Why bother, asks former Glen Eira mayor
Date October 23, 2012
Melissa Fyfe
HELEN Whiteside considers herself a normal sort of person. She’s political, no doubt – a paid-up Liberal Party member. But her time as Glen Eira mayor left her so disillusioned she wonders why an average community member would bother running for council.
With council elections winding up this week, Mrs Whiteside is calling on residents to scrutinise candidates carefully. As for the troubled Glen Eira councillors – some of whom were sacked in 2005 and are standing for re-election – they all deserve to be thrown out, she says.
Glen Eira – which covers suburbs such as Caulfield, Bentleigh and Elsternwick – consistently outperforms other councils on community satisfaction.
But in the past four years the council has faced the Ombudsman’s scrutiny over 10 separate issues, one Ombudsman’s report revealing Councillor Frank Penhalluriack’s alleged bullying behaviour and failure to declare conflicts of interest, and a critical assessment from the local government watchdog, the third since 1998.
Mrs Whiteside, a popular mayor, resigned in 2010. The council suppressed her letter of resignation. She told The Age she resigned because she felt some councillors were not declaring conflicts of interest and were set against chief executive Andrew Newton, wasting at least $30,000 on extra legal advice during the renegotiation of his contract.
Now that every sitting councillor except one is standing for re-election, the former mayor says residents should think carefully. ”Integrity is fundamental to being a councillor,” she says. ”Transparency, accountability and being objective. I believe councillors should make decisions for the long-term best interests of the entire community.
And her former colleagues? ”I don’t think they should be re-elected,” she says.
Mrs Whiteside said she was particularly disturbed about the 2010 decision to relinquish public open space to the Chabad House synagogue extension at 441-496 Inkerman Street, St Kilda East. She alleged Cr Michael Lipshutz had a conflict of interest because of an association with the synagogue’s benefactor, Jewish community leader Joseph Gutnick.
Mr Lipshutz said Mrs Whiteside’s revival of this matter was ”anti-Semitism of the worst kind. She is saying that because I am Jewish I am not fair-minded … I have no association with (Mr Gutnick) whatsoever,” he said. (Greens Cr Neil Pilling also voted to hand over the park.)
Mr Lipshutz said Mrs Whiteside was a ”failed councillor and a hopeless mayor who divided the council”.
Since the last election in 2008, councillors have had several brushes with the state’s integrity agencies and the court system. This year chief executive Mr Newton filed a bullying claim against Cr Penhalluriack. The hardware store owner refused anti-bullying training and is fighting councillor misconduct allegations at the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal.
In a 2010 investigation, Chief Municipal Inspector David Wolf found insufficient evidence to prosecute any councillor, but uncovered councillor behaviour ”at odds” with the council’s objectives and ”underlying issues with regard to transparency and accountability”.
When drafting the chief executive’s contract in 2010, councillors inserted a clause requesting he notify them of any inquiries from the state’s integrity agencies. Mr Wolf found the illegal clause existed in an early draft, but no one owned up to putting it there. ”Despite all the talks and presentations the councillors get on governance, it is still not getting through,” a council source told The Age.
The Glen Eira city council elections are this Saturday.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++
First frisbees, now fitness
23 Oct 12 @ 12:01am by Donna Carton
Not-for-profit group Humans Vs Zombies was told their tag games were “unsuitable” for Virginia Park Bentleigh.
They had requested permission to take about 30 kids there for a game in which “humans” chase “zombies” with foam dart blasters. o
Humans Vs Zombies Victoria secretary Anthony Osborne said the group’s objective was to get young people “outside, exercising and interacting socially, rather than home behind a computer.”
“We are looking to partner with councils’ youth services and park management as well as grant and funding bodies,” Mr Osborne said.
“We are also looking for parks.”
Some councils have been positive but Glen Eira and Manningham have refused.
Glen Eira council is still reeling from the negative publicity it received after a group of young frisbee players said they were told they needed a permit to play in Caulfield Park.
Councillors have now vowed to review the local law concerning park permits and clarify the definition of “organised sport.”
Council public relations chief Paul Burke told the Leader the council hadn’t recieved Humans vs Zombies’ request – nor any applications “from Clingons, Romulans, Daleks or Goths.”
++++++++++++++++++++++++
Council is where the sun should shine
2012PRINT EDITION: 23 Oct 2012
Mathew Dunckley
I love a good local council story.
There is something about the grand council chamber which suspends usual standards and leads to pitched battles over potholes.
The gravity of municipal level matters has a certain charm. A personal favourite was the Melbourne municipality that banned cricket teams from hitting sixes. Another Melbourne council threatened to use DNA tracing on dog poo on the beach to find offenders. The publicity seems to have been a deterrent. But the whiff of small-time CSI speaks volumes about local concerns.
