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.

Notice of Special Council Meeting - 11 February 2015

Posted on: Monday, 9 February 2015 at 8:48:46 AM

Notice of Special Council Meeting - 11 February 2015

A Special Council Meeting will be held on Wednesday 11 February 2015 commencing at 3:00pm at the York Recreation & Convention Centre, Barker Street, York.
PURPOSE OF THE MEETING:

• Increase number of Councillors.
• Receive the 2013/2014 Annual Report.
• Set annual electors meeting date for 25 February 2015.

GRAEME SIMPSON
Acting Chief Executive Officer

IS THIS THE BEST FOR YORK? Jane Elise Ferro

Due to a change in the Shire of York’s Business Direction, The office of the York Information Services will be CLOSED Monday’s and Tuesday’s until further notice.

Effective Monday 9 February, Council will trial closure of the Information Services on Mondays and Tuesdays each week excluding Public Holidays.

Is This the Best for York?

Which of your ‘visions for the potential future of York’ does this fit into, Mr Best? I’m at a loss as to how this qualifies as consultation with the community. Perhaps this is part of New Oregon Model: Envision, Plan and Achieve. It appears you alone are taking credit for all three steps in the process – envisioning, planning and achieving. That is, unless one of the committees you’ve engaged on behalf of the town’s interests will explain how this “Change of Business Direction” came about.

From what I (and others) have read in the cover article of the latest Community Matters, you intended discussing ideas / information with the community Visioning Forums. This would then be “reported to community organisations, where they can decide on the best course of action to ensure a positive outcome, within an overall vision that the community has agreed on”.  There hasn’t been any community agreement in this matter that I am aware of. Therefore, towards which ‘Change of Business Direction’ are we being herded?

One thing I can say for certain is you haven’t consulted (all) the businesses. I haven’t heard anything about it in the shop I manage – Settlers’ Gift Shop in the heart of town – nor have my colleagues along Avon Terrace said anything to me. Therefore, I imagine they are as much in the dark as I am, along with other business owners in York. It’s obvious the community has NOT been consulted about this “Change of Business Direction”.

Did you cross-reference this decision with the tourist town you suggest we emulate, Hahndorf, in SA? I very much doubt they withdraw assistance from their visitors / tourists on Mondays and Tuesdays.

Do you realize the importance of keeping York’s Visitors’ Centre open every day? Many of the attractions along the Terrace are closed the first part of the week, so there is little available for tourists as they walk up and down the main street. There is often an overflow of weekend visitors on Monday. I have been directing enquiries to the Town Hall / Visitors’ Centre for suggestions on where they can go / what they can do to experience all that York has to offer. This often includes accommodation enquiries.

Then there are those visitors who don’t come into the shops but attempt to locate the signposted Information Centre. Will there be an information board to tell them no information is available on Mondays and Tuesdays?

In my opinion, Mr Best, you’re not off to a very good start in “getting the foundations right for managing York into the future together ” considering the importance of tourists to an historical town such as ours.

Jane Elise Ferro

NOTES FROM UNDERGROUND James Plumridge

Who takes care of the caretaker, when the caretaker’s busy taking care?

Like me, you may have been a mite surprised to read on the front page of the latest edition of ‘York and Districts Community Matters’ (YDCM) that our Commissioner, James Best, is here as ‘caretaker’ of the suspended York Shire Council. 

For me, the word ‘caretaker’ evokes nostalgic memories of my distant English childhood.  In those days, every state school had someone called a caretaker. I particularly remember from primary school a seedy old chap with a mop and bucket, who reeked of tobacco and disinfectant and could often be discerned crouching outside the boys’ toilets rolling cigarettes.

Commissioner Best is nothing like him, as the photo accompanying the article makes clear.  It’s a pleasant photo, cleverly posed and composed, taken by local photographer Lisa Astle.  It shows the Commissioner to his best advantage, sitting on a conference table with a pen at the ready in his right hand.  Maybe copies are available from Lisa at a reasonable price.  I’m sure he would be happy to sign them.

I have a few ideas, or perhaps I should say ‘ideations’, I’d like to share with you arising from the article, but first I want to give my namesake a well-deserved pat on the back. 

Turn to page 12 of YDCM, and read the ‘infotorial’ (sic) from AVRA entitled ‘The Missing Bits’.  James has assured AVRA that he supports the Shire’s position on SITA’s proposed landfill and is keen to represent York as its JDAP representative at the SAT hearings. 

In that capacity he will stand in for Matthew Reid, our ruler-in-exile, or in the words of the Jacobite toast, ‘the king over the water’.

