GE Governance

Archived Posts from this Category

December 13, 2011

Council Meeting: The Bastardry Continues

Posted by gleneira under Councillor Performance, GE Council Meeting(s), GE Governance
[17] Comments 

The gallery included many men, women and children from the McKinnon Basketball Association. The following report on the discussion focuses on the decision whether or not to hold the discussion on court allocation in public, or restrict to in camera. It was part of the response to Committee Meeting Minutes on GESAC.

LIPSHUTZ: Gesac is ‘unfortunately behind schedule….(due to) builder’s delay….probably be able to make an opening in February…..basketball courts are pretty much completed….(pool area) will still take some time….(paying) liquidated damages in a large amount…our project managers are on top of every aspect….number of issues where (builders have had to redo work) because we are insisting….that GESAC will be of the highest standard….”

MAGEE: “there’s nobody more disappointed….than myself ….GESAC behind schedule….we were all hoping that GESAC would be open on the 1st December….I’m actually quite comfortable that it’s late….Council has a number of senior engineers working for us on site…..(sometimes they decide that ) what is happening is not good enough…..stop, redesign, pull out….it’s crucially important that we don’t rush GESAC….just quickly patch it up and get it finished….(handed over and then) for the next umpteem years we’re continually trying to patch it….GESAC….in my opinion is the state of the art…..(many basketballers in the gallery) and I can whet your appetite by telling you that the courts are the best that I have ever seen….it is a world class centre, it is made of world class materials…we have to be patient because we have to do it properly….there’s an item of business to be considered later on in camera (12.8) and that’s to do with basketball …..Council is not able to deal with that item in the ordinary council meeting…..that item must be considered….dealt with in camera….I thank you all very much for coming….but unfortunately we can’t talk about the allocation of basketball in the open part of the council meeting….but I can assure you there will be a report…..and a report on the voting…..I would have loved to have been able to do more tonight, but it’s an item for camera and it will stay an item to be considered in camera….

PILLING: ” I thank everyone for coming here tonight….because of confidential nature we have to do this privately….the results of our decisions tonight will be available in council minutes when published ….It’s a bit disappointing I understand but advice is to do things by the letter and certain councillors are resolved to do that….great to see (people) committed and passionate….I’m hopeful it will be a good outcome for the community.

COMMENT: the really sad aspect of this outcome is not merely the disregard for all those people who crammed into the gallery tonight and then left disappointed. But what these comments reveal is that once again, decisions are made behind closed doors (ie. ‘advice’, ‘certain councillors’, ‘resolved’). After all the pronouncements on Cr. Pilling’s blog site, it would have been uplifting to actually have a motion put to the floor that the item be discussed in chamber. By failing to move any motion, and meekly accepting what was obviously decided previously, residents are again left to ponder what has happened to transparency and accountability – although it would not be too hard to guess which councillors might have opposed the removal of ‘confidential status’. Please note, Cr. Lobo was absent. It would therefore have been a very interesting vote – probably 4/4 and Esakoff forced to use her casting vote – again embarrassing to a council that prides itself on being a cosy ‘club’ with no division!

We will report on the other items in the next few days.

 

December 11, 2011

GESAC Basketball

Posted by gleneira under Councillor Performance, GE Governance, GE Service Performance
[4] Comments 

We’ve copied the latest post, plus a comment, from Cr Pilling’s blog and congratulate him on the initiative shown in this alternative motion.

“As reported widely and here in previous postings there has been an ongoing issue throughout the past six months of resolving the weekend allocation usage at our great new indoor court facilities at the soon to be opened Glen Eira Sports and Aquatic Centre(GESAC) in Bentleigh.

This wonderful new $45m community facility,the largest ever built in the municipality, was primarily funded by local ratepayers with significant contributions from both the Federal and State govts. The original expression of interest offer to the Oakleigh Warriors effectively meant that in excess of 1400 local players in the Mckinnon Basketball Assoc would not be playing this season at GESAC- this situation I have consistantly stated is unacceptable.

This Tuesday night under item 12.8 GESAC MULTI-USE COURTS of the Council meeting agenda I will be supporting the following proposed alternative motion.

1.That council notes the report

2.That council sets the seasonal hire rate for basketball at GESAC at $40.00 per court per hour.

3.That council awards the Friday tenancy (6pm to 11pm) and Sunday (9am to 11pm) to The Oakleigh Garden State Warriors Basketball Association.

