NO MERRY XMAS AT WHITE GUM AIR PARK- but maybe a better New Year.

A multi-million dollar tourism development in the Avon Valley suffered a tragic setback just a month before Christmas

In November, Gordon Marshall, one of the proponents of a bold plan to bring two retired Boeing 737-200 airliners to White Gum Air Park, near York, died in an aircraft hanger on the property.

Mr. Marshall was White Gum Air Park’s senior flight instructor,  a Director of Sky Sports Flying School and part of the park’s tourism development team.

One of the air park proposals is to attract tourists from all over Australia and the world to view and interact with these giants of the skies, relocated in a rural setting.

A similar project in Queensland, with a Boeing 747 displayed in the town of Longreach, is now attracting over 40,000 visitors each year.

Despite this- currently local government regulators appear intent on refusing to allow visitors to see the 737’s, on private property within the local government area and are also said to be attempting to police the future flight plan development for the air park.

However close friends and business colleagues are determined to ensure Mr. Marshall’s death and any local government bureaucracy will not prevent the project from going ahead as planned.

“The last 18 months has been pure hell for all of us with our dreams seemingly turning to dust. This is even though airport planning at a regional level is entirely at the discretion of the local airport owners, aircraft noise and traffic movements are not under the control of any local government and an already proven successful  business venture should not be prevented for no good reason” a friend said.  

‘‘Knowing Gordon for 15 years I’m sure  he would want us to continue, so we are all determined to make White Gum Air Park’s restored Boeing 737’s his legacy no matter what it takes’’.

The reaction of local businesses is also a stimulus for the plan to go ahead. Gordon was so passionate about this project he was the one who canvassed the majority of businesses in the town.

“We had 100% support”, a director of this tourism development said.

Fifty four local businesses support us and we had 316 individual signatures on a petition that has been sent to the Minister for Tourism. So one wing of one of the aircraft has already arrived at the property and plans are underway for the delivery of the other wing and then the fuselage in the coming months’’.

“Gordon would really like that’ he said.

David Taylor

Lifeline 13 11 14- beyondblue 1300 22 4636.

TIME WAITS FOR NO-ONE- especially SAT!

With their workdays filled with massive decisions on a better future for York, the Shire of York Administration sadly forgot to check the calendar and who they were really dealing with regarding the Allawuna Farm environmental debacle. 

Firstly the alleged ‘thumbs-up’ for the Shire’s position by the Minister for Planning, Rita Saffioti, could just as well have been the middle digit as she has every right to say it is actually none of her business and probably did- and certainly will when push comes to shove.

Never trust a wounded elephant or a politician. Her correspondence may have contained a few of the right platitudes but the underlying message could well have  been ‘Shire of York emptor’- York beware, meaning some due care is possible, but forget any responsibility.

And of course the government department that Ms. Saffioti takes care of, called the Department of Planning, contains the West Australian Planning Commission that appears to have been considered another potential friend by Chief Executive Officer, Paul Martin, and his executive crew.

Certainly this department claims to consider all interests including environmental and community wants. Unfortunately it also considers both economic and political needs so if Allawuna Farm is the cheapest alternative, the proponents have lobbied cleverly and the dump is not going to be in a Labour held seat- then guess what!

So read this shire sob story and weep:- and remember ‘implied’ means maybe yes-or maybe no and ‘not complied with’ means the shire did not do what it was supposed to do!

"Therefore, whilst the 42-day timeframe to provide the executed documents was not complied with, it was understood at the time that there was an awareness and implied level of consent to the Shire’s position within the correspondence between the Shire on the one hand, and the office of the Minister and the Western Australian Planning Commission on the other hand."

 A little assumption is a very dangerous thing.

And now the shire has to deal with a gaggle of quasi-intellectuals including lawyers, accountants, psychologists, architects and a midwife called the State Administrative Tribunal (SAT).

Would they care that WA has the worst earthquake tremors in the nation with  5.7 and 4.7 magnitude quakes in the South West this year. ( Both Meckering and York are in this area of instability. )

And given that these earthquakes were at a shallow depth they would probably tear the walls of a landfill site apart. Would this register on SAT’s Richter Scale?- probably not!

The fact that the most recent road death statistics show that 8 people have died and 32 seriously injured on Great Southern Highway between the Lakes and St. Ronan’s well between 2001 and 2016 probably does not register either.

Nor would the fact that heavy haulage movements will increase a massive 3.5 times, per day-existentially increasing the possibility of road trauma by a similar amount.

So good luck with SAT because there is probably not one environmentalist among them, not one of them lives in the Wheatbelt and maybe none of them has ever spent time in the town of York.

Cr Ferro sporting

No landfill attire 

Therefore congratulations go to President David Wallace and his team, some elected because of their  populist  stance against the rubbish tip at Allawuna and CEO Paul Martin whose trust in others is quite astounding.


David Taylor. 

ANOTHER DOG’S BREAKFAST

You should never let an arsonist play with matches or a local government make its own local laws which are already offences in common or criminal law.

