11 October 2025 Post
Campaign Issues
Using EM Titles for Campaign Purposes
LGIRS say below on their website. While we agree with it, LGIRS gives no statutory authority for this proposition against which to make a complaint. We suspect it is Conduct Rule 17 prohibition against using LG resources for election campaigns but it is not clear. We have asked the LG Minister. Noting LGIRS are often not accurate with their legal information in our opinion but it is an indication of how the Panel might deal with minor breach conduct complaints.
“Using council titles during campaigning
Once elected, council members receive titles such as Councillor, Mayor, or President, and may be elected as Deputy Mayor or Deputy President. If you’re campaigning for re-election, you must clearly separate your official council role from your role as a candidate when:
- speaking at public events
- talking to the media
- creating printed campaign materials sending emails or posting on social media.
Make sure it’s clear whether you’re acting as a council member or as a candidate.
If you use social media in your role as a council member, avoid posting or sharing campaign content on your official accounts. Keep campaign material separate from your council communications.
Visit LGIRS guidance page for election campaigning for more information, which includes information on “appropriate use of social media”
——————————————————————————————————————–
26 August 2025 Post
LG Electioneering Using LG Resources
Conduct Rule 17 provides that an EM must not, directly or indirectly, use LG resources of a local government for an electoral purpose … unless authorised by Council or CEO (for ANY election).
“Electoral purpose” means persuading electors to vote in a particular way at an election.
Prudent CEOs will be scrupulous about ensuring the LG resources permitted for use in election by one EM or candidate will be known and available to all EMs and candidates, and any CEO permission given will be published in writing to all EMs/candidates.
“LG resources” include:
- LG official logo
- text comprising LG email address
- any property, equipment or material (including leased)
- financial, physical or human resources of or under LG control
- employees’ services in their hours of work
- LG email server and service
“Property” is anything – land or not – belonging to, or vested in, or under LG’s care, control, management – such as a wall or reserve boundary fence used for banners/posters.
—————————————————————————————————————————–
26 August 2025 Post
Candidate Nominations
- 27 August: Last day for mandatory state wide notice (as LG Act defined) advertising for candidate nominations.
- 28 August: Candidate nominations open for 8 days; CEO must commence electoral gift register available on-line, at offices.
——————————————————————————————————————–
25 August 2025 Post
Voting Information Dissemination in LG Elections
At every opportunity candidates need to make clear that in LG elections there is Optional Preferential Voting, which means an elector can vote for:
- one candidate – by putting a number 1 next to the candidate name, OR
- some candidates – by numbering two or more but not all candidates in the order of your preference, OR
- all candidates – in the order of electors’ preference.
—————————————————————————————————————————–
14 August 2025 Post
Protecting Threatened Species in your LG District & LG Elections
Council can resolve to request the CEO to report all the evidence it needs regarding a threatened species in need of protection, invite experts to speak to Council etc’
On receipt of that report Council can resolve that it wants the species protected, resolve to insert a budget item for what Council can do to help and send a copy of the Council meeting minutes of that resolution and budget allocation to the state and federal environment Ministers under a cover letter signed by the EM who put up the motion.
In the alternative, a community group could prepare a Notice of Motion with all the evidence research done and work with an Elected Member to put up that Notice of Motion on a Council meeting agenda. Now is a good time given the upcoming Local Government Elections. Finding a new candidate or current EM candidate who would put up such a motion and vote for them.
Process for listing threatened species, ecological communities and key threatening processes under EPBC Act is published as a helpful flow chart here:
——————————————————————————————————————–
23 August 2025 Post
PRIVACY Protection Reform is Coming
OIC Privacy Tips of the Month
1. Do not reuse the same password on more than one account.
2. Deploy multi-factor authentication on all your accounts where possible.
Sign up to new Information Commissioner’s OIC newsletter here:
——————————————————————————————————————–
22 August 2025 Post
WA’s New Information Commissioner
1 July 2025: Annelies Moens is WA’s inaugural Information Commissioner under new Information Commissioner Act 2024, which adds new functions of privacy and freedom of information additional to those under FOI Act, which was amended 1 July 2025 to align with new IC Act.
LGs will need to transform to meet new requirements under new “Privacy and Responsible Sharing of Information Act 2024” (PRIS Act) which establishes WA’s first privacy framework.
All Council workforce plans should now have a PRIS champion and be preparing for introduction of a mandatory Privacy Policy and Information Breach Policy compliant with PRIS Act requirements.
The New Privacy Principles, operative from 1 July 2026 are here https://www.wa.gov.au/media/155186/download?inline
OIC will be taking privacy complaints against LGs from 1 July 2026.
There is a new OIC website that explains all
——————————————————————————————————————–
21 August 2025 Post
LG Electioneering
Conduct Rule 18 does not apply to candidates who are not currently EM. It appears that (but is not yet finally clarified) current EM as a candidate can breach Rule 18 when electioneering. If this is the case, a current EM campaigning for re-election, or for mayoral office has different constraints from candidates who are not EMs. This means the rule of law applies differently to candidates): Kingston and Local Government Standards Panel [2024] WASAT 85.
18. Securing personal advantage or disadvantaging others (1) A council member must not make improper use of their office — (a) to gain, directly or indirectly, an advantage for the council member or any other person; or (b) to cause detriment to the local government or any other person.
Behaviour conduct rules apply to candidates: see preface to each rule 7 > 12. Only Conduct Rules 20(2)&(4) apply to candidates.
—————————————————————————————————————————–
19 August 2025 Post
Minimum Election Caretaker Period From 4 September
A statutory caretaker period applies to LGs, which applies from close of nominations until an election result is declared, the day after the close of nominations if the number of candidates is same or less than the EM positions available, or the day after a candidate dies if the result has not been decided.
During a caretaker period a LG cannot undertake a s.3.73 “significant act” as defined.
Council can decide to extend this by starting sooner, or expanding the scope, as it decides.
—————————————————————————————————————————–
18 August 2025 Post
WA Train Paths
ERA has just approved WA’s railway operator’s statement in relation to allocation of train paths and access to train paths that have ceased to be used. Policy covers intended paths, underutilised paths but excludes some trainlines.
There were 5 public submissions and NONE from local governments.
Does your LG need a train route? Does it have/wish to have rails to trails projects?
Was your CEO advised that submissions were open? Did CEO advise Council of possible submissions?
——————————————————————————————————————–
17 August 2025 Post
Investigating WA Development
WA Legislative Council majority has just pushed Cooke Government into holding a “Select Committee Into Land Development and Planning in Western Australia”
The Committee will inquire into and report about:
- Land use planning, transactions, development
- Local planning schemes, strategies, policies, frameworks especially WAPC, DAPs
- Land transaction decisions
- If development decisions align with key planning documents
- High profile development decisions including but not limited to Burswood motorsports facility and Smiths Beach.
WE HAVE ONLY 12 MONTHS!
Start now on,
- Gathering evidence, especially by sworn affidavits, for submissions
- EM notice of motion to Councils supporting establishment of the inquiry and send minutes to inquiry, now
- Community Public Question Time questions and statements urging Council to formally support establishment of committee now, and about submissions that should be made on particular development/subdivision/zoning and the governance around them
- notices of motion to submit on matters affecting your local government
- election profiles for upcoming LG elections relating to this inquiry
- start drafting private and group submissions especially supporting third party merits review rights and establishment of a Land and Environment Court with judicial powers
These are the Committee members who you can contact about the committee:
Hon. Neil Thomson MLC (Chair) https://www.parliament.wa.gov.au/Parliament/Memblist.nsf/AllDocs/FA2C66ABEF376A4E482586DF001F0EE7?opendocument
Hon. Dr Brad Pettitt MLC (Deputy Chair)
https://www.parliament.wa.gov.au/Parliament/Memblist.nsf/AllDocs/F16CD72B92EEF3E748258C83001A98C2?opendocument
Hon. Dan Caddy MLC
https://www.parliament.wa.gov.au/Parliament/Memblist.nsf/AllDocs/BFF1F0353A6FA956482586DC0007F0C2?opendocument
Hon. Lauren Cayoun MLC
https://www.parliament.wa.gov.au/Parliament/Memblist.nsf/AllDocs/047DFD70901D362948258C83001929A7?opendocument
Hon. Amanda Dorn MLC
Information about parliamentary committees generally here https://www.parliament.wa.gov.au/WebCMS/webcms.nsf/content/about-committees
Information about this committee here https://www.parliament.wa.gov.au/Parliament/commit.nsf/WCurrentNameNew/FFD74EC37410553348258CE600204762?OpenDocument#current
Committee Terms of Reference are here https://www.parliament.wa.gov.au/Parliament/commit.nsf/WCurrentNameNew/FFD74EC37410553348258CE600204762?OpenDocument#current
These are contact details for the Committee
Parliament House
4 Harvest Tce
West Perth WA 6005
08 9222 7491
CHECK Into Committee website at least weekly to find out when it is meeting, submissions are due, programming.
——————————————————————————————————————–
1 August 2025 Post
Who Is Governing WA?
So we have DLGSC/LGIRS not regulating local government (OAG Report);DevelopmentWA giving away public land (OAG Report);DWER giving away our water (OAG Report);DWER letting waste facilities pollute us, our water and soils (OAG report);DPLH presiding over poorly planned development destroying local amenity and biodiversity in the absence of third party merits review rights (Liberal and Labor Party policy position);DBCA not protecting Threatened Ecological Communities (OAG report);PSC not protecting and fostering whistleblowers (weak legislation, noting TIA’s recognition of “huge unfinished business for getting Australia back on track. A priority must be a dedicated Whistleblower Protection Authority to end the culture of silence and ensure the people who play a vital role in exposing corruption and wrongdoing, across all sectors, get the support they deserve”);
an Ombudsman off on junkets;
WAEC Commissioner on leave after shocking state election procedures/conduct; LG CEOs able to resign from their position to forestall investigation of their conduct/maladministration (too many to name); LG EMs punished for exercising their freedom of political communication in trying to govern (conduct regs);
unelected Commissioners without financial or legal qualifications and with at least perceived conflicts of interest replacing EMs who were dealing with a failed financial audit years in the making (Nedlands);
unelected WALGA running LG policy agendas, LG procurement, LG insurance (despite parliamentary LG Reform committee recommending this stop);LG Minister refusing to amend LG Act to require LG CEOs to act in good faith (despite parliamentary committee recommending this).
Parliamentary Accounts Committee not properly overseeing OAG report and outcomes; Joint Standing Committee on Delegated Legislation refusing domestic cat containment local laws based on their poor understanding of local law making.
Is this departmental/LG maladministration of budgets, not enough money in budgets, ethical leadership abandoned to corrupting powerful influencers, bad law, ignorance or general malaise where no-one is fearful of losing their poorly undertaken highly paid public service/LG jobs?
Is this what WA Inc Mark 2 looks like?——————————————————————————————————————–
29 July 2025 Post
Victoria Public Accounts and Estimates Committee
Representatives of 18 local councils from across metropolitan and regional Victoria are set to appear before Victoria’s Public Accounts and Estimates Committee (PAEC) in public hearings scheduled for this week.
The Committee is inquiring into fraud and corruption controls in local government. The inquiry is a follow-up on two Auditor-General reports tabled in 2019 and 2022.
We need such an inquiry in WA.
——————————————————————————————————————–
Letters Section : Post Newspaper 26 July 2025
–——————————————————————————————————————-
26 July 2025 Post
OH Dear! State Auditor finds WA Government (DBCA) Failing Our Ecological Communities
LGs will have to step up – come to Urban Bushland Forum 31 August to find out how: https://www.bushlandperth.org.au/events/
Where:
DCBA = Department of Biodiversity, Conservation and Attractions
TEC = Conservation of Threatened Ecological Communities
DBCA:
- TEC recovery plans are interim, outdated
- has not made progress in monitoring 72% TECs not on DBCA managed land
- not using notifications to landowner powers
- does not have enough TEC information
- has significant backlog without a plan to resolve
cannot effectively track, demonstrate impact of its practical conservation activities on TECs
- is not using all protection options available under BC Act, leaving some TECs with legal but not practical protection.
Ecological communities are unique groups of plants, animals and microorganisms that interact and rely on each other in a specific environment. TECs are those at a high risk of collapse and once destroyed, unlikely to recover.
First listing of TECs under WA’s Biodiversity Conservation Act 2016 (BC Act) made 26 May 2023, noting 65 TECs > 45 critically endangered, 9 endangered, 11 vulnerable; including Roebuck Bay, Kimberley and Bluff Knoll in Stirling Range National Park, of which, 27 also listed under EPBC Act (Cth) and 390 Priority Ecological Communities under BC Act: see OAG Conservation of Threatened Ecological Communities Report 23:2024- 25, 26 June 2025.