4.That council awards the Saturday (8am to 11pm) tenancy to the McKinnon Basketball Association.

5.That all court fees are payable regardless of court use. 6.That council requires a bond of $10,000.00 per court payable on signing of the lease agreement. 7.That if either association is unable to fill its allocated times, it must first offer that time to the other before it can be offered to any other association, body or individual. 8.That this resolution be incorporated in the public minutes of this meeting. (if in camera)

Will also support a division (a recording of how Councillors vote) on this item and the tabling of this item in the public (non-confidential) section of the meeting.

This is an equitable,reasonable and balanced proposal that caters for both associations and allows for all local kids, families and clubs to use our great new facilities at GESAC. It sensibly balances financial and community responsibilties. I will be encouraging all Councillors to support this motion”.

Reader’s comment: “Some questions – why should the Warriors get 19 hours of court time and the McKinnon basketballers only 15 hours – and this all on the same day? Why should this be held in camera? If Newton suggests this, then councillors should overturn the decision with a council resolution. Simple if councillors can get together 5 votes.”

 

December 9, 2011

Gobbledygook & Dirty Tricks

Posted by gleneira under Councillor Performance, GE Council Meeting(s), GE Governance, GE Service Performance
[13] Comments 

The agenda for Tuesday night’s Council Meeting is a mixture of more gobbledygook plus a few new dirty tricks. We will go through some of these.

Pools Steering Committee Minutes – 1st December 2011.

“The builder’s revised program suggests further delays in relation to the gym and stadium. As these elements are not on the critical path, these works should not delay overall completion of the works. Unfortunately, officers are aware of other works that are not tracking as per the revised program. These delays (primarily in the pool hall) have the potential to further delay works. Officers have advised the builders of their concerns.”

COMMENT: If the gym and stadium are not on the ‘critical path’ does this mean that there are more serious problems with construction that have lead to the delay?

Under the heading Cash Flow – nothing, zilch, a big zero!

Budget/Variations

“There are a number of additional deductions under the contract. A quantity surveyor is currently valuing these works. Council continues to levy liquated (sic) damages.”

COMMENT: ‘additional deductions’ is a fascinating phrase. We suggest that what this is really referring to is that the original GESAC design is being cut back because of the cash flow crisis. Of course this will be trumpeted as GESAC coming in even further ‘under budget’. But residents should know what corners are being cut and what this suggests about the final quality of the building and facilities.

Critical Issues

The next paragraph is unintelligible and we are continually astounded at how such nonsense can be released into the public domain – “There are a number of active critical issues that officers continue to manage (some of which confidential has they relate to contractual matters). Critical issues include planning for handover of the facility from the builder, commissioning and managing delays in the program.”

COMMENT: Residents may as well forget January as the opening of the site. Again, the phasing is sublime in its attempts to camouflage the truth – “This would mean the facility would not open to the community until after the end of January”. ‘After the end of January – can only mean February, maybe even March’. But it sure sounds better to say ‘January’ rather than the later months! And no further meetings until ‘some time in January’!

DIRTY TRICKS

For the first time EVER a councillor’s ‘Right of Reply’ is published in the agenda items, rather than after it has been delivered at council meeting and then appears in the Minutes of that meeting. We can only speculate as to the thinking behind such a new ‘initiative’. Is this meant to ensure that Penhalluriack sticks 100% to the published script? That if he diverges by one single word, then Hyams and his cohorts will leap to their feet and declare a point of order?

Hyams is also very, very busy again requesting amendments to various previous minutes according to the Records of Assembly.

One other point we’ve noticed is that on all previous occasions when ‘legal advice’ and OH & S matters were discussed BOTH Penhalluriack and Newton left the room. (See 15th November for example). However, the minutes of 22nd November (after Newton has got his reappointment!) there is no mention of Newton departing even though the items cited were: “”Under s89(2)(a) ‘Personnel” of the Local Government Act 1989 re OH &S compliance” and “under to (sic) s89(2)(f) ‘Legal advice”, and (h) “may prejudice the Council or any person” regarding OHS legal advice.”

