Shire of York

Shire of York

Tuesday 24 April 2018

OPEN LETTER TO THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, SHIRE OF YORK, PAUL MARTIN


Dear Mr. Martin                                                                                       Date: 24 April 2018 

Your Ref: TIME TO JUSTIFY YOURSELF.

A point has been reached in your tenure where you should be required to quantify, qualify and adequately define your overall performance as Chief Executive Officer, in writing , to the York community, identifying all the constructive  developments created by you, and your administration, including positive financial investments in the future. This should include a numerical financial valuation of expenditure to return.


The period in question is over the past 2 years.

York’s recently well publicised trial program to increase dementia awareness in the Shire is a positive health care move forward, but is not a constructive development created by you, your staff or Council. (Although one of your Executive staff could be accused, by the more cynical, of appearing to want to hog some limelight.)

It would also be hard to believe that the impending opening of a top quality hostelry by locals is as a direct result of any positive initiatives by you, your staff or Council other than an arguably improper offer of funding.  However, there may be some positive financial synergies if Shire President, David Wallace’s past indication of a possible local intent to develop a microbrewery and/ or distillery comes to fruition.

You should realize that several legitimate queries have been made regarding serious Local Government Area matters to the Minister for Local Government, the Hon. David Templeman, with reference to possible irregularities in your discharge of your duties. The Minister has not appeared to endorse your performance, rather that it is currently outside his jurisdiction.

There are various incidences where you have appeared to have been inactive in providing appropriate written responses to legitimate questions raised with you by the public, often in the public interest.

Where you have responded, explanations provided by you could be described as having a degree of ambiguity.

It appears that, on some occasions, you may be prepared to defend the potentially indefensible regarding alleged inadequate and unprofessional actions attributed to your staff.
It may be time that you came to realize that such a defense could reflect poorly on your staff management skills, professionalism and community standing.

A major bone of contention is that there is an apparent continuing refusal by you to reveal the qualifications held by highly paid members of both past and current staff that have been engaged or are engaged in overseeing important multi-million dollar asset management and maintenance programs.

This could legitimately be claimed to be of detriment to the rights of the community, far outweighing the supposed rights of the individual.

Of particular concern is the apparent endemic and systemic failure to properly implement the recommendations of the Talis Report since its inception. Many may find this situation unacceptable.

You personally have validated concerns regarding
the issues associated with some construction projects last year directly related to this report.

This potentially reflects poor overseeing management by you regarding assets, including your management of financial issues involving these assets.

In particular- if insufficient funding has been allocated to undertake extremely important community projects such as roads, now, and for the future, and to ensure it proceeds to mandatory standards.

By timing and inference it appears that you may be suggesting, in public, that your previous Executive Manager Infrastructure and Development may bear some responsibility for what is described as issues of concern  associated with some construction projects during his abruptly ended tenure.

Also I am sure you are fully aware of the excuses that have been  made by past Shire of York executive officers and Presidents regarding keeping accurate records (for fair comment and  review) of important meetings involving ratepayers and the public. It was claimed by them to be an unjustifiable, financially non-viable, excessive resource intensive process.

This has in the past involved investigation by a Department of Local Government official of breaches of the State Records Act 2000 focussing on the inability of Shire of York staff to keep proper records across the board.

It may be that very little has changed since then and the Shire of York’s Public and Private Records Archive is still of a quality and lack of serviceability to warrant re-investigation under the Act.

Regarding what is claimed to be unjustifiable expenditure, as Chief Executive Officer, I would like to remind you that you have in excess of $2.5 million in employee related resources that equate to one quarter of your annual budget. This may be something that you may wish to reflect upon.

Another introspection should be that despite the vastly improved personal relationships between you, your staff and members of the local community you have failed to meet numerous, all important, Local Government Standards set to show financial and administrative compliance and competence.

Currently your regime is well below average and appears, on face value, to be well below the standards supposedly set by the previous long term incumbent, Ray Hooper.

Your response could be that York is in a serious predicament because of actions taken by Mr. Hooper and previous staff. Two years on it is an excuse that is starting to wear thin as many York home owners struggle desperately to try and pay their exorbitant rate valuations.