This should dispel once and for all persistent rumours that Mr Best’s appointment reflected government support for SITA’s proposal. It is good news for York.

So come on, Hon. Mia Davies, our very own parliamentary representative and ‘passionate’ lover of the Wheatbelt, don’t be shy, take a leaf from James Best’s book and tell us, before Colin calls an election, where you stand on the landfill issue.  

The New Oregon Model

Until the Commissioner mentioned it, I’d never heard of the New Oregon Model. So I googled the topic, and found an article by one Steven Ames at http://www.jfs.tku.edu.tw/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/152-S05.pdf .  

In four short pages, Mr Ames, a management consultant, managed to convince me that I had no idea what he was going on about.  Not even Stephen Hawking was able to do that.

Then I looked more carefully, and on the third page found a series of questions underpinning the tripartite ‘Community Visioning Process’ on which the model is based (‘Envision, Plan, Achieve’).  I felt as Alan Turing must have felt when he and his team found the key to Enigma, or like Ventris and Chadwick when they deciphered the logo-phonetic Mycenaean script known as Linear B. (Stop showing off, James P.  Signed, your wife.)

These were the questions, all in the plainest of plain English:

·         Where are we now?

·         Where are we going?

·         Where do we want to be?

·         How do we get there?

·         Are we getting there?

·         Are we having fun yet?

(I added the last one myself.)

More nostalgia, as my mind drifted back to the ubiquitous ‘workshops’ of the ‘80s and ‘90s, when earnest ‘consultants’ * exhorted lethargic public servants and NGO staff and volunteers to cover acres of butchers’ paper with answers to questions that were pretty well identical with the ones quoted above.  (Confucius say:  ‘consultant’ means someone who borrows your watch in order to tell you the time.)

Then it struck me:  people have been doing that kind of stuff for millennia, probably since the dawn of civilization. In those days Gilgamesh and his mates must have used clay tablets instead of butchers’ paper, which I suppose would have slowed things down a bit—or maybe it was sticks making lines and squiggles in the sand.

Translated into everyday language, the process makes sense.  The first three questions relate to something akin to brainstorming, the fourth to planning, and the fifth to monitoring and evaluating progress.  The last question, the one I added, is not as silly as it sounds.  It’s well attested that humour assists (sorry, ‘facilitates’) creative thinking in any field.

So the New Oregon Model boils down to getting people together to talk about their wants, needs and ideas for the future and to form a common purpose regarding important aspects of the life of their community.  Hang on a tick—isn’t that what Matthew Reid, our elected Shire President, was trying to do before the Minister gave him the shove?

*Confession:  Bless me, comrades, for I have sinned.  I was a consultant myself once, way back in the dark ages.  I never really succeeded in walking the walk or talking the talk. Honesty and common sense kept breaking through.

Infamy, infamy, they’ve all got it infamy!

 (apologies to the late Kenneth Williams and Carry on Cleo)

As a frequent contributor to this blog, I was quite deflated to see it described as ‘infamous’ in the YDCM.  Shame on you, Mark Lloyd.

It isn’t infamous. It is famous throughout Australia and apparently even further afield, and becoming increasingly so.  I suppose that if you line up with the Dark Side, meaning Minister Simpson (‘go, winged thought, widen his brow’) and his mutant gaggle of senior bureaucrats (‘may their hair fall out, their teeth turn green, their bowels dissolve and their feet blister’, ancient Hittite malediction), you might prefer to say ‘notorious’, and for some inexplicable reason I would find that perfectly acceptable.

Commissioner Best says the blog is bringing a kind of publicity that ‘isn’t doing York any good at all, most locals and visitors want to see a vibrant, active place’.  Even though I was only a visitor then, I remember York when it was vibrant and active, many years ago, before it fell victim to the Curse of the House of Hooper.  There were trees along Avon Terrace, no empty shops, smiling faces everywhere and you had a wide choice of places to eat and drink. 

Paradise Lost, you might say (but as you’d expect, not without the occasional serpent).

The Commissioner has spent only a month in the town. How would he know what ‘most locals and visitors want’ and what is or isn’t doing us any good?  The blog is certainly raising the morale of its readers by giving the town a voice.  Ask around.

No, James B, my dear fellow, you are wrong.  This blog has put York firmly on the map. Unfettered, the blog will remind York people of their shire’s pristine glory. It will inspire them to rise up against their oppressors and restore their rightful king to his throne.  I dream of the day when tourists will come from the four corners of the earth to visit York, home of that rare humanoid species, the ‘passionate extremist’…

Oh, crikey, I’m envisioning again.  Nurse, fetch my pills.