Time and time again critics of local government tell administrators and councillors not to make up local laws, by-laws, statutes. principles and guidelines as a knee-jerk reaction to situations they have  no ability to handle, or should keep their noses out of.

Too often these laws such as the new Local Government Property Amendment Local Law 2018 are a cut-and-paste miasma with many questioning what T.F does it mean and who T.F will actually enforce it.

One absolute classic is in Division 4-Aerodrome (Airport) 5.6 regarding the restrictions the shire places on you when you and your beloved pooch arrive at Terminal 2, at York International Airport.

Your dog is not allowed unless-
(a) the animal is being air freighted from the aerodrome
(b) the animal has been air freighted to the aerodrome
(c) the person is authorised to do so by the local government (read Shire of York here.)
     (probably as a sniffer-dog to locate the stash of meth-amphetamines)

You can probably add goats, chooks, cattle and sheep to those not permitted. However there may be sniffer-pigs.

You could probably ask David Wallace or your local councillor- or your cheery administrator, such as Paul Martin, what airport are they referring to- and why do they have such a fetish about when, where, how, why and with what aeroplanes fly within shire airspace when it would be in everyone’s best interest if they left it to the Department of Civil Aviation and its determination of the Civil Aviation Act 1988. (Aeronautical airspace is Commonwealth property and the Shire of York owns bugger-all of it.)

In Part 1 Clause 1.2, the definition of ‘Boat” has been deleted. Possibly because most sane people would not put a boat in the murky depths of the Avon River in and around York.

The rest seems to be mainly targeting aquatic facilities such as the dilapidated York Swimming Pool and the Health Act so they can charge culprits $125 who are caught peeing in the pool- beyond a reasonable doubt.

‘Reasonable’ seems to be a Shire of York buzz-word.

So what is the Shire’s definition of a reasonable person and what could be considered by the shire of York as deleterious to the reasonable physical, mental or social well being of a person (whether reasonable or not)?

Is a reasonable person considered to be someone who is taking their medication to combat chronic schizophrenia or has their Post Traumatic Stress Disorder under control?

Who then is the arbiter of reasonable, Mr. Wallace? Mr. Martin? Or both- as each one is a signatory to the documents?

The Shire of York uses the word ‘nuisance’  to define a person who it thinks is not a reasonable person and who  needs to be fined at least $125 for their indiscressions and/or inappropriateness for the 13 prescribed offenses.

So the decision is if a person stands up at the next monthly Council Meeting and asks Paul Martin ‘has he found another job yet?’ is he being a nuisance? and be fined $125 under the clause ‘all other offences not specified’?

In 12 Part 3 Clause 3.9 in subclause (2) the Latin term ‘Mutatis Mutandis’ has been substituted for ‘as though it were a substitute for a permit’ because no-one at the Shire of York speaks Latin. 

It sounds very much like a deadly disease but Mutatis Mutandis sort of means something that is very much the same but with some differences. So ‘as though it were a substitute for a permit’ could mean it might be a substitute for a permit, but actually is not and is to be determined by the Shire of York at your expense.

The Shire of York is more than happy to call expenses ‘Costs’ which includes its administrative costs but does not explain what they actually are.

Just so you know the Xmas Grinch has arrived- you are not allowed to ‘ conduct or take part in any gambling game, contest or bet’ presumably on local government property so forget Bingo at the Town Hall and the staff Melbourne Cup Sweep in the Shire of York Offices.

Despite Same Sex Marraige becoming law. The Shire of York does not appear to have moved with the times.

Transgender people beware-the highly competent designated authority from the Shire of York may fine you $125 if this reasonable person believes you have acted unreasonably by ‘ entering a toilet block or change room facility of the opposite gender’ because you identify with a gender and he or she does not agree with your choice.

To cap it all off the Shire of York intends to fine you $125 for being under the influence of alcohol or a prohibited drug.

When , where, how and who is going to arrest you, breathalyse or drug test you to establish you are drunk or drugged to the eyeballs is unknown.

In the case of a drug offence- this could well be a criminal offense with penalties far greater than $125.

The most offensive offense listed is , Behaviour detrimental to property’. You can assume this means local government property and can be anything from graffiti to urinating on the grass in Peace Park. The fine is $350.

The reason for the re-jigging of an old act is obtuse. If it is anything to do with inappropriate behaviour on government rather than public property then there is an easy fix.

It is called an Indecent Act with intent to offend. The word public does not crack a mention.

Someone ‘screwed-up bigtime’!

COMMUTER COMPUTER GAMES

As the new Development Services Coordinator climbs behind the wheel of their fully serviced, mid-range shire vehicle they will have the absolute latest advance in in-car infotainment- the use of their own personal commuter. 

It is a must have- to go with the Bose speakers, leather trim and hands- free mobile phone.

Hang on! Let us rewind here. Commuter means someone who travels to and from a destination, usually from home to their place of work and back, by plane, train and automobile which can include bus, taxi and Uber.

The Development Services Coordinator will already be a commuter as soon as he or she starts to drive so they already have commuter use- so the vehicle comes with commuter use anyway.