Any calculations compiled using Gross Rental Value compared to Median House Prices compared to the quality and quantity of goods and services supplied by the Shire of York, compared to between 85% and 90% of other Local government Areas, does not compute.

There are persistent rumours that the Shire of York, or its administration, or both may now be facing multiple litigation proceedings?

Given the circumstances, you may wish to respond to this letter through the appropriate channel, being the York and Districts Community Matters publication. I believe you pay the proprietor to publish what ostensibly is Shire of York propaganda.

I await your response but will not bother to hold my breath.

Yours sincerely

David Taylor
Shire of York ratepayer.


Sunday 15 April 2018

HOW TO GROW YOUR OWN ROADS.

It seems so simple almost anyone can do it. All you need is some well prepared soil, a decent sprinkling of water and lots of fertiliser called asphalt.  (It may help if you have a theodolite as well) 

Next - you may need an accomplished GARDENING GURU to give you a hand. 

He may not need to know anything about AUSTROADS and the Australian Road Rules industry standards, including the required design and construction standards for Australian Rural Roads, or even be able to spell WA Main Roads.

However it may be wise for anyone and everyone concerned to be able to stand up in a Coroner’s Court to bullshit their way out of trouble when someone has their life ended through gross negligence in road maintenance.

The Shire President has made a Churchillian Statement that is so rudimentary, so primitive, so basic (and so sanguine) it is almost brilliant. ‘It is important that the CEO employees (should be employs) staff with expertise to construct and maintain Shire Roads’.

All the community hopes that the CEO listens to his President’s absolute gem of wisdom and astuteness.


However-rumour has it that the Shire of York has poached (no pun intended) Beverly District High School’s famous chook shed builder and ‘multi-talented’ gardener to fill the long vacant position of Works Supervisor on a trial basis. 
Jethro (left of picture) with his little works crew
constructing chook shed 

This man of many talents is Jethro Sleer and for everyone’s sake we wish him well.

In this case there are two meanings for trial basis, one is to assess the performance of an employee, and the other is a court appearance as the end result of something going seriously wrong!

Any Works Supervisor should be an integral part of ensuring the proper maintenance of local roads to AUSTROADS and Main Roads definitive specifications.

Such specifications must not include sealing a loose, dry, unbound, washed-away road shoulder on the inside of a high speed corner with asphalt as has already occurred.

Nor the hiring of a Vladimir Putin to claim that you cannot photograph serious mistakes being made in repairing a public road while someone is trying to repair it.

For the PUBLIC SERVANT GURU who allegedly said this, no matter what rules and regulations you quote, if it is a public road it is a public place-then anyone can take a photograph.

As York’s multi-functional Shire President may say in future, it is time the Shire of York invests in employing staff who know what they are doing and do not make presumptuous, preposterous, laughable statements about the basic rights of an individual in public without legal advice.

He may find that only a POLICE OFFICER has the legal right to request someone remove themselves from a public place, including a dangerous, local shire road.

Then of course there is the Shire inspired Talis Report that was accepted, but not really.

Otherwise if it had - there should be no road drainage stuff-ups: causing roads to flood through being built with inverted crowns

and

a) no ubiquitous potholes that go halfway to China,

b) no steep shoulders and road verges that plunge down like the edge of the Grand Canyon,

c)  and no fun involved in setting fire to grass around concrete culverts that surprise-surprise-explode. (That is the effort of a real Bright Spark.)

York has seen some of the pictorial evidence of the public thoroughfare nicknamed The Terminator, and the Stairway to Heaven.

This is the road widened then terminated at the crest of hill, on a corner, giving  the  road user the thrill of playing ‘Chicken’ to see who pulls out of a head-on collision and takes to the gravel, then the bush, then a tree.


The photograph of this incredible debacle, published in York’s Social Media, may have caused a miraculous shire inspired invigoration to improve a local road.

The CEO is on public record as saying, two staff members who no longer work for the shire made the decision to terminate the road work at this location.

As this decision was made in 2017 and the CEO still works for the Shire, it appears that Mr Paul Martin, may be blaming a potentially deadly faux-pas on one who’s disappearance will always remain a matter for conjecture.


The Shire of York’s spin on this former employee is the person left at his own request, maybe because of illness, not any ineptitude.

Local Government Officials should always be careful when and where they lay the blame.