Another pat on the back for Commissioner Best

I was delighted to read that James B ‘will commit to investigating the issues [raised] in the Fitz Gerald Report and pursue the necessary action to resolve the situation as far as possible under the office of Commissioner’.

I’m baffled, though, by his next sentence:  ‘Of course we wish to minimize any damage it may cause in trying to pursue it’. 

What kind of damage?  Damage to what or whom?  What’s the ‘it’ that may cause it? How will it be minimized?  Who is he reassuring? Commissioner, pray tell us more!

It’s good to see James begin to build bridges, but I remind him that he has a lot of bridges to build following his unpopular usurpation of Matthew Reid’s authority, and his socially awkward speech on Australia Day.  Let’s see you do much better, Mr Best.

Probity Blues Revisited

Probity Blues Revisited

Bill Cebula and James Plumridge

           

If the DLGC doesn’t understand its own Act and Financial Regulations, how can it train York’s councillors in the way things should be done?

 ‘Probity’ is an important word nowadays.  It has all sorts of connotations—integrity, honesty, being able to withstand moral scrutiny.  People with probity are people you can trust not to overcharge you, seduce your partner, steal your car or misuse their corporate credit cards. 

It’s a word politicians and public servants love.  The Department of Local Government and Communities has its own probity guru, Brad Jolly, and uses a device called a ‘probity audit’ to bring errant councils into line.

An earlier posting on this site noted that the Department doesn’t always conform to the high standards of probity it seeks to enforce on others.  Naively, some of us have ascribed that failure to incompetence, self-interest, ministerial arrogance or a combination of all three.  In short, lack of probity.

But perhaps it’s really ignorance of its own legislation that lets the Department down.

Missing shire policies

Last year, following the departure of CEO Hooper, York Shire President Matthew Reid and the Acting CEO Michael Keeble asked Bill Cebula to draft policies for the shire because copies of existing shire policies were nowhere to be found.

The Council was suspended before it got round to approving Bill’s honorary appointment, but he continued with the work, undertaking a study of the Local Government Act of 1995 (‘the Act’) and the Local Government (Financial Management) Regulations 1996 (‘the Regulations’). 

Credit card disclosures

Use, and possible misuse, of corporate credit cards is a matter of interest and concern to ratepayers.  It was a contentious issue in York for many years.  It is hard to see why.  One might have expected the Shire Council to take pleasure in telling ratepayers how their money was being spent.  Instead, requests for information were fiercely resisted.

In a letter dated 29 January 2009, Mr Quentin Harrington, the Department’s Director of Governance and Statutory Support, on behalf of the Minister, told the Shire of York that neither the Act nor the Regulations ‘require copies of bank statements to be included with the monthly financial reports…it has been the practice of the Shire to provide copies of credit card statements as supplementary information to Councillors’.

Mr Harrington went on: ‘The Shire sought advice from the Department and now intends to cease the practice of including copies of credit card statements in the financial report.  Instead it will now provide a summary of purchases made on credit cards…’

Mr Harrington’s advice was wrong.

What the Regulations say

Regulation 11(1)(a) says a local government must develop secure procedures for authorizing payment of accounts.  The intention is that cheques, credit cards or other methods of paying for goods and services, or obtaining money or other benefits, are rendered safe from fraud, theft and improper use generally.

Regulation 13(1) says that if a local government has delegated to the CEO its power to make payments from its funds, a list of accounts paid by the CEO must be prepared for each month.  The list must include for each such account the payee’s name, the amount paid, the date of payment and ‘sufficient information to identify the transaction.’

Regulation 13(2) says that each month a list must be made of accounts requiring council authorization for payment.  The list must show the payee’s name, the amount paid, and, again, sufficient information to identify the transaction, as well as the date of the council meeting to which the list will be submitted.

Regulation 13(3) says that lists prepared in accordance with Regulations 13(1) and 13(2) must be presented to Council (and thereby made available to ratepayers) at the next ordinary meeting after the list is prepared and subsequently recorded in the minutes of the meeting. 

What is meant by ‘sufficient information to identify the transaction’?  In the case of payments made via credit card, it means both the relevant invoice or account and the matching credit card statement.  This was confirmed by the FOI Commissioner’s ruling last year that sufficient details of credit card transactions—bank statements as well as invoices—must be made available to ratepayers.

A mere summary of credit card purchases is not enough.  It isn’t now, and it wasn’t in 2009 when Mr Harrington led the Council to believe it was.

Mr Harrington’s advice had far-reaching consequences.  It encouraged Council to deny ratepayers access to other information, on a broad range of topics, that they were entitled to obtain.  This led to an unprecedented volume of FOI applications, placing an unnecessary burden on Council’s staff and resources.