Now you would think that senior Shire of York management, who are paid a fortune to get things right when they write anything would actually know the difference between a commuter and a computer.

You would also think if a mistake has been made in an official advertisement, featuring the shire insignia, for and on behalf of the Shire of York ratepayers, they would have enough pride in themselves to rectify that mistake?

No- not yet.

Maybe it would cost too much to change a word, maybe they just do not care when they make even small mistakes on your behalf or maybe they are going to use the vehicle as a Taxi after office hours

& HACKING.

However- the Shire of York may have a far larger problem on their hands than typographical errors.

It appears that a Confidential- Review Remittance document, flagged as being For Your Eyes only, has been transmitted to an unknown number of recipients, delivered from the Shire of York’s computer system, complete with a memorandum apparently sourced from Carly Rundle -Senior Planning Officer from planning@york.wa.gov.au

The text says ‘Carly Rundle has sent you a Remittance to review and sign’.

Remittance means sending money in payment or as a gift.

If you are game enough to try and open the Docsigned PDF to collect or send your remittance- it is 114.44 Kilobytes, which is reasonably large when you consider that the average email is just 10 Kilobytes.

Given that this remittance could be regarding an unknown number of private business planning proposals there is the potential for a shitstorm of private and confidential, commercially sensitive information to be bobbing around in the ether.

The Review Document tells the viewer “not to share this email, link or access code with others” yet the Shire of York may well have no-idea to whom and how many times it has been sent.

It gets worse- with a promotional blurb saying that the Digital Transaction Management platform apparently used by the shire is safe, secure and legally binding- and used across the globe’.

It would be hard to argue that it is safe and secure and legally binding is a real worry.

So you have a commuter that is actually a computer and a private & confidential local government computer system holding the important records of numerous ratepayers which appears to have been hacked. And, unfortunately, the number of recipients certainly does not appear to be confined to the Shire of York Planning Department’s email list.

In a recent article in the Sunday Times the Shire of York was described as an ‘often troubled organization’.  Maybe they got that right.

David Taylor.

ALDI versus YORK

As the York & District Co-Operative Ltd, whose Board is chaired by the brother of Shire President, David Wallace, registers a disturbing loss of earnings and asks for local support, the Shire of York appears to be flush with cash under the Wallace & Martin regime and is hiring like it has just won Lotto.

The latest acquisition will be a Development Services Coordinator with a salary of between $85,000 and $95,000 which actually equates, in salary packaging terms, to between $120,000 and $130,000.

It is assumed he or she will be answerable to the Executive Manager Infrastructure and Development Services, Darren Wallace (just a coincidence) whose package would be around $160,000 -give or take some loose change.

So around $300,000 is earmarked for development services in employee costs only- prior to any new development services being developed.

The shire vehicle supplied to the lucky candidate comes with Commuter Use- whatever that means- but it sounds good. But then maybe the shire employee, or contractor, tasked with creating the advertisement actually meant Computer Use and forget to check the text.

This does not sound like the Shire of York Administration even if it could not spell its own address, Joaquina Street, about six years ago during the Hooper years .

Also there may be some local concern with the potential ambiguity of the meaning of ‘Public’ in the legal sense?

So the Shire of York, as an alleged mechanism for its own protection, is creating the Local Government Property Amendment Local Law 2018; to restrain activities that could be reasonably argued to be inappropriate on or in local government property- in this case the Shire of York Offices.

This is highly commendable.

David Taylor.

LETTER TO DAVID TEMPLEMAN-MINISTER FOR LOCAL GOVERNMENT

Oct 8, 2018

Hon. David Templeman
Minister for Local Government

Cc David Wallace
President
Shire of York
Bcc Paul Martin
Chief Executive Officer
Shire of York

Your Ref:- SUNDAY TIMES- PAGE 26 "FLASHING CHARGES FOR SHIRE  OFFICIAL" Exclusive Tony Barrass (below)

I draw your attention to the aforementioned article published in the Sunday Times of Sunday October 7, 2018, placing on the public record incidents which occurred nearly twelve (12) months ago at the Shire of York Offices.

Former Shire of York  Executive Manager Infrastructure and Development Services, Paul Matthew Crewe, now faces seven (7) counts of Indecent Exposure apparently occurring between August 30 and October 11, 2017 against three (3) female employees, also one (1) count of Common Assault. (October 11, 2017, was just ten (10) days prior to the WA Local Government Elections.)

The act of wilful and indecent exposure in public is a criminal offence under the Criminal Code Sect: 203 with penalties of up to nine (9) months in prison and/ or a $9,000 fine as a Summary Conviction or two (2) years as a Criminal Conviction.

These alleged offences apparently occurred on seven occasions over a period of not less than five (5) weeks.

It could be reasonably argued that there are disturbing similarities between the current world-wide #MeToo campaign regarding the length of time that offences against women occur without any official, expedient and necessary intervention by any appropriate authority  on behalf of the victims- and the suggested possibility that the victims, or fellow employees representing them, had to personally advise Police of the offences.

