This is an exceedingly long post but, we believe that residents should have some knowledge of what goes on in Council chambers. Tonight had all the hallmarks of a classic farce – ludicrous, stage-managed, confusing, and full of sound and fury but achieving bugger all! The most important items on the agenda (the two development applications) were brushed off in the space of 20 minutes, yet item 9.5 (Agreement between Ajax & Caulfield Bears footy clubs) went on and on and on interminably. It’s really good to know that these councillors have really worked out their priorities. When developments which impact so severely on people’s lives can only receive the minimum of attention and a garbled talkfest so dominates, then residents are in real trouble.
It should also be noted that Magee in his request for a report to move the skate park at Bailey Reserve (right next door to GESAC) to another part of the park, also suggested that this area be turned into additional car parking space. We suggest that perhaps Council can forget the whole idea of Bailey Reserve being a mini-park and turn the whole area into a car park. That should service GESAC sufficiently!
Item 9.5
Readers will remember that this issue has been discussed ad nauseum by council and involved Ajax’s alleged financial offer to the Bears to vacate Princes Park so that Ajaz Seniors would receive the ground allocation.
Moved Magee, seconded Pilling
That the clubs give council a copy of the agreement and that when council receives it it will be treated as confidential
MAGEE: Started off by saying that this is really ‘to get all the facts straight’ and to ‘move on’. Said that he had some doubts ‘in my mind’ as to what the agreement ‘had in it’. He wanted to ‘move on’ as well so the clubs should provide this agreement ‘in its actual true form’….’so we can digest it’….’and make decisions’ once we have ‘all the knowledge of what happened in the past’. Saw this as an ‘opportunity to clear the air’ and to answer the questions of whether this is ‘all above board’. This is then the chance for everyone to ‘say of course it is’.
PILLING: Said that this is the opportunity to ‘put in place a transparent process’. Said that the confidentiality clause should allay the clubs concerns about the agreement being made public so that it will be ‘seen within Council’. Reiterated that council has to be ‘transparent’…’it does things the proper way’. This will lead back to a ‘good working relationship’ with the clubs.
LIPSHUTZ: Saw no need for council to have the document ‘whatsoever’. Said that the clubs are ‘moving on’; that they are ‘tenants’ and that ‘whatever tenants do between themselves is none of our business’ if there’s no impact on Council. Since the clubs can’t sell anything like allocations because it’s council that decides this, therefore they don’t have an impact on Council. Said that rumours had got out about one club ‘refurbishing’ the pavilion and said that this can’t be done ‘because council does that’. He didn’t see ‘where this is going to go’. If they had acted improperly then he saw this as ‘an issue for their own league’…..’if council policy’ then have to find this out. Clubs have now cancelled the agreement and therefore ‘we have nowhere to go’….this…’leads nowhere’. Said that if the motion is passed then this could apply to every club every agreement and that’s ‘ridiculous’. Said that the ‘good working relationship’ could be ‘damaged by this motion’. Said that if the motion gets up that it should be confidential under Section 89(2) of the Local Government Act. If the motion is lost then he’s got an alternate motion.
PENHALLURIACK: Said that the clubs have confirmed in writing that the ‘agreement has been cancelled, null and void, no longer exists’ ….’so what are we seeking?……’personal vendetta against the Caulfield Bears or against the Ajax Football Club’. Said that the paper ‘won’t tell us anything except a little bit of history’. Stated that there had been a meeting at council last night and the paper was read by three councillors and 2 other councillors refused to read it. Couldn’t understand this and said that ‘we’re simply muckraking’….’why council should dredge through history like this….’there is no advantage to anybody’. No one will benefit from seeing the paper but maybe the ‘ego of somebody will be boosted’. The paper is ‘null and void’ and hasn’t got anything at all to do ‘with council’. Went on to say that ‘confidentiality means nothing’. It can be overcome via an FOI application and leaks. Said that if the motion is lost he will move a motion that ‘council takes no further action’
FORGE: Said that she attended last night’s meeting and read the agreement and that ‘there was absolutely nothing wrong with it’. Agreed with Penhalluriack and that there’s ‘no suspicion’ about the parties involved.
