Changes have been happening in the Mornington Peninsula Shire as shown below. We invite residents to contemplate the following questions:
- Should any CEO position be filled time and time again without advertising the post?
- Should pay hikes be awarded with each new contract when ratepayers are totally ignorant of how any CEO has performed against the stated Key Performance Indicators?
- Is the constant refrain by councillors of ‘best man for the job’ acceptable given that nothing else is provided in order to justify continual reappointment?
- Should the Local Government Act be amended to mandate public advertising?
November 18, 2014 at 12:25 PM
on front of leader Southwick is going to match Labors offer on Glen Eira college redevelopment. He has also promised to deliver extra space around the school if elected. This would be unlike the his last 4 years where the MRC has gained more public land than they ever before. Interesting the park which was part of the deal of the century has had its fences removed. Pity only way to ge there is via helicopter!
November 18, 2014 at 2:02 PM
Staikos has said that he will rebuild the Mackinnon Secondary College. To do this there would need to be another site. It is not possible to build a school that has 1800 students by doing a few rooms at a time. This would take the prize for the state wide pie-in-the sky promise award for this campaign. It will be marvellous watching Little Nic wipe the egg from his face if he wins.
November 18, 2014 at 2:51 PM
Interesting Southwick as one of his Caulfield promises is going to provide 200,000 to AJAX for their pavillion in the little known Caulfield suburb of ‘Albert Park’!. Southwick could have forced the MRC off the public land in the middle of the Racecourse and provide lots of sportsgrounds. AJAX want to move to be in Caulfield but there are not enough sports grounds as we know.
November 18, 2014 at 8:28 PM
Unfortunately, no one forces the MRC to do anything.
November 18, 2014 at 3:04 PM
Where is this open space going to come from? Glen Huntly park or will the stables be gone?
November 18, 2014 at 2:04 PM
Which of the councillors would set the CEO KPI’s. Maybe Cr. Lobo. Love to be the fly on the wall while that process was taking place.
November 18, 2014 at 3:54 PM
Nah, Newton sets them himself and these mugs agree.
November 18, 2014 at 8:29 PM
You are kidding, right
November 18, 2014 at 11:43 PM
Lobo? You are kidding. The most unqualified Councillor.
Ever since Newton mustered the numbers to down the counclllors when he was at real risk some time ago he runs the show, When he says jump the councillors say ‘how high’
It’s criminal that an executive search for a CEO is not undertaken at the time of each contract renewal. That applies to every divisional manager too.
November 18, 2014 at 4:27 PM
Keep them coming the different Councils CEOs being changed after 10 to 15 year service. In Glen Eira you will need to first change the Councillors that last extended Newton’s reign till 2017, because ‘the devil you know is better than the devil you don’t’. Crs Lippshutz, Esakoff, Hyams, and Pilling need to go in 2016 before we can clean up the stable as they do it in other Councils.
November 18, 2014 at 5:26 PM
The worst decision made by any group of councillors in the history of Glen Eira was to grant another five year contract. It’s that simple I think. The job should have been advertised and a new ceo appointed.
November 18, 2014 at 5:36 PM
Glen Eira’s current CEO was originally appointed around 2002 – reportedly this was an unadvertised appointment. Every re-appointment since then has not been advertised.
As the articles above say there is nothing wrong with testing the waters and it is in the current incumbents best interest to welcome competing in the market place for a position he has held (uncontested) for the past 12 years and is contracted to hold for another 3. It is common practice for CEO’s (and their equivalents) in both the private and public sectors to change after a period time usually less than 10 years.
As I look around and see the changes that have occurred in Glen Eira in the past 12 years and assess how well Council has/has not managed them, I am seriously questioning if Newton is the appropriate person to be heading Glen Eira’s Administration. I don’t think he is and it is inappropriate to again argue that saving $40,000 on recruitment searches justifies his re-appointment without the waters being tested.
November 18, 2014 at 9:30 PM
The guy’s got no pride or no sense. He’s booted out of his job and still wants to hang in there. Sounds like Newton years ago when he threatened to sue and they all raised the white flag. Lousy way to run a multi million dollar operation.
November 18, 2014 at 10:20 PM
It’s not just Newton that has past his use by date.
Think about the Councillors and their performance
. Esakoff – elected 2003, sacked 2005, re-elected 2005 – 2016 (13 years)
. Hyams – elected 2003, sacked 2005, re-elected 2008-2016 (10 years)
. Lipshutz – elected 2005 – 2016 (11 years)
. Pilling – elected 2008, re-elected 2012-2016 (8 years)
. Magee – elected 2008, re-elected 2012-2016 (8 years)
. Lobo – appointed 2009, re-elected 2012-2016 (7 years)
Delahunty – elected 2012-2016
Souness – elected 2012-2016
Okotel – elected 2012-2016
Consider the length of the Councillor’s tenure and the changes that have occurred in that time. And don’t ignore the performance of the recently elected – they joined the longer serving Councillors to vote to renew Newton’s tenure for 5 years with out advertising the position and also voted for the planning zones without community consultation.
November 19, 2014 at 9:50 PM
Precisely! And yet they keep getting re-elected. Apart from Pilling most with an increased vote. Thing is the overwhelming majority of voters have little or no interest in what happens at White Hall.
The unimpressive array of talent who put their names forward as alternatives at election time is another reason why the usual suspects continue to be re-elected.
Frankly, I’m opposed to people making careers out of being councillors. I’d like there to be a two term limit on standing.