Such an extended time-frame has the potential to add to any emotional trauma suffered by the victims.

In the context of the content of the published article it is suggested that matters pertaining to the alleged offences were placed in the hands of the Western Australian Local Government Association (WALGA).

It is on public record that, in 2016, WALGA originally recommended to the Shire of York, Paul Crewe, as the ideal candidate for the position of Executive Manager Infrastructure and Development Services. Apparently after the alleged offenses were known to have occurred, Mr. Crewe was allowed to resign with all entitlements instead of being suspended, pending an investigation or summarily dismissed.

The article also suggests that the Police subpoenaed, from WALGA, documents relevant to the case, arguably to now assist in prosecuting this case.

As Minister for Local Government you were advised, in writing, of the case and the potential problems arising from it in October/November 2017.

The written response on your behalf, authored by one of your senior staff, suggested that you were fully conversant with the issue and you fully supported the actions taken by the Chief Executive Officer of the Shire of York, Paul Martin at that time.

You will note, in the article, that at the time of publication the Shire of York President, David Wallace, had refused to comment and the Chief Executive Officer was unavailable to make any comment.

Yours sincerely
David Taylor
Shire of York Ratepayer. 

A ‘BETTER’ ACT FOR A NEW TIME.

Minister David Templeman wants “A new Act for a New Time” claiming it will be the biggest reform of the WA Local Government Act.1995, in 20 years. Try 23 years and still counting as we head towards the end of 2018 with no final, clearly defined policy in sight. Yes we do need a new ACT but it needs to be a BETTER one- and soon!- Not another year away.

The Minister’s so-called ‘big reform; includes the right for community interest parties, otherwise known as stakeholders and/ or ratepayers, to have their input.  This is extremely kind and generous of him seeing we all pay his wages and perks, those of his staff , those of shire and city councillors and all local government employees.

In many cases they are certainly not paid peanuts but there can be a distribution to monkeys.

Mr. Templeman reminds us all that Local Governments, arguably the most poorly performing sector in Australia’s Three Tiers of Government System, particularly regarding financial accountability, often make controversial decisions. (And, on a per capita basis, Western Australia has far more local governments than any other state.)

As a politician he uses the term controversial rather than irresponsible, ridiculous or even vapid and vacuous.

Unfortunately those who pick up the tab for multi-million dollar indiscretions/controversies, often aggravated by contentious Local Government By-Laws, Principles and Guidelines which can defy even basic logic, are once again and always- the long suffering ratepayer.

These formidable faux pas are often exacerbated by the distinct lack of knowledge of legal and equitable understandings of the laws and statutes governing a particular industry which has a local government officer overseeing, possibly even interfering with its creation, development structure and performance in a Local Government Area. (Too often to an individuals and industries’ detriment and the stultification of much needed progress.)

As an example, for those who are Local Government Planning Officers -you cannot undertake Land Use Planning restrictions using the Environmental Protection Act to prevent such things as perceived detrimental noise from aircraft. This is for not one (1) but two (2) clearly specified reasons being  the regulation (1) specifically excludes the assessment of aircraft noise- therefore (2) the rule does not apply.

It would be extremely helpful that all persons employed as Local Government Planning Officers and their direct superiors, including Chief Executive Officers, were aware of these edicts- so a probably disgruntled State Administrative Tribunal (SAT) does not have to waste its time, its energy and our money in suggesting to a shire council that it reconsiders making demands that it cannot enforce. The word Reconsideration in these type of cases may well mean get it right next time.

Therefore the few who, in a Local Government Area, may well feel they will be disturbed through undue sensory reception caused by  aircraft noise maybe, for the common good, retreat from making a fuss. And, obviously, those who make such perceived errors of judgement, based on presumed lack of knowledge, are now on SAT and public records.

The vast, continuously expanding chasm between politicians, government departments and reality is exemplified by recent statements made by Mr. Templeman regarding financial accountability, particularly relating to rural and remote shire councils.

He is toying with an idea to allow councils to become commercial trading corporations, arguably giving them the right to develop businesses in direct competition with their ratepayers, trading in anything from apples to fly zippers or owning and running unprofitable taverns and convention centres.

It goes even further with a suggestion that investment regulations are removed to allow your local councils to sink ratepayers money into financial instruments not guaranteed by the Commonwealth or the WA State Government, thereby granting the potential ability for those with no known financial business services acumen to invest your rate money in high risk ventures such as ‘Bitcoins’ or Elon Musk’s ‘Space X’ private passenger flight around the moon!

It gets worse, including allowing councils to secure debt against property such as the alleged dilapidated by neglect “Chalkies” and guarantee finance for commercial developers and non-residential property owners, although this means that campaign funds provided to council members by property developers will be banned.

This low risk assessment of local government councils and officers ability to dabble with your money in the stock market, trade as a commercial corporation and possibly financially assist a relative, friend and business partner through a financial guarantee is tempered by the fact that there may be much harsher penalties for a malfeasance which appears to happen regularly- the Breaching of Tendering Rules.