Then there are the numerous dust-ups and petty personal political intrigues that have always filled local papers. Perhaps this is why people regard councils as sometimes annoying, sometimes amusing, and, often, irrelevant.
They shouldn’t be regarded this way. In the post-Kennett amalgamation era, Victorian councils are serious entities managing large amounts of public money. In total the 79 councils manage $55 billion worth of assets and spend close to $5 billion a year. They are worthy of scrutiny.
Right now, Victoria is enjoying its four-yearly council campaign carnival, complete with the sight of John Elliott running in the Melbourne lord mayoralty race.
All up more than 2000 hopefuls have put their hats in the ring to contest seats on Victorian councils.
Reporting on councils often falls to local papers.
As a young (or should that be younger) journalist at Leader Newspapers, I had the pleasure of covering Glen Eira Council in Melbourne’s south-east.
Every suburban journalist covers council, but not everyone gets Glen Eira. Councillors were at each others throats (sometimes literally), the chief executive was at war with the councillors, and there was a myriad more misdeeds and mischief.
The council was managing an annual budget of about $100 million a year, but after months of chaos, it was investigated and sacked.
Chalk one up to the local paper, eh? But it was not that simple. As part of the investigation I was required to front municipal inspectors, swear an oath and answer questions. The penalties for refusing to appear, to swear the oath or to answer the questions were thousands of dollars in fines or prison. There is nothing small-time about those powers. The inspectors wanted me to identify sources. I refused, citing my code of ethics. After some scoffing remarks about journalistic ethics, the inspectors made it clear they did not accept my reasons and recommended to the minister that further action be considered against me.
I happened upon that minister at a Christmas party later that year. I offered to do dishes or mow lawns to stay out of the clink. She indicated she did not think putting journalists in prison was a good idea. Lucky me.
Victorian Premier Ted Baillieu’s so-called shield laws should have fixed this problem.
Such laws, taking shape around the country, give journalists a legal right to refuse to divulge their sources. But Baillieu’s pledge went only as far as court cases and he has refused to go any further.
That means Victoria has carved out protection for journalists when dealing with a number of public institutions including council inspectors. Victoria argues it is following other states’ example, but I can’t understand why you would craft shield laws and consciously leave out local government.
Councillors and council workers who leak to journalists almost always commit a breach of the Local Government Act. They risk career-ending prosecutions, fines and even jail for talking to journalists. They warrant protection. Yet, somehow, the right of journalists to protect sources when covering local government is ranked as less important than those covering other levels of government, or crime.
Local government decisions directly affect everyday lives. And as every corruption commission in the country (Victoria’s is not yet established) will tell you, councils are fertile ground for misdeeds.
Inhibiting the ability of local press to cover councils is poor policy.
Baillieu’s attempt to improve the system looks almost as worthy of ridicule as the genetic profiling of dog turds, and equally unable to be polished.
Source: http://afr.com/p/opinion/council_is_where_the_sun_should_vtYMZ9f1triCf9riXuj6KL
October 23, 2012 at 9:17 AM
if you were Lipshutz’s electoral advisor would you not advise him to follow the family name and ‘shut the lips’. Every time he opens his mouth he is losing votes. Maybe this is Penhaulrick’s intention with the negative campaign just casting the bait out and Lipshutz will bite!
October 23, 2012 at 9:28 AM
Talk about a hypocrite accusing Whiteside of being a failed councillor, if she is a failed councillor the question that should be posed is what would that make you Mr Lipshutz?
I think if a vote was held today between the two of you she would win hands down over you, not bad for a failed councillor.
Accusing Mrs Whiteside of “Anti-Semetism of the worst kind” would be very offensive to her. These comments are hypocritical I’m sure she has many dear Jewish freinds from her tenure at council. If Mrs Whiteside opposed an extension of a Church or Mosque would you considered her to be “anti-Christian or anti-Muslim”, I seriously doubt that!
Good on ya Mrs Whiteside keep them honest.
October 23, 2012 at 11:53 AM
Lipshutz needs to be very carefull.Calling someone an anti-Semite for questioning a possible relationship with Mr Gutnick does not constitute anti-Semitism.The question is legitimate because Lipshutz and Gutnick have both been involved wiithin leadership positions in the Jewish Community at the same time and it is a legitimate question that only requires an answer without the terrible answer given.There is no need for aggression.