OAG noted
OAG Report 23: 2024-25 26 June 2025
——————————————————————————————————————–
25 July 2025 Post
Elected Members Access to Records
LG records are property of the LG corporate entity, not the CEO.
LG records’s purpose includes assessing the administration’s performance.
CEOs have conflict of interest in records access outcomes, and would have no role in access decisions in a well governed LG.
EM right to LG records access at LG Act s.5.92 is so badly drafted that LG Minister, CEOs and DLGSC have felt the need to remedy the poor drafting by adding s.5.92A.
s.5.92B and s.5.92C in 2023, and s.5.92(4)&(5) to wrest control of which records CEOs can refuse or make difficult for individual elected members to access; and to make MORE time consuming procedures by regulations called “ Local Government (Default Communications Agreement) Order 2025” and “Local Government Regulations Amendment Regulations”. The Minister could just have redrafted s.5.92.
Your Council might be asked to endorse submissions drafted by your CEOs. Any proposal that reduces power of EMs or Council to access records in a timely way, further reduce Council powers or put CEOs between the LG’s records and members of its governing body MUST be resisted. Submissions are due on this proposed order and new regulations by 22 August 2025.
——————————————————————————————————————–
10 July 2025 Post
Its that time of year again!
2025/2026 Membership invoices for current members should now be in your inboxes.
If you follow the page and are a current elected member and would like to join – please apply for membership via https://lgema.org.au/membership/
Former EMs are always welcome – no charge for membership.
Our next two SME forums are booked in and in August we have a photographer booked to do head shots for the elections as a members benefit.
—————————————————————————————————————————–
10 July 2027 Post
Supreme Court overturns SAT decision
SHIRE OF MOUNT MAGNET -v- ATLANTIC VANADIUM PTY LTD [2025] WASC 274
In interpretating LG Act s.6.26 court found:
- It is the land that is rateable, not the owner
- Crown land the subject of/occupied by Miscellaneous Licence under the Mining Act 1987 (WA) is rateable land.
—————————————————————————————————————————–
6 July 2025 Post
Confidentiality, Not
Just because a CEO marks a document confidential and Council agrees or does not exercise its power to disagree, it is not necessarily confidential.
In Travers and City of Armadale, Re [2025] WAICmr the Information Commissioner released documents from a report concerning the Roleystone Volunteer Bushfire Brigade, which had been referred to in the agenda of an Armadale Council meeting in 2021!
—————————————————————————————————————————–
4 July 2025 Post
Boulter on Local Government: A Handbook for Elected Members
A 2 volume, 800 page first edition is now available for order: see https://lgema.org.au/ for ordering details.
——————————————————————————————————————–
2 July 2025 Post
ABC Report
Shire of Coolgardie CEO, appointed in 2016 fresh from criminal conviction in Magistrates court and CCC corruption findings, resigned in April ’25 after 5 month suspension; and as CEO of Shire of Coolgardie has left the Shire in dire financial straits, with doubts as to its financial viability including from a net loss of $4.6 million for 12 month to June 30, 2024; liabilities exceeding asset base by $14.2 million, and owing $4.8 million to creditors.
When will the LG Minister do something about wayward CEOs who move from LG to LG causing havoc and not complying with LG Act and bullying mercilessly any EM with temerity to question them? How often have CCC and OAG identified LG CEO performance issues, but nothing is done; with certain bodies who have the ministers’ ear laying the blame on EMs and Councils, who conspiracy theorists would suggest are being deliberately kept in the dark as to their governance powers, duties and responsibilities. And no, the Minister will not let LGEMA do mandatory EM training. Furthermore, the LG Minister is about to remove legal support for very same EMs battling bullying and coercive control to right the wrongs they see in their LGs. They are such great heroes deserving of public service medals!
Sadly I guess the Shire has no time to resist enormous mining pressure for minerals needed for climate change response such as batteries, with especially grave potential impacts across the mineral rich Coolgardie woodlands, which comprise largest in world remaining Mediterranean forests, woodlands, and scrub biome, which conservation status is critical/endangered. They are too busy going into debt in this mining paradise.
CCC Report on the Investigation of Alleged Public Sector Misconduct by a Local Government Employee in Relation to the Purchase of Management Systems Software 19 December 2013.
—————————————————————————————————————————–
28 June 2025 Post
LGEMA Forum 28 June 2025
LGEMA members and guests had lots of questions for our SMEs presenting on current hot topics in Local Government.
James Guzman AECOM Associate Director, Geosciences and Remediation Services, Perth, WA – Responding to PFAS Soil Contamination.
Jane Bremmer Chair: Toxics Free Australia – Local Government Responsibilities in Waste Management.
Scott Cairns: CEO Mindarie Regional Council : Looking Back, Looking Forward – Waste Management Pitfalls for Elected Members.
Dr Bruce Webber: Executive, WA Feral Cat Working Group – A Cat-astrophic Tale of Skulduggery and Subterfuge.Sandra Boulter launched her book “Boulter on Local Government” available to buy. Please email lgema@iinet.net.au for details.
Congratulations to our door prize winners – thank you very much to Cr Mark Hutchison, Shire of Dardanup for the beautiful cheese boards.
Membership applications—————————————————————————————————————————–
25 June 2025 Post
WAEC Turmoil
Local Governments expecting expertly conducted fair elections in October might consider having in-person elections and putting poll out for tender.
ABC: “The WA Electoral Commission faced issues in this year’s state election but is now without half of the leadership team on that polling day as local government elections loom. Former acting electoral commissioner Courtney Barron has taken leave, election operations director Shani Wood has resigned from her role and then-commissioner Robert Kennedy took unplanned leave earlier in the year”.
This is following on from Court of Disputed Returns Magistrate stating in court earlier this year that it was not his job to punish Electoral Commissioner, after handing down court of disputed returns LG election decision.
——————————————————————————————————————–
LGEMA MEMBERS AND MEMBER APPLICANTS ARE INVITED TO LGEMA 2025 FORUM ONE
(13) WASTE MANAGEMENT & CAT ACT CATASTROPHE | Facebook
Please remember to book in so we can order lunches and catering! Looking forward to catching up with you all
—————————————————————————————————————————–
18 June 2025 Post
LG Bullying Culture
Investigating why 70 women didn’t run in Victoria’s 2024 LG elections, ALGWA (Australian Local Government Women’s Association) found 80% cited abusive LG environment as contributing factor. VLGA survey showed 61% of female respondents impacted by threatening, intimidating behaviour by fellow EMs.
LGEMA agrees that many WA LG cultures condone, foster bullying cultures where the BULLIED are men AND women; and the BULLIES are EMs, CEOs and senior employees.
It’s so rife that many LGS are unsafe workplaces and being safe prevails over good governing.
Toxic culture forcing women to leave local government – Government News
—————————————————————————————————————————–
17 June 2025 Post
Does your LG Have a RAMSAR Site, Threatened Ecological Community (TEC)?
RAMSAR wetlands identified under international RAMSAR Treaty are representative, rare, unique, important for conserving biological diversity.
WA RAMSAR wetlands are: Becher Point wetlands, Eighty Mile Beach, Forrestdale and Thompsons Lakes, Lake Gore, Lake Warden system, Lakes Argyle and Kununurra, Muir-Byenup system, Ord River floodplain, Peel-Yalgorup system, Roebuck Bay, Toolibin Lake, Vasse-Wonnerup system.
27 TECs under EPBC Act in first listing of TECs under WA’s Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 made 26 May 2023 (BC Act), where 65 ecological communities listed as threatened under WA’s BC Act: 45 critically endangered, 9 endangered, 11 vulnerable.
Prudent Councils will ensure any material agenda item recognises RAMSAR sites, TECs, and provides all information relevant to any possible TEC/biodiversity impact/loss from proposal.
—————————————————————————————————————————–
16 June 2025 Post
WA Water Extraction Not Being Regulated
As OAG exposure last week of Crown land being given away by DevelopmentWA, we now have highly disturbing OAG “Regulation of WA Water Licences” Report 11 June 2025 showing our water being given away. Water is precious.
Department of Water Environment and Regulation (DWER)
- is responsible for over 12,000 WA water extraction licences across multiple sectors, which it does not effectively monitor, or enforce conditions
- does not know how much water is being extracted
- carries out mostly desktop compliance activities based on unverified meter readings, self-reported information from licence holders
- cannot be confident that licence holders are meeting their licence conditions
- in three year audit scope, 87% of potential incidents were never assigned to a staff member to investigate
Regulation of Water Licences – Office of the Auditor General
—————————————————————————————————————————–
12 June 2025 Post
Bullying LG Cultures
City of Hobson Bay, Victoria June 2025 saw suspension of senior council executives by monitor and/or WorkSafe – reporting not clear – amid claims of systemic bullying wherein it was shown Council needed to better understand its powers to govern its CEO and employees.
No such power appears in WA LG Reform LG Act enactments. SO same old, same old dressed up in new clothes. While CEOs are still not accountable and protected by the system, bullying cultures they foster and/or benefit from persist. Bullying cultures in WA LGs is rife.
—————————————————————————————————————————–
11 June 2025 Post
LGEMA FORUM – UNDERSTANDING CAT CONTAINMENT LOCAL LAW MAKING
Attend LGEMA Forum 28 June as LGEMA member or invited guest to hear how ANY courageous LG can adopt a cat containment local law and ignore refusals from Joint Standing Committee to endorse the local law.
The Shire of Pingelly has adopted amazingly named domestic cat containment local law being Shire of Pingelly Save the Numbats Local Law 2025.
For example, western suburbs could call it the save native birds and possums local law.
—————————————————————————————————————————
4 June 2024 Post
LG Undemocratic Bureaucratic Cage Called Out
Former Federal National MHR MP Cr George Christensen has just resigned as LG Councillor saying EMs must be free to intervene before it’s too late. He has called out:
- LG as a bureaucratic cage.
- QLD Office of the Independent Assessor (WA’s about to have equivalent) for turning governance into a minefield; where EMs asking hard questions, taking stand on controversial issues > slapped with complaints, dragged through drawn-out process that exists more to chill speech than to protect integrity.
- Rarity of real debate
- Absence of a functioning democratic in LGs without robust questioning
- Questioning being discouraged, as disruptive
- Dissent being viewed as disruption
- Community outrage, pushback being dismissed as emotional
- Annual budgets crushing ratepayers with usual meaningless mantras of sustainable, responsible, forward-looking.
Thankyou George for courageously spitting out the awful LG truths.
——————————————————————————————————————–
1 June 2025 Post
Multiple Vexatious Minor Breach Allegations
The worst part of vexatious minor breach complaints against EMs is the time-consuming, stressful, unsupported process of rebutting the complaints, and that the Standards Panel get it so wrong some of the time as SAT reviews show us.
If a CEO, other employee or any EM is misusing local government resources (LG pays hearing invoice from Standards Panel) to bully an EM by multiple vexatious/failed minor breach allegations, this is arguably corruption which can be reported confidentially to CCC. This is especially so if the consequence is that the EM resigns and the EM position is filled by the complainant’s preferred candidate.
This replacement motive would be hard to prove but demonstrates the ridiculous, corrupting, and undemocratic consequence of amendments to LG Act that allow second placed candidates to replace EM vacancies. This will become even worse once the nefarious LG Act amendments to stop Councils or D&O insurance paying for legal advice/representation for EMs minor breach complaint responses are operative.
—————————————————————————————————————————–
31 May 2025 Post
LG Legal Advice
Legal Advice obtained by the CEO using municipal funds is advice to the LG not the CEO. The advice is the property of the LG, not the CEO.
It is poor governance to keep full text of any legal advice secret (and the brief that sought the advice) from Council, individual EMs.
For example see Tasmanian Dorset Board of Inquiry Report October 2024. Att 1 – Dorset Council Board of Inquiry – Report to Minister for Local ~ 18 October 2024.PDF
—————————————————————————————————————————–
31 May 2025 Post
LG Legal Advice
Legal Advice obtained by the CEO using municipal funds is advice to the LG not the CEO.
The advice is the property of the LG, not the CEO.
It is poor governance to keep full text of any legal advice secret (and the brief that sought the advice) from Council, individual EMs.
For example, see Tasmanian Dorset Board of Inquiry Report October 2024.