There is also a large body of disgruntled ratepayers throughout the state who believe their councils cannot even perform adequately in some of the basic functions and requirements- such as local road maintenance, let alone become a viable, profit making business and investor.

Others subscribe to the view that the relaxation of investment regulations is in the hope that councils make enough money in financial share and business trading that the Commonwealth and the State can reduce the amount of their commitment for the provision of loans and grant funding?

For years arguments have been raised regarding the fact that Local Government Elections are not held under a universal franchise, being restricted to ratepayers only.  Proposed changes would mean that a compulsory voting system for everyone on the electoral role would be introduced as well as the possibility of online voting.

The perception here is that with elections being the same as Federal and State, the fact that everyone above the age of 18 can vote, will reduce the potential for small-self interest groups, for example farmers in rural areas, to dominate a councils’ decision making processes.

However this could mean ‘Political Parties’ may become more and more involved in local government councils in rural, regional and remote areas than they are now. Campaign donations from property developers, the tobacco industry and liquor and gaming entities will be banned- political party funding of a council candidate is not.

So where does all this affect the Shire of York both directly and indirectly.

Certainly there may be an objection by a number of ratepayers to their money being invested by the current local government officers with the Shire.

To put everything into perspective, since 2015 when half the current councillors were elected, as well as the current Shire President, the average price of a domestic property in York has fallen by 26 per cent, there are 2 to 3 times the number of dwellings for sale, in York, compared to similar sized shires and they take approximately one-and-a-half years to sell.

This socio-economic malaise does not seem to have been halted by the employment of a new Chief-Executive-Officer in mid 2016. In 2017 the median house price fell by 3.2%.

When there is a substantial economic downturn at the state and federal level, the Commonwealth and State Governments are directly blamed for the crisis in confidence. There is therefore a substantive argument for some blame to be the laid at the feet of Councillors and the administrators they employ when a financial and/or economic crisis develops within the confines of a Local Government Area.

David Taylor.

OH WHERE, OH WHERE HAS OUR RATE MONEY GONE? OH WHERE, OH WHERE CAN IT BE?

With our roads full of holes and our footpaths f***ked, oh where can we park our RV? (Copyright Disney Studios)

Before you read on, if an asthmatic use Ventolin, if already depressed use Prozac and if you have blood pressure problems take your Warfarin.

Now, having been warned, if you are bored and you want to scare yourself half to death- keep on reading and enjoy  the macabre, frightening, spine-chilling calculations displayed as item SY121-09/08  RV PARK RELOCATION COSTINGS- and freak-out.

The original cost estimate for the new RV site was $79,960 to be completed months ago. Unfortunately sealing the surface appears not to have been included so a lot has now slipped into the Avon River.

Expenditure up to date has been $72,788 with earthworks ballooning out from a mere $24,415 to a majestic $64,135 and eighteen cents, close to three times the original guesstimate . Much of that is flowing down the Avon too.

Now comes the next gem, the amount to complete the original, obviously crazy design is $73,940. So if you take your shoes and socks off to keep counting you will discover the awful truth- it actually is going to cost nearly twice as much -$145,132.

But it gets even better (or worse). The expenditure to complete the apparently hopelessly flawed design with a 2 seal coat to keep it all out of the Avon is $87,345- a grand total of $159,133.

To complete this bodge-job to a minimum standard-it will cost just $38,605 or $111,393 all up. How much will still end up clogging the river is not mentioned.

Could it get better/worse? yes it can. The original booby-prize winning design did not have a DUMP POINT where the RV’s can release their flotilla of floaties. One would have assumed that this was one of the main objects of the exercise-but then again obviously not!

So you can add-on $4,355 for toiletries!

If you classed the Shire of York as a publicly-owned corporation with expenditure estimations being so financially-flawed you would see a plunge in its share price, the CEO sacked and the Board of Directors removed from office.

There is a term called financial duty of care which the current Shire of York Council and administration arguably hasn’t come to grips with.

And there could be another meaning for the Shire keeping up its level of performance with the term Key Performance Indicators( KPI’s) . It could be Keep People Ignorant!

David Taylor.

‘ALAS POOR YORK WE KNEW IT WELL’ (plagiarizing a death scene in a play called ‘Hamlet’ to discuss a hamlet called York.)

FIRSTLY-The emergence of populist websites, including social media sites has given rise to an ugly phenomenon- the Internet Troll- who take public criticism of others to a whole new low-rent, personal level using the cloak of anonymity.

Those with a perfectly legitimate criticism of someone’s performance in their position as a politician or as any part of the fabric of a governing body, including a Shire Council, has the right to have their honest opinions heard if they are prepared to use their name. If not- they should waive that right.

It is understood that in the goldfish bowl that is a small regional town many are reluctant to use their name with a published comment-

BUT:-

An anonymous troll makes it much easier for a Shire Council to deflect and survive legitimate adverse criticism because the majority of the community who read it will identify with those that have their personal character impugned for no good reason through just attacking the player not the ball.

It also gives councils and individual councillors the excuse to threaten legal action against these sites trolls use even though the chances of this being successful, or even happening, is next to zero. (Ratepayer funds should not be used to support an individual councillors, or employees, legal case over personal, probably undue criticism of them.)