MURRAY RD DEVELOPMENT

This application is for a 4 storey building comprising 31units. Officers recommend permit for 30 units. What caught our eye again was this sentence: “In principle, there are a number of factors which make this site appropriate for medium density development at the scale proposed:

  • It is located within close proximity to the Hawthorn Road tram route and shops;
  • It has abuttal to a tall 3 storey commercial building to the north and a single storey commercial building to the east (both fronting onto Hawthorn Road);
  • it has abuttal to two storey flats to the east”

COMMENT: When did a 30 unit development suddenly become ‘medium density’? Why the use of the word ‘tall’ in ‘3 storey commercial building’. Three storeys is three storeys surely? But what is most laughable is the logic of the argument – because of the existence of a 3 storey building and a 2 storey building then this seemingly justifies the granting of a permit for a 4 storey building! A small paragraph then follows – “Whilst the proposed development will be taller and more robust in its build form than adjoining existing development, it is considered that it represents what policy expects in terms of reasonable change to the character of this street being within a Housing Diversity Area”. We congratulate the planning department for its expertise in the use of euphemism and spin and simply wonder where in the planning scheme does the policy state its ‘expectations’ as to medium density meaning 30 units on one lot?

Audit Committee Minutes – 27th November 2011

“The Committee noted the Auditor-General’s issuing of a high risk rating for Council based on a low liquidity ration as at 30 June 2011. Officers confirmed that the overall high risk rating was due to the liquidity ration of 0.95. The CFO stated that the monthly finance report to Council now included an additional liquidity section. The CFO also confirmed that Council should continue with all planned operating and capital expenditure, but should avoid any unplanned expenditure proposals. He said that delaying any planned capital expenditures such as the roads program or the warm season grasses program may have a negative impact on future renewal costs. The Chairman requested that Councillors be made aware, particularly at the strategy workshop, of the spending impact on the liquidity ratio. He also requested close monitoring of Council’s liquidity position and asked the CFO to report back at the next Audit Committee meeting”.

COMMENT: Another Machiavellian strategy by the CFO (Chief Financial Officer)? It’s okay to spend an unbudgeted for million on extending the car park at GESAC and relocating the playground, but not okay to delay roads and sporting ovals? Again, the logic is mind boggling, especially when you consider that many of these roads are repaved yearly! All in all, we suspect that this is a not so subtle warning to councillors to watch their “p’s and q’s” and not to interfere with the grand plans laid out by Messrs Newton and co – for example such as the recent funding of Take a Break and the attempt by Cr. Magee to have public toilets installed in Bentleigh. The message seems clear – it states “butt out councillors and let us continue as we will”!!!!

 

December 9, 2011

GESAC Basketball

Posted by gleneira under GE Governance, GE Service Performance
[24] Comments 

Dear MBA members,

The mediation between McKinnon and Oakleigh took place yesterday(Wednesday)  We assume that the outcome of this will be discussed at next Tuesday’s Council Meeting, following which we will know more.

In the meantime, we strongly recommend that you continue to write to your Councillors encouraging them to make a decision in the best interests of McKinnon Basketball Association, their local and largest Basketball Association.  Please contact the MBA office if you require a list of the specific MBA credentials.

Source: http://www.sportingpulse.com/assoc_page.cgi?client=1-4059-0-0-0

 

December 4, 2011

How Long Is Too Long?

Posted by gleneira under GE Governance, GE Service Performance
[3] Comments 

Change management and succession planning are some of the buzz words found in the corporate world. Those at the top generally recognise that they have time limits on their tenure and for the company to flourish and advance new blood must be continually groomed, sought and introduced. This is also true of local government. In order to attract all the new bright things, people with talent and ambition and who thrive on challenges, the old must make way for the new. With no chance of advancement anyone worth a cracker from within the organisation will seek positions elsewhere whilst attracting outside talent is a forlorn task – especially if they perceive there is no room for advancement.

In Glen Eira, as opposed to numerous other councils, we seem to be stuck with the old. There just isn’t any space at the top. Some might argue this means “stability”. Others may see this as stagnation and a detriment to the organisation. It all depends on results and point of view. Bayside obviously welcomes new blood – in droves. According to their website, the most senior officers have ALL been at the council for less than 3 years – that is, not just in their current positions, but newly arrived at Bayside. They are listed as:

Heather Johnson – Director community services – arrived 2008

Shiran Wickramasinghe – Director City Strategy –  arrived 2010

Guy Wilson-Browne – Director Infrastructure Services –  arrived 2008

Sharon Pearsons – Director Corporate Services – arrived  2008 –

Andrew Robb CEO – 2008

Glen Eira’s story stands in stark contrast. Note that the following years DO NOT NECESSARILY SIGNIFY WHEN THESE INDIVIDUALS FIRST ARRIVED AT COUNCIL – ONLY WHEN THEY ACQUIRED THEIR CURRENT ROLES.