Secrecy in government is sometimes justified—usually, where matters of national security and diplomatic negotiations are involved—but in general it is a very bad thing, antithetical to democracy.  There is no excuse for it in local government. So far as we know, neither the fate of our nation nor our standing in the world has ever hung on a decision of the York Shire Council.

Financial management

The Act and the Regulations are very specific about what constitutes proper financial management.  Their objective is to minimize the risk of misappropriation of public funds.  In the case of credit card purchases, presenting to council a ‘summary’ that contains only a number of headings and a dollar figure means councillors have no idea what they are ‘noting’ or ‘approving’.  What happened in York from 2009 to 2014 was equivalent to signing a series of blank cheques. Such a procedure is contrary to Australian Accounting Standards, with which councils are bound by Regulation 4 to comply.

The role of the CEO

According to Section 5.41 of the Act, the job of a local government CEO is twofold:  (a) ‘to advise the council in relation to the functions of local government under this Act and other written laws’, and (b) ‘to ensure that advice and information are available to the council so that informed decisions can be made’.  Power and authority are vested in elected councillors, not in the CEO and other administrative staff.

We can only speculate as to why Council sought advice from the Department about suppressing transaction details relating to corporate credit cards. 

Mr Harrington’s advice resulted in Council persistently flouting the law every month for several years—perhaps on as many as 60 separate occasions.  When ratepayers requested information about corporate credit card transactions, as they had every right to do, Council said no.  It got to the point that Council wanted one such ratepayer ruled ‘vexatious’ because he wouldn’t stop asking embarrassing questions. 

It seems likely, though hard to believe, that Shire administrative staff denied some councillors access to details of credit card transactions.  If true, that was a stark breach of Section 5.92(1) of the Act, which clearly states: ‘…a council member or committee member can have access to any information held by the local government that is relevant to the performance by the person of any of his or her functions under the Act or under any other written law’.

So who will train the trainers?

Mr Harrington, the Department and the responsible minister of the day effectively gave Council carte blanche to deny York’s ratepayers information to which the law clearly says they were entitled.

If one of its most senior officers can show such catastrophic ignorance of the Act and Regulations, why should we trust anybody from the Department to train our councillors in the way things should be done?

And what assurance can the Minister give us that his Department will not at some future time advise the Shire Council to flout the Act and Regulations again?

Probity rules, OK? 

THE LATEST NEWS..Homer or Bart Simpson

                  _______________________________________                            

 Councils main source of corruption:Barnett

West Australia's premier says most of the state's corruption comes from local governments.

Local governments are the main source of corruption in Western Australia, Premier Colin Barnett claims.

In a swipe at councils and the leaderless Corruption and Crime Commission, Mr Barnett said the watchdog had not lived up to expectations.
The CCC has been without a full-time commissioner since April 2014 after the previous one resigned following less than two-and-a-half years in the job.
Mr Barnett's comments also come as his government is amalgamating Perth metropolitan councils, slashing their number from 30 to 16.
"I don't deny you get the odd element of corruption - most of it has actually been in local government," Mr Barnett told Fairfax radio on Thursday.
"There hasn't been a great deal in the area of policing.
"What concerns me is organised crime, drug syndicates - that I think is our problem."
Mr Barnett said he intended to sit down with some leaders in justice and law to rethink the role of the CCC.
"I don't believe there's widespread political or corporate corruption in Western Australia. I just don't see any evidence of it," he said.
"Whose to say there's not going to be a corrupt politician or some head of agency in the future, but most of it has been fairly small."
The establishment of the CCC in 2004 was the main recommendation of the Kennedy royal commission, which probed almost 20 years of corrupt and criminal behaviour in the WA police.

_______________________________________

Date: 9 February 2015.

Hon. Tony Simpson

Minister for Local Government

8^th Floor Dumas House

2 Havelock Street

WEST PERTH, WA 6005

Minister Simpson / CC Premier Colin Barnett

YOUR RESIGNATION FROM THE POSITION OF MINISTER FOR LOCAL GOVERNMENT.

The Premier, Colin Barnett, has publically announced that, in his opinion, the WA Corruption and Crime Commission main role now is investigating corruption within the state’s Local Government sector.

Mr. Barnett claims this is because most corruption in Western Australia comes from this third tier of government. (It is the lowest level of governance in the country, being barely recognized by, or legitimized within, the Constitution of Australia.)

Local Government is the responsibility of the individual States and Territories within the Commonwealth, therefore any form of corruption in the Local Government sector of Western Australia is the direct responsibility of the Government of Western Australia. 