——————————————————————————————————————–
LGEMA MEMBERS AND MEMBER APPLICANTS ARE INVITED TO LGEMA 2025 FORUM ONE
WASTE MANAGEMENT & CAT ACT CATASTROPHE
- Date: Saturday 28 June 2025
- Time: 11 – 4pm
- Venue: The Grove Library, 1 Leake St, Peppermint Grove, WA, 6011
Travel and Parking: Near Cottesloe Train Station & Stirling Highway bus routes; free parking under Grove library & Woolworths carpark opposite library on Leake Street. - Cost: $30 (contribution to catering and venue hire)
- Bookings: https://www.trybooking.com/DCHZO
- PROGRAM:
- 11 am – Registration
- 11.30am – Sandra Boulter & Lorna Buchan – LGEMA Update
- WALGA FOI in Supreme Court: Local Government Elected Members Association v Western Australian Local Government Association GDA 3 of 2025 Monday 10.30am 8 December 2025
- Synergy FOI
- EM defamation proceedings in Supreme Court
- LG Elections 2023 – court of disputed returns challenge
- OAG Reports: Waste Management Performance Audits, LG Purchasing Cards, DevelopmentWA
- 11.45am – James Guzman AECOM Associate Director, Geosciences and Remediation Services, Perth, WA “Responding to PFAS Soil Contamination
- 12.15 Lunch and networking
- 1 pm – Jane Bremmer Chair: Toxics Free Australia “Local Government Responsibilities in Waste Management”
- 2 pm – Scott Cairns: CEO Mindarie Regional Council : “Looking Back, Looking Forward: Waste Management Pitfalls for Elected Members”
- 3pm – Dr Bruce Webber: Executive, WA Feral Cat Working Group “ A Cat-astrophic Tale of Skulduggery and Subterfuge in WA: progress towards pet cat containment in WA”.
Coming up…
Forum Two: Saturday 16 August 2025
-
- 11 – 4 pm: LGEMA 2025 COUNCIL GOVERNANCE;
Photographer in attendance for headshots for members included
Forum Three: Sunday 9 November 2025
-
- 12 – 4pm: LGEMA AGM; LOCAL GOVERNMENT ACT OVERVIEW – ELECTED MEMBER AND COUNCIL POWERS
See you there ….
—————————————————————————————————————————–
29 May 2025 Post
WA Government’s Development WA Land Sales, Development Irregular at Best
Oh dear! Released Today…
OAG Forensic Audit: Fraud Risks in Land Transactions by DevelopmentWA Report 16: 2024-25
WA Government owned DevelopmentWA in selling, developing land:
- sells our state owned land to developers for less than its value
- has process has irregularities that may indicate fraud, corruption, misconduct
- cannot demonstrate value for money from public land sales
- has questionable checks and balances
- does not have supporting documentation for over 30% of 242 OAG reviewed sales
- sold land at unapproved sale price 50%lower than most recent valuation
- disclosed insufficient details relating to conflicts of interest, gifts, benefits, invitations, hospitality.
WA Inc (Royal Commission Into the Commercial Activities of Government 12 November 1992) reported. … serious weaknesses and deficiencies in our system of government. Together, they disclose fundamental weaknesses in the present capacity of our institutions of government, including the Parliament, to exact that degree of openness, accountability and integrity necessary to ensure that the Executive (Cabinet and Governor) fulfils its basic responsibility to serve the public interest. This is not to deny the essential strengths of the concepts of representative democracy and responsible government which Western Australia has inherited …
Are we there again?
—————————————————————————————————————————–
29 May 2025 Post
LG Management of Purchasing Cards OAG Report 17: 2024-25 | 28 May 2025 PERFORMANCE AUDIT
Sampled Entities:
Band One: Cities of Cockburn, Fremantle, Melville, Perth.
Band Two: Subiaco; Town of Victoria Park.
Each sampled LG must produce action plan to Council and Minister, publish plan on their website.
Noting,
Band One CEO: TRP between $288,727 > $439,682
Band Two CEO: TRP between $238,132 > $370,428;
These LG CEO Performance Audits showed:
- varying controls
- no clearly stated allowable and reasonable business expenditure in line with community expectations of responsible use of public money.
- no evidence of cards being misused, in part because without clear policies and guidance, we had no benchmark to assess purchases against.
- some items of expenditure appeared excessive when compared with practices in the State sector
- gaps and weaknesses in all areas of purchasing card management that increase the likelihood of cards being inadvertently or deliberately misused because:
- policies, guidance did not clearly state allowable, reasonable expenditure on such things as travel, accommodation, meals and alcohol.
- purchases not always adequately reviewed, approved in timely manner.
- operational need for purchasing card not always established; cards were issued to staff who did not have delegated authority to make purchases; cardholder obligations, responsibilities not made clear; cards not promptly returned, destroyed when no longer needed.
- lack of oversight, monitoring of how well purchasing cards managed meant LGs were missing opportunities to identify, promptly address risks of card misuse, financial loss.
Reform Needed:
- Staff should have clear guidance on what is allowable and reasonable, particularly for travel, alcohol, meals, entertainment and gifts.
- Improve controls over issue, cancellation of cards, review, approval of purchases and reporting.
—————————————————————————————————————————–
27 May 2025 Post
CEOs’ Mandatory Monthly Financial ACTIVITY Statement to Council
CEOs’ financial activity statement must report on revenue and expenditure for previous month, as set out LG’s annual budget; and must include,
- annual budget estimates, taking into account any expenditure incurred for additional purpose
- budget estimates to end of relevant month
- actual amounts of expenditure, revenue, income to end of relevant month
- material variances between comparable amounts referred to above
- net current assets at end of relevant month with note containing summary explaining composition of net current assets, structured in same way as annual budget material detail
- information relating to exclusions from calculation of budget deficiency are structured in same way as corresponding information included in annual budget
- must have attached to the report, an explanation of each material variance; and supporting information required by Council
- nature classification of financial activity
- any other information required by Council in a format required by Council.
Financial Activity Statement must,
- be presented at ordinary Council meeting within 2 months after end of relevant month
- be recorded in minutes of meeting at which it is presented
- apply Council adopted percentage or value, calculated in accordance with the AAS, for reporting material variances.
Authority for above propositions available to LGEMA members on request.
—————————————————————————————————————————–
26 May 2025 Post
CEOs’ Mandatory Monthly Financial ACTIVITY Statement to Council
CEOs’ financial activity statement must report on revenue and expenditure for previous month, as set out LG’s annual budget; and must include,
- annual budget estimates, taking into account any expenditure incurred for additional purpose
- budget estimates to end of relevant month
- actual amounts of expenditure, revenue, income to end of relevant month
- material variances between comparable amounts referred to above
- net current assets at end of relevant month with note containing summary explaining composition of net current assets, structured in same way as annual budget material detail
- information relating to exclusions from calculation of budget deficiency are structured in same way as corresponding information included in annual budget
- must have attached to the report, with an explanation of each material variance; and supporting information required by Council
- nature classification of financial activity
- any other information required by Council in a format required by Council.
Financial Activity Statement must,
- be presented at ordinary Council meeting within 2 months after end of relevant month
- be recorded in minutes of meeting at which it is presented
- apply Council adopted percentage or value, calculated in accordance with the AAS, for reporting material variances.
Authority for above propositions available to LGEMA members on request.
—————————————————————————————————————————–
25 May 2025 Post
Rates
Councils have power to decide who the necessary employees are, what employee qualifications are necessary in their employees, and are required to decide the employee workforce plan. This should be done before entering budget discussions.
This is the starting point for reining in operational costs, improving productivity, limiting rates increases, and making rates monies go further. Some LGs have many years of embedded incompetent maladministration not dedicated to the community benefit or the public interest, which takes years and overcoming sector resistance to remedy.
When you see ill-informed LG Ministers and DLGSC working against such reform and against effective EM training to foster productivity and good governance, it makes one weep with utter frustration for what could be.
Nedlands is getting itself back on track after many, many years of working towards a failed audit but some are working so hard against Nedlands Council majority that they have persuaded LG Minister she needs to intervene, where in fact, she needs to exercise her many and not inconsiderable powers to assist and support the Council majority and CEO to do their reform and restore work.
LG Minister will not authorise LGEMA to provide EM training or speak at our LGEMA forums or insist that CEOs comply with the LG Act; and has caused laws to be enacted that will stop EMs accessing funds for legal representation, doubling fines and penalties against EMs; and directing powers away from community and their Councillors to unelected CEOs; and further protecting CEOs. Where a Council fails its community and LG Act is wrongfully amended – look no further than powerful property developer and LG sector interests, and non-compliant powerful highly resourced (from rates monies), CEOs not properly advising their Council according to law.
The history of many CCC and LG Inquiry reports lay the blame for maladministration/corruption (wasting rates) at feet of unaccountable ill qualified CEOs who poorly trained Councils have blindly trusted. Councils have all hands tied behind their back because they cannot question or ask without punishment for their individual constituent members. Countless OAG LG performance audits show incompetent/poorly performing LG administrations. Furthermore, EMs need to be protected from defamation actions relating to their work on Council.
IT IS TIME FOR ABSOLUTE COUNCIL PRIVILEGE SO EMS CAN ASK AT COUNCIL MEETINGS ANY QUESTION THEY NEED TO ASK AND MAKE ANY STATEMENTS THEY NEED TO MAKE (AS IT IS IN OUR PARLIAMENT); AND REQUIRE THE FULL ANSWER WITHOUT EMPLOYEES USING STRESS LEAVE OR RESIGNATION TO AVOID ANSWERING THE PROPERLY PUT QUESTIONS.
—————————————————————————————————————————–
24 May 2025 Post
Signing LG Documents
LG document is only lawfully executed:
- if LG seal is affixed as authorised by LG, and in presence of, attested to and signed by mayor/president and CEO; or
- it is signed by persons authorised, generally and/or specifically, by Council simple majority to sign it who can be CEO or another employee, and only according to conditions, restrictions imposed by Council.
Council cannot delegate to CEO power to authorise another employee to execute documents. (Check your delegation registers).
CEO and all other employees cannot lawfully sign LG documents unless authorised as above. Courts may overturn any agreements/contracts not lawfully executed.
LGEMA members can ask for authorities for above propositions.
—————————————————————————————————————————–
22 May 2025 Post
LG Commercial Enterprises
LGs contemplating land transactions (acquire, dispose, develop) or trading undertaking (activity for profit not a land transaction; and prescribed activity),
- MAY require a business plan for any such enterprise
- MUST have a business plan for any such enterprise valued over prescribed amount.
There are mandatory statutory requirements for content, preparation, notice, publication of business plans.
Prudent Councils will require an external expert reporting directly to Council to prepare and respond to comment about such plans.
Only Council absolute majority can approve, adopt a business plan.
LG members can email LGEMA for more information about LG business plans.
—————————————————————————————————————————–
15 May 2025 Post
LG Dissent and Grievances
This month, Solomon, J of WA Supreme Court. found that, …
“We are indeed privileged to live in a society that permits dissent and grievances to be aired.”
Pity LG EMs not so privileged
see MICHELMORE -v- BROWN [No 5] [2025] WASC 152
—————————————————————————————————————————–
12 May 2025 Post
2025 LGEMA FORUMS
Diarise now, program for first forum should be circulated within next fortnight, once our speakers are settled.
All forums will be at the Grove Library in Cottesloe, we look forward to seeing you there.
- 28 June 2025, Saturday afternoon: Environmental Protection: Waste and Pollution
- 16 August 2025, Saturday afternoon: Council Governance Obligations and Local Government Elections
- 9 November 2025, Sunday afternoon: Local Government Act Overview- Elected Member and Council Powers
—————————————————————————————————————————–
9 May 2025 Post
CCC Concerns About Public Sector Held Confidential Information
CCC report highlighted significant misconduct risks in weak, insufficient information controls. BUT when has LG Minister/DLGSC ever taken up all CCC/ LG Inquiry/OAG recommendations??
Public servant downloaded confidential information from computer system before leaving for private sector employment.
CCC identified serious misconduct risks in policies, procedures (at Department of Finance) aimed at protecting confidential information, and Department’s use of USBs, which may be applicable to other agencies, which includes LGs.
In response to CCC recommendations Department of Finance has:
- reviewed, enhanced confidentiality agreements for employees; and
- implemented procedure to remind departing employees of their ongoing confidentiality obligations once they leave.
CCC encourage all public sector organisations including LGs to implement.
LGs also on notice from OAG about records security including in,
- Local Government 2023-24 – Information Systems Audit Results No 11: 2024 – 2025 11 April 2025
- Staff Exit Controls at Large Local Government Entities Report 25: 2023-24
- Local Government Physical Security of Server Assets Report 20: 2023-24
CCC REPORT – Report on Risks to Confidential Information Control in the Public Sector
——————————————————————————————————————–
2 May 2025 Post
Valuing Land Resumption Compensation Payments
City of Wanneroo unsuccessfully appealed against court ordered payment owed to Bakotas for land resumed by City.
Disturbingly, the decision remarks on,
- City’s written submissions on ground 1 being remarkable for their brevity/being exceedingly brief.
- It being incumbent on City to identify with precision the relevant evidence of that character that the primary judge should have taken into account.
- It not being in the interests of justice to permit the City to run its case in the appeal on a materially different basis from its case at trial, as it tried to.
- the premise of appeal ground 2 not being consistent with proper understanding of trial judge’s findings.
So,
- What was City and its legal representatives thinking?
- What oversight did Council have?
- As well as payment for the land resumption, what were the City’s legal costs of appealing, and what were Bakota’s legal costs to be paid by the City?