October 23, 2012 at 12:11 PM
What “The Age” readers think –
22 comments so far
“
Helen Whiteside sounds like that rarest of things – a principled person. So ‘of course’ she is ‘a failed councillor and a hopeless mayor who divided the council’ and horror, a perpetrator of ‘anti-Semitism of the worst kind’ – a terrible thing, if it were true, another ‘why would you bother’ moment given its not. The injustice and dishonesty that goes on in this home of ours under a cynical pious window dressing is breathtaking.
Commenter Dark Lord of Terror Location Date and time October 23, 2012, 7:57AM “
It surprises me that I have to come to the defence of a member of the Liberal Party, but I am simply astounded as Michael Lipshutz’s description of Helen Whiteside’s actions as “anti-Semitism of the worst kind”.
Even if we accept Mr Lipshutz’s inerpretation of the matter as being anti-Semitic (and I note that, while the allegation of a connection to Joe Guttnick is denied, there is insufficient information in the story to determine the truth of that point), her alleged anti-Semitism is hardly “of the worst kind”. Helen Whiteside is hardly up there with the commanders of Auschwitz, or of, at a slightly lesser level of culpability, the organisers of Kristallnacht,, or even the authors of the notorious anti-Semitic forgery of The Protocols of the Elder of Zion. If Ms Whiteside is guilty of anti-Semitism at all, and I find the evidence presented to be insufficient proof, it is of a far milder kind than “the worst”.
Mr Lipshutz’s hyperbole raises my suspicions. It actually makes me more likely, rather than less, to accept Helen Whiteside’s version of the matter.
Commenter Greg Platt Location Brunswick Date and time October 23, 2012, 9:26AM
“
So now Mr. Lipshutz announces that it’s anti-semitism for him to be accused of having a conflict of interest? Perhaps Mr. Lipshutz needs a refresher course on how not to appear to be a complete mensch in public life.
Commenter Perk_Cartel Location Westgarth Date and time October 23, 2012, 8:07AM “
+1, I hate it when people play the race card.
Commenter Geoff Location Date and time October 23, 2012, 10:40AM
“
+2.
Commenter Uptightkid Location Albion Date and time October 23, 2012, 11:27AM
“
I can only agree with the comments of Mary Whiteside…. as a local resident of Stonnington, I know one of the candidates that is running in the North Ward and I can personally attest to the fact they certainly do not measure up to Mary’s comment where ‘Integrity is fundamental to being a councillor, ”Transparency, accountability and being objective” Our local candidate certainly battles to understand any of these concepts. In my experience their actions that I have witnessed first hand, are in the majority of cases about having control over those about them, certainly not community minded or community spirited….
Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/why-bother-asks-former-glen-eira-mayor-20121022-281jw.html#ixzz2A41dWZnh
Commenter ConcernedResident Location South Yarra Date and time October 23, 2012, 8:08AM
“
They are just playing the political “game” rather than getting on with the job so we should shed ourselves of this level of government and only have managment organisation running local affairs.
Commenter meincranbourne Location Date and time October 23, 2012, 8:10AM
“
“anti-Semitism of the worst kind” I find statements like that to be of the worst kind.
throwing out such statements willy nilly when some one says something you don’t like belittles the hurt and pain that so-many endured for so long.
Political point scoring of the worst kind. Your right HELEN Whiteside he should not be reelected
Commenter Lennie Location Date and time October 23, 2012, 8:13AM “
Yes, I think the broader community is well and truly sick of the ‘anti-Semitism card’ being drawn in place of a good argument or explanation.
Commenter Enough Location Date and time October 23, 2012, 8:49AM
“
It is amazing that this council is able to function. As a resident I see promises to not to increase rates, yet they havent been able to do this in the past couple of years so how will they stop it next year. Then whilst living near the Racecourse end of town where they did the under the table inequitable transfer of land to the MRC, who are going to over develop the area, not one prospective councillor has door knocked the area or contacted residents to show if they support or against the project. I have a feeling Mrs Whiteside is correct, leopards dont change their spots and it is most likely that the incoming councillors will be no better than those sacked in 2005 if infact the same councillors are selected.
Commenter Ken Location Caulfield Date and time October 23, 2012, 8:20AM
“
Another sure sign that we should get rid of councils. Totally over-governed. Councils are full of despotic cranks and property developers acting only in self interest.
Commenter ditch councils Location Australia Date and time October 23, 2012, 8:22AM
“
Ok, so who should I vote for?
Commenter Gefilte Location Caulfield Date and time October 23, 2012, 8:22AM “
Easy fix: don’t vote at all; ‘present’ yourself and refuse to be ‘re-presented’ – representation always was a fraud so no wonder that parasites ‘of the worst kind’ end up scrambling for this ‘jobs’.