The CCC is an extremely expensive, complex organizational failure that has not met its fiat. Through the Premier’s imputation, this failure must include you as Minister for Local Government and your Department of Local Government and Communities.

 

Your mandate is to ensure that governance strictures put in place by your department, prevent the misuse of municipal funds, blatant disregard for the rules governing Conflict-of-Interest matters and the personal abuse of power by elected members and administrators. Or why are you there?

The consensus of public opinion is that you, as the Minister, have failed dismally and your lack of 

ability has led to an increase in such corruption, thereby bringing the Local Government sector into further disrepute.

Corruption can be a criminal offence and any form of aiding, abetting or any refusal to investigate legitimate accusations of corruption can be considered as a criminal offence in itself.   

Mr Barnett has strategically positioned himself by suggesting, through public presumption, that corruption within the Local Government sector is why the CCC still exists and this seriously impugns your reputation as Minister and your department as a whole.

It would place most honourable men in the position of having no recourse but to resign.

Yours sincerely

David Taylor- York Ratepayer.

BEST BULLSHITTER IN TOWN

PUTTING HIS "BEST" FOOT FORWARD.

 In February’s edition of The York and Districts Community Matters York’s Commissioner, James Best, is quoted as saying “It would be fantastic (for York) to become a town like Hahndorf  in Adelaide”  being an example of a tourist town York could emulate.

Unfortunately Hahndorf is not in Adelaide, nor is it part of Adelaide.

A month ago, January 5, 2015, I wrote to the Hon Kim Hames, Minister for Tourism, CC’d to the
Hon Colin Barnett, Premier of Western Australia regarding the tourism industry in York.

The following is part of this letter.

“I am hoping that, now, you and your department show due respect to the overall importance
of historic inland towns, in particular York, as a tourism asset and assist it financially, and otherwise,
to re-establish itself as an Events Tourism market leader.

This is not a selfish request. It is supported by substantive evidence of the financial significance of similar historic towns in other Australian States in their local, national and international tourism markets.

One example is, Hahndorf, in the Adelaide Hills. Established in 1839 by German Lutheran immigrants it has used its ethnic background and its close proximity to Adelaide to develop itself as an integral part of South Australia’s tourism landscape. 

Another is Dalesford in Victoria, established in 1852. Like York and Hahndorf it is located close to a capital city, is close to international and domestic airports, celebrates its Swiss-Italian heritage and has the historical bona fides of being established in excess of 160 years ago.

The Dalesford Local Government Area claims to have 1 million tourists per annum, in excess of 40,000 overnight accommodation bookings, with tourism providing $129 million in gross revenue to the region each financial year.

Like Hahndorf and Dalesford, York has all the ingredients, including an Anglo-Saxon, Northern England, farming heritage it can be proud of, which allowed it to be the first ‘food bowl’ assisting in preventing both starvation and the abandonment of the Swan River Colony.

The fact that York, Western Australia’s first inland rural community, is promoted by Tourism Western Australia as part of “Experience Perth’ appears illogical in practice and can probably only be explained by a Public Service style, economic rationalism in theory.

Experience Perth appears to be partially designed to encourage tourists to enjoy a “Day-tripper” experience to destinations within a 150 kilometer radius of the Perth CBD, ensuring maximum tourist occupancy rate for hotel accommodation providers in the Perth Metropolitan Area.

To the best of my knowledge, Hahndorf is not part of any so-called Adelaide experience- or Dalesford part of a Melbourne one. They are promoted as what they are, not just part of an experience. This is logical- and it is a financial success.

Another intrinsic problem is that some WA Local Government Councils, which are supposed to have significant positive input into the provision of local tourism information and assist in tourism development in their own Local Government Area, have no tourism promotion and marketing expertise what-so-ever.

The resurrection of York as a tourist icon and ‘Gateway to the Heartlands’ could be initially cosmetic in nature to provide a fresh ambiance to the historic York Town site, and be relatively inexpensive.
(Here it should be noted that the Shire of York could have withheld funding in excess of $500,000 from tourism related promotion since the theft from, and financial collapse of, the York Tourist Bureau Inc. in 2009-10.)

I am quite sure that the Shire of York President, Matthew Reid, his council and local tourism business operators would be more than happy to meet with you to discuss a joint Government, Tourism Western Australia and local council project to beautify, rebrand and rebirth, York, as a major WA tourist attraction.

Historic York deserves this.

Of course it may just be a coincidence that Mr. Best came up with the town of HAHNDORF
as his prime example. Then again maybe Minister Hames and Premier Barnett feel that Mr.
Best needs all the help he can get.


David Taylor
YORK ratepayer