At least we have some current legal precedent about valuing payments for land resumption from our Court of Appeal.
CITY OF WANNEROO -v- BAKOTA [No 2] [2025] WASCA 62 – eCourts Portal
——————————————————————————————————————–
1 MAY 2025 Post
Council Decides LG Administrative Structure
LG Act required LG Plan for the Future = Strategic Community Plan + Corporate Business Plan.
ONLY Council (cannot be delegated) can:
1. Decide the appropriate administrative structure for its LG, by simple majority
2. Decide necessary employees (numbers, qualification), by simple majority
3. Decide the Corporate Business Plan, by absolute majority; which includes workforce planning; which must be informed by Council’s Strategic Community Plan which requires adoption by Council absolute majority.
Prudent good governing Councils will workshop these requirements rather than just accept CEO proffered plans.
Authority for above propositions available to LGEMA members.
——————————————————————————————————————–
30 April 2025 Post
Discrimination in footpath construction
Disability advocates alleged that design, construction, implementation of roadworks in Glendalough was indirect discrimination.
Federal court restrained Commissioner of Main Roads from removing existing footpath to allow for complaint-making and resolution process of the Human Rights Commission to take place.
LGs take note when designing new footpaths.
Seniors and Disabilities Best Access Group v Commissioner of Main Roads [2025] FCA 424
—————————————————————————————————————————–
29 April 2025 Post
OAG Audit of LG Gifts and Benefits
NOW: Please send your stories/complaints about LG gifts and benefits to OAG to have your say to ensure your concerns are addressed
From OAG: Local Government management of gifts and benefits
“Local governments have a responsibility to ensure they are effectively managing the risks associated with accepting gifts and benefits. The public need to trust and have confidence that local governments are making the right decisions for the community which are fair, impartial and have not been influenced.
“This audit will assess if local government entities are effectively managing gifts and benefits and is intended to be performed in two phases. The first phase will consider sector-wide public information of all local government entities’ gifts and benefits registers. The second phase will include a more in-depth audit across a sample of local government entities.“OAG criteria include, but are not limited to:
- Are local governments complying with their gifts and benefits policies and procedures, and do these meet the local government regulation requirements?
- Are local governments recording all offers of gifts and benefits?
- Are local governments’ decisions for accepting or declining gifts and benefits appropriate?
- Are local governments recording and managing all conflicts of interests in relation to gifts and benefits
OAG plan to table this report in the second quarter of 2025”.
—————————————————————————————————————————–
27 April 2025 Post
OAG Auditing LG management of LOCAL ROAD Maintenance
NOW: Please send your stories/complaints about local road maintenance to the OAG now to have your say to ensure your concern is addressed
From OAG:
“Local government entities spend a significant portion of their budget on transport, primarily the local road network. A well-maintained local road network contributes to positive safety, economic and social outcomes for the community. Local roads in regional areas have been identified at most risk of maintaining, most in need of funding and where councils require greater support to help manage these roads. Local governments manage local roads within their own boundaries, in collaboration with other entities.“Roads which are not maintained impact people, the economy, road safety and creates a financial liability into the future. There is a risk that roads may deteriorate if maintenance needs are not met.“This audit will assess if regional local government entities effectively manage the maintenance of their local roads.“OAG criteria will include, but may not be limited to:
• Do local government entities have appropriate information and data on the condition of the roads they own/or are responsible for?• What funding is available to local government entities and are they accessing funding that may be available?• Do local government entities have a structured and risk based process to prioritise and fix roads in poor condition?
OAG seeking feedback from regional road users, please complete the survey by Wednesday 19 March: Regional road user surveyOAG plans to table this report in the second quarter of 2025.
—————————————————————————————————————————–
26 April 2025 Post
Local Government 2023-24 – Financial Audit Results Report 12: 2024-25 released 24 April 2025
OAG notes,
- Councils should sign off on audit reports before sending to OAG
- Audit timeliness improving since OAG hard line approach
- Significant bottlenecks still occurring in December > LGs need to improve their audit readiness
- LG financial audits improving
- Recognises top 20 LGs audit reports
- Identified 865 control findings made up of,
512 financial management issues353 information control issues
- Accounting Standard ASB 13 “Fair Value Measurement” now applies to LGs, including relating to current use presumption of highest and best use
Search report using your LG’s name to find out what OAG has to say about your LG
——————————————————————————————————————–
26 April 2025 Post
LG Purchasing Cards
NOW: Please send your stories/complaints/concerns about use of LG credit cards to OAG now to have your say/inform the audit
OAG is currently auditing LG management of purchasing cards.
From OAG“Purchasing cards are an important part of modern purchasing systems, offering significant benefits such as reduced costs and streamlined business processes. If not managed correctly, there is potential for improper, wasteful or unauthorised expenditure.This audit will assess whether a selection of local government entities effectively manage the issue, use and cancellation of purchasing cards.OAG criteria include, but are not limited to:• Are there effective controls over the issue and cancellation of purchasing cards?• Are there effective controls over the use of purchasing cards?
OAG plans to table this report in the second quarter of 2025″.
LGEMA – Local Government Elected Members Association
Previous OAG report on 12 June 2024 on OAG audit of LG management of purchasing cards, including credit cards, store cards, fuel cards and taxi cards. The three audited entities were/still required to have responding action plans on their websites – being Albany, Murchison, Kalgoorlie-Boulder.
Audit showed,
- varying controls in place to manage issue, use, cancellation of purchasing cards
- weak implementation and control gaps, which meant controls were only partly effective
- gaps, weaknesses in all areas of purchasing card management, which increased likelihood of cards being inadvertently or deliberately misused (which can cause public money losses)
- inadequate policy guidance on what each LG Council considered was allowable, reasonable expenditure on such things as travel, accommodation, food and drink; LGs regularly purchased air fares, accommodation and food and drink10 (including alcohol) in absence of any guidance around what was allowable, reasonable
- purchases not always adequately reviewed, approved in timely manner
- operational need for purchasing card not always established
- cardholder obligations, responsibilities not made clear
- cards not promptly returned, destroyed when no longer needed
- lack of oversight, monitoring of control effectiveness
- no documented processes or timeframes to recover money when cards were used to pay for personal items
- inadequate review, approval processes for purchasing card transactions
- non-compliance with Council policy, administration procedures on review, approval of purchases
- CEO purchases approved by a Mayor despite Mayors’ having no established administrative authority (City of Albany)
- purchases were approved by subordinate of cardholder (City of Kalgoorlie-Boulder)
- card sharing while cardholder absent from office (Shire of Murchison)
- collection of personal reward scheme points on business purchases that were not identified, reported as part of approval process (Albany, Kalgoorlie-Boulder)
- significant delays in the approval of card purchases
- partly effective management of the issue and cancellation of purchasing cards
- instances of vague or inaccurate expenditure descriptions, which should have better identified the expenditure to facilitate proper scrutiny
- cardholders exceeding their monthly limits
- reviews of purchasing card procedures did not provide ongoing confirmation that purchasing card controls were appropriate or effective.
—————————————————————————————————————————–
24 April 2025 Post
CEO Accountability Avoidance – LG Prosecutions – Part 14
Some CEOs act for LG or instruct employee authorised persons or legal representatives to prosecute or not prosecute persons; or defend prosecutions of the LG, when they,
- do not have authority to do so, or
- have such a conflict of interest in outcome that they should recuse themselves, and even do not report to Councils notices of prosecutions served on LG.
CEOs avoid accountability by controlling outcome of prosecutions of LG for which they would otherwise be accountable.
A person can make a complaint to any body authorised to prosecute a LG CEO or employee for a LG Act offence (which is NOT limited to those authorised by LG Act, and now we have a high court decision saying so) and includes the Council, police, SSO, DPP.
Solutions
Council requires,
- All CCC or auditor investigators attendance must be reported immediately to Mayor and to Council in timely way
- All notices of proceedings must be reported to Council
- Council appoints and instructs legal representative if CEO or other employee has conflict of interest in outcome.
—————————————————————————————————————————–
23 April 2025 Post
MP Interests – Open Politics Website
Open Politics website follows and discloses MP interests.
Open Politics has law reform proposals to remedy this issue.
If these are important to inform your vote in upcoming federal election, go to website and look up:
- Politicians interests
- Best disclosure law reform practices advocated by site authors
The private interests of Australia’s federal parliamentarians – Open Politics
——————————————————————————————————————–
22 April 2025 Post
Victorian LG Mayor Causing Psychological Harm
Sound familiar? … councillors (unanimously) expressing fear and trauma at having to interact with [Mayor] …
…. Whittlesea Mayor has been suspended for six months in response to allegations of intimidating behaviour ….
Mayor announced on social media that it is a “a dark day for democracy in Victoria”.
Imagine hurdles trying to respond likewise to employed (not elected) CEO exhibiting same behaviours
Whittlesea mayor suspended – Government News
—————————————————————————————————————————–
17 April 2025 Post
LGs Not Information/Cyber Security Safe
Your INFO Not Safe With LG
OAG Local Government 2023-24 – Information Systems Audit Results Report 11: 2024-25
LG CEOs responsible for 360 adverse findings reported to89 LGs
- Five categories relating to information, cyber security controls highly concerning > increases likelihood of security breaches.
- LGs need to implement robust controls to safeguard against range of internal, external threats.
- Report includes important case studies showing types of risks and what entities should/ should not do.
- Half of significant findings remain unresolved from those identified in prior years.
- 20 of this year’s 27 significant findings related to weak, missing access management and information security framework controls.
OAG protects poorly performing LGs by not naming them so no public accountability.
EMs should ask CEO if their LG was sampled entity > ask for urgent report to Council accompanied by statutory action plan.
OAG encourages all LGs to learn from case studies to implement fit for purpose controls > = Council policy > = administration implementation.
ALL Councils (sampled or not) should refer to recommendations in OAG report and OAG’s “Digital Identity and Access Management – Better Practice Guide” to help address weaknesses.
—————————————————————————————————————————–
16 April 2025 Post
LG Accountability Impossible?
Players (not necessarily in order):
- FAB 7/Team Awesome WhatApp group of 7 Logan Council EMs
- CEO whistleblower to CCC
- Majority EMs not happy with new CEO
- LGAQ CEO (WALGA Qld equiv) backs mayor, majority EMs, criticises CCC, urges majority to hold firm to dismiss CEO
- CCC “Operation Front” inquiry arising possibly from whistleblower
- Police/CCC commence phone taps
- Industrial Relations Commission restrains Mayor from voting in relation to CEO performance
- CEO sacked in probationary period by vote of 7 of 12 EMs
- Corrupt Mayor convicted of receiving secret commissions from developers, job interference
- Police charge 8 Councillors with fraud for voting to dismiss CEO, then drop charges
- Parliamentary inquiry criticises CCC “Operation Front”, finds CCC exceeded its powers
- Industrial Commission rejects CEO unfair dismissal claim
- EMs sue state government for malicious fraud charges
- CCC Commissioner expresses concern about influences in LG by developer/political lobbyists, LGAQ
- CCC Commissioner resigns
- LGAQ CEO resigns from LGAQ
Question: What chance would a minority EM advocating for good governance have?Answer: None
What hope is there for Local Government?—————————————————————————————————————————–
5 April 2025 Post
CEO Accountability Avoidance – Not Answering Public Questions, Part 12
Public Question Time (PQT) is primary route to community engagement with its Council.
PQT required at every OCM, SCMs open to public, Committee with delegated authority meeting.
Some CEOs unlawfully refuse PQT questions, do not answer them, answer evasively = seeking to avoid accountability answers bring.
Each person who wishes to ask PQT question MUST be given equal, fair opportunity to ask their question, receive response.
In order of priority, PQT governed by;
- LG Act
- LG (Administration) Regulations
- Standing Orders Local Law (invalid if inconsistent with above)
- Presiding Member procedural decision (only where above silent/unclear), unless over-ruled by Council.
PQT Procedure
- LG Act , Admin Regs do not require name, address of, or prior notice of a question > Standing Orders/Council policy for such rule
- minimum time 15 minutes
- questions must be asked and responded to before matter to which it relates put to Council; “responded to at meeting” arguably means question cannot to be taken on notice, without consent of questioner
- Presiding Member responsible for answers, unless PM has financial interest in matter to which question relates; in which case EM without disclosable interest can answer
- minimum PQT meeting minutes requirements are for summary of questions/answers
SOLUTIONS
- CEOs and employees should have NO role in how PQT conducted, questions put
- Council can,
a. prohibit answer to question to be taken on notice without consent of questioner
b. require full text of PQT questions/answers to be included in meeting minutes
c. consider refusal to deal with matter unless related PQT question answered to questioner’s satisfaction
d. ensure Audit Committee regularly reviews quality of PQT answers, PQT management
e. require questioner’s satisfaction determinative of PQT question answered or not.
