastically wrong with the workings of this council.
Recent events, such as the testimony of Jones and Burke, are indicative we believe why the so called evidence must be tested in the public domain. Councillor Conduct Panels are secret. Our view is that they are nothing more than an ‘old boys’ club’. When Hyams and his cohorts have no regard for public monies and can throw away up to half a million dollars, then they should also be called to account.
Glen Eira Debates 
September 18, 2012 at 12:22 PM
About time Glen Eira started acting like a real council with open honest discussion where decis
ions are made on behalf of the ratepayers…not this childish finger pointing we continually see. Not much time left Jamie.
September 18, 2012 at 2:52 PM
I’m really quite fascinated to know whether any of this is actually “legal”? I’ve only ever seen resolutions published by this blog about sending Penhalluriack to a conduct panel and then the council meeting following the ombudsman’s report. What we don’t know is whether or not there was ever a council resolution which authorised spending hundreds of thousands of dollars in this pointless pursuit. If there hasn’t been such a resolution then this is unforgiveable. It’s like handing Newton an open cheque book to do whatever he wants without any accountability to councillors and residents. Whether or not he’s exceeded his delegated powers in spending all this money is one question that really should be answered by the likes of Hyams and the others.
September 18, 2012 at 3:11 PM
Dont worry D.Evans they have paid for it by cutting costs in not maintaining Queens Avenue. I think the weed that is 2 metres high by 2 metres wide could actually become a landmark for the area!
September 18, 2012 at 4:10 PM
Apparently Council is quite chuffed with its decision to put up the barriers on Queens Ave which cost around $15,000 but saves thousands of dollars maintenance each year. Next step is a big fence around Caulfield Park which will stop those pesky ratepayers from accessing that area. Fencing off all parks footpaths and roads will save Council a fortune. That Newton is a genius. Give him another 5 years.
September 18, 2012 at 5:40 PM
Geez, Hilly, what’t $15,000 bucks to stop Penhalluriack getting his way? Betya that if the gang suggested the clean up then it would be done tomorrow.
September 18, 2012 at 7:25 PM
I agree that the barriers were put there just to piss off Penhalluriack who had been questioning why Council was no longer maintaining the jogging track located on the western side of Queens Avenue. As with the Berlin Wall, it serves as a symbol of oppression in Glen Eira. Come October, I can just see Penhalluriack and Co knocking them down Boris Yeltzin style!
September 18, 2012 at 6:18 PM
Hyams can cry innocence all he likes. The bottom line is that he and his dodgy mates allowed a fortune to be spent on the witch-hunt. If the evidence that’s emerged so far is any guide then he and the rest of his bunch had better start saving their dough. Penhalluriack would be an absolute bloody idiot if he didn’t sue the pants off them.
September 18, 2012 at 9:03 PM
Frank is a good boy and would never do anything wrong.Signed Frank P
September 18, 2012 at 9:29 PM
How’s the toy business Noel? Sold any bunnies lately?
September 18, 2012 at 10:19 PM
There are several points that need to made about Mayor Hyams’s letter, since it was designed to mislead.
The “independent legal expert on workplace behaviour” was not independent. She did her work on behalf of Council and wrote the list of allegations for the CEO which he then just had to sign. Subsequently most of the irrelevant material has been turfed at VCAT. The “lengthy investigation” was due to the irrelevances that were pursued with a passion. In the end, there were only 4 allegations made. The Ombudsman, himself the subject of criticism for the quality of his work on other issues, plagiarised much of her material, which he accepted uncritically, and failed to demonstrate in his report that there was a conflict of interest as defined by LGA over the mulch heap. He thought there *may* be a conflict.
Janette Powell didn’t say that “a Councillor Conduct Panel is the appropriate place for matters of this kind to be heard”. What she did say, presumably parroting what her advisors told her to say, is “Councillor Conduct Panels are the appropriate forum to deal with most councillor misconduct matters”. Its not at all clear that this is such a matter, especially since Council urged VCAT for a finding of Gross Misconduct without the authority to do so, having alleged breaches of LGA. CCPs are secretive institutions, populated by bureaucrats, in some cases ex-CEOs of councils. Janette made the claim, without supporting evidence, that it was cheaper for a matter to be heard by a CCP.
It has been discussed here previously that that actual costs of appearing at VCAT are largely discretionary. It was and is up to Council whether it chooses to have legal representation, but if it exercises its right to be represented then the other party gains the same right [people generally do not have the right to have legal representation at VCAT]. Much of Council’s costs are not related to a VCAT hearing itself, but the “lengthy investigation” and pesky requirement to prepare a case to be answered. VCAT itself had to step in and direct Council to prepare a list of specific allegations.
September 18, 2012 at 10:26 PM
One other point worth mentioning and which should never be overlooked, is that in our society defendants are assumed innocent until proven guilty. They also have the legal right to defend themselves as best they can. In this case, Penhalluriack is the defendant, not the litigant. If Newton had agreed to mediation right from the start, then the expenditure of all this ratepayers’ money might have been avoided. For this, Hyams, Lipshutz, Esakoff, Tang, Pilling and Lobo have to take full responsibility.
September 19, 2012 at 1:33 PM
I offered to be a wittness, but funnily enough Ms O’Neill did not contact me. She did however, contact all the wittnesses which ouor unusual leaders suggested. I think he only had two or three wittnesses and maybe our äuthoritiies” had five or six. Maybe all football teams could try playing with different numbers in their teams. I wonder if those with lower numbers would ever win.
September 19, 2012 at 1:40 PM
Also I have heard an email sent to an ordinary ratepayer was intercetped and the question mark which was on it over looked to make it seem Cr. Penhuiluriack was making a statement rather than asking a question.
What a debacle a question turned into a positive statement and interception? Where are we … in this battle for the preservation of transparency and privacy?
Voltaire would not have liked this behaviour!!!!!!!!!!!!
September 21, 2012 at 7:23 PM
Speaking of Wueens Avenue … there are always water puddled draining from the track on the roadway even though it’s shotter. This will be very dangerous foir all residents as mosquitoes are loving this. Take action and remove the puddles maybe MRC cou;ld pay as it is thrir drainage overflow from excessive watering.
September 21, 2012 at 10:37 PM
I rang the MRC on this issue and the fact that the overgrowth is going onto the road over the bike lane. Not us was the reply. I then rang Council to fix. Not us said the Council. Call the MRC !