TANG: Said that he had letters from the clubs that were given to councillors at last night’s meeting and wanted to quote from them. Asked Hyams whether the letters were intended to be given to all councillors. Hyams answered ‘yes’. Read out bits from the letters. First was from Ajax which said that the agreement was from the 27th January about ground allocations and that ‘at all times’ this was subject to council’s approval. Admitted that the club acknowledge that ‘at this point in time’ that council wouldn’t agree to their allocation to Princes Park as a result of the agreement. The Bears were ‘also suffering’ in their relationship with council. The letter then went on to state that the clubs were ‘terminating the agreement’. The second letter said that they were willing to ‘provide a copy of that agreement’ as long as it remained confidential. The letter went on to say that all ‘allocations are subject to Council’s approval’. The letter also stated that Koornang park required some work and that Ajaz was ‘prepared to assist’ but only if council approved. Finally the letter affirmed that ‘no payments had been made’. (time extension) Tang said that the dates were important because it was the 4th November that the Bears let council know that the facilities needed upgrading and that Ajax was willing to pay. Tang said that this is a ‘significant point’ that hadn’t been considered previously by councillors and he didn’t know why they hadn’t received this information. As a result he thought that it was important that the agreement now be ‘seen in a different light’ and that council should ‘discourage clubs from entering’ into such agreements. Admitted that clubs have their own ‘motivations’ in getting the best grounds, or even allocations, and they’re doing thej right thing if they ‘bring it to council’s attention’. It is now ‘moving from a sinister event to an unfortunate agreement’. So council needs to ‘fully understand’ and therefore they need to see the agreement and supports Magee’s motion. Accepted the need for confidentiality and suggested that Magee amend his motion so that it conforms with the specific clauses of the Local Government Act on this area.
LOBO: said that they already had a resolution at last council meeting to see the agreement. Said he was ‘surprised why that agreement was not shown to all councillors’ so they could ‘study’ it and then ‘ask our officers for a report’.
HYAMS: Hyams admitted that he ‘chose not to read the document’. Said this was because of the previous motion asking clubs for the agreement and that he and Pilling were uncomfortable since the agreement ‘hadn’t been given (to them) in accordance with the resolution’. Since he was ‘representing council’ it was important that he only accepts it ‘under the terms that council had asked for it’. Agreed with Tang that ‘it’s not sinister….but something we would seek to discourage’. Understood why clubs wanted confidentiality especially since there was no ‘context’ and ‘might be used against them’ since there had already been ‘negative posts’ on a sporting blog and he also ‘understood why it may not have been appropriate to offer money to upgrade council facilities’ even though it goes on in other municipalities. Said that even in Glen Eira one cycling club had put money in to ‘upgrade’ the veladrome but ‘we at the moment prefer that we don’t do anything’ because it might create the impression that they could have greater tenure if they put money in. admitted that ‘we roll over the allocations regularly but we don’t want clubs to take that for granted’. Supported the motion and that it be kept confidential but that the motion ‘needs a bit of work before I can support it’.
BURKE READ OUT THE MOTION
Hyams asked for extension of time. Said that the question now was whether the letter read by Tang ‘should be incorporated’ into the minutes. Asked Magee if he would accept this amendment that the clubs hand over the agreement ‘for council to retain’ and it would be confidential under section 89 (2)(h) and that the letters be incorporated into the minutes.
MAGEE said that he wanted the word Senior put in. Said he was happy.
FORGE: started by saying that at yesterday’s meeting
HYAMS interrupted saying she’d already spoken to the motion. Forge then said that she’s got a question.
FORGE asked whether the copy of the agreement would be ‘retained’ by council ‘or given back’ to the clubs? Said that they were ‘quite adamant that they wanted that document back’.
LIPSHUTZ: said he wanted to move an amendment. Tang said that there wasn’t an amendment on the floor. Hyams said he asked Magee a question and Magee agreed to the amendment. Lipshutz said that his amendment would be that instead of the word ‘retain’ the word ‘sight’ be used.
Magee ‘couldn’t accept that’. Penhalluriack seconded Lipshutz’s amendment.
LIIPSHUTZ: Said the clubs were worried that the agreement would ‘go out in the public domain’ through FOI or leaked. Went on to say that if council is worried then the first thing that has to happen is that council ‘look at the agreement’ and see if it is ‘sinister, or unfortunate, or something else’. If it’s ‘sighted by council’ and they decide that nothing’s to be done then ‘that’s the end of it’. If council decides that the ‘agreement is inappropriate’ and sanctions should be applied council can do that. Was worried for the welfare of the 2 clubs ‘and their reputations’.