Authority for above propositions available to LGEMA members.
—————————————————————————————————————————–
4 April 2025 Post
CEO Accountability Avoidance – Hiding Behind Operational, Part 11
Some CEOs champion operational confusion to avoid performance management.
From the CCC:
Bifurcation of “operational” v “governance” responsibility,
-
may cause confusion as to extent Council can inquire into operations of its local government (which in fact is anything)
-
is quite often used as a shield by CEOs > “butt out; that’s operational” (which is wrong).
Some Council are not vigilant. Some EMs show breathtaking levels of ignorance as to their role, responsibility over CEO governance.
Some EMs may have concerns about LG governance. EMs have,
- a legitimate right to be involved and ask questions
- the power to inform themselves but they don’t know it because they rely on CEO to tell them what they can/cannot ask/do
Authority for above propositions available to LGEMA members
—————————————————————————————————————————–
2 April 2025 Post
CEO Accountability Avoidance – Usurping Council Employee Roles, Part 10
Notwithstanding some CEOs’ assertions to contrary,
1. ONLY Council can decide,
a. LG’s administrative structure
b. what employees are necessary
c. detail of LG administrative structure (what employees & where) through Corporate Business Plan workforce plan,
none of which above decisions can be lawfully delegated to CEO.
2. LG entity is employer (not CEO, not Council) and PCBU (workplace safety)
3. CEO functions include employing dismissing, directing, managing employees on behalf of Council/LG in accordance with Council plans and policy, except for employees Council has designated as senior employee in which case Council decides employment, re-employment, dismissal.
4. All LG employees required to be under Council adopted structure.
SOLUTIONS
- Check delegation register for compliance
- Ensure Council has adopted LG structure, identified necessary employees, workforce plan by identifying relevant resolution(s); where there is non-compliance hold initial workshop about Council requirements, adopt draft decisions at Council, advertise to community.
- Ensure poor/high performing employees are managed by being in designated particular class of senior employees.
- Ensure CEO is reporting on compliance with these requirements.
LG authority for these propositions are available to LGEMA members
#localgovernmentemployees #localgovernmentemployment
—————————————————————————————————————————–
2 April 2025 Post
CEO Accountability Avoidance – Avoiding Performance Audit Responses, Part 9
Office of Auditor General (OAG) LG performance audits are the ONLY worthwhile CEO and Council performance audits. Following are LG relevant wherein woeful results in over 80 sampled LGs:
- Staff Exit Controls at Large Local Government Entities Report 25: 2023-24
- Local Government Physical Security of Server Assets Report 20: 2023-24
- OAG report Regulation of Air-handling and Water Systems Report 20:2022-2023
- Information Systems Audit Report 2022 – Local Government Entities Report 22: 2021-22
- Audit Practice Statement 2022
- Audit Report 2020 – 2021 Financial Audits of State Government Entities (see LGs at Appendix Four)
- Cyber Security in Local Government
- Financial Audits of Local Government Entities
- Local Government General Computer Controls
- Regulation and Support of the Local Government Sector
- Grants Administration
- Waste Service Delivery
- Food Safety
- Information Systems Security
- Contract Extensions and Variations
- Fraud Prevention
- Building Approvals
- Verifying Employee Credentials
- Records Management
- Management of Supplier Master Files
- Procurement
- Timely Payment of Suppliers
- Credit Card Controls.
SOLUTIONS
- Ensure LGs who were OAG sampled entities have,
a. presented required action plan response to Council
b. sent required action plan response to LG Minister
c. published LG action on LG website as required
- Ensure every Council has adopted, as Council policy (within existing budget), OAG best practice recommendations from each OAG performance audit, whether or not they were sampled entity
- Ensure CEO KPIs include compliance with OAG LG best practice
Statutory authorities for above propositions available to LGEMA Members
—————————————————————————————————————————–
1 April, 2025 Post
CEO Accountability Avoidance – Employing Tractable Employees, Part 8
Some CEOs convince poorly trained EMs/Councils that employee employment is an operational matter, which Councils cannot govern.
IT IS NOT
ONLY Councils can (cannot be delegated) and Councils must,
- decide LG administrative structure
- adopt a Workforce Plan to implement administrative structure
- employ employees – through CEO employee functions – in accordance with Council’s Work Force Plan, who must be suitably qualified, have a suitable contract of employment, and who are selected and promoted according to merit and equity.
Councils can protect particular class of or particular LG employees (other than CEO) from harm for speaking out or against CEO, or to foster them to do their job well; by designating them “senior employees”, who ONLY Council can then dismiss or employ or re-employ.
Statutory requirements for above available to LGEMA members.
——————————————————————————————————————–
Stand out from the crowd with a Local Government Elected Member Association membership.
Educating our members in good Governance, the Local Government Act and the role of an Elected Member since 2019…….
—————————————————————————————————————————–
29 March 2025 Post
CEO Accountability Avoidance – Agenda/Minutes Differences, Part 7
Some CEOs might change report they authorised for Council meeting agenda. Different versions of reports might be in,
- agenda
- draft minutes
- adopted minutes
- authorised minutes.
Generally speaking such practices are unlawful.
CEO reasons might include if CEO/other employee report is,
- deficient
- wrong
- incomplete
- devoid of evidence to support assertions
- incompetent
- does not make required interest declarations
- lacks good faith for other reasons.
SOLUTIONS
- Council Meeting and Agenda Policy will specifically identify that such changes are prohibited, recognise all statutory minutes controls.
- EMs and community members can compare the three versions, especially for reports about contentious matters.
—————————————————————————————————————————–
28 March 2025 Post
CEO Accountability – Messaging Apps, Part 6
Given recent,
- revelations of Trump Administration use of messaging app, and
- Australian OIC audit report on government agencies’ use of messaging services, noting LG records, including information on messaging apps, are valuable public asset to be protected by Council policies, practices.
Australian Office of Information Commissioner best practice recommendations include,
- review of existing policies/develop a policy to clearly set out whether or not body (Council in this case) permits use of messaging apps by employees for work purposes
- if use of messaging apps permitted for work purposes, body (Council in this case) policies, procedures about employee use of messaging apps must,
o address information management, FOI, privacy, security
o explain how to extract information from messaging apps
o address phone numbers linked to agency-issued phones
o require disappearing message functionality to be turned off
o conduct appropriate due diligence on messaging apps
—————————————————————————————————————————–
27 March 2025 Post
Fed Govt Interim Local Government Sustainability Report 2025
Report alerts us to amongst other things,
- consequences of,
o skills shortage in LGs
o costs of climate change damage to LG infrastructure
o LG run airports/aerodromes
o poor allocation rules for Cth funding
o LG responsibility for EPBC Act compliance and,
- benefits of rate pegging.
Not sure committee has identified real problems in LG sustainability. What do you think?
#localgovernmentsustainability #airports #climatechange #ratecapping #ratepegging #localgovernmentclimatechange
—————————————————————————————————————————–
26 March 2025 Post
CEO Accountability Avoidance – Legal Proceedings Secrecy, Control, Part 5
LGs are legal entity that can sue and be sued, be a party in proceedings.
LG proceedings can be in court, tribunals, Worksafe, Equal Opportunity, FOI Commissioner, CCC, PSC. (Proceedings in Magistrates Courts are generally not reported by court, so can be kept secret from Council).
CEOs who do not advise Council of every notice of proceedings against or taken on behalf of LG are not serving or informing Council, thus inhibiting Councils’ governance role.
CEOs have conflict of interest in the outcome of many proceedings.
CEOs with conflict of interest in outcome of any LG proceedings can influence outcome in their own personal interest, by the way they brief LG’s legal representatives.
EXAMPLE: LG fined (and paid from municipal funds) for something that was done or not done by CEO, where LG representatives do not advise court of CEO statutory functions.
EXAMPLE: CEO commences action against a troublesome ratepayer through LG, and does not act as a model litigant, which District Court has held that LGs must apply
EXAMPLE: CEO pays out a troublesome senior employee/self with confidential deed of settlement
EXAMPLE: CEO authorises unlawful land clearing, does not advise Council, instructs legal representatives; LG fined > paid from municipal funds
SOLUTIONS
- Councils remove any relevant delegated authority to pay fines against LG, to conduct proceedings.
- Councils adopt Model Litigant Policy
- Councils adopt Legal Representation and Proceedings Conflict of Interest Policy
- Councils require timely notice of all proceedings, including monthly updates which include costs to date, to Council
- Councils appoint independent legal representatives where CEO or any employee have a conflict of interest in the outcome of any proceedings
- Councils have LG Proceedings CEO KPI
- LGs undertake annual police checks for all senior employees and present outcomes to Council.
Do not vote for any EM’s who do not support proceedings good governance.
—————————————————————————————————————————–
25 March 2025 Post
CEO Accountability Avoidance – Keeping, Providing Accessible Records, Part 4
Intention of LG Act is for greater “community participation” in LG “decisions and affairs”, which requires lawful, effective, timely access to records, by EMs and community.
Public Access to information plays an essential role in democracy and equality, which United Nations seeks to promote and protect as a fundamental human right. United Nations formally recognised importance of access to information in 2015 by proclaiming 28 September as International Day for Universal Access to Information. Australia is signatory to International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and the UN Convention against Corruption, wherein ICCPR Article 19 incudes that, Everyone shall have the right to freedom of expression; this right shall include freedom to seek, receive and impart information …
ALL Australian FOI Commissioners have recommended reversing onus of proof so that all government records are public records unless otherwise decided by Council/government.
SOLUTION
Council resolves,
- to adopt a Records Access Policy
- that all its records are public records unless Council specifically resolves otherwise in relation to a particular record
- CEO timely provision of records according to law and Council policy is CEO KPI
Community will not vote at next LG election for EMs who do not support this approach.
—————————————————————————————————————————–
23 March 2025 Post
CEO Accountability Avoidance – Access to EM Records, Part 3
To monitor EMs, some LG CEOs/employees,
- open postal mail, remove envelopes, stamp and record letters addressed to EMs
- access EM emails, texts
- access EM mobile phones including location data,
which is unlawful without EM permission.
It is EM responsibility to ensure relevant LG records are passed to LG when appropriate. It is NOT CEO’s function nor does CEO have power to take/access EM records lawfully without EM knowledge or permission.
SOLUTIONS
- EM advise CEO orally and in writing that permission is not given to open/access ANY EM communications; and keep a record of that communication and require CEO acknowledgment of it
- Council communication and records policy identify the relevant crimes, prohibit access to EM records without EM permission
- EMs do not use LG provided software for confidential communications
- EMs have private cybersecurity check of all LG devices provided
- EMs purchase own LG device and send account to LG – check latest LG Salaries and Allowances Determination
- EM makes complaint to police if postal mail or emails or phone are unlawfully accessed by any employee.
Statutory basis for above available to LGEMA members.
—————————————————————————————————————————–
22 March 2025 Post
CEO Accountability Avoidance –Access to Public Records, Part 2
It is CEO statutory function,
- to provide records access to public according to law
- comply with LG’s Record Keeping Plan.
There are,
- at least 55 LG public records required by law to be available at LG offices for inspection, with a copy for most required to be provided at cost
- at least 57 LG public records required by law to be available on LG website
- other records required by Council, courts or tribunals required to be public records.
SOLUTIONS
Ask CEO for the 3 lists of public records required to be at offices, on website or by order; and if they cannot provide it,
- undertake a CEO performance review
- ask Council to table lists and direct CEO to publish
- ask Council to adopt records access policy using LGEMA model
- ask LG Minister to direct CEO to provide the 3 lists and make available as required
- complain to State Records Commission about CEO offence of non-compliance with Record Keeping Plan
- complain to police about CEO non-compliance with a statutory obligation
- contract LGEMA to undertake a LG Governance Health – Records check.
Do not vote for an EM who votes against such a resolution at next LG election.
LGEMA has lists and applicable statutory authorities available for LGEMA members.
—————————————————————————————————————————–
21 March 2025 Post
CEO Accountability Avoidance – Records Access to EMs, Part 1
EM function and duty to be fully informed before making a decision at Council.
LG records belong to LG corporate entity, not CEOs.
Many CEOs,
- unlawfully apply LG Act s.5.92(1) to refuse a request from an EM for a LG record
- permit EMs to access some records but unlawfully refuse to give EM a copy of the record.
SOLUTIONS
Council resolves that,
- a policy that all LG records are to be given to EMs on request, or
- a record refused to the EM must be tabled in confidential to Council at the meeting immediately after the refused request
- ask LG Minister to use her power direct the CEO to release the record to Council
- ask the Ombudsman to use her power direct the CEO to release the record to Council
Elections
If Council will not do this, do not vote for EM who voted against it at next election.
——————————————————————————————————————–
20 March 2025 Post
LG Legal Advices
ANY legal advice obtained by LG employees,
- are a LG record = not a CEO record, and
- must not be secret from EMs, and
- must be given to an EM nearly always on request (especially important when the advice relates to a matter to be put before a committee or Council) or always to Council on request.