And if you are not ‘re-presented’, do not pay rates. All essential city services are already paid for by State grants (from taxes already collected), and your rates just pay for council employee benefits, and subsidized with parking infringement revenue. Cut off their ‘blood supply’ and see how meek they will become. It takes only few people to show some courage for the rest to follow.
Commenter A Location B+ Date and time October 23, 2012, 10:52AM
“
Totally agree with Helen. Having spent time on Monash council I too wonder why people would want to stand unless they are driven by person gain. Many councillors have taken the famous JFK quote and converted it to ‘ what I can take from my community’.
Commenter Former Monash Councillor Location Monash Date and time October 23, 2012, 8:30AM
“
Yes, it’s happenned again. Stand up for what you believe in and have the temerity to query dodgy planning decisions and you risk being attacked and pilloried. Bringing out the racist card is the oldest trick in the book. Councillors like Helen Whiteside are sorely needed to to expose shady deals and stand up to these bullies.
Commenter Fairgo Location Melbourne Date and time October 23, 2012, 8:42AM
“
Certainly agree with the sentiments of this article. Why would you do it? Its almost a full time job to do it properly, yet the pay is way too low to allow that sort of involvement.
As someone who used to work at a council and who saw the councillors up close it was a pretty depressing sight. Many of them had stood on a single issue platform such as stopping the development at the end of their street. These single issue councillors would be fanatical about their pet issue and end up making silly decisions about everything else. Not a good way to govern.
I find voting at council elections very hard. I have never heard of most of the candidates, and all you have is a small paragraph full of motherhood statements to decide from. They are mostly ‘independent’. Who are they really? At least in state a federal politics with the parties openly involved you have more of an idea what a candidate stands for.
Commenter tps Location Date and time October 23, 2012, 8:45AM
“
Have been troubled in trying to work out who to vote for in Darebin also.
Have read each candidtates blurb but they are all extremely general and vague.
There are no costings no explanation on how they intend to reach thier targets
Just very vague sweeping statements such as . cut the waste ?
Recuce costs ?
get things done ?
I wish the State Government would sack the lot of them
Commenter chucka Location Melbourne Date and time October 23, 2012, 8:49AM “
Same here in Booroondara…. I just tossed a coin. Sad but true
Commenter w Location Kew Date and time October 23, 2012, 10:12AM
“
Glen Eira Council believes it is one of the best Councils in Victoria. I spend hours in the Council chamber gallery listening to self congratulatory remarks. To hear a whistle blown this loudly by an ex Mayor must surely not fall on deaf ears. I am standing outside Glen Eira Town Hall right now at the pre poll feeling a wind of change in the air. I hope voters grasp this opportunity for new open and community led decision making and elect new voices on Saturday.
Commenter Newton Gatoff Candidate for Glen Eira Council Location Bentleigh Date and time October 23, 2012, 8:50AM
“
We should get rid of local council and start again. The elected people are refered to as puppets and are dictated to by the machine that has not been voted in . who oversees the shire secretary, engineer and so forth., who hires and fires them. they have taken too much power unto themselves and the people need to get it back. In the short term the council should conform to the constitution .
Commenter patf Location Date and time October 23, 2012, 8:54AM
“
For those Glen Eira voters who may like more unfiltered information check out the blog at gleneira.wordpress.com for background on candidates, which ones may be stooges for various parties, and links to individual candidate blogs in the various wards. Usual disclaimers apply.
Commenter Questions and Answers Location Bentleigh Date and time October 23, 2012, 10:05AM
“
Living and understanding the constant battle Glen Eira residents have faced over the last two councils, including this current Newman/lipshitz Council. In particular with this reoccuring “conflict of Interest” issue arising such as this Jewish centre and the Caulfield Racecourse c60 development where amazingly, decisions of crown land and council land was decided by 3 out of 9 council members due to this common Glen Eira city council “conflict of interest”. Interestingly, one council member who was not able to contribute to thos decision, in fact received approx 70 % of caulfeild racecource wards votes.
Glen Eira residents have created the “Glen Eira WordPress” forum to express their viewpoints on many decisions the current council have made against the communtities best interest!
Commenter Very concerning that Glen Eira City Council integrety has been questioned! Is this the Norm for GI? Location Date and time October 23, 2012, 10:43AM
“
Local Councils are more often than not basket cases. Made up of mostly power hungry, corrupt business folk who wouldn’t be talented or disciplined enough to make it in state or federal politics (and that’s saying something). I resent having to vote for any of them. Many people who and busy and on the move simply don’t have time or any desire to become interested in a local bitchfest and voting should be voluntary. At least State and Federal politics really matters and there is plenty of information about what is going on.