PENHALLURIACK: Said he doesn’t like the whole thing and that as a council they are trying ‘to destroy the 2 presidents’ and the clubs. ‘there is no need for us to see it’…it’s not an agreement anymore, it’s been cancelled….it doesn’t exist’. ‘People who are supporting this motion haven’t even seen it’. It’s going to be in the minutes and lengthy and ‘other muck-raking as well which is just not necessary’…’a storm in a teacup’. Didn’t know why council is debating this ‘when we’ve got a budget of over $100 million’….’we’re running a big business’ and spent so much time on this over sporting clubs who either don’t want to give us the agreement or are ‘embarrassed’ by the agreement and who ‘don’t trust us to keep it confidential’…I don’t blame them’ because the council ‘does tend sometime to leak’. Reiterated the argument about FOI. Said it’s like a business transaction and therefore council shouldn’t be asking for it. ‘What temerity we have’ to go to clubs and ask for a ‘private agreement’…’I am disgusted’. Went on to say that ‘no-one has given me a good reason to see this document’.
PILLING: ‘this is about transparency…..proper process’…’we’re a thorough transparent council’ and this shouldn’t ‘be tolerated’. ‘This is about proper process, proper transparency’.
HYAMS: said that he didn’t suggest the letters go in the minutes ‘to damage the clubs in anyway’ and that the letters ‘set the record straight’ that there is no agreement now.
PENHALLURIACK interrupted and said that he had said that the letters would only add to the turmoil. Didn’t think there was ‘anything wrong with the letters themselves’
HYAMS: thanked him and said that ‘normally you wait for someone to finish talking before you interrupt them’. Asked Lipshutz that if council ‘sights’ the document whether this refers to councillors and officers or just councillors.
LIPSHUTZ: answered councillors and officers
HYAMS: asked Newton that if council receives the agreement whether under the Public Records Act, council ‘is obliged to retain the document’?
NEWTON: Basically stated that the resolution from last council meeting was not a resolution of officers but of council. There is a resolution and if council wants to ‘retain this document’ then a resolution is required.
Hyams then began to study the Local Law to see if Lipshutz can sum up on an amendment.
MAGEE then asked for the amendment to be read out again.
THE AMENDMENT WAS PUT AND LOST
Hyams then went back to study the Local Law to see if a division could be called on an amendment after Lipshutz asked for one. The answer was ‘no’.
The original motion was back on the agenda.
MAGEE: Said he doesn’t know a thing about the Caulfield Bears and had received emails from one club and talked to presidents. He wasn’t interested in muckraking and that wasn’t his intention. His intention was to ‘look at this as an auditor’ and how could council ‘make decisions on a letter they hadn’t sighted’. Can’t ignore the fact that clubs are aware that ‘one club offered another club $170,000 to vacate’ a ground ‘we owe it to both Ajax and the Caulfield Bears to set this record straight’ but ‘by keeping all this quiet’….’the document will be retained by council’ as a council document. Said he’d never leak the document and that he wants to see it and ‘would like an officers’ report’. Neither club has acted ‘inappropriately’. They acted ‘silly’. ‘Grants in Glen Eira are not up for sale’. ‘we don’t know what that $170,000 was for; we haven’t seen the agreement’. It mightn’t say this and be merely a cash offer. Said that ‘thousands and thousands’ of clubs and kids don’t have allocations and that ‘allocations need to go to clubs that are already there’. (time extension). ‘Not about being vincictive…..it’s about transparency’. Ajax has got their community day and another team were ‘denied because they went through the right process….they asked….wasn’t an allocation available’. Yet this team accepted the decision. ‘If we see the document then I…would be able to make a decision’.
LIPSHUTZ: had a question for Magee. Not allowed.
MOTION PUT.
FOR – MAGEE, PILLING, TANG, HYAMS, LOBO
AGAINST – LIPSHUTZ, FORGE, PENHALLURIACK
THIS ITEM LASTED ABOUT THREE QUARTERS OF AN HOUR!
Glen Eira Debates 