Prudent Councils will NEVER accept a synopsis of a legal advice made by an employee; will ALWAYS ask to see the brief that solicited the advice and will prohibit CEO seeking legal advice other than by a written down brief.
Where no harm or breach of privilege an issue, prudent Councils will authorise legal advices to be published in Council agenda and on a legal advice register so other,
- LGs can benefit from the advice, and
- independent community member lawyers can review advice as to its accuracy and comprehensiveness.
LG Act provisions, inquiry reports, relating to legal advices is available to LGEMA members.
All reactions:
Michelle Shackleton and 3 others—————————————————————————————————————————–
19 March 2025 Post
Securing Postal Ballots
Further to the Court of Disputed Returns decision in the 2023 Fremantle local government election dispute, and noting concerns about postal votes in the recent state election, it is relevant to remember that in the Local Government Act 1996 second reading speech, the WA government in enacting these (electoral) provisions expected that,
… “All postal voting elections will be conducted by the Electoral Commissioner who WILL ensure that the postal voting system is as SECURE AS POSSIBLE.”
The WAEC is not making postal votes as secure as possible in LG elections, and apparently not doing so in state elections.
—————————————————————————————————————————–
19 March 2025 Post
Western Australian Electoral Commission/er (WAEC)
Please write in any complaints you have about the WAEC, conduct of the state election or last LG election, to the ABC, or send them to LGEMA at sandra.boulter@lgema.asn.au and we will forward them on.
—————————————————————————————————————————–
16 March 2025 Post
October ’25 LG Elections
Given recent publicity about WAEC failings, prudent Councils/electors will be asking their LG CEOs:
- What are the current arrangements with WAEC for October 2025 local government ordinary elections?
- How will the CEO ensure a secure chain of custody of postal ballot papers?
- How will the CEO ensure a secure chain of custody of spare ballot papers/overs?
Prudent Councils desirous of free and fair elections will NOT hold a postal election or let any employee be a Returning Officer or electoral officer in their own LG given the clear conflict of interest in such secondary employment.
Electoral Commission’s purpose is,
“To provide Western Australians with an electoral experience that they understand, trust and can access easily and efficiently”
WAEC Annual Report 2020-2021, page 9;
“to provide Western Australians with an electoral experience that they understand, trust and can access easily and efficiently”
WAEC Annual Report 2023-2024 page 7.
The WAEC values according to the 23/24 Annual Report include Professional:
“Our work will be at the highest standards for ethics, accuracy and efficiency” and Innovative: “Our systems and processes will adapt to customers’ needs”.
——————————————————————————————————————–
16 March 2025 Post
Deputy Mayors/Presidents
Deputy Mayor or Deputy President
- is only EM who holds 2 offices at same time = Deputy Mayor and Councillor
- who steps up into mayoral role is NOT an Acting Mayor but remains Deputy Mayor performing the duties of Mayor
- cannot act in role unless and until they have sworn relevant oath of office.
Council “absolute majority” can authorise extra allowance for deputy mayor position only in compliance with Salaries and Allowances Tribunal LG determination, and pay deputy mayor mayoral allowance equivalent only if acting in role for more than 4 months.
—————————————————————————————————————————–
14 March 2025 Post
Structure Plans
Third Party Interveners in SAT Structure Plan Proceedings
- Endorsement or otherwise by WAPC of structure plan is NOT a private matter between developer and WAPC: para.63
- Strategic focus of structure plans encourage broader view that third parties should participate, than may be the case in the context of subdivision or development assessments: para.64
- While there are no third party rights of review of planning and development decisions in WA, the application of the SAT test of “sufficient interest” for deciding when a community group or LG can intervene in SAT merits review proceedings has been clarified and established: paras 14 > 65, for community groups and for local governments
Satterley Property Group Pty Ltd and Western Australian Planning Commission [2025] WASAT 17
SATTERLEY PROPERTY GROUP PTY LTD and WESTERN AUSTRALIAN PLANNING COMMISSION [2025] WASAT 17 – eCourts Portal
—————————————————————————————————————————–
10 March 2025 Post
Recording Confidential Meeting Items
- A “local government” must make a recording of all Council meetings, including closed sessions.
- This is Council duty unless formally delegated to CEO.
- The recording of a confidential session can only be given to Departmental CEO or person authorised by Departmental CEO.
- Council will ensure and clarify that no employee will have access to the recording.
- Council will direct CEO as to how recording is to be managed, stored without any employee access, and ensure a clear and transparent chain of custody of recording.
- An employee or EM who accesses and makes improper use of information from the recording of a confidential meeting for gain or to cause detriment commits an offence.
Applicable statutory authorities available to LGEMA members.
——————————————————————————————————————–
9 March 2025 Post
Council Meeting EM Voting Compulsory
- Each EM “present at a meeting of Council” must vote on each item, unless an EM has been granted leave by Council or has a disclosable interest that prohibits EM from taking part in a particular item.
- Council cannot grant leave for that part of a meeting before the granting of leave if leave granted during a meeting.
- It is a LG Act offence, which is an EM disqualification event, not to vote for each item on agenda of a Council meeting at which the EM is “present”.
- “Present at a meeting” is not defined but probably means being part of meeting quorum, not just in or out of the room.
- Presiding Member should adjourn meeting before a vote is taken if an EM is out of a room briefly until EM has returned to vote.
- EMs who without Council leave “storm” out of or just leave a meeting of which they form part of the quorum and miss any vote arguably commit a disqualifiable offence.
Relevant statutory provisions are available to LGEMA members on request.
—————————————————————————————————————————–
8 March 2025 Post
Mangano Defamation Trial 10 March 2025
Former Nedlands Cr Andrew Mangano is being sued for defamation around statements former Cr Mangano made at a Council meeting as a Councillor.
To support Andrew, anyone can attend on any day of the trial, which is booked to last for 8 days.
MCGARRY & Anor v MANGANO (CIV/1256/2023) Civil Trial – eTrial Monday 10 March 2025 commencing at 10:30 AM, Court 36, David Malcolm Justice Centre, 28 Barrack St
Perth (not far from Perth train station
—————————————————————————————————————————-
6 March 2025 Post
Confidential Meeting Agenda Items
Until recent amendments to LG Act s.5.23 take effect (who knows when),
- ONLY Council can decide what is confidential and what is not confidential
- it is improper for CEO to tell Council that part of the meeting WILL be confidential
- a CEO can only recommend to Council that an item be confidential and give the reasons why
- a meeting can be open but relevant documents can be confidential or vice versa, as Council decides
- an agenda item can be confidential for part of the item
- the vote on the confidential item cannot be secret and preferably the meeting will be open for the vote
- Council can put a time/after event limit on confidentiality of meeting minutes
- a resolution from a confidential item should not be so vague that it does not have meaning
—————————————————————————————————————————–
3 March 2025 Post
Economic Valuations of our Ecosystems by ABS
There is substantial debate in the scientific, economic and accounting communities about appropriate metrics for ecological condition, methods to measure and value ecosystem services.
On 27 February 2025 ABS published Australia’s first National Ecosystem Account, which helps us understand the economic and health values from our ecosystems. Wide variety of data very useful for assessing LG decisions all of which (since 2023) require regard to be had to climate change, and economic, social and environmental sustainability (We are not seeing this regard in employee reports to Councils, which is disappointing and unlawful).
In 2020–21, services provided by Australia’s ecosystems included:
- Grazed biomass – 111.2 million tonnes of forage was provided, worth $40.4 billion.
- Coastal protection – Mangroves protected 4,006 dwellings worth $57 million, while saltmarsh protected 566 dwellings valued at $8 million (WA has saltmarshes).
- Climate regulation – 34.5 million kilotonnes of carbon was stored by selected ecosystems, with a value of $43.2 billion.
- Water supply – 10.4 million megalitres of surface water was provided for drinking and use as a material at a value of $1.4 billion. A further 48.4 million megalitres of surface water was used as an energy source.
- Wild fish provisioning – 56.3 million kilograms of fish were caught by Commonwealth fisheries, worth $39.2 million.
Points of particular concern from this ABS study include that,
- threatened species listed under the Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (EPBC) Act in 2020 was 1,898 species, up from 1,772 species in 2015.
- feral animal and weed plant species in different regions are increasing,
especially when noting poor LG performance audits by OAG in “Managing the Impact of Plant and Animal Pests: Follow Up” 31 August 2020.
This experimental account estimates extent, condition of Australia’s ecosystems, as well as measures of selected services and the values these services contribute to the economy.
—————————————————————————————————————————–
2 March 2025 Post
Perth’s 8 Most Healthy Suburbs
Claremont, Cottesloe, Cambridge, Canning, Mosman Park, Murray, Nedlands, Perth, Gosnells
What do they have in common?
These researchers established the first, to their knowledge, practical and effective tool for communicating environmental health risks based on quantitative relationships using three types of mortality data and 12 environmental factors.
Researchers combined all-cause, cardiovascular and respiratory mortality data (2016–2019) from Australian regions encompassing 12 environmental exposures, including,
- PM2.5 (very small particles usually found in smoke)
- Ozone
- Temperature
- Humidity
- normalised difference vegetation index
- night light
- road and building density
- socioeconomic status.
In noting existing environmental quality indices often fail to account for varying health impacts of different exposures and excluded socio-economic status indicators.
The New EHQI (Index) integrates multiple environmental exposures and socio-economic status to assess mortality risks across Australia.
Which LG has a Health Local Law as authorised by LG Act?
- If not, why not?
- If yes, what does it regulate?
New measure identifies Australia’s healthiest places to live – Monash University
—————————————————————————————————————————–
1 March 2025 Post
Even Courts Make Typos, Sometimes they are Funny
This is a particularly hilarious one … given opacity of interaction of laws around dividing fences, development and building approvals … note it is a diving act …
Para. 37 The appellant submitted that, as she had an agreement with her neighbours pursuant to the Diving Fences Act 1961 (WA) regarding the erection of the screen, she either did not require development approval under the Planning Act or that agreement provided a good defence to the charge of failing to comply with the direction to remove it.
This decision is important because it also gives us a,
- definition of structure in Planning Act
- difference between “building” and “structure”
- precedent that confirms “public interest in planning controls”
- description of proper process for LG Planning Act prosecutions
- precedent that confirms estoppel may be maintained against a LG discretionary representation where a grave injustice would otherwise be done to an individual and is a higher damage than the damage to the public interest in changing a representation (estoppel = making a LG stand by a discretionary representation)
—————————————————————————————————————————–
28 February 2025 Post
Regional LG Grant Opportunity
Has your LG applied for this grant?
As at 1 July 2024: statewide ban on disposal of e-waste to landfill.
E-waste Regional Transportation Support Scheme (ERTSS) will support regional, remote LGs during transition period.
Eligible LGs can apply for rebate of up to half of the costs incurred for transporting eligible e-waste to an appropriately licensed e-waste recycler or aggregation hub.
—————————————————————————————————————————–
27 February 2025 Post
Planning Minister Powers, Scheme Approvals and Deemed Provisions
Planning Minister’s power to require amendments to a proposed local planning scheme (under P&D Act s 87(2) ) does not extend to authorising a scheme, which contains a model provision inconsistent with a deemed provision.
Mccomish v Shire of Peppermint Grove [2024] WASC 502, para.53
—————————————————————————————————————————–
26 February 2025 Post
LG Employee Retribution against Community
22 January 2025 Dorset Board of Inquiry Report – October 2024 released by Tasmanian LG Minister.
In describing conduct familiar to WA LG activists, inquiry found:
- failure by Mayor, EMs to adequately undertake their functions
- inappropriate, offensive conduct by Mayor and former general manager (ie the CEO)
- culpable conduct by former general manager, another former employee, including retributive actions against some community members conduct of former employees led to Council acting unlawfully.
Recent changes to WA LG Act CANNOT be called reform because they will make conduct like this continue as the norm/more likely/less accountable.
—————————————————————————————————————————–
25 February 2025 Post
Governing LG CEOs
Governing LG CEOs is Councils’ job, which can be fostered by:
- Good governing Councils
- Councils working together to support EMs agitating for good governance against CEO resistance
- Councils being willing to discipline and performance manage their CEO, and knowing how to
- EMs not putting blind trust in their CEO, as CCC keeps telling us
- Effective CEO Contract (LGEMA is developing best practice proforma CEO contract for LGEMA members to use)
- Better EM training (LG Minister will not let LGEMA provide training, but we are ready to do so)
- Best practice Council governance of CEOs (EM training needs to identify this but doesn’t)
- Best practice independent CEO performance reviews (adopting OAG best practice recommendations (OAG performance audit reports best practice recommendations need to be implemented by all Councils)
- Community supporting good governing EMs.