Commenter Wyn Location Earth Date and time October 23, 2012, 11:01AM
Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/why-bother-asks-former-glen-eira-mayor-20121022-281jw.html#ixzz2A52KS1Dl
October 23, 2012 at 12:25 PM
Rightly or wrongly there is an enclave within Glen Eira council that happens to be Liberal and Jewish. Given that recent Mayors have been part of this group, and hence have the advantage of the deciding vote, the question of probity and decision making in the interests of the community has to be raised. Over the last few years there have been numerous decisions that have rightly been perceived by many as astonishing and which fly in the face of logic and real transparency. A few examples should suffice: – the Seaview properties, one of which was owned by the Esakoffs, and in the face of officers reports, independent heritage advisors, this group (plus others) on council voted to remove heritage status. There has also been numerous decisions on synagogues – either expansion or development. These have often unleashed huge community opposition. Yet they have mostly been passed – even when it’s been admitted that past practice of these groups has been far from exemplary. If councillors are elected to voice the concerns of the entire electorate, and to make decisions for the entire electorate, then this doesn’t seem to be happening in Glen Eira.
The example referred to by Whiteside is just one more piece in the puzzle. Questionable Section 173 removed and then a VCAT hearing which got it all wrong because the basic documents and evidence were all wrong. Playing the race card as Lipshutz does here, is the final abomination.
October 23, 2012 at 5:41 PM
Councillors being Liberal and some Jewish is a pretty fair reflection of Caulfield, Bentleigh, Carnegie, Murrumbenna and Bentleigh.
4 Jews
1 Green.
2 ALP members
2 independants.
I reckon that is pretty reflective of the people living in Glen Eira.
As far as Party membership goes, 2 ALP, 2 Liberal, 1 Green. 4 non Party members.
That is also balanced. I doubt that the Glen Eira Councillors vote on Party lines. Maybe this is the reason that it gives the appearance of not running smoothly. The 173 was probably set up poorly in the first place.
October 23, 2012 at 1:06 PM
I believe Helen Whiteside absolutely.
Vote on Saturday for open, transparent and accountable Glen Eira Council- and that means NO VOTE FOR HYAMS, LIPSHUTZ, ESAKOFF..
A clean slate is vital….
October 23, 2012 at 1:48 PM
I’m Jewish and there’s 2 possible ways to interpret Lipshutz’s repeat attack on Whiteside. Either he’s a total moron and can’t help himself or this is part of a dirty election campaign. The moron bit is obvious. His slurs do more to incite anti-semitism than anything else. The other side of the coin is that this could perhaps be an attempt to rally the troops as it were – that is the Jewish vote. Whichever, it tells me that he and the gang must be pretty desperate and worried. They should be!
October 23, 2012 at 2:13 PM
I heard a whisper that even the Jewish community is fed up with him. This astonishing attack on ex mayor Whiteside might just be his undoing.
October 23, 2012 at 3:39 PM
More Age readers –
“
Honestly, the sooner we can do away with this patently unnecessary, cripplingly iniefficient and disgustingly corrupt level of government altogether, the better.
Commenter Pips Ahoy Location Melbourne Date and time October 23, 2012, 11:17AM
“
don’t tell my mum i am a local councillor, she thinks i play piano in a brothel!
Commenter economics 1a Location melbourne Date and time October 23, 2012, 12:01PM “
❤ you both made my day and summed up my feelings towards council elections/councils in general.
Commenter Pidgie Location Date and time October 23, 2012, 1:59PM
“
There is really only one way for ratepayers to get good value from councillors, ban any member of a political party from running, along with real estate agents & property developers, of course.
Federal government oversees the country, state government the state, so let local government truly serve the people around them. Probably a big ask and will never happen, unfortunately. But local government should really be about our roads, rates and rubbish, not overpaid council ceo's and huge staff, along with politically-tainted councillors who really are, in the main, using their role to impress their political party and hopefully be preselected for a forthcoming state or federal election. If you also examine closely, when a council is dominated by a particular political party who also happens to be the state government, there is barely a word of criticism from the councillors against any inequities brought by the state.
This idea may not necessarily be democratic, but it would certainly be a fairer and less troublesome system than we have now.
Commenter Ratepayers rule Location Melbourne Date and time October 23, 2012, 12:05PM
“
He used the race card? What a pig. You have no credibility what so ever. So she should have disputed it!
Commenter Abi Location Date and time October 23, 2012, 12:28PM
“
Good old Lipshutz playing the anti-semitic card again. Yawn yawn yawn. By playing that card it typically means to me, there is no other valid defence available.