Conversely, proposals within the re-writing of the Local Government Act 1995 should put all councillors on notice that inappropriate behavior likely to bring a council into disrepute will not be tolerated. Instead of just a ‘slap-on-the-wrist’ censure from the Department of Local Government’s Standards Panel, individual councillors can and will be sacked.

Social media, despite its faults, has been a catalyst for positive change particularly for Rural, Regional and Remote Shire Councils. At least seven Shire Chief Executive Officers have resigned, been terminated or arrested through public pressure on local social media sites or other on-line platforms which have developed over the past five years.

The infractions have included fraud, stealing, or the inappropriate hiring of staff- being a blatant Conflict of Interest.

So where does York itself sit at this present time?

It is certainly not on the radar to become a future satellite city of Perth. That is Waroona. In many ways this is probably a good thing as York should attempt to regain its unique status and identity, not become a suburb.

And the council and administration? It may well have problems with external authorities with questions to answer over road maintenance and funding including legislative compliance and internal controls of such important matters as financial risk management? Also what, when, where, how and why things happened that are currently the subject of continuing criminal proceedings in a Perth courtroom?

It is difficult to analyze exactly where any future issues of responsibility for possible malfeasance lie, but there is an argument to suggest it is both the Shire of York administration and the Shire of York council. If there is lack of compliance by the administration, the Council should be in the position to know and act accordingly.

Ignorance may be bliss, but not when you have been elected to council by ratepayers and given the community trust to ensure the massive rates being levied are actually spent wisely, in the community’s best interest. (If you ought to know-then you should know.)

Now $590 million questions why?

Another question is how proactive both the current council and administration have been in seeking and successfully obtaining funding for York’s continuing economic and social welfare? This includes- but is not limited to- revitalization of river systems, flood mitigation, town revitalization projects, economic growth and required skills training.

As examples it appears that the Shire of Northam has received $8,628,211.97 for projects such as Avon River Revitalization and Riverfront Development as well as $1,079,801.33 for Drainage.

The Shire of Merredin has total drawdowns for local projects of $13,209,976.12 as of May 31, 2018 if the dots are in the right spots.

The Shire of Narrogin has $6,305,049.23 for a heavy haulage bypass and a cottage homes project. And the Shire of Morawa has $3,400,000 to spend on a Town Revitalization program.

This review of Rural, Regional and Remote stimulus packages appear on a Total Cost of Acquisition (TCA) document, including drawdowns and related interest payments on Royalties for Regions programs, released by the Nationals WA to Shire Chief Executive Officers in one of its electorates.

Including payments to Super Towns and Royalties for Regions projects the total sum appears to be around $590 million.

The recipients range from the Shire of Ashburton to the Shire of Williams.

Two of the main centres in the Central Wheatbelt Electorate have received the princely sum of $22,915, 988.42. The third, according to the TCA, has not received one cent.

There is no ‘Y’ or ‘Z’ amongst this alphabetical order of shire’s flush with cash for acquisitions.

The documents appear to show, that recently at least- YORK HAS GOT ZILCH!

Once again questions are raised that are highly unlikely to receive a proper response.

David Taylor.

AN INTERESTING CONFLICT-

Regarding the Code of Conduct within the Public Service relating to Conflict of Interest determinations by Shire Chief Executive Officers.

According to numerous sources, York, has a multi-talented person who runs a tourism business, is a Shire of York employee engaged in project creation and promotion, is allegedly sometimes employed by the York Business Association and is the Chairperson of York Arts &Events.

In some ways this is highly commendable- but maybe highly untenable.

Apparently it has raised public concerns regarding ‘feathering a nest’ and of course the ever present Conflict of Interest. It has caused the alleged nest featherer to cry foul and claim it is a blatant attack on the persons character and on the community in general to the potential detriment of local participation in volunteering.

Unfortunately, there is an argument to suggest that this person may have been actually placed in a potentially invidious position by the Public Officer responsible, the Shire of York Chief-Executive-Officer, Paul Martin.

Conflict of Interest is a matter of both transparency and perception. So if the vast majority are not adequately informed and perceive that these matters, in their opinion, are a conflict of interest then there is a CONFLICT OF INTEREST.

Mr Martin is on record as saying the person was considered, by a panel, to be the best candidate to promote the York Recreation and Convention Centre that includes the highly contentious Forrest Bar and Café. The membership of this panel and their abilities to evaluate the qualities  of a prospective employee are not known by most and therefore this process currently lacks transparency.

Mr Martin claims he and one other discussed the persons involvement in potentially conflicting activities apparently considered extraneous by him under the Shire’s Code of Conduct.

Mr Martin insists that, in his opinion, the YRCC Project Officer’s role is part time, narrowly focussed and will not impact on York Arts & Events. 

Narrow focus is an unusual term to use when arguably the position of Project Manager is to ensure these premises increase their viability and sustainability including the improved public usage of a currently largely unsustainable asset. This existentially must include the introduction of new, promotable events, or why bother to have such a position at all?  You cannot forget all the new staff advertised for- who need to be paid.

To place himself in a position where he believes he will not be accused of making a fundamental errors of judgement, Mr. Martin may have tried to cover all bases by claiming both parties have agreed to actively manage any real or perceived conflict of interests.

The only way to accurately define what this means is that Mr. Martin suspects that his decision has the potential for what is a real conflict of interest .


In the latest agenda item SY104-08/18 – York Arts & Events – Request to Use Mount Brown,

clearly states:-

“DISCLOSURE OF INTEREST: Impartiality – YRCC Project Officer

is the Chairperson of York Arts & Events. This Officer has not been involved in the preparation of this report.”

Although it was this person who lodged the original application with the Shire on behalf of York Arts and Events, according to the item withdrawn from the July 2018, Ordinary Council Meeting. 

This suggests that the YRCC Project Officer and the Chairperson of the York Arts & Events, who are one and the same, and there is a real Conflict of Interest.

There is a pamphlet titled ‘Conflicts of Interest Guidelines for the Western Australian Public Sector’ co-chaired by Justice John McKechnie QC, the head of the Corruption and Crime Commission.

It is there to guide the decision making processes of senior public sector employees, including Local Government Chief Executive Officers, particularly when making local employment choices in a small community.

So did Mr. Martin read it and follow the rules prior to making the decision?

They are:-

PERCEPTION:- is highly important- so did he assure himself that his involvement in the decision making process would not be viewed as a negative decision by the majority of ratepayers?

PROPORTIONALISM:- did he adequately investigate whether his involvement would appear fair and reasonable in all circumstances to the majority of ratepayers?

PRESENCE OF MIND:- did he ever consider his official involvement would be questioned publicly by ratepayers?

PROMISES:- did he make any promises or commitments in relation to this matter of which ratepayers are not aware?

In the end- your guess is as good as mine!

David Taylor.

FROM RV TO RRV

RV means Recreational Vehicle and RRV means Ross River Virus and herein lies a tale- this financial year will mosquitos descend on York’s muddy, polluted waters like they would on a varicose vein? They did in a short time in 2017 with allegedly six (6) RRV cases reported.

But firstly here is a review of some ‘not-so-wise-words’ from CEO, Paul Martin, who may suffer from tinnitus, myopia, RRV, misunderstanding of the written word or has graduated with ‘Torus Excreta Honours’ in Public Service ‘avoiding serious issues’ classes.

Within last month’s Council Meeting agenda he was asked the legitimate question of what engineering qualifications did the former Executive Manager Infrastructure and Development, Bret Howson, have?

Mr. Martin’s response was to direct the questioner to www.howson.com.au to view his ‘management capabilities and experience’.

Howson’s management skills and experience was not the question- it was did Howson have verifiable documented evidence that he had reached the status of a professional practitioner of civil engineering?

It is believed the real answer is NO! and this fact becomes even more pertinent when you find that Mr. Martin recommended him as such in a memorandum to Councillors two years ago.

Mr. Howson’s glitzy web address is Howson Management created by the team from “Brandicoot” an  unfortunate title for a web designer. Coot has the synonyms dullard and old fart!

Howson specializes in design, asset and project management, strategic planning and marketing and has recently spread his expertise into the Northern Territory and South Australia. Lucky them!

His team is currently providing a seamless design, creation, management and eventual celebration for the Gunbarrel Highway, 1,000 kilometres North-East of York, at Wiluna . Lucky us!

Did he arguably provide, create and bring to successful fruition positive designs, assets, plans and marketing strategies for York to celebrate while an employee of the Shire, temporary or permanent – Not that anyone is aware of!

Were qualifications mentioned within the promotional ‘Brandicoot’ rhetoric?-none!

The second major issue is the pessimist’s proverb ‘believe only half of what you see and nothing of what you hear’- or READ.

Mr. Martin supposedly employs staff to act in the best interest of the Shire of York Council on behalf of the ratepayers.

It is incumbent on the CEO to ensure that these staff members have ALL THE QUALIFACTIONS NECESSARY to undertake their duties to the standard required by ratepayer and community expectations.

To suggest that anyone should source their knowledge of an employee’s actual professional prowess from their promotional website is farcical.

It is like saying that the Big Four Banks promotional advertising campaigns are true and correct in every way- when it has been proven beyond any reasonable doubt that they are having a lend of those who they lend to. And you keep on paying bank fees after you die.

Mr. Martin’s assessment of Mr. Howson’s engineering prowess has probably caused limitless financial damage to local ratepayers.

Just a quick calculation puts it at $500,000 without the costs of rectifying the alleged damage and what he was paid while doing it.

And now comes the RV’s

At February’s Council meeting Mr. Martin (the responsible officer not anybody else ) was tasked with developing and implementing a new or improved site for Grey Nomads and their self-contained travelling apartments.

Anyone who comes to York willingly, indeed any inland town which is not on the blatantly incompetent WA Tourism Commissions promotion radar, should be encouraged.