Paul Burke –2001

Peter Jones – 2003

Peter Waite –2006

Jeff Akehurst – 1996

Peter Swabey –2004

Andrew Newton – 2000

Gibbs & McLean (Audit Committee) – at least since 1998!

So we can only ask: How long is too long? – especially when it is the CEO alone who has control over his lieutenants!

 

December 3, 2011

Councillor Courses

Posted by gleneira under Councillor Performance, GE Governance
[9] Comments 

On 28th November 2011 a public question at Bayside City Council asked for information on each councillor’s academic qualifications and the courses each had undertaken since becoming a councillor. Information was also requested on the cost of these courses to Council. We’ve copied the responses and provide them in the public interest. We note specifically the number of councillors who have undertaken Director courses and wonder how many, if any, of our councillors have completed similar courses.

Academic Qualifications

Del Porto – B.A. (Hons) M.A Melb; Post Grad Sec. ACU

Hayes – Adv. Dip App. Sci. (Farm Management)

Long – B.A. (Multidiscipline)

Norris – M.A, M. Sc (Econ)

Frederico – B. Bus. (Mktg) Certificate of Business (Tourism)

Cooper-Shaw – B. Comm, B-Ed. Grad Dip Criminology; M.A. (applied Psych) M. Ed.

Russell – Nil

Councillor Course Year Cost Course Completed Certificate Issued
Del Porto Australian   Institute of Company Directors 2011 $5,900 Completed Yes
Hayes Media   Training

Presentation   Training

Australian   Institute of Company Directors

 2009

 

2009

 

2011

 $1,350

 

$800

 

$5,900

 Completed

 

Completed

 

Completed

 Yes

 

Yes

 

Yes
Long Media   Training

Presentation   Training

 2009

 

2009

 $1,350

 

$800

 Completed

 

Completed

 Yes

 

Yes
Norris Media   Training

Presentation   Training

 2009

 

2009

 $1,350

 

$800

 Completed

 

Completed

 Yes

 

Yes
Frederico Media   Training

Presentation   Training

Australian   Institute of Company Directors

 2009

 

2009

 

2011

 $1,350

 

$800

 

$5,900

 Completed

 

Completed

 

Not   Completed

 Yes

 

Yes

 

No
Cooper-Shaw Australian

Institute of

Company

Directors

 2011 $5,900 Not   Completed No
Russell Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil

 

 

 

December 2, 2011

A New ‘King Maker’ In Town?

Posted by gleneira under Councillor Performance, GE Governance
[25] Comments 

Things are hotting up and becoming really interesting. With the mayoral election just around the corner we can lay bets that the phones have been running hot and little clandestine meetings going on all over the place, with lobbying at its most intensive. Promises are being made left right and centre; favours called in, and all kinds of pressures brought to bear. The way we read the situation, is that the race is well and truly on between Hyams and Magee. Speculating a little further, we believe that the gang will of course vote for Hyams (ie. Lipshutz, Tang, Esakoff and Hyams himself) whilst Magee will possibly have the votes of Forge, Pilling, Penhalluriack and himself. That leaves dear Oscar – the new ‘king maker’.

What a turn around from last year when Lobo nominated himself and got no support. His continual cry of ‘4 plus 1’ fell on deaf ears. Well, this year things are vastly different. Lobo is that pivotal ‘1’! The question of course is: will he succumb to the wiles of Hyams et al or the wiles of Magee et al? How will he vote? Will past animosity against ‘the gang’ suddenly be fresh in his memory, or will his current (inexplicable) embrace of the group remain firm? From last year’s ‘nowhere man’, Lobo is suddenly thrust into the limelight – the real ‘kingmaker’.

 

November 30, 2011

‘Please Explain!’