Commenter DJCJ Location Melbourne Date and time October 23, 2012, 1:07PM
Comments are now closed
Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/why-bother-asks-former-glen-eira-mayor-20121022-281jw.html#ixzz2A5so1eCu
October 23, 2012 at 3:54 PM
This is off topic but I want to comment on the appalling lack of coverage by the Leader for this election. Unlike previous elections there are no candidate statements or any background whatsoever on the bevy of people standing. The only mention is the equally woeful “Elections 2012” where the 3 main issues for each municipality is highlighted. For some unfathomable reason the Glen Eira version has the Penhalluriack vcat hearing as top of the list. Since I’m very cynical, questions of manipulation and pressure come to mind since I can think of many other “issues” that we currently face which are far more important than the Penhalluriack case. Nevertheless, the lack of coverage overall is more than disappointing – it’s unforgiveable for an organisation that would like to call itself a “local paper”. Even today’s miniscule editorial deserves to go straight into the rubbish bin.
October 23, 2012 at 5:15 PM
I think before people cast judgment, it would be useful for Ms Whiteside to substantiate the conflict she claims exists, given that she put such a claim in the paper…
October 23, 2012 at 5:17 PM
The claim had been made previously in her letter of resignation and reading between the lines, it also was part of the Wolf investigation in 2010.
October 23, 2012 at 5:45 PM
Yeh, read both of them. I don’t see any substance whatsoever to back up the allegation of conflict of interest. Neither did Wolf.
October 23, 2012 at 5:23 PM
Whiteside has clearly bided her time and waited for the opportune moment to reek revenge on Lipshutz’s previous shellacking of her. It’s really amusing that his attack includes the allegation that she has never been a “team player” – as if he is one if the “team” is regarded as more than the gang!
It must also be said though that these little squabbles between once firm friends is irrelevant. The real Machiavelli is unelected and has worked the principles of “divide and conquer” sublimely. If Glen Eira is ever to emerge from the long standing morass that it finds itself in under Newton, then the solution is very clear. Sack Newton and the rest of the lemmings will follow toute suite. Whiteside’s support for Newton has been as ill placed and unwarranted as the current gang’s is. She has pinpointed one trivial incident in comparison to the ongoing and serious failure of governance in this council.
October 23, 2012 at 9:02 PM
I agree. Regardless who is elected, if the community wants to change administration and its ‘divide and rule’ style then it has to demonstrate for such a change. I cannot see that happening if the community does not ‘stir’ for administrative changes.
October 23, 2012 at 9:36 PM
I think you’ll find Lipshutz was front and centre in putting forward the name of then Councillor Whiteside to be Mayor.
Mrs Whiteside was too inexperienced to be thrust into that role so early in her career something Lipshutz should have been cognisant of. With friends like him, who needs enemies.
That said, she was a hard working councillor who carried out her responsibilities with integrity and diligently and she was across the workings of council when she decided enough was enough.
For those who haven’t seen then Councillor Whiteside’s letter of resignation, here it is:
” Mr Andrew Newton
Chief Executive Officer
City of Glen Eira
PO Box 42
Caulfield South
Vic 3162
30 July 2010
Dear Mr Newton
Letter of Resignation as Councillor in the City of Glen Eira
It is with sincere regret that I tender my resignation as Deputy Mayor and Councillor for the City of Glen Eira effective 30 July 2010.
The reasons for this serious decision are a cumulation of Council actions and decisions over the last several months, which in my opinion constitute serious failures of Governance of the City. A number of these issues are on the public record.
1. The most recent decision that brought me to decide to resign now was the decision of Council last Tuesday 20th July expressed in Item 10 Urgent Business and followed up in the Confidential part of the Council meeting, with regard to a matter relating to Legal Advice, to quote from the minutes:
“ Moved by Crs Magee/Whiteside: That a matter concerning a request from Council’s solicitors Norton Rose, dated 15th July 2010 seeking instructions from Council to allow them to meet a 23 July 2010 deadline be treated as a matter of Urgent Business. And that this item of Urgent Business be dealt with in the Confidential part of this Council Meeting as the first item of business under S. 89 (2) (f) Legal Advice. The MOTION was put and CARRIED unanimously”
The matter was subsequently dealt with in Confidence. I was in substantial disagreement with the majority decision of Council which, while confidential, remains in Council records.
2. On 27 November 2009, in the Audit Committee meeting of that date the CEO and three Councillors present, quote:
“referred to possible issues, or perceptions of issues, around conflict of interest. The Committee Members unanimously recommended that Council consider writing to the Minister for Local Government to seek the advice of the Chief Municipal Inspector in reviewing these matters.”