An advisory suggests that any revised RV location was a toss-up between the areas of land known as Mongers Reserve, a flat well drained stable area between the Coffee Carriage and Balladong Bridge or the loam based, poorly drained smaller parcel of land next to the York Croquet Club, on the Eastern bank of the river Avon.

For reasons known to their hip-pocket nerves it appears that the newly established York Business Association may have gotten involved and taken umbrage to the idea of relocating the RV Park from Avon Park without paying heed to the alternatives.

Allegedly, some in a fiscal funk fired email shots to every caravan club in WA advising that Council planned to put an end to RV’s using Avon Park in the mistaken belief there would be no RV facilities at all.

Mr. Martin’s (the responsible officer and no-one else) unbelievable recommendation was a $80,000 RV project next to the York Croquet Club that remains a washout rather than the Mongers Reserve site that would have cost just $30,000 and now probably be open and operational.

It should all have been finished on June 30, 2018.

Obviously, Mr. Martin has had to seek some approval, including a licence for land use from the Water Corporation regarding the Eastern swamp as the “Rivers Edge Club Med project”.

Has this happened?-who knows. Maybe the Gross Pollutants Traps and other large drainage pipes to prevent water flowing down from the cemetery to leave big brown stains in the river are not there yet?

In fact, they are not- and most of the earthworks completed have completely disappeared into the Avon. Maybe the whole lot of it- earthworks and seal $25,415, Kerbing (otherwise known as curbing) $12,875, drainage $9,000, landscaping $12,670 and lighting/services $20,000 will end up in a watery grave.

So far it appears that around $70,000 has already been washed away- leaving just $10,000 to pay for $79,960 worth of earthworks, seal, curbing, drainage, landscaping and lighting/services.

Once again it seems there is another stuff-up on a different day. Currently this project is a GROSS MUNICPLE MONEY TRAP which could well cost double the original projection-maybe more.

And the Shire of York is rapidly descending into bumbling, stumbling, fumbling mess which its ratepayers do not deserve and should not tolerate.

Mike Nahan, the Opposition Leader says that the print media such as The West Australian have lost reader interest and therefore community relevance.

Social Media has, in a way, taken its place and must be responsible.

Harsh criticism is not what Social Media should be all about. It suggests exaggeration and being too severe and unpleasant.

Unfortunately, in the Shire of York’s case in particular, with the CEO and President there are way too many unanswered questions, far too much money being spent and far too many muddy ponds of brackish water in town- without a legitimate answer.

If they feel that Too Harsh a Treatment Feeling, get used to it or actually do something positive that all of York can applaud.

What should happen if you get a dose of RRV from York’s black lagoons, send a copy of your medical bills C/O the Shire of York and Howson Management

David Taylor.

“WATERWORLD”

Twenty-five years ago Kevin Costner starred in this post-apocalyptic extravanganza
where the Polar Icecaps had melted leaving nothing but seascape. The budget was blown out of the water and it bombed at the box office.

Now it would appear that York’s past engineering guru, Bret Howson, has starred in his own mini under- water bombshell in Avon Terrace and blown another large hole in ratepayers pockets turning his pipe dream into everyone else’s nightmare.

In fact it is allegedly a $250,000 nightmare meant to stop storm water from flooding the gardens of the 3 new stilt homes, built way up high to keep the floorboards dry- because the area is subject to flooding.

As the photographs below show, this project has been spectacularly unsuccessful leaving the property developer, like the AMI insurance advert says- up ‘Ship (or if you prefer Shit) Creek’.

And as many ratepayers struggle to keep their heads above water, the Shire has blithely splashed out   municipal funds on a submarine pen when they do not have one.

Prior to purchasing and developing the land, the developer knew the area was in a natural watercourse and prone to flooding, hence the requirement to build on stilts.

With hindsight the developer should have realized that he was dealing with the Shire of York Executive Management where 250,000 things could go horribly wrong.

As a self-proclaimed visionary Mr. Howson’s personal business mantra is to ‘have a simple but positive vision, respecting and understand every task we do-providing services from project inception to construction and celebration’.

This is an intuitive, imaginative, insightful and mind-soothing slogan where the celebrants can celebrate up to their necks in dirty brown floodwater.

While shifting the garden deckchairs on the ‘Titanic’ the Shire’s latest, part time consultant engineer, has been busily getting quotes to lay pipes under the road directing stormwater to the river, which is, allegedly exactly what should have happened in the first place.

According to the law, the owner or occupier of an up-slope property is not liable for flooding problems merely because surface water flows naturally from their land on to lower land.

Putting it succinctly- when surface water is a natural watercourse upon the land from which it flows, as distinct from water artificially brought or concentrated there (such as a dam) and allowed to escape, the owner is not liable merely because surface water flows naturally from his land on to lower land.

Taking into account this Avon Terrace U-Boat pen is a natural watercourse, why were ratepayer’s forced to fund this project in the first place and why did the project sink to the bottom of the harbour?

It is a quarter-of-a-million dollar question that only the Chief Executive Officer, Paul Martin, should have to answer.

David Taylor