Review results delivered behind closed doors
MORNINGTON Peninsula Shire councillors are being urged to improve “transparency” in the wake of the Independent Broad-Based Anti-Corruption Commission’s investigation into allegations of corruption at the City of Casey.
IBAC’s Operation Sandon report tabled in state parliament on 27 July this year “found clear evidence of two [Casey] councillors accepting personal benefits from making or influencing council decisions related to planning or land use”.
IBAC’s launch of Operation Sandon saw Mornington Peninsula Shire councillors order a review of development planning decisions made by the shire over the past two decades.
The move directed that the review give “particular emphasis” to the Martha Cove housing and marina development at Safety Beach.
Results of the review ordered at a public council meeting in January 2020 and presented by CEO John Baker to a private councillor briefing on 31 August 2022, “did not identify any activity, patterns of decision making or other actions that would suggest corruption”.
The review was seen as necessary as the IBAC investigation involved three companies that also had dealings with the shire.
The three companies were Watsons Pty Ltd, Wolfdene Built Pty Ltd and Schutz Consulting Pty Ltd and the shire’s review was made “to determine if there was any reasonable suspicion of corrupt conduct that would require a referral to the IBAC”.
The council’s decision to conduct the review also included a directive that it receives “timely notification of any Woodman or related company application or secondary consent or review of permit and on large projects”.
“I would prefer briefings to be broadcast to ensure accountability and transparency on public matters allowed and lawful under the Local Government Act,” Cr David Gill said last week.
In an email to his colleagues headed Council Transparency Following IBAC Report (Operation Sandon), Gill said councillors could “improve transparency and the ability for councillors to represent our community”.
“One issue concerns asking questions of officers in public, which is under threat at our council meetings without a decision by council being made.
“I believe there has been a gradual encroachment to the rights of councillors in this term due to changes in governance rules and decisions by chairs.”
Gill said he believed councillors may have had “a change of heart” and would now support a review of the rules.
He said questioning officers during public council meetings would be a “first step in restoring community confidence as shown in community feedback surveys”.
Two successive annual community satisfaction surveys have seen the shire hit an “all time low” (“Shire again misses survey satisfaction” The News 21/6/23).
Councillors were this week set to debate Gill’s move that councillors be allowed to question officers about their reports at public council meetings.
Ther shire’s legal and governance manager Amanda Sapolou in this week’s meeting agenda explains the “mechanisms” that enable councillors to question officers and the strict process that needs to be followed to amend its governance rules.
In the wake of the Sandon Report, the “council watchdog” Council Watch urged all Victorian councils to stop discussing officers’ reports in private briefings.
“Councillors need to ensure governance rules do not seek to limit, control, or reduce any councillors’ reasonable rights to free speech and robust public debate on issues,” Council Watch stated.
In its Operation Sandon report IBAC said it “found that [Casey] councillors Sam Aziz and Geoff Ablett promoted John Woodman’s and his clients’ interests on council in exchange for payment and in-kind support”.
It said that neither councillor had declared a conflict of interest in relation to their involvement with John Woodman or his companies on many occasions”.
The review of the shire’s involvement with the companies named by IBAC covered 60 decisions made in the council chambers, 572 decisions made under delegation by shire officers as well as election donations, gifts and benefits made to councillors.
The review – finalised while the IBAC investigation was suspended due to the COVID pandemic – “did not identify any activity, patterns of decision making or other actions that would suggest that there is any evidence of corruption in the decision making of councillors or council officers, although Baker said it would “remain open such that any further developments from Operation Sandon can be addressed in due course”.