On 2 February 2010, in Item 8, Reports from Advisory Committees Item (a) Audit Committee 27 November 2009, Crs Lipshutz/Whiteside moved and carried by Council “That the minutes of the Audit Committee held on 27 November 2009 be received and noted and recommendations adopted”
3. On 16th March 2010 in the Confidential part of the meeting, this matter was considered again under item 12.4 quote:
“ under s89(2)(h) “any other matter which Council considers would prejudice the Council or any person” which relates to a recommendation of the Audit Committee”
This is confidential and the decision of Council is in the records.
4. The process of the reappointment of the CEO Mr Andrew Newton was of particular concern to me. On 4 November 2009 during my term as Mayor I was appointed to the Subcommittee to draft and negotiate a new Contract with the CEO. It is important to note that no Councillor acting alone had any authority. The four appointed named Councillors had joint responsibility. Subsequent to my term as Mayor which ended on 14 December 2009, numerous communications to and from the Council lawyer took place. After my term as Mayor, I was not included in these communications and my request to be provided with all documents in relation to the process has been denied by both the lawyer and the Council.
5. A related issue of concern is the blowout in legal and facilitation costs recently advised to be in excess of $44,000. As of 14 December the cost incurred was approximately $6500 for legal costs. In addition to my right to know, it was in order to understand how this excessive cost could have been justified that I sought the documents referred to above.
6. As a consequence of my position on these and other matters some Councillors have stopped communicating with me except in formal Council meetings. In this situation I can no longer serve the people of Camden Ward and continue working effectively in the current environment.
I particularly regret having to resign now because, other than these matters of Governance, the City is well run and administered. During my time as Councillor since 2005, there have been many achievements of which I am proud. The Community need to be reassured that the CEO and officers and the wonderful staff of Glen Eira adhere to the highest standards of probity and business conduct. I particularly appreciated the support given to me during my term as Mayor. Achievements of the City include:
• The independent survey of Community satisfaction conducted by State Government, for the year 2009, among all 79 municipalities in Victoria, gave Glen Eira an overall satisfaction rating of 89%, up from 85% in 2008. This is the highest among our benchmarking councils and an achievement to be proud of.
• Glen Eira continues to maintain lower rates than benchmark councils in Melbourne.
• Glen Eira has started construction of the largest capital works project in its history, the Sports and Aquatic Centre, currently on time and on budget for completion mid 2011.The combined $14.5 million support from Federal and State Governments for this project demonstrated confidence in Glen Eira’s ability to plan and deliver a complex facility for the benefit of the Community.
• The Caulfield Park Pavilion and associated landscaping, planting of drought resistant grasses and a large tree planting program was completed in 2009.
• A graffiti removal and City cleanup program was started in 2009 and continues to the satisfaction of the community.
• I instituted a program of school visits and education in the process of Council governance and the history of Glen Eira. I hope this program continues, because I believe it is very worthwhile and the children enjoyed the experience immensely.
• I have been committed to open up the Caulfield Racecourse Reserve to a wider use by the community in accordance with the original purposes of the land grant. The proposal for new landscaping and park facilities for the Community in the Racecourse Reserve is coming up for consultation next week. This has been an unresolved issue for decades.
• The Booran Road reservoir land transfer from State Government to Council, for community use as much needed open space, is now confirmed.
• Greening of the City by the street tree policy and the upgrading and renewal of our old infrastructure continues in an orderly way after previous decades of neglect.
My thanks to you personally and to the Directors and all staff for their loyal support to me and for their hard work on behalf of the City.
Yours sincerely
Cr Helen Whiteside
Deputy Mayor
City of Glen Eira”
October 23, 2012 at 9:59 PM
I find it rather difficult to have much sympathy for Helen Whiteside. Through most of her time on council she rarely spoke out for resident issues. She was happy to support Lipshutz in whatever he wanted.
In the 2008 election she enlisted her friend Cheryl Forge to run as a stooge to help her get re-elected. She was only elected through through the preferences of Lipshutz and Frank.
She was made Mayor only as a show of power by the “gang” – that they could make anyone Mayor regardless of their ability. She was probably the least competent person on council to be Mayor – anyone who attended council meetings at the time will know how poorly run they were.
I believe the main reason she resigned was that after the 2008 election Lipshutz and Frank put so much pressure on her to support them (because they said she owed them for her re-election) that she found it intolerable. Remember at the time Frank and Lipshutz were the best of buddies.
However, Lipshutz response is appalling , even by his usual standards. And his claims don’t stand scrutiny. In regard to the Chabad House synagogue extension he claims he has no association whatsoever with the synagogue’s benefactor, Jewish community leader Joseph Gutnick.