- Complaints to,
a. LG Minister to exercise his/her numerous powers to direct CEO compliance
b. Ombudsman to exercise his/her power to direct CEO
c. WorkSafe for an unsafe workplace occasioned by CEO bullying/poor culture
d. Office of Auditor General for poor CEO performance matters
e. State Records Director about State Records Act CEO offences
f. Public Sector Commissioner for misconduct
g. Corruption and Crime Commission for serious misconduct
h. Police for offences and crimes by CEO such as,
i.LG Act offences
ii.Criminal Code crimes such as,
1. Omitting to do something required by the LG Act
2. Committing something that is prohibited by the LG Act
3. Giving false information to an oversight body
4. Swearing a false oath
5. Falsifying records.
But wait you have done all that? CEO was removed and is now working as a CEO at another LG?
State government LG Ministers need to do their job. CEO governance Law Reform is urgently needed but there is NO political will. LGs are state government agents and state government is too scared of those LG CEOs who are non-performing/maladministering and too scared of the CEO lobbyists. And so it goes …
—————————————————————————————————————————–
24 February 2025 Post
BUSINESS PLANS
Councils MAY require a business plan for ANY venture/project.
Councils MUST prepare a Business Plan before,
- commencing a major trading undertaking (as defined),
- entering a major land transaction (as defined)
- entering a land transaction that is preparatory to entry into a major land transaction.
(unless LG Minister has declared proposal exempt undertaking, on specific statutory grounds).
- Prudent Councils will ensure, business plans are prepared by independent experts at arms’ length from their administrations.
- Employee reporting to Council templates to include a corruption and harm risk assessment on every item that comes to Council, including business plans.
Case Study
Think of a sports or arts facility built with grant funds without regard to operational, and ongoing service and maintenance costs, for which rates have to go up and up. Effective business plans will identify such risks which will be borne by ratepayers long after CEO has escaped with project on his/her CV.
See LG Act s.3.59 Commercial Enterprises by Local Governments.
—————————————————————————————————————————–
23 February 2025 POST
SECRET COMMISSIONS
Secret commission occurs when a person required to provide independent unfettered advice to their principal, dishonestly accepts money, other benefits for agreeing to depart from duty owed to principal.
Secret commissions maybe hidden from disclosure in administration costs or wrongly categorised as non-disclosable gift. It is criminal offence and/or corrupt conduct and/or misleading and deceptive conduct, to:
- receive, solicit secret commission from any person
- give, offer secret commission to an agent, or
- aid, abet, counsel, procure, attempt to or take part in a secret commission, noting secret commission may also be criminal bribe.
Secret commissions can waste LG municipal funds. Examples of persons who might be in a position to be subjected to pressure to receive, give secret commissions in relation to local government include LGs, CEOs, employees, contractors including WALGA.
Complaints about purported LG secret commissions can be made to,
- police as a crime
- CCC as serious misconduct, and/or
- ACCC (Australian Competition and Consumer Commission) as misleading and deceptive conduct.
Criminal Code s. 534 Secret commission for advice to another “Any offer or solicitation of a valuable consideration in respect of any advice given or to be given by one person to another with a view to induce or influence the person advised —a). to enter into a contract with the person offering or solicited; or
b). to appoint or join with another in appointing, or to vote for or to aid in obtaining the election or appointment, or to authorise or join with another in authorising the appointment, of the person offering or solicited as trustee,
and with the intent that the gift or receipt of such valuable consideration is not to be made known to the person advised, shall be a crime, but this section shall not apply when such first mentioned person is the agent of the person offering or solicited.”
—————————————————————————————————————————–
22 February 2025 Post
LG, Council and LEGAL ADVICE
Report into the Inquiry at City of Joondalup 2005 inquirer Bill Ford then Dean of UWA Law School and employment law specialist, in relation to Legal Advices recommended that:
- Councils will not hesitate to obtain alternative legal advice or a second opinion, where EMs are divided, hesitant about any advice.
- EMs considering advice from legal practitioners, will be given sufficient time to consider the legal advice, and will follow accepted legal advice, so as to ensure that they are not otherwise acting improperly.
- DLGSC should keep a central register of legal advices, which will be of general assistance to LGs (but preserving legal professional privilege as required.
EMs have a right to access, and have a copy of, any legal advice obtained by their LG unless they have a personal interest in that advice.
——————————————————————————————————————–
21 February 2025 Post
WHO Knows?
The local government entity ONLY knows what its Council (and some of its committees) know.
A local government does NOT “know” what,
- Elected Members know
- CEO knows
- employees know
- community knows.
So if you want proof for courts or other proceedings that a LG “knows” something you need to ensure it is on the record on recordings and especially in the meeting minutes.
For example: It’s why some CEOs do summaries, such as of public questions/statements for meeting minutes, to leave the important bits out.
Prudent fair, wise councils will not permit summaries that leave out important facts from meeting minutes, which are the record courts accept.
—————————————————————————————————————————–
19 February 2025 Post
Superannuation Payments
All EMs who are eligible should now be receiving their super payments. If not, ask your CEO why not?
—————————————————————————————————————————–
18 February 2025 Post
More Council Agenda Item Secrecy About to Start
The word “MAY” in LG Act s.5.23(2) means it is entirely in Council’s discretion which if any agenda item is secret/confidential. This means only COUNCIL decides what is secret and what is not secret from us (except matters relating to court orders, legal privilege).
It also currently means CEOs must be careful to make 5.23 matters confidential until Council decides otherwise.
New s5.23 enacted 7 December 2024, once operative, will change the “MAY” to “MUST” be confidential for some matters including relating to CEO or senior employee termination/performance review; as ordered by new Inspector (provision not yet operative); and as yet unknown matters to be included in regulations.
Any Council wishing to make public those matters listed in new s5.23(2) should do so now before regulations are published and new 5.23 is operative.
Oh dear … more secrecy to protect CEO/senior employee poor performance from the light. Whose idea was this?
—————————————————————————————————————————–
17 February 2025 Post
Can the Conduct of WA state election be fair?
Magistrate Darge said to everyone sitting in court to hear the Fremantle Court of Disputed Returns decision that it was not the court’s job to punish the behaviour of the WA Electoral Commission, which the decision refers to as a scandal.
Whose Job Is It?
LGEMA has asked the media to find out. See that media release and read the decision on https://lgema.org.au/news/
—————————————————————————————————————————–
16 February 2025 Post
Cat Containment, State Election intentions, and Joint Standing Committee on Delegated Legislation (JSCDL) Annual Report
Will you vote for an MP candidate in state election who does not support domestic cat containment?
As at November 2024 JSCDL maintains its curious, arguably untenable, arguably lawfully wrong, position that Councils do not have power to make cat containment local laws, so they can stop cat containment local laws being operative.
Domestic cats contribute to feral cat population and prey on local native fauna. Cats are one of worst predators. Cats threaten survival of about 120 Australian nationally listed threatened species.
In Australia each year, cats and foxes collectively kill more than 1.4 billion mammals; almost 700 million reptiles; around 510 million birds
LGEMA policy on domestic cat containment here https://lgema.org.au/new-policy-suggestions-2/
For your voting consideration at upcoming state election, these are MP members of JSCDL committee who are against cat containment local laws:
• Mr Geoff Baker MLA (Chair)
• Hon Lorna Harper MLC (Deputy Chair)
• Mr Stuart Aubrey MLA
• Hon Steve Martin MLC
• Hon Martin Pritchard MLC
• Mr Paul Lilburne MLA
• Ms Magenta Marshall MLA
• Hon Shelley Payne MLC (from 11 June 2024)
• Hon Stephen Pratt MLC (until 27 May 2024)
————————————————————————————————————————————–
16 February 2025 Post
State Administrative Tribunal Annual Report
-
While development refusal reviews remain highest workload in Commercial and Civil stream, they have reduced in numbers maybe because rules regulating developers are being abandoned by government
-
Building dispute reviews trend is up (although down from last year) because of the building boom > contractual disputes regarding completion dates, claims for price increases
-
increase in proceedings under the Real Estate and Business Agents Act 1978 (WA)
-
67% increase in residential parks applications (from 31 to 52) under Residential Parks (Long-stay Tenants) Act 2006 (WA)
-
50% increase in domestic animals (dogs) applications
—————————————————————————————————————–
16 February 2025 Post
Voting in Local Government Elections
Only 31% of electors voted in WA 2023 LG elections.
In absence of compulsory voting (only WA, SA do not have compulsory LG voting) that vested interests can manipulate postal vote election outcome is conceivable, possible, even likely by,
- false entries/omissions on owner/occupier roll
- misusing blank ballot papers
- stealing postal ballot papers
- losing ballot papers
- voting twice or more often
- using LG employees as electoral officers
- WA Electoral Commission incompetence
- fraudulent use of spare ballot papers/overs
- ballot box tampering
- scrutineers not understanding all their powers.
Only vote for candidates at State election who support compulsory in-person voting in LG elections so we can improve the likelihood of free and fair local government electoral outcomes.
——————————————————————————————————————–
13 February 2025 Post
EM Minor Breach, Crime: Turning Off Recording Device During Council Meeting
Since 1 January 2025,
- Class 1 & 2 LGs must have video and audio recording of Council meetings
- Class 3 & 4 LGs must have audio recording of Council meetings. (ie minimum requirements: for example, class 3 LG Council could require video and audio).
LG must record, “the deliberations and communications that are part of the meeting’s proceedings”
- Presiding Member cannot have private communications with CEO, any person during a Council meeting (even if communication would embarrass PM).
- Reg 14G requires meeting recordings to be on LG’s official website; or another website ONLY if link is publicly provided on LG website.
Arguably, turning off recording device by Presiding Member is,
- EM meeting point of order for non-compliance with LG Acts.5.23A, Admin Regs Part 2A, Regs 14F >
- EM Conduct Rule 18 minor breach improper purpose for presiding member to turn off a recording device during Council meeting, without Council authorisation with proper purpose
- LG Act breach about which LG Minister could be asked to direct compliance
- LG Act breach about which complaint could be made to Ombudsman
- Criminal Code s.177 crime for not doing something Presiding Member required to do under LG Act (record meeting) about which complaint to police could be made, noting police might only prosecute if complainant has tried every other avenue and each avenue tried is properly documented for the police.
Furthermore,
- It is CEOs’ function to advise, inform Council NOT individual EMs at Council meetings, and
- CEOs, any employees are NOT authorised to, cannot take part in Council meeting debate (including through secretly putting words in Presiding Member’s mouth) other than to publicly answer a question of fact (not opinion) directed to them by EM through Presiding Member.
Secret communications between CEO/other employees and Presiding Member during Council meetings may be CEO performance issue/disciplinary matter for Council.
See Admin Regs as at 1 February 2025 Part 2A Regs 14F:
————————————————————————————————————————————–
13 February 2025 Post
EM Offence of Not Voting at a Meeting
Subject to not having a disqualifying EM from voting financial interest, an EM who is part of a meeting quorum of Council, or a committee with delegated authority, commits an offence if they do not vote, such as by walking out of a meeting without leave.
The offence possible penalty makes not voting a serious local government offence, which is an EM disqualification event.
————————————————————————————————————————————–
13 February 2025 Post
Court of Disputed Returns and 2023 Fremantle Election – Right Result?
Yesterday CDR Magistrate dismissed 2023 Fremantle election invalidity complaints because he did not have evidence that the electoral outcome was affected by Electoral Commission’s distribution of wrong postal ballot papers in 2 wards, and found that Commission’s actions,
- led to a crisis
- were a terrible mistake
- were a momentous error
- were an error of enormity
- were a scandal
- in information dissemination were not perfect
- caused elector confusion
- led to posting inaccurate tally of votes on its website, noting Commission conduct of election not affecting result can still make an election invalid if bad enough.
Magistrate stated in court several times it was not court’s role to punish Commission. So whose role is it?
Magistrate at para 75, “Whilst the Commission and the State Government no doubt scrutinised this error in great detail, with a view to preventing its recurrence, investigating the error is not part of the determination of whether the election was unsafe and should be re-held.” John Quigley MLA is Minister responsible.
Decision also makes clear that complainants need to,
- Clearly articulate any breach of the LG Act or LG Election Regs, or other applicable law
- Clearly articulate what orders they are seeking
- Produce all relevant evidence to the Court, such as in this case evidence about use of overs could and arguably should have been put to the inquiry
- Give evidence of usual way of LG notifications that community is used to, such as “local public notice”
- Give evidence of multicultural diversity as to need for non-english/other language communications
- Clearly clarify to the court the significance of each evidential fact, noting in this matter one example > the significance of unbarcoded addresses in relation to postage time was not explored.
- Constantly remember and remind the court that the process is an inquiry, not a trial and is not a court of pleadings
Decision shows,
- law reform is clearly needed to articulate the CDR process, and procedure, and
- an urgent independent review of the WAEC operations is needed given 2025 is a local government, state and federal elections year.