Posted by gleneira under Councillor Performance, GE Governance, GE Service Performance
[9] Comments 

From the flood of comments we’ve received on the Newton reappointment and upcoming Mayoral election there is clearly keen interest out there in the community. We’ve basically summarised the range of comments and present them below as a series of questions – many of which need to be answered by councillors themselves since the Councillor Code of Conduct tells us that the public has a right to hear the reasons and logic behind each councillor’s vote! We therefore welcome their responses and also ask readers to provide their ‘answers’ to the following:

  • Why didn’t the majority of councillors choose to advertise?
  • Why after 12 stormy years with Newton at the helm did the gang choose to reappoint?
  • What really went on behind the closed doors of the Special Committee?
  • Should the public really believe that these councillors are so enamoured with Newton’s performance that the decision to reappoint was inevitable – keeping in mind GESAC; more bullying allegations; more Municipal Inspector investigations; more ombudsman’s investigations; more rate rises; more service charges; more planning objections; more lawyers than you can count; more secrecy and lack of transparency; general discontent in the community, etc. etc. etc.
  • Were any (undue) pressures brought to bear as in 2005?
  • What will be the legacy of another two years of Newton?
  • Will Hyams, if elected Mayor, enhance governance or continue along the same slippery path as Esakoff?
  • Why has Lobo so dramatically aligned himself with the gang?
  • Do any of these 9 councillors deserve re-election if they stand?
  • Will  Liberal party backers/supporters of certain councillors be dismayed at the current turn of events?
  • Will the presumed ongoing Municipal Inspector’s and Ombudsman’s reports be another whitewash?
  • Has this Council reached its lowest point in the eyes of the community?

 

 

November 29, 2011

The Leader: ‘Newton’s Green Light’

Posted by gleneira under GE Governance, GE Service Performance
[18] Comments 

Glen Eira CEO keeps job and pledges to complete sustainable lighting project

Newly reappointed Glen Eira chief Andrew Newton is hoping cost savings will appease residents who wanted him out.

The 54-year-old father of two said he was looking forward to finishing projects he had started, such as creating sustainable street lighting that would save the council $250,000 a year.

A special committee, at a meeting closed to the public, resolved to extend Mr Newton’s contract until April 2014.

Mr. Newton, who has held the top job since 2000, will be paid $271,000pa plus super and has the use of a hybrid Camry.

Residents behind the Glen Eira Debates blog created an online petition in a push for the council to advertise the job and encourage fresh applicants.

But Mr Newton said people criticising his reappointment should understand it was common practice. “Numerous councils have reappointed their CEO,” he said. “The (Local Government) Act gives councils the choice whether to reappoint their CEO or advertise the job.”

Mr Newton said he was looking forward to converting 5000 street lights to new-technology globes. “The project will cut council’s total green house emission by 15 per cent,” he said. “Glen Eira already has the lowest emissions per capita of any metro council and this will cut running costs by $250,000 per annum.”

He said the council had “important work to address in our ageing population, government reforms to kindergarten, increasing public open space, providing extra housing while protecting neighbourhood character.”

Louise Clifton-Evans

 

November 28, 2011

The Mayoral Stoush

Posted by gleneira under Councillor Performance, GE Governance
[27] Comments 

Candidates are lining up for the annual Mayoral Stoush. In the blue corner we have Hyams, whilst in the red corner there are two likely candidates – Pilling and Magee. It’s the traditional end of year derby that takes place behind the closed doors of assembly meetings and, you can bet your bottom dollar, countless private phone calls, secret meetings and emails, away from the prying eyes of the public and Newton. Favours are called in, promises made, hand on heart commitments to the ‘public good’, favourable time off from work, agreeable wives and husbands. The prize isn’t half bad either – just under $90,000 per annum; fame and glory; your mug shot on the hallowed walls and of course the opportunity to ram your (and Newton’s) agenda through with support from your allies. Sitting up on high you can squash debate so easily; you can rule anybody at any time out of order; you can prevent residents from addressing council; you can dismiss public questions as harassment; you can speak to the press and promulgate more spin; you can have your picture in the Glen Eira news innumerable times; you can, in short, rule the roost.

Or you have the real opportunity to return Glen Eira to what it should be – a place of respect for individuals, especially the public, and to oversee the change in corporate culture. We do not hold out much hope for this option if the blue corner maintains its current position.

Gazing into our crystal ball, the numbers are probably evenly split. We doubt that Pilling will stand if Magee does, and vice versa – this would only dilute their already limited power base. Lobo is the lynch pin. His vote is vital in breaking the Mexican stand off. Will he again stand with the gang and vote for Hyams? Will he resort to his former self and break with his new found friends? We do feel sincere sympathy for him – the pressure must be enormous. In a very real sense the future of good governance rests with him.

 

« Previous Page — Next Page »