But then from the Jewish News article we find the following – Lipshutz, a keen supporter of Chanukah In The Park, wants to ensure the event remains a firm fixture on the Glen Eira calendar, and opposed a move some years ago to cancel it because the Caulfield Park grounds were said to be in poor condition. “I made sure it actually went ahead.”
And guess who runs Chanuka in the Park? This quote from a news item last year. “Another successful Chanukah in the Park sponsored by Yossel Gutnick and his Chabad House of Caulfield”.
The man has no credibility.
October 23, 2012 at 10:05 PM
The Age feature quotes Lipshutz as saying “I have no association with (Mr Gutnick) whatsoever”. That’s pretty adamant. But, and this is a huge but, the Wolf report has got this paragraph -“Investigators found no evident to suggest that the councillor has any relationship with the applicant other than a ratepayer constituent relationship. All councillors interviewed stated that it was normal practice for both applicants and objectors to a planning permit to approach them with their views about a particular issue. All councillors viewed this as lobbying and part of the role of being a councillor.”
There’s a massive difference in saying that there’s “no association” and then a couple of years back there was one – even as a ratepayer constituent relationship”. Hunting through the minutes I find that Hyams chaired the planning conference for the application and that the motion was moved by Lipshutz and Hyams.
October 23, 2012 at 10:36 PM
Of course! No more needs to be said. Hyams and Lipshutz the pinnacles of good governance. Out with them both.
October 23, 2012 at 10:46 PM
This post and comments deal with governance issue. It is critical because if Council governance is not done properly decisions affecting concerns of inappropriate planning, implementation processes and operational matters impinge upon the everyday effects of over-development, open space, use of community facilities etc. These seem to be determined by management the way they see fit with little regards to community wishes.
The best example is the 80/20 planning scheme proposed and implemented about 10 years ago. The 80/20 rule (Pareto principle http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pareto_principle) was an observation by the economist ‘that 80% of the land in Italy was owned by 20% of the population’.
This rule of thumb was later adopted by many in management and government administrations as an easy, flexible and lazy way of assessing cause and effects for different situations. It is not a strategic approach to planning or improving efficiency. It is not scientific. In Glen Eira, the Planning scheme was constructed to fit that model. A long investigation into minimal and housing diversity areas was conducted to subdivide Glen Eira into 80/20 areas. All other aspects of planning and development are mostly to comply with State Government legislation frameworks. Nothing to do with any unique features of Glen Eira or residents wishes. There is nothing magic about 80/20 rule. It can be 85/15 or 90/10 or any other subdivision. It is just a rule of thumb that does not deserve consideration unless it is justified by proper strategic considerations.
A strategic approach would start with assessment of population that Glen Eira can accommodate and consequences of increased population on its infrastructure development and effects on traffic and community services. That was not done and every project is justified as though there is no impacts on other parts of Glen Eira. Such a study was done by Prof Rob Adams. Glen Eira required less than 10% of its area to be higher rise.
So why are we doing it and who gains from this easy, flexible, and lazy approach? Businesses (including developers) argue that they would prefer a consistent, hard and fast regulatory environment to work with. However, from administration viewpoint the flexible arrangement means they are in charge of interpretation of the rules (eg ‘reasonable laws reasonably enforced’). As long as the rules are subject to interpretation then developers need to negotiate with Council staff, legal matters have to be referred to lawyers, another administration process, and finally if that fails VCAT representation attended to. The end result, more staff and bigger Glen Eira local government. Over the last decade Glen Eira has become top heavy and funding its management and operation contributed to the increased Council rates. Time for change, particularly the 80/20 planning rule.
October 23, 2012 at 11:02 PM
It’s worth adding to this comment that the latest census figures reveal in all their glory the folly of council’s planning scheme and its failure to address population figures responsibly and in a timely manner. Even going on the discredited Melbourne 2030, or the Melbourne @5m, Glen Eira reached its projected population increase years ago. Officers even argue this at VCAT. Yet the planning scheme refuses to acknowledge, or even attempt to address this issue. It’s full steam ahead with more and more development. The irony of course is that even the much vaunted Minimal Change Areas are not protected in the manner they should be. Planning Scheme Reviews are nothing but public relations exercises, orchestrated by Newton and Akehurst and accepted unquestionably by the majority of councillors. To therefore read the nonsense of protesting/opposing overdevelopment that is writ large on Lipshutz’s, Hyams’, Esakoff’s and the Greens publicity blurbs is an insult to the intelligence of residents. Their problem is that more and more residents are coming to realise this and the sham that the entire planning processes – from conferences, to officers’ reports – really are.