State Solicitor’s Office who has duty to court to act as a model litigant appeared as “an interested party” on behalf of the state and vigorously opposed both applications and gave no quarter to witnesses called by the complainants appearing in the public interest.
Marija Vujcic and Greater Fremantle Community and Business Association Inc v Electoral Commission of Western Australia and Jemima Williamson-Wong Fre/Gen/922/2023 Fre/Gen/930/2023 City of Fremantle Election CDR Decision
————————————————————————————————————————————-
11 February 2025 Post
CCC Annual Report 23/24
LGs comprised 82% of allegations (261) assessed > rise from 78% in previous year, with 46.3% LG corruption allegations coming from community.
————————————————————————————————————————————-
9 February 2025 Post
WAEC Annual Report 2023 – 2024
1. WAEC conducted 124 of 139 LGs’ LG general biennial elections, being highest number on record (with remaining 15 LGs purchasing counting software from WAEC):
- of 139 WAEC conducted LG elections, 9 in-person election, 115 postal elections
- 1,089 candidates contested 564 vacancies, with 39.6% female candidates
- voter participation up 1.2% to 31.2%; but was 19.1% for in-person elections
- WAEC prepared 164 LG residents rolls
- WAEC prepared 145 consolidated LG rolls (includes registered to vote owners, occupiers).
2. WAEC conducted 21 Extraordinary LG elections.
3. WAEC did not report LG election electoral offence complaints, prosecutions, electoral misconduct.
4. Retirement of Premier McGowan meant Rockingham by-election costing more than $900,000.
https://lgema.org.au/bba
————————————————————————————————————————————–
8 February 2025 Post
LG and Foreign Affairs
Foreign Affairs, regulated by Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (DFAT).
Since December 2020 DFAT has required notifications by LGs of their proposed entry into foreign relations with foreign entities, which may be required to be published and are known as non-core arrangements under the Foreign Arrangements Scheme. These arrangements are placed on a public register. Sister city arrangements may be included in these requirements.
Under the scheme, LGs are required to notify Minister for Foreign Affairs of any proposed non-core arrangements.
DFAT Fact Sheet Fact sheet 3 – Local Government.pdf
————————————————————————————————————————————–
8 February 2025 Post
Meeting Procedure Local laws
Local laws, including Meeting Procedure local laws, are inoperative to the extent of any inconsistency with LG Act or any other written law, including the Australian and WA constitutions.
————————————————————————————————————————————-
9 February 2025 Post
EM Bullying Personal Information Records Part 28
EMs can, and arguably should, regularly FOI information held about them by the LG and DLGSC for purpose of checking that information and having it corrected if wrong or unlawfully held, especially for an improper purpose.
Such FOIs do not attract a fee if made by person about whom it is made.
Community activists can also adopt this practice of checking information held about them.
Personal information held by an agency must be accurate, complete, current and not misleading.
————————————————————————————————————————————–
6 February 2025 Post
EM Bullying Part 27: By Social MediaUsing carriage service to menace, harass or cause offence is Cth crime under Crimes Code (Cth) s.474.17(1) about which a complaint can be made to the police.
————————————————————————————————————————————–
5 February 2025 Post
Super for Elected Members
1 February 2025: LGs are authorised to pay superannuation to EMs from this date.
19 October 2025: Tier 1 and Tier 2 LGs required to pay superannuation to EMs, optional for Tier 3 & 4 LGs from this date.
While we do not begrudge hard working EMs this payment, it will foster some seeking EM office for the wrong reasons and who might then be quiet acquiescent trusting poor governing mice when they are elected, and not lions who roar loudly in furious support of good governance.
New super payments provides further support for EMs to be paid for meetings they actually attend and NOT by an annual allowance (which CEOs prefer because it is less work for employees).
Councils can resolve that EMs are paid for each meeting attendance rather than annual allowance.
————————————————————————————————————————————-
4 February 2025 Post
LG Act Changes Yet Again 1 February 2025
There seems to have been around 13 versions of LG Act since May 2023. This is not effective or fair, and is confusing law reform.
Announcements are made that certain things are now so without giving us comparative tables, guidance about how to find, check (it is a tedious process), using a “trust us, we are the government” approach is unacceptable.
New LG Act version as at 1 February 2025 includes,
- Serious local government offence (SLGO) definition reduced to be any possible term of imprisonment (down from one year or more) or fine of or exceeding $10,000 up from $5,000), noting SLGO offence is EM disqualification event.
- CEOs are now required to conduct election for deputy mayor or president, more power to CEO … really?
- Owner Occupier Roll changes: Nominees of companies on owners/occupiers roll must be officer or employee of the company; consequential Audit Regs amended as at 1 Feb. 25.
- Owner Occupier Roll (OOR) must be undertaken anew for 2025 LG election using new complex, extensive rules; noting of OOR register of voters must be available to public for inspection at LG offices but cannot be published on LG website.
- Insolvency definition changed for purpose of EM disqualification.
Noting new 2025 of LG Administration Regs, LG Constitutional Regs, LG Elections Regs and new 2024 LG Financial Regs, LG Functions and General Regs. It’s hard to keep up!
LG CEOs should provide hard copy of “state government printer version” of LG Act and all Regulations on request from EM, each time there is a new version.
Council EM training and resources policy should require this in any event.
LG Act is type of book you write all over to remind you of issues, what, where, how, court cases, changes at what date, what CEO or standards panel or SAT told you about particular provisions, etc etc.
Latest version LG Act as at 1 February 2025 here WALW – Local Government Act 1995 – Home Page
————————————————————————————————————————————-–
3 February 2025 Post
LG Internal Systems Audits
Not less than every three years, more often as Council requires, LG CEOs must review LG’s systems, procedures for risk, internal controls, legislative compliance including Work Health and Safety Act compliance.
Review Reports required to be presented to Audit Committee, Council
Audit Committee must oversee responses to Review Report.
There are NO grounds for making the report confidential.
Indeed any risk to EMs, employees, community members exposed in such reports must be published.
————————————————————————————————————————————–
2 February 2025 Post
Truth in Political Advertising Local Law
Councils can,
- decide truth in political advertising is necessary and convenient for their electoral functions
- have a relevant local law with penalties of up to $10,000 for contraventions, and adopt a “Truth in Political Advertising Local Law” in relation to any misleading or deceptive electoral material published or continued to be published by any person within the election period, thus expanding the ambit of LG Act s.4.90.
————————————————————————————————————————————-
1 February 2025 Post
Parliament Decides EMs No Longer Lead, Guide Their Community
As at 7 December 2024 EMs no longer, “provide statutory leadership and guidance to their community” because parliament removed that from LG Act.
Parliament made shocking, disrespectful statement against EMs.
Who sought this repeal? Why? What were they thinking?
-
EMs who are leaders will remain leaders.
-
EMs who guide their community will continue to guide
-
EMs who are minority EMs will continue to lead agitation, action for good governance, wise expenditure of municipal funds
-
EMs who ask questions will keep asking
-
EMs who hold CEOs to account will keep doing so.
Parliament cannot stop effective EMs from leading, guiding.
State MP candidates worth voting for will stand for return of this provision to LG Act.
————————————————————————————————————————————–
31 January 2025 Post
CEOs Need Better Oversight, More Accountability
So only in the last year we have had current or former LG CEO at,
- Bridgetown-Greenbushes unlawfully award herself a pay rise
- Ravensthorpe use municipal funds for sex services
- Coolgardie suspended amidst bullying allegations
- Nedlands move on to another LG after failing OAG financial audit
- Melville who had records that could not be found or did not exist, as found by Information Commissioner
- Armadale, Canning, Gosnells, Joondalup, Rockingham, Stirling, Swan, staff exit controls found not to be up to standard by OAG
- 16 non-metropolitan LGs, CEOs did not have secured LG servers
- Murchison, Albany, Kalgoorlie-Boulder were not exercising OAG best practice management of credit cards, store cards, fuel cards and taxi cards;
and recently enacted law reform increases CEO powers and reduces EM, Council powers; and does not enact parliamentary committee’s recommendation that LG Act require LG CEOs to act in “good faith”. Go figure!
——————————————————————————————————————–
29 January 2025 Post
Council, EMs Led Up Garden Path by CEO, Directors
Tasmanian Board of Inquiry investigated serious allegations of systematic, widespread statutory non-compliance; good governance failings (Note: CEOs called general managers in Tasmania).
Significant conduct governance failings, Council decision-making including:
- failure by Mayor, EMs to adequately undertake certain functions;
- inappropriate, offensive conduct by Mayor, CEO
- conduct by CEO, another employee, including retributive actions against community members
- former employee conduct > Council acting unlawfully.
Report release > suspended councillors (not mayor) resumed duties under directions framework, Commissioner appointment concluded.
At page 8: Board’s findings about EMs were not so much what they did, BUT WHAT THEY DID NOT DO. EMs did not,
- adequately monitor CEO performance
- pursue access to CEO’s legal advices
- have appropriate policies to ensure compliance with all Council’s obligations
- ensure appropriate governance arrangements in place to manage statutory obligations.
At page 9 (now former) Employees bad behaviour included,
- CEO & Director causing development construction on Crown land without authority
- CEO failing to stop unlawful works when requested
- CEO failing to share legal advice with Council, EMs
- CEO failing to act in accordance with legal advice, and/or failing to obtain legal advice
- CEO improperly recommending Council continue to act unlawfully
- Director failing to take all reasonable steps to ensure planning permit conditions’ compliance
- CEO sent correspondence to resident containing false assertions, making improper, highly insulting comments
- CEO & Director not declaring shareholdings
- Senior employees issuing infringement notices illegally, or in retributive manner
- CEO using combative, inappropriate, offensive language
And so it goes …
——————————————————————————————————————–
28 January 2024 Post
SOFT LAW Protects LG Employee Bullies
Soft law means a cleverly worded “rule”, which has no legally binding force but which is intended to influence conduct or to appear to influence conduct; and is designed to emphasise behaviour control objectives by clothing instrument with a patina of enforceability and characteristics of a law.
Example: A LG Employee Code of Conduct is Soft Law, which is ineffective in fostering ethical employee conduct.
Opposite: An EM Code of Conduct is hard and harsh law, which is weaponised to bully EMs.
————————————————————————————————————————————–
27 January 2024 Post
Victorian EMs Still Being Bullied
Like in Victoria, Moira Shire Council where severe EM bullying by CEO and majority EMS was exposed, Victoria’s smallest council is now under investigation where it appears:
- allegations CEO threatened to “take apart” an EM
- most popular EM considering quitting, reportedly due to toxic work environment.
- previous investigations reported to have been made and investigated without effect against CEO
- EMs complain of toxic work environment
- some EMs will not recontest upcoming election because of “toxic culture” at LG, frustration having to work with underperforming administration within a bad culture
- EMs feel manipulated
- said one EM, “The truth is, a few of us [councillors] have thought of resigning, and if you haven’t, it is probably because you are here for the wrong reasons”
- plummeting community satisfaction levels.
Sound familiar?
Victoria has inspectorate like one enacted and planned for WA … look how that has worked out. If Minister cannot identify the problem, she cannot fix it. None of enacted reforms can fix the problem, which OAG, CCC keep exposing but remain unheard. It’s many of the LG CEOs Australia wide that are the problem, but no-one with the power is courageous enough to do anything … so they go for the soft undefended highly performing but rare minority targets – good governing EMs.
Victoria’s smallest council, the Borough of Queenscliffe, in turmoil just months into new term – ABC News
————————————————————————————————————————————-
24 January 2025 Post
Tasmanian LG Inquiry finds,
- LG Mayor was combative, highly disrespectful, rude.
- LG Council had significant failings in governance, non-compliance with statutory obligations, conflicts of interest, bias, improper use of statutory authority, inappropriate behaviours and communications.
Sound familiar?
————————————————————————————————————————————–
26 January 2025 Post
EM Bullying Using Threats A Crime Part 27
Any person who makes a threat to an Elected Member with intent to,
(a) gain a benefit, pecuniary or otherwise, for any person; or
(b) cause a detriment, pecuniary or otherwise, to any person; or
(c) prevent or hinder doing of an act by a person who is lawfully entitled to do that act; or
(d) compel the doing of an act by a person who is lawfully entitled to abstain from doing that act,
is guilty of a crime under Criminal Code s.338 about which a complaint can be made to the police; where, “threat” means a statement or behaviour that expressly constitutes, or may reasonably be regarded as constituting, a threat.
Example: Where a CEO or other employee threatens to make or makes a breach complaint against an Elected Member to stop the EM asking questions about a particular matter.
————————————————————————————————————————————-
23 January 2025 Post
EM Bullying By Interfering with EMs Political Rights Part 26
EM’s political right is a personal right because it is a crime if any person (including an EM, CEO or other employee, DLGSC public servant or any other person) