Shire of York

Shire of York

Tuesday 10 February 2015

JACKY (Jacqui Jackie) JURMANN Director at Glenwarra Development Services SACKED

SACKED

JACKY (Jacqui Jackie) JURMANN
pictured on left right

WANTED FOR QUESTIONING

Title: Director at Glenwarra Development Services
Demographic info: Western Australia, Australia | Architecture & Planning
Current: Director at Glenwarra Development Services
Past: Manager of Planning Services at Shire of York,
Development Assessment Planning at Port Macquarie-Hastings Council
Education: University of Western Sydney, Sydney TAFE, University of New England (AU)
NO DEGREES SPECIFIED.

The Shire of York financials due for presentation at the Ordinary Council Meeting 16 February 2015  identify that Glenwarra Development Services AKA Jacky Jurmann, is being paid the sum of $2805.00 for advice and services...?
Ms Jurmann is acting on behalf of the Shire of York against SITA, whilst, at the same time  acting on behalf of the York Race Club.
The previous CEO, Michael Keeble made no attempt at hiding the fact that Ms Jurmann had 'bullied' the present Shire of York planner Ms Kira Strange while representing the York Race Club.
Below are excerpts from the Fitz Gerald Report (suppressed) which highlight the  apparent inability for Ms Jurmann to act professionally and impartially.

7.47. On 20 March 2013, CEO Ray Hooper wrote to the department of Racing, Gaming and Liquor expressing surprise at the licensed alfresco areas identified on the Saint’s Liquor License Approved Plans.  Ray Hooper requested that the matter be investigated and rectified “as a matter of urgency” and that the outcome be reported back to the Council.  (See Doc 17)  A copy of the Council report that identified the areas approved by the Council was attached to Ray Hooper’s letter.

7.48. On 25 March 2013, the Acting Premises Manager from the department of Racing, Gaming and Liquor wrote back to Ray Hooper advising that the alfresco areas that his Department had approved on the Saint’s Liquor License mirrored the Maximum Accommodation Approval issued by the Shire on 16 October 2007.  (See Doc 18)

7.49. If this allegation is correct, Ray Hooper and/or the Planner Jacky Jurmann, should be asked to explain who drafted the letters to the Department of racing Gaming and Liquor.  Why was the prior Council approval documentation not checked before these letters were written to the department of Racing Gaming and Liquor?  Whose initiative was it to write the letters and what was the justification for the letters being issued.

There is no justification!

7.50. Saints Diner was opened on 1 March 2008.  It had complied with the planning conditions set by the Council in June 2006 and was signed off as compliant.  The Shire also signed a Section 40 Certificate for the purposes of a liquor licence application.

CEO Ray Hooper was the administrative authority in charge at that time, however, he was advised by Ms Jurmann.

7.51. Five years later, on 8 January 2013, the Shire issued a Direction Order to the Saints to either provide two on-site car bays at the development or pay cash in lieu, the amount due being $10,500.  The Saints appealed the Direction Order in the State Administrative Tribunal (SAT) and had the Direction Order overturned.

CEO Ray Hooper and Ms Jurmann refused to accept the findings of the authority of appropriate jurisdiction.

7.52. In a legal opinion from McLeod’s, dated 8 April 2013, the lawyers stated on three or four occasions that they were of the opinion that the original Direction Order may well be found to be invalid by the State Administrative Tribunal.

CEO Ray Hooper and Ms Jurmann refused to accept professional legal advice.

7.53. The SAT set aside the Shire’s Direction Order and the Planner, Jacky Jurmann advised Mr Saint in an email dated 11 April 2013 that action in relation to the Direction Order had been "finalised".

It could reasonably be assumed that Ms. Jurmann deliberately made a false and misleading statement.

7.54. Four days later, on 15 April 2013, a confidential report appeared on the Agenda for the Ordinary Council Meeting prepared by Jacky Jurmann which resulted in the Council resolving the Saints be advised to comply with the Direction Order issued on 8 January 2013 within 7 days, or face prosecution.  (See Doc 19)

Ms Jurmann, with no justifiable cause, demanded compliance with an invalid Direction Order.

7.55. Whilst a legal opinion from McLeod’s dated 8 April 2013 (See Doc 20) suggested that the Shire withdraw from the SAT appeal and withdraw the Direction Order against the Saints, they suggested that the Shire could prosecute the Saints for breach of the Town Planning Scheme in the Magistrates Court to achieve compliance.

CEO Ray Hooper and Ms. Jurmann colluded to undermine the authority of a duly authorised Government agency and undertake unjustified legal action.

7.56. It is apparent that McLeod’s were not made aware of the terms of the 19 June 2006 planning approval that the Saints had received from the Shire when this first opinion was prepared.

CEO Ray Hooper and Ms. Jurman may have withheld pertinent information.

7.57. By the time that McLeod’s issued a second legal opinion on 28 May 2013 (See Doc 21) it appears they had been informed of the terms of the planning approval issued to the Saints on 19 June 2006 and their advice changed completely, advising the Shire that they had no case against the Saints and that the Magistrate would probably find the Shire had approved the development without the requirement for any car bays

CEO Ray Hooper and Ms. Jurmann were prepared to have a case prosecuted that they should have reasonably known they could not win.
.
7.58. This process would have cost the Saints a significant amount of time and money and personal stress and anxiety together with the loss of professional credibility.

7.59. In October 2013, Mrs Saint was diagnosed with Breast Cancer and underwent surgery in November 2013. At this time, and as far as Mr   & Mrs Saint were concerned, the open threat of some form of prosecution by the Shire of York still remained.  A very difficult personal decision was made by them to close their successful business entirely. A formal request was made to the Shire to have the property transferred to residential use as a result of their overarching concern that there may be more prosecutions by the Shire in the offing.  Having regard for assurances given by Jacky Jurmann in the past, which were then followed by prosecutions, the Saints may well be justified in their fears of further prosecutions by the Shire.

7.60. As it transpired, on the recent production of various documents to Mr & Mrs Saint, it became evident to them that the original planning direction issued by the Shire of York in January 2014 was invalid. The development fully complied with the Planning approval of 2006 and the Shire of York was fully aware of the fact which had been re-iterated to them on May 28 2013.

CEO Ray Hooper and Ms Jurman, deliberately and with probable malice, decided to pursue a prosecution on the understanding that their actions were unconscionable and could give rise to punitive legal action being taken against the Shire of York.

QUESTIONS FOR MS JURMANN

1. It has been alleged that Ms. Jurmann was given the option to resign, rather than have her employment terminated. This was done in an attempt to minimize any future legal exposure?

2. Ms. Jurmanns performance directly relating to this matter should exclude her from being employed, or hired under contract, by the Shire of York for any purpose?

3. Ms. Jurmann may in future be held accountable for her actions by a court of appropriate  jurisdiction?

4. Ms Jurmann has not provided sufficient information regarding her qualifications to adequately provide architectural and planning services to the Shire of York?

Ms. Jurmann should certainly be held accountable for her actions by the citizens of York.

THE SHIRE OF YORK BROADCASTS THAT IT HAS NO VACANT POSITIONS. THEREBY THE CURRENT SHIRE OF YORK ADMINISTRATION, ITS AGENTS AND ASSIGNS MAY BE ACTING IN A DECEITFUL, DECEPTIVE AND DISHONEST MANNER IN APPOINTING A CONTRACTOR TO UNDERTAKE EMPLOYMENT WHERE NO
EMPLOYEMNT VACANCY EXISTS.

26 comments:

  1. A dreadful and well-documented story that illustrates corruption in the exercise of power. It tells of a local government official, seemingly out of control, willing

    (a) to spare no expense (of ratepayers' money) in persecuting two York residents who had discomfited councillors and shire adminstrative staff by asking embarrassing questions, and

    (b) to drag other, less senior, members of staff into giving credence and effect to that persecution.

    It also reflects very poorly on councillors of the day who not only approved the actions of those officials but in at least one case pledged support in writing to the perpetrator.

    And Commissioner Best wants a line in the sand? Is he kidding? In my book what happened to Simon and Heather is one of the worst instances of misconduct reported by Fitz Gerald, but not by any means the only one deserving investigation. We shouldn't rest until every single allegation of wrongdoing is properly acknowledged, investigated and the perpetrators held to account.

    Bugger the line in the sand, Mr Best. Tell Minister Simpson and his senior staff to butt out, join us in demanding a full, open and impartial inquiry, help put matters right for those who were wronged, work closely with Matthew Reid and councillors who support him, and guess what, you could be a local hero.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I am surprised we can afford Jacky. Have you seen the financials? We are paying Mr Best over $13K per month and that doesn't include accommodation, meals etc. The question remains, Which items on our current budget are to be set aside for this cost?

    Jacky and Ray's relentless pursuit of the Saints was not only unprofessional it was cruel and senseless. Why did they start it all? Who knows. RH gets offended very easily. Ask a question in 2008 about his credit card and expect to be in his bad books till 2014. The only person I can compare him with is Pat Hooper who similarly holds a grudge over the smallest criticism and makes you pay in the worst possible way. They're just not nice people. They refuse to be questioned. LG is definitely the wrong environment for egotistical people who take personal offence at being scrutinized.

    This particular threat of prosecution is the tip of the iceberg when it comes to all the terrible things RH did to the Saints and plenty of others. In all cases of similar behavior against other York people I can think of the attacks from the SOY came as a direct result of asking a question of them. Sounds exaggerated but true. PH has been known to say "Stop anything that person wants to do." Three instances I can think of. How do I know this? Because other Councillors would tell me just before they would put the knife in my back.

    I am most disgusted at Pat, Tony and Duperouzel who voted to prosecute the Saints against legal advice and departmental advice just because Ray and Jacky said so. HOW DARE they use our money to victimize a resident who never did anything wrong in the first place. The Saints always complied. Those Councillors should be ashamed of themselves aiding and abetting a crusade to destroy a ratepayer. Course TB has selective memory so in one ear and out the other hey Tone?

    Yes Mr Saint has put signs in his window. This was long after the problems started. He and his wife (by default) had no voice at Council. They were silenced completely by TB for 18 months (completely illegal, but ignored by the DLG.) I would hang signs around my neck and stand outside the SOY offices if I had to, whatever it takes to expose what is going on, especially if they silenced me. I would be angry and putting a few signs in my window would be the least of their problems. Thank god he did put signs in the window and did fight for so long at such personal and financial cost to expose the truth. Both the Saints have been instrumental in exposing the truth about SOY in more ways than one and those of you who labelled Simon (and others) "trouble makers" should now crawl in on your hands and knees, apologize and thank him.

    Those of you who say the Fitzgerald Report is hogwash, take off your blinkers.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I pity Pat Hooper, he has an insatiable appetite for recognition and power.

      He surely does not believe he has represented everybody in York fairly - does he? How can he, when he completely ignores those he does not like.

      Delete
    2. The truly sad part is he must honestly believe he has done nothing wrong otherwise he would have resigned. When he comes back I have plenty of questions ready for him. Question is are you ready to truthfully answer them Pat?

      Delete
  3. I've read the financials and I can't see what the invoice relates to.
    Is it a SITA matter?

    ReplyDelete
  4. Truth and Justice11 February 2015 at 06:19

    Well, this lady is doing alright for herself; e.g. Cunderdin Shire's Unconfirmed Minutes of 18th December 2014:
    http://www.cunderdin.wa.gov.au/Assets/Council_Minutes/1.10_Minutes_-_Unconfirmed_18th_December_2014.pdf
    Payment of Accounts for the Month of November: 14/11/2014 EFT-2488 Payment: - Glenwarra Development Services -$ 11,880.00
    That's for one little job. She knows how to look after herself.
    And still representing our Shire on the SITA case, and The Race Club.
    Wow! What a crazy mixed up world.

    And getting back to the Saints issue: Thank you for the detailed, systematic exposé above about JJ, and wholehearted agreement with Cadre's comments, and James P has not let himself down in his summary statements, either.

    I feel like using language I don't usually, because there are some people whose knowing and deliberate evil acts deserve our judging them. These are the kinds of things that cannot be excused by any excuse of upbringing or disadvantage. Jacky can only blame herself for knowingly persecuting a family and destroying their business. She cannot even blame her boss. She should have had the integrity to decline an order to do evil. Was it that she wanted Manager of Planning Services at Shire of York on her CV? That's what she has, written on: au.linkedin.com/pub/jacky-jurmann/57/818/772/en
    Viz:
    Director Glenwarra Development Services
    August 2014 – Present (7 months)York, Western Australia
    Providing town planning services to local government and developers in the Avon Valley, Wheatbelt and beyond. Available for private consultancy, short-term contracts and casual urban and regional planning work.
    Manager of Planning Services
    Shire of York
    February 2011 – July 2014 (3 years 6 months)York, Western Australia
    Development Assessment Planning
    Port Macquarie-Hastings Council
    2001 – 2011 (10 years)Port Macquarie, NSW

    How dare she! She should be hanging her head in shame, just as should some others who, without conscience, knowingly did wrong to the people of York they were meant to serve, including ambushing our Shire President and causing lasting trauma to some of our previously 'willing horse' contributors to the community. An accidental wrong is one thing, and an apology in such a case usually suffices. However, a deliberate wrong not retracted and redressed but escalated and perpetuated requires legal action to bring her to appreciate the significance of her actions (I am being mild, here), as others have recognised.

    How does she dare to base her business round here? She brings shame to the good name York had. And yes, who has the greater sin? The person who persecutes, or the person who exposes the persecution, so helping York become aware of what has actually been happening? I fully and completely agree with Cadre who thanked the Saints for risking more flack by exposing that matter and others to the public; a single-handed (or dual-handed) precursor to emboldening us to blog.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. On the Shire of Cunderdin website, Jacky Jurmann is listed as Town Planning Officer. She shares her surname with one Tim Jurmann, Environmental Health Officer who is also Building Officer.

      I thought she did a good job in preparing the case for rejection on town planning grounds of SITA's landfill proposal back in late 2013.

      There can be no excuse for what she did to the Saints under Ray Hooper's direction, but I'd love to hear her side of the story. Fitz Gerald asked her to comment on what he'd been told about her, but she declined the opportunity to defend her good name.

      Delete
    2. James, I believe she was all for the Landfill project, until it was found out what was being planned.

      Would never trust her myself.

      Delete
    3. Ask yourself the question, are these people genuinely acting on behalf of the ratepayer or is there some underlying motive.
      Had these people been acting in the interest of the public, then the SITA business should have been made public from the very start.
      To withhold information of this type from the public is bad enough, to withhold it after a Freedom of Information application was lodged is despicable, to force the applicant into the situation where they have to go to the Commissioner is criminal.
      If she had any issues with Ray Hooper's directions, she could have 'whistle-blown', she would have been afforded protection, she didn't, why?
      If the Fitzgerald report wrongly accused her, she could have taken the Shire to the cleaners, instead, she was out like a rat up a drainpipe.

      Delete
  5. I'm no expert or a lawyer but I was under the understanding that administration law encompasses a requirement for any agency to be able to account for its decisions making processes.
    There is also the legal and moral requirement for an agency to be able to explain and ultimately justify its decisions.
    My question is; what initiated this action, was it a complaint generated by a member of the public, or, is malice the motive? A reason must exist!
    This is why it is imperative for a public body to be fully accountable to the public and to be in a position of being able to justify any decision it makes, as being in the best interest of the public.
    If what I am reading is true, and I see no reason why it should not be, the Shire of York need to justify what it did to the Saint's as being in the public interest.
    I wonder what clouded the Shires reasoning to the extent that it ignored the decision made by the State Administration Tribunal by subsequently unanimously voting to prosecute the Saint's though the courts, when the only avenue open to the Shire was to appeal to the Supreme Court of Western Australia?
    Finally, what does this type of behaviour achieve, does it instil confidence in existing businesses, does it attract new businesses to York....?
    You be the judge!
    A. Business

    ReplyDelete
  6. Both Ray Hooper and Jacky Jurmann resigned.
    Why resign if innocent?
    If these two were falsely accused, then insist the FitzGerald report is thoroughly investigated, clear those names who insist they are innocent.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Take a look at Omnibus 50 and tell me again about her good name. Your biggest downfall Jacky was that you think some of us are not as clever as you. I know what you did and why.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. She thought she was so clever, sick b***h.

      Delete
  8. I had the misfortune to deal with her, the politest word I can think of to describe her is sanctimonious.
    I could go on but I doubt they'll be published.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Well I hope Daggy German is happy about the contribution she made to York, NOT!

    ReplyDelete
  10. Wonder if Jacky J. left the Eastern States for similar reasons she left the Shire of York?

    ReplyDelete
  11. She made Mario's life hell at the Bela Cucina, all over a tiny little sign.
    Good work Jacky, hope you are very happy with all your accomplishments.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Bawden had a flashing light outside the Spooky Hall and the woman at the Terrace Cafe had a flashing light in her window, nothing happened to them.
      Inconsistent decision making at its best.

      Delete
  12. How could the current admin contract this person back to the Shire. There are questions raised in the Fitzgerald report about her (serious) and she walked away. Now she's back no questions asked. Now Carbone? Commissioner Best drawing a line in the sand does not mean bringing back these people!

    ReplyDelete
  13. I love it that when you Google Jurmann's name, this blog comes up so the whole world can read what a nasty piece of work she is for evermore!
    Good work Jacky.

    ReplyDelete
  14. If you anti SITA's trust this b___h your mad. Like Ray Hooper, she knew what was going on in the very early days but chose to stay quiet.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Jackie has now turned up in Shire of Northam April 2018 and still up to her tricks....

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes I have been victim to her tricks, very very similar to the original post, Danni contact you for details please

      Delete
  16. Is she a Jacky, Jacqui or a Jackie?

    ReplyDelete
  17. Whatever it calls itself this valuable information (though not overly flattering) is here for posterity including the Jurmann offspring should they wish to engage in genealogy at some time in the future. Yes your c**t of a mother was really that bad, a manipulative lying individual, a model of how the modern public servant has evolved.

    ReplyDelete
  18. She's an abomination of a woman, I have had very similar issues with her in recent times at Northam shire

    ReplyDelete