Given David Wallace’s obvious command of the problems at hand, his response to his CEO’s public statement should be - what are you talking about? I do not give a toss about who they are, the damage is done and you are ultimately responsible.

It should be noted that the Minister for Transport, Lisa Saffioti, will soon be in possession of the original image which could be hung on her wall for posterity on how not to build a road.

Regarding the power of Social Media, even if it is not read by the CEO and the Shire President, it may cause things to happen by proxy.

It has been suggested that the owners of the unopened The Imperial Inn have decided to withdraw their request for a rate payer funded $5,000 grant to re-beautify their premises.

Congratulations on doing that, if you have, and I wish you the greatest of luck with your enterprise.

David Taylor. 


Tuesday 10 April 2018

THE HEAT GOES ON.

For two decades WA State Government’s duckshoved as much responsibility as they could onto Local Government Councils turning them from rubbish and rate collectors, road graders and pavers and local park gardeners into having supposedly autonomous, almost total ‘responsibility’ for their own survival. 


It is often thought that the method behind the madness was to shift much of the cost burden from state and federal taxpayers to local ratepayers who did not have enough direct political power to argue the toss.

Also government departments and agencies involved with local government appear to have wanted  to be able to exist in a ‘no care taken-it is not our responsibility’ it’s yours’ employment utopia, enjoying a much reduced workload, good wages and conditions with no pressure to perform. A sort of permanent semi-retirement.

There is no greater example of this philosophy than the recent performance of the  Department of Local Government itself.

Over the years nothing and no one has filled this ‘responsibility’ void!

One great problem is that there are not 138 qualified experts in planning, health, tourism, asset management, road maintenance, financial management and accountability and local domestic, commercial and industrial development to cover the state’s 138 councils to ensure an overall, level playing field.

Under the current system each of these expertise should be handled by a single, highly qualified staff member to maximise performance and guarantee a viable future for each and every  Local Government Area. (Yet many of these LGA’s find it financially difficult to maintain the level of, mostly unqualified, staff they have now.)

At least 1,000 suitable personnel are needed to cover all the most important Local Council administrative bases, particularly outside the city.

According to WALGA, these people already exist and there is no inherent problem. WALGA is a self-interest agency, highly protective of its own future and will say there is no difference between hot and cold  until hell freezes over.

These required 21st Century wunderkind actually do not exist. And there is no capacity , capability and local government finances to provide the expertise required, often not even to a bare minimum standard.

A newspaper headline now says ‘WA STATE DEPARTMENT WANTS TO STRIP COUNCILS OF PLANNING POWERS’.

It is the  Western Australian Department of Planning, Lands and Heritage (DPLH) who appears to want to claw back some oversight over infill, amenities and dealing with developers and development in the Perth Metropolitan Area.

They have tentatively approached the Local Government Minister, David Templeman, to have some re-seizure of power incorporated in the new Local Government Act 2018 because of frustration in dealing with recalcitrant councillors and their councils.

So what! President David Wallace and CEO Paul Martin may say on behalf of the Shire of York. What happens in Perth stays in Perth.

Maybe not so!

There are underlying, all encompassing issues that can be a threat to all councils and their futures.

The complaint by the DPLH is that certain local government  Policies and Guidelines and related procedures, including Strategic Planning and Development are grossly out-of-date.

The Shire of York, with a consultant as hired help, claims it has completed all these necessary reviews and can probably relax for a couple of years until another mandatory evaluation is demanded (after five years.)

The problem is, even if a strategic planning review or any other review was undertaken yesterday, it does not mean that the decisions made are not already totally useless in this day and age.

Nor do they  necessarily  truly reflect the modern day wants and needs of the Shire of York community.

Does the Shire’s 2016 to 2021 review criteria have a satisfactory, professional, up-to-date development procedural content, or is it just a mishmash rehash of yesteryear with a consultants advice? .

An overall problem that the DPLH perceives is the lack of ability of Local Government Councillors to make important decisions in these areas.

There are unappreciated, unstudied laws and statutes, conflict of interest, self-interest, friendships and animosities that ensure a development that should not go ahead- proceeds, and one that should- does not get the green light.

Has this happened within the Shire of York?- allegedly it may well have.

So WHO IS THE REAL CARLY RUNDLE and her importance in the scheme of things that may now have an added meaning.

She is the Shire’s Senior Planning Officer and the one most directly affected by any changes in her area of expertise in the Local Government Act 2018, other than Martin and Wallace.

This Act cannot have one edict for City Councillors and their council’s planning staff and another for Rural Regional and Remote councillors and their council staff.

It may be that the DPLH is trying to stave off anymore redundancies by trying to take back some workload. No- probably not.

Maybe the Heritage Section of the department is looking at what the Shire of York intends to do with the collapsing, heritage convent. That is highly likely.

Just do not think what happens in Vegas- stays in Vegas

Or better still- think that York is Vegas,

David Taylor.


Thursday 5 April 2018


WHO IS THE REAL CARLY RUNDLE?

You think you know who she is. She is on the Shire of York websites’ official Administration Staff List as ‘Planning Officer’.

Yet the Shire of York’s official letter regarding the Mid-West Joint Development Assessment Panel meeting (JDAP) that includes her signature, has her describing her official title as ‘SENIOR PLANNER’ in  CAPITAL LETTERS.

Does this mean she is no longer just a lower-case Planning Officer, but now an upper-case SENIOR PLANNER, obviously with far more, recently gathered, extensive qualifications than her title, shown on the website, suggests.

Planning what is one question?  Why the increase in employment status is another and what really is the difference between Planning Officer and SENIOR PLANNER is another? Is it the pay grade?

If it is an employee salary and benefits upgrade that has generated this? Is it sheer ability, recent planning successes, new qualifications, or is it because of something that may have happened in the recent past? The reason and timing could end up to be a very serious question should an answer be pursued.

It is not her fault, but what she should not be doing is being seen to be in charge of any fight to save York from Allawuna Farm. This is the role of the CHIEF-
EXECUTIVE-OFFICER and the SHIRE PRESIDENT not someone who is an employee.

Either, or both their signatures should be on all official correspondence regarding Allawuna Farm. It is a fight for York’s future that these gentleman should realize, in their own best interest, they should not lose.

So why does Ms Rundle appear to be the SENIOR PLANNER in charge?

One rationale is that Mr. Martin and Mr. Wallace could be trying to distance themselves from the end result. That is if things go pear-shaped? Then they can try and throw poor Ms. Rundle under the proverbial bus.

Perhaps they have been reading newspapers and have seen the reports of the unprecedented tourism market slump throughout Western Australia, particularly in rural areas? That is assuming they have time to read in their busy schedules?

They could feel that, given these circumstances, the Allawuna Farm dump may be the only good, bad or indifferent new business development York can look forward to for years to come?

Another worry is the possible composition of the JDAP panel. On the current official panel list there is no one from York, but Kulin, Cue , Menzies, Meekatharra, Coolgardie and Mingenew could have a Shire Councillor on board.

Firstly, with no disrespect, Mid-West council representatives are made up of butchers, bakers, candlestick makers, a plethora of farmers and business proprietors who exist in support.

Secondly the environment and geographical scientific evidence that has, or will be, presented to them could well be in their area of no-expertise. Then there may be the attitude that no one gives a rats as long as this dump is not in their shire.

The facts that this JDAP must recognize as irrefutable evidence why this dump should not go ahead are:-

1. York is considered by large domestic insurance companies as an area of high damage risk through a raft of natural disasters including earthquake. Major insurer, YOUI, will not cover York properties and others charge excessive premiums.

2. The access road could already be considered dangerous through the official road toll statistics of death and serious injury.

3. Heavy traffic movements will increase by 3.5 times per day with the attendant risk of the death and serious injury increasing exponentially to an unacceptable level.

Seriously- those involved in supporting or assisting in any way in this project, including Alkina itself and the relevant Ministers for Roads and the Environment could face serious public opinion repercussions should people be killed or maimed between The Lakes and St. Ronan’s as a direct result of increased heavy haulage waste vehicle movements.

There has been enough publicity to ensure that no-one can claim they were not aware that an extremely dangerous traffic congestion could not exist on this road-given its physical state.

You can call it the ‘Steve Smith Syndrome’. You will be forever guilty of a terrible error of judgement.

David Taylor.