Performance Review & Contract of Employment – Deputy Chief Executive Officer

9. OFFICER’S REPORTS 

9.6 CONFIDENITAL REPORTS 

9.6.2 Performance Review & Contract of Employment – Deputy Chief Executive Officer 

 

NO:  COUNCIL DATE: 25 May, 2015
REPORT DATE: 8 May, 2015
LOCATION/ADDRESS: N/A APPLICANT: N/A REPORT APPROVED BY THE A/CEO: Graeme Simpson

Summary: Commissioner to open the meeting after reviewing the Deputy Chief Executive Officer Performance Review and Contract of Employment.
Statutory Environment: Local Government Act 1995 – Part 5 – Division 2 – Section 5.23:  
(2)  If a meeting is being held by a council or by a committee referred to in subsection (1)(b), the council or committee may close to members of the public the meeting, or part of the meeting, if the meeting or the part of the meeting deals with any of the following —   (a) a matter affecting an employee or employees

Voting Requirements: Commissioner’s Voting Support  



AGENDA – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 25 MAY 2015

Suitably qualified or in over her head? 

Below is the position description for the DCEO position 

Vacancy for:  Deputy Chief Executive Officer Closing Date: 04-01-2011    

DEPUTY CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER  

Applications are invited for the above position with the Shire of York under 3-5 year employment contract.  

The position offered is in the $90,604 to $100,604 cash component, salary package range is $130,661 to $143,349.  

Further details may be obtained by contacting Gail Maziuk on 08 9641 2233 08 9641 2233 or email records@york.wa.gov.au.  

Applications clearly endorsed 'Deputy CEO' will be received at the Shire of York, PO Box 22, York, WA, 6302 up to 4.00pm on Tuesday, 4th January, 2011. 

Mr Ray Hooper CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER   

Ph: 9641 2233 Fax: 9641 2202 PO BOX 22 YORK WA 6302   

POSITION DESCRIPTION 

Contract  

1. TITLE: Deputy Chief Executive Officer 

2. LEVEL: Contract Position 

3. DEPARTMENT/SECTION: Governance, Finance, Administration & Community Services  

4. POSITION OBJECTIVES:  

4:1 Objectives of Position: 

4.1.1 Manage the Governance, Finance, Administration and Community Development Sections of Council in an effective, efficient and accountable manner for the benefit of the community; 

4.1.2 Oversee and monitor the finances of Council including the timely and accurate preparation and adoption of Plans for the Future, Budgets, Annual Statements, Business Plans and any other statutory requirements; 

4.1.3 Provide quality advice and direction to Council on investments, financial trends, resource requirements and other matters affecting the finances of Council; 

4.1.4 Provide advice and direction on the community development needs of the community; 

4.1.5 Manage the administration section of Council to achieve the highest levels of efficiency and effectiveness; 

4.1.6 Provide advice and direction to Council on all matters impacting on the good governance of the district; 

4.1.7 Assist and guide Council in providing community leadership through forward planning; 

4.1.8 Liaise and communicate with Council to facilitate the good governance of the district; 

4.1.9 Liaise and consult with the community on all matters related to Community Development;
4.1.10 Provide advice and input into the strategic planning process to assist with planning for the future of York 

4.1.11 Develop a corporate approach within the Senior Officer Group towards budget development and ensure that effective financial controls operate within and across each functional area.   

5. REQUIREMENTS OF THE POSITION:  

5:1 Skills: 

5.1.1. Highly developed public, relations and interpersonal skills 

5.1.2. Highly developed verbal and written communication skills 

5.1.3. Developed team management and leadership skills 

5.1.4. Highly developed time management skills 

5.1.5. Highly developed decision making skills 

5.1.6. Highly developed problem solving and conflict resolution skills 

5.1.7. Developed negotiation skills  

5:2 Knowledge: 

5.2.1. Detailed knowledge of the Local Government Accounting requirements 

5.2.2. Sound working knowledge of Local Government Law and meeting procedures 

5.2.3. Detailed knowledge of Councils¡¦ organisational structure and function 

5.2.4. Sound knowledge of the Equal Opportunities Act and Occupational Health, Safety and Welfare (OHSW) legislation 

5.2.5. Sound knowledge of human resource issues 

5.2.6. Working knowledge of Corporate Strategic Planning 

5.2.7. Working knowledge of computer systems and software awareness 

5.2.8. Working knowledge of community development. 

5:3 Experience: 

5.3.1. At least three (3) years experience in senior management position within Local Government or the commercial or public sectors with an understanding of the workings of Local Government 5.3.2. At least three (3) years experience in financial management and budget processes in an organisation.  

5:4 Qualifications and / or Training 

5.4.1 Hold at least an associate diploma in local government, business administration or management of a minimum of five (5) years experience at a senior management level 

5.4.1 Hold a current class Motor Drivers Licence.  

6. KEY DUTIES/RESPONSIBILITIES 

6.1.1. Overall responsibility for financial management, including the ability to provide appropriate reports, statements at designated times to Council  

6.1.2. Responsibility for the supervision and management of Finance, Administration and Community Service Staff in accordance with Councils¡¦ / organisational structure 

6.1.3. Attend all Council and Committee meetings as required 

6.1.4. Provide guidance and direction in line with Council policies for the implementation of Councils¡¦ Community Development Programs being: Economic Development Recreation Management Library Services Welfare Facilities Ranger Services Youth Services 

6.1.5. Oversee the preparation of Councils' Annual Budget, Annual Statements and Plan for the Future in liaison with the City of Canning. 

6 1.6. Organise Council and Committee Agendas and Minutes to be prepared and distributed promptly 

6.1.7. Organise and administer Local Government Elections in the capacity of Deputy Returning Officer 

6.1.8. Organise staff training and undertake professional development to maintain a team of skilled and motivated personnel 

6.1.9. Coordinate Workplace Injury Management 

6.1.10 Act as the Council¡¦s Public lnterest Disclosure Officer Process road closures, boundary realignments, road name changes in accordance with legislation. 

6.1.11 Responsible for the supervision, training and management of the Administration Department.

6.1.12 Assist with the elections. 

6.1.13 Review and keep updated all position descriptions and job specifications.

6.1.14 Co-ordinate leave and other entitlements to ensure staffing requirements are met. 

6.1.15 Conduct staff appraisals as designated by the Chief Executive Officer and Deputy Chief Executive Officer. 

6.1.16 Oversee Council¡¦s Record Management system and improve the Records Management Plan. 

6.1.17 Assist with recruitment of administration staff. 

6.1.18 Co-ordinate the I.T functions of Council with the assistance of external contractors. 

6.1.19 Preparation and submission of statutory annual returns, eg. FOI, Equal Opportunity, Corruption and Crime Commission etc. 

6.1.20 Provide secretarial services to Council Committees as directed. 

6.1.21 Act as Council¡¦s Freedom of Information Co-ordinator, Equal Opportunity Coordinator and Public Interest Disclosure Officer. 

6.1.22 Act as the Shire of York¡¦s Grievance Officer.  

7. GOALS 

Key Result Areas and associated strategies and actions will be varied by the employee and employer annually during the term of the contract. Specific annual targets will be established during the annual review process. Upon the commencement of employment these Key Result Areas will reflect.   

Leadership and Governance Provide leadership which is proactive, open and accountable and encourages community and staff consultation and participation Regular reports are presented to Council on its strategic plan, associated budget and significant projects Sound financial controls are in place to gauge the efficiency and effectiveness of services.  

Unique Heritage and Environment Conserve and enhance the natural features, built environment and cultural heritage of the Shire and region.  

Economic Prosperity Support an environment which encourages, promotes and facilitates sustainable business development, fosters investment opportunities and compliments the unique lifestyle of the Shire and region.  

Social Support and Development Encourage opportunity for quality social and community development in health, leisure, education and human services which supports individual and community well being Promote sustainability principles.  

Assets and Infrastructure Provide assistance, advice and support in the development of sustainable assets and infrastructure which are functional and aesthetically appropriate Identify and promote economic development opportunities for Council.   

8. PERFORMANCE CRITERIA  

Foster and Maintain Positive Public Relations Performance Indicators Demonstrate a customer service focus Effective relationships with business and community organisations, other local, state and federal authorities and departments are maintained Promote active participation and interaction with other local governments and authorities to develop and use joint services and functions and to generate mutual operational and economic advantages.  

Provide support to the CEO on Policy and Legislation Performance Indicators Professional and objective advice provided Councillors briefed on their statutory and community roles when required Advice by employees is monitored and tested to adherence to legislation and Council strategies and policies.  

Assist in Monitoring the Operations of the Council Performance Indicators Sound administrative and financial controls are in place to gauge the efficiency and effectiveness of services Council decisions and communication arising from decisions of Council are promptly dealt with Statutory and policy obligations are met and decisions made by officers, comply with the approved delegations of Council Objectives and strategies linked to the strategic plan are developed for consideration by Council Meeting agendas and minutes are prepared promptly and reports are factual, accurate and impartial with due regard to sustainability implications and policy Council statutes and local laws are reviewed and enforced.  

Assist in the Formulation, Co-ordination and Review of Effective Corporate Planning and Strategies Performance Indicators Strategic and community plans are regularly reviewed Objectives, strategies and actions from the strategic plan are implemented Regular reports are presented to Council on its strategic plan, associated budget and significant projects.   

9. ORGANISATIONAL RELATIONSHIPS 

9:1 Responsible to: The Chief Executive Officer 

9:2 Supervision of:  Finance Staff Administration Staff Ranger Recreation Staff Youth Officer Events Co-ordinator (if appointed) Grants Officer (if appointed)  

9:3 Internal and External Liaison: Internal  President and Councillors Chief Executive Officer Senior Management Team Other Staff and employees  External  Ratepayers General Public Government Departments Community Groups Creditors/Debtors Local Government Authorities  

10. EXTENT OF AUTHORITY: Operates under limited direction of the Chief Executive Officer within established guidelines, procedures and policies of Council as well as statutory provisions of the Local Government Act and other legislation.  

11. SELECTION CRITERIA: (All requirements are essential unless otherwise stated)  

Leadership Proven leadership at the Senior Officer or Executive level, with the demonstrated intellectual capacity to develop an understanding of all legislation impacting on Local Government. 

High level Strategic Planning skills and knowledge of corporate management requirements Demonstrated understanding of the application of contemporary human resource management principles to ensure the continued training and development of employees abilities. 

Awareness of new innovations and legislative reforms relative to Local Government. Demonstrated capacity to identify entrepreneurial opportunities that maximise the return on Council assets.  

Policy Implementation High Level knowledge of public policy issues as they impact on Local Government.  

Governance and Compliance Demonstrated capacity to administer the Local Government Act and other associated Legislation Proven provision of professional and timely advice to support Council in making the most informed decisions on behalf of constituents Extensive knowledge of statutory, legal and contractual obligations.  

Financial Results Demonstrated experience in the area of financial management, including budget control.  

Community Development Considerable experience in dealing with the public and community Considerable experience in encouraging, promoting and facilitating sustainable business development and fostering investment opportunities Demonstrated knowledge in the management of natural features, built environment and cultural heritage. Applied knowledge of sustainability and its application of the economic, social and environmental principles at an organisation level.  

General Management Excellent interpersonal and communication skills Degree/Diploma in Management, Business and/or Public Sector Administration discipline or experience that is accepted as comparable.  

Present Occupant: Date Appointed:  

Prepared by: ______________ Date Issued:________  

Supervisor: ______________  

Approved by: ______________ No. of sheets: 9  

Reviewed: ________________ Date: ________ 

Conditions of Employment The position of Shire Deputy Chief Executive Officer is offered as a full time position under a contract of employment for a three (3) or five (5) year term under the following conditions:  

Salary Salary Cash component $ 90,000 - $101,000 Occupational Superannuation (9%) $ 8,100 - $9,090 Local Government Superannuation (5%) $ 4,500 - $5,050 (Subject to staff matching contribution) 

Staff Housing  Rental Subsidy $ 5,200 (In Council Provided House) 17.5% Leave Loading (To be part of cash) $ 1211 - $1359 Uniform Allowance $ 250 Water & Shire Rates Staff House $ 1,400 Professional Development $ 3,000 Telecommunication Allowance $ 1,000 Vehicle (Unrestricted Private Use) $ 16,000 TOTAL $130,661 - $143,349  

Annual Leave Four (4) weeks per year with leave loading to be built into the cash component. To be negotiated.  

Sick Leave Under the conditions of the Local Government Officers Award and the Shire of York Collective Workplace Agreement 50% of unused sick leave will be paid out on termination of employment.  

Long Service Leave As per the Local Government Long Service Leave Regulations.  

Hours of Duty Minimum of 38 hours per week Monday to Friday. This position requires the person to work the hours necessary to meet the requirements of the position. No overtime is payable in this position. 19 Day Month A 19 day month applies to this position with unused rostered days off being paid out each six month period (30th June and 31st December) unless accruals are approved by the Chief Executive Officer.  

Service Pay Service pay is due and payable in accordance with the Shire of York Collective Workplace Agreement.  

Safety Bonus A six monthly bonus is payable to all staff in accordance with the Shire of York Collective Workplace Agreement.  

Salary Increases A 4.5% increase shall be applied to all staff payments on the 9th May each year for the term of the Shire of York Collective Workplace Agreement. National wage increases also apply to the position.  

Vehicle A fully maintained vehicle shall be provided for the position with unrestricted private use by the staff member.  

Contract of Employment A contract based on the WALGA model will be used for this contract of employment for a three (3) or five (5) year term.  

Staff Housing A new four bedroom house is available for the position at a subsidised rental of between $100 - $150 per week. The Shire of York will pay local government and water rates and water usage for this residence. 

Telecommunications A mobile phone will be provided for the position for office use and $1000 per annum will be payable for broadband and telephone use at the residence.  

Professional Development Up to $3000 per annum will be available to the staff member for attendance at engineering related conferences and seminars and other professional development associated with the position.  

Relocation Expenses A payment of up to a maximum of $3,000 shall be payable to the employee of appropriate invoices/receipts on the following basis: (a) 50% of incurred and supported costs on commencement of employment. (b) 50% of incurred and supported costs on completion of six months service.  

Clothing Allowance A uniform allowance of $250 per annum shall be payable.  

Other Conditions of Employment As per the Local Government Officers Award, Shire of York Collective Workplace Agreement and any Council employment policies in place from time to time. 

 

THE HISTORY CHANNEL James Plumridge

And all our yesterdays have lighted fools

The way to dusty death…

Shakespeare: Macbeth, Act V Sc. 5

Beware, monitor lizards on the loose

After the April Council meeting, I had a brief conversation with Commissioner Best.

He told me among other things that the blog is being monitored at the request of the Shire’s insurers’ lawyers. Every contribution is printed out and passed on to them. (Why can’t they do the job themselves?  Don’t they have access to the Internet?)

I have no idea what this process is meant to accomplish.  I can’t see that it would benefit the Shire’s insurers, the Shire or ratepayers in any way. 

Perhaps the plan is to intimidate contributors like David Taylor and me, who identify themselves by subscribing their names, with the veiled threat of legal action.  If so, it isn’t going to work.

Anonymous and pseudonymous contributors can’t be traced.  Even the Blogmaster can’t trace them.  So friends, if the thought of being pursued by monitor lizards worries you, ignore my previous requests to identify yourselves, and take cover behind fancy confected names.

‘Offensive’ comments on the blog

During our conversation, the Commissioner objected to comments posted on the blog that mention unfavourably members of Shire staff.  He also suggested the blog should go a bit easier on certain former Shire presidents.

Personally, I find it difficult to summon up much sympathy for councillors who abused their position and influence to bully and intimidate residents. Nor do I have tears to shed for Shire officials who carried out enthusiastically and apparently without question the more dubious instructions of a former chief executive.

These days the Nuremberg defence—‘I was only obeying orders’—simply won’t do.

More than once, I’ve asked my fellow bloggers not to give vent to rabid personal abuse—not on the blog, anyway.

I pointed out to the Commissioner that the verbal free-for-all that occasionally ran riot during the early days of the blog is now pretty well (though not entirely) a thing of the past.  The quality of comments has improved dramatically over recent months, with contributors these days generally more inclined to argue a case than engage in strident abuse.

From the beginning, this blog has acted as a bastion of free speech.  By all means, though, let’s exercise restraint where decency, fairness and objectivity require it.

Restraint—or self-censorship?

All the same, there’s a fine line between restraint and self-censorship. 

Where elected office holders or public officials are associated with wrongful or corrupt behaviour that has had a negative impact on the lives and welfare of others, they must expect to be identified, criticised, held up to scorn and pelted, figuratively speaking, with rotten tomatoes.

At first blush, it’s hard to see why DLGC staff have shown themselves so keen to dismiss corrupt acts of the past—like dishing out jobs, contracts and other benefits to relatives and friends, falsifying public records, misallocating public funds, credit card ‘anomalies’, and using Shire employees to intimidate concerned residents—as ‘historical issues’ deserving only to be buried and forgotten.

They are well aware that some people still around have a strong personal interest in burying the truth about those ‘historical issues’.  They would also know, or strongly suspect, that there is evidence in the files and elsewhere of corruption, even of crime.  Yet, astonishingly, they insist that nothing should be done about those things and nobody compelled to account for them.  Why?

Never mind history, shroud truth in mystery

I surmise that this attitude has everything to do with their having been well acquainted with York’s ‘historical issues’—which frustrated residents reported to them over several years—but choosing to ignore them.  Thus they made themselves, in some sense, accessories to what went on and now have to keep that quiet.

According to DLGC probity guru Brad Jolly, in a letter dated 12 January 2015 to a local ratepayer, ‘…in 2013, circumstances did not exist that warranted making a recommendation to the Minister to issue a Show Cause Notice to the Shire of York Council’.

Either Mr. Jolly had spent several years living under a coconut shell, or he knew, when he wrote that, that what he was writing was untrue. 

He and his colleagues would have known in considerable detail of the very poor handling by Shire President Reid’s predecessors of council meetings and public question time.  They would have known that there there had been for many years substantial non-compliance with the record keeping requirements of the Local Government Act, the responsibility in the first instance, it should be noted, of the Shire’s then CEO Ray Hooper.

If they didn’t know, they were negligent.  If, as I believe, they did know, they were culpable.  Either way, they did nothing until prodded spitefully into action against Matthew Reid by their old friends Crs Hooper and Boyle and former CEO Ray Hooper, with Cr Hooper’s poodle Superduper tagging obediently behind.

They joined with those dignitaries in bearing false witness against Cr Reid, for example by accusing him of authorising the release of the Fitz Gerald Report (he didn’t) and of signing two purchase orders actually (and obviously) signed by then Acting CEO Keeble.  They also accused him of ‘standing down’ and ‘terminating’ CEO Hooper, when in fact, as they must have known, Mr. Hooper had ‘terminated’ himself (though not ‘with extreme prejudice’) by resigning.

Readers might be interested to know that Brad Jolly is the officer designated to handle our FOI application to the DLGC.  I’ve protested, but so far in vain.

‘The past is a foreign country’ but sometimes we have to go there

Implicit in the department’s thinking is the argument that because bad things have happened in the past, they should be of little or no concern to the present. 

That argument seems to have been the basis of the brief the Minister, acting on departmental advice, gave to Commissioner Best before sending him off, like a colonial officer of old, to subdue and tame the ‘sullen peoples, half-devil and half-child’ running wild in the streets of York and on the slopes of Mount Brown.  

It underwrites the department’s determination to flush our ‘historical issues’ down the nearest available loo.

Luckily for all of us, our law enforcement agencies operate differently.  If I had committed a string of burglaries several years ago but had only just been caught, what good do you think it would do me to tell the police and the magistrate they should forget about my felonious forays into other folks’ homes because time has elapsed and they are now merely ‘historical issues’? 

Where a community has been done over and ripped off by people who were supposed to take care of its interests, retribution against those most responsible is an essential precursor to recovery, reconciliation and revival.

It’s a sad fact of political life in a democracy that sometimes we miserable forelock-tuggers are betrayed by the very people we elect or appoint to rule over us. 

Whitecollar crime really is crime, on the same legal and moral plane as defrauding Centrelink, armed robbery or knocking down an old lady and stealing her purse.  It isn’t just a bit of fun, a game for privileged players. It’s deadly serious, and people who engage in it may eventually find themselves drawing the card that reads ‘Go directly to jail’.

THE FAMOUS FIVE ARE AT IT AGAIN......

Relax and enjoy a little light reading......this will put minds at rest.

Now that the month of May is upon us there can be no confusion, this is not

another 'April Fool' story, it really did happen and an extract from Shire

of York council minutes of 17 August 2009 is the embarrassing testimony.

For those potential 'bloggers' who have worried about being pursued to the end

of the earth for expressing a view - fear not - the 'negative use of the internet'

referred to in the Officer's Report from 2009 related to an alternative blog

site ('loosely' based on York townsfolk) which caused much discontent at the

time.

Needless to say, the ridiculous Council resolution recommending operation CSI

York, turned out to be a hopeless flop. In order to understand the mentality, we

have to borrow a phrase from 'four grand a week Graeme' - "No reasonable

thinking person" ...................!

What adds to the irony is that the 2009 blog is still alive and seriously kicking

in the realm of cyber space and comparatively speaking, its content really does

put our current effort in the Enid Blyton category of anti-social behaviour and

threats to the community.

Oh, what an adventure - raspberry pop and lashings of ginger beer all round!

MINUTES – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 17 August 2009

9. OFFICER’S REPORTS

9.2 ADMINISTRATION REPORTS

9.2.6 Anti-Social Behaviour

FILE NO:                             CS.NCS.11.1

COUNCIL DATE:            17 August 2009

REPORT DATE:             12 August 2009

LOCATION/ADDRESS: Shire of York

APPLICANT:                     N/A

SENIOR OFFICER:   Ray Hooper, CEO

REPORTING OFFICER: Ray Hooper, CEO

DISCLOSURE OF INTEREST: Nil

APPENDICES: Nil

DOCUMENTS TABLED: Nil

Summary:

Consideration needs to be given to a monetary reward system to combat incidences of vandalism, hooning, graffiti and anti-social behaviour.

OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

“That Council:

1. Authorise a payment of up to $2,000.00 to any person reporting an incident of criminal or anti-social behaviour which results in a conviction for the offence; and

2. Authorise the Chief Executive Officer to request the Court to impose a full cost recovery provision for any conviction for an offence arising from damage or destruction of Shire of York property or facilities.

RESOLUTION 170809

Moved: Cr Hooper        Seconded: Cr Lawrance

That an amendment be made to the Officers Recommendation with the addition of the following:

3. Authorise the CEO to seek immediate state and federal police intervention and support to trace, identify and prosecute any persons using the internet to defame, libel or denigrate without proof and substance any citizen or employee of the Shire of York.

Advice Note:

While realising that this may be difficult to enforce or enact, the Council believes it should strive to protect those who live and work in the Shire.                                                                             CARRIED (5/1)

The amended recommendation became the motion.

RESOLUTION 180809

Moved: Cr Lawrance            Seconded: Cr Randell

“That Council:

1. Authorise a payment of up to $2,000.00 to any person reporting an incident of criminal or anti-social behaviour which results in a conviction for the offence; and

2. Authorise the Chief Executive Officer to request the Court to impose a full cost recovery provision for any conviction for an offence arising from damage or destruction of Shire of York property or facilities.

3. Authorise the CEO to seek immediate state and federal police intervention and support to trace, identify and prosecute any persons using the internet to defame, libel or denigrate without proof and substance any citizen or employee of the Shire of York.

Advice Note: While realising that this may be difficult to enforce or enact, the Council believes it should strive to protect those who live and work in the Shire.                                   CARRIED (5/1)

REASON: The Officer’s Recommendation was amended to include the negative use of the internet as it was seen as another form of anti-social behaviour that the Council should seek to protect the community from.

Carried 5/1.......

The famous five being, Crs Hooper, Boyle, Lawrance, Randell and Fisher.

ONE MAN’S TROUBLE IS ANOTHER MAN’S TREASURE

York’s Politicus Annus Horribilus appears to be continuing unabated as 2015 happily chugs along.

We all know a major reason is an ineffectual and recalcitrant Minister for Local government and his merry band of misfits still denying York’s citizens their democratic right to have elected representatives. (Unfortunately this untenable situation may not cease in July 2015 when we were told it will.)

Just as importantly, many feel that York has not had a Chief Executive Officer or a council to meet what should be appropriate local government standards, or local community needs, this century. That is fifteen-years of enormous backward steps for one of the Australian mainland’s oldest inland towns-still in existence. Once famous for its major ‘Events’, it is now a non-event.

Enough has been said about Razor Ray Hooper. Since then we have had a new, startlingly ineffective local government administrative dilettante in Michael Keeble.

Not only was he here for six months too long, he had a disgusting “potty-mouth” and the remarkable ability to vacillate. That is twist and turn on a five cent piece in any direction he thought the wind was blowing. (This- being a gentle breeze wafting just for his benefit and best interest.)

Then a strange thing happened, Mr Keeble decided to denigrate the ability of his current administrative staff by saying, to his knowledge, not one of them had a tertiary qualification (of any description) to meet their job descriptions. 

He then selected the Deputy CEO, Tyhscha Cochrane, for a special rant claiming she was not good at her job, had made no reasonable attempt, in three years, to improve her knowledge of local government regulations through appropriate training, and was in charge of the Shire’s official communications library which was antiquated, inefficient and poorly structured. And he intended to shift her sideways to another position.

In an inordinately short time after this effort, Michael left the building, and York, hopefully never to be seen or heard from again.

Now his replacement, a Mr. Graeme Simpson from somewhere or other, has claimed his Deputy CEO, one and the same person, is an exemplary employee. And, by inference, any making of little boo-boos through repetitive data entry from what his predecessor stated was an inefficient database is not an uncomment error.

Unfortunately one person’s not uncommon error through repetitive data entry within a Local Government Council database can be another person’s tampering with, and possible falsification of, official Council documents.

Such a massive variation in the assessment of an employee by a different direct superior, in just a few months, beggars belief and once again puts the efficiency, effectiveness and credibility of Local Government Chief Executive Officers under the microscope. 

There is also the effectiveness of the WA Local Government Association (WALGA) in ensuring Local Government probity- and quality. 

The current Chairman of WALGA, Joondalup Mayor Troy Pickard, is allegedly a very close associate of the DLGC’s probity Uber-Spinmiester, Brad Jolly. In fact, some feel they are each other’s doppelganger.

Now here is an interesting bit. Press reports in 2014 said that Wayne Troy Pickard, as Mayor of Joondalup, was accused of a serious breach of the financial interest provisions of the Local government Act 1995. Reports suggested that Prima Facie evidence existed that Mayor Pickard had failed to comply with requirements under section 5.65 of said Act regarding proximity interest between Pickard and a third party.  

At her discretion, determined under section 5.116 of the ACT, the DLGC’s Director General, you guessed it, Jennifer Matthews, decided not to refer the Prima Facie evidence to the State Administrative Tribunal. That good news information for Mayor Pickard was forwarded on by the DLGC’s Executive Director, Sector Regulation and Support. You guessed right again, Brad Jolly.  Enough said!

Nowadays, for a Chief Executive Officer of a Rural Shire to perform to meet required demands, he or she should have the Wisdom of Solomon, the financial acumen of Nelson Rockefeller and the ‘visioning’ of Nostradamus. (A shire Council is a competitive business, in direct competition with other Shire Council’s to attract new ratepayers, new commercial investors and additional tourist numbers to name but a few areas of required generative growth.)

If the Shire of York’s Council or Chief Executive Officers’ have come even close to ticking any of these boxes over the past 15-years- you can line me up in front of a firing squad. What they have done is tried to attract retirees to a potentially collapsible retirement village, attempted to sell contaminated blocks of land to unsuspecting investors, sent the tourist industry to the wall and built a recreation and convention centre which may never be debt free.

A tiny select group of yokels did feel that a major Perth rubbish dump near the town was an  exciting, new, external commercial investment and the possibility of a bauxite mine near the York Racecourse was a once-in-a-lifetime business opportunity.

Maybe this was because there was the potential for a lucrative contract to assist in maintaining the fifty-or-so SITA trucks ploughing up and down the Great Southern Highway each day, or the chance to be a local board member of a Chinese-owned bauxite mining company. Who knows?

The politicized bureaucratic Gods from Perth have told the people of York to forget the issues of their councils past, smell the roses, and move forward to the tune of the Pied Pie-Baker of Byford, Tony Simpson, and his DLGC bureaucratic bungling band.

What I say to them is you cannot guarantee a positive future without ensuring that all the dirty linen of the past has been aired, cleansed and will not be soiled again. I suggest that neither Simpson- nor his DLGC can insure us against that happening.

I now make the following, personal request.

This is- upon their return to office, Councillors Matthew Reid, Denese Smythe, Pat Hooper and David Wallace immediately seek to employ a Chief Executive Officer outside the square, a person who has not been contaminated by being employed as a public servant, particularly under the current WA local government regime. This has happened in the past. (Neither WALGA or the DLGC should have any say in this matter.)

The person chosen should, preferably, be less than forty years of age, have a University Degree in Business Management and be offered a three-year contract only, where clearly defined Key Performance Indicators must be met in specified periods.

Any senior Shire of York staff member, employed prior to April 15, 2014, must immediately undergo a performance revue to ensure their past performance has met the fair and reasonable standards now required by the current Council and ensure that their qualifications and definable expertise meet their current, and past, job descriptions.

There should be no employment positions made available by Council that do not fulfil the specific needs of the York community. For the Shire of York to have a Human Resources Manager looking after its staff, when it cannot adequately communicate with, and does not have the respect of its ratepayers is a sick joke. York cannot afford such a macabre sense of humour.

Any new senior staff members employed by Council must have the tertiary qualification compatible with the advertised position and their resume must reflect at least three years satisfactory employment in a similar role.

With regard to any future involvement of York & Districts Community Matters in possibly disseminating propaganda on behalf of the current administration, this will be tempered by the fact that Mark Lloyd, its’ Editor and Publisher is not a journalist and therefore he should be fully aware of his limitations.

In the past Mr. Lloyd has sought my assistance on several occasions when threatened, in writing, by Ray Hooper. Mr. Lloyd was aware of my thirty-year involvement in the Australian media.
One particular instance was the publication of a cartoon caricature of Mr. Hooper depicting him in a similar vain, and garb, to Adolf Hitler. 

I provided Mr. Lloyd with a rebuttal which Mr. Lloyd published next to Mr. Hooper’s threatening, yet ridiculous diatribe. Mr. Lloyd published this rebuttal under his own name which I had no problem with. (Mr. Hooper’s response was deathly silence.)

In conclusion I am sure Mr. Lloyd is an astute business who understands the meaning and ramifications of his publication to be allowed ‘to be distributed, by post, as a newspaper’.

David Taylor.

NOTES FROM UNDERGROUND 8 James Plumridge

Incorporating Negativity Times, The Line-in-the-Sand Review, The Persona Non Grata Gazette and The Freedom from Information Record

You cannot hope to bribe or twist, thank God, the Aussie journalist…

Readers, I have discovered to my amazement that there may be important people in York who take this blog seriously. 

Let me explain.

A week or so back, I heard a rumour that the Shire has employed a journalist to help it counter the blog’s baleful influence over the minds of of its thousands of readers around the globe.

The rumour started up at Commissioner Best’s Strength of Community meeting on 22 April.  I’m told it was the Commissioner himself who set it going.   The journalist’s job will be, in the Commissioner’s words, ‘to report on all the wonderful things that are happening in York’. 

That’s good news.  The blog needs competition to keep it fit and trim and on its toes.

Before long, the rumour changed.   It now suggested that the Shire had entered into a clandestine arrangement with the proprietor of a local newspaper. According to this arrangement, the paper would become a twice-monthly bugle for the Shire in exchange for extra paid advertising.

In its latest version, however, the rumour has taken a sinister turn.  It suggests that whatever they may write on the Shire’s behalf, the Shire’s media hirelings have received instructions to deny us bloggers and other dissidents a right of reply.

Of course, we could and would reply in the blog.  But that wouldn’t have the same force as a response published in the same prestigious journal as the statement that has prompted the response.

With the Blogmaster’s blessing, I have more than once invited opposing voices to take advantage of the hospitality of these pages.  It’s always been my hope that Commissioner Best in particular would use the blog to contest in vigorous debate our views on Shire-based topics of the day. 

That invitation remains open.  I think it should be reciprocated.

Especially considering that we ‘passionate extremists’, along with other ratepayers, would be paying for the Shire’s bold venture into advertorial journalism.

If the rumour is true, and the venture does go ahead with dissent excluded, I suggest the newspaper in question should change its name to Pravda. There’s nothing like irony to give your propaganda a touch of class.

The Misfortunes of Ms B—the saga rolls on

 A fortnight ago, in Notes from Underground 7, I recounted the distressing tale of Ms B, who was promised a refund of interest charges and legal costs by a resolution of the Shire Council before it was suspended, only to see Acting CEO Simpson try to snatch her prize away by recommending that the Commissioner revoke the resolution.

To recapitulate, in October 2014 the Shire voted by resolution 111014 to refund to Ms B interest charges and legal costs totalling $3014.44 and a further $800 for legal costs.  This decision broadly accorded with recommendations made by the rates officer and then Acting CEO Michael Keeble.

The Shire paid the $800 to Ms B, but not the balance of $3014.44.

Enter Acting CEO Graeme Simpson, who in the briefing papers for the April Council meeting sought ‘the Commissioner’s approval…to revoke Council Resolution 111014’.  It‘s my understanding that only Council can revoke a Council resolution.  

The Commissioner is currently the Council.  Mr. Simpson’s recommendation should therefore have read ‘That the Commissioner resolve to revoke Council Resolution 111014’ or something like that.  I don’t believe the Acting CEO himself has the power to revoke the resolution, with or without the Commissioner’s approval. 

Leaving that aside, we have a clear issue of principle.  The York Shire Council promised to refund a sum of money to Ms B.  It hasn’t done so.  The Council that made that decision was an elected body. 

Commissioner Best, with all his talents and virtues, is not an elected official.  The Minister, acting on very dubious advice from his department, imposed him on us.  I do not say that as a reflection on Commissioner Best.

I’m beginning to realise that before taking up his role in York Mr. Best received mischievously inaccurate briefings from the Minister’s advisers.  One day, inshallah, the full story will be told.

As a matter of tact, decency and commonsense the Commissioner should give effect to resolution 111014 and refund the money outstanding to Ms B.  Otherwise, he should defer the matter for consideration by the next elected Council.  He should ignore Acting CEO Simpson’s recommendation altogether.

Since I wrote my previous article, further information has come to light that reinforces that advice.  Here’s a summary.

Ms B’s financial difficulties had resulted in a mortgagee sale of her property.  One issue complicating her situation vis-à-vis the Shire was whether or not the mortgagee, a well-known bank, had an interest in funds the Shire might repay her. 

On 23 October 2014, Acting CEO Michael Keeble wrote to the mortgagee’s solicitors asking if the mortgagee had an interest in funds amounting to $3014.44 that had been charged against the rates account for Ms B’s former property.  Notice that he does not say the amount in question related to rates, merely that it had been charged to the rates account.

In their reply dated 30 December 2014, the mortgagee’s solicitors confirmed their client had no such interest.

On 22 January 2015, Acting CEO Simpson wrote to Ms B to tell her the mortgagee had confirmed that ‘it does not have an interest in the issue of funds being paid to you’.  He added that he was now ‘seeking a ruling on the legality of the Council decision’ from the Department of Local Government.

On 5 February 2014, the Acting CEO wrote again to Ms B saying that he had ‘exhausted the research’ into her request for a refund of moneys in relation to her former property.  He alleged that money Ms B owed to the Shire was ‘equal to the outstanding debt that remained with the land’.

He also described the Council’s resolution to refund money to Ms B as ‘non-compliant’.  He does not say how it was non-compliant i.e. with what provision of any act or regulation.  He should have provided chapter and verse, so that Ms B could check for herself if his statement was true.

It turned out the Acting CEO was jumping the gun.  On 6 February 2015, Minister Simpson wrote to Ms B confirming the legality of the proposed refund.  He said his Department, in response to a letter dated 21 January from the Shire,

…had advised the Shire that it would be reasonable for the refund to be apportioned in proportion to the amount of interest and legal costs that you and the bank paid respectively.  However, if the [bank] confirms in writing that the full refund should be paid to you, then the Shire should refund the monies [sic] to you.  I note from the information that you provided, the [bank] has advised the Shire that the monies can be distributed to you and it is assumed that the Shire will now action this accordingly.

The Minister goes on to say that he and his department can’t direct the Shire, so Ms B had better continue talking to the Acting CEO.

We may wonder why the matter didn’t end there, with a payment being made to Ms B as authorised by the former Council and approved by the Minister.  We may also wonder why the Shire continues to devote so much time and energy to obstructing Ms B’s attempts to obtain what the legitimate Council had promised her.  

It’s now three months since the Minister said it was OK for the money to be paid. The Shire’s efforts to date to avoid paying Ms B must have cost at least as much as the money owed.

The answer may lie not with CEO Simpson but with one or more of his ‘exemplary employees’.  It has to be said that Ms B is an outspoken, sometimes combative individual. I’m told she has a talent for upsetting officialdom.  It is possible she has alienated somebody who dislikes her intensely and is in a position to pull the Acting CEO’s strings.  By all accounts, that is not an unlikely scenario and would not be a first for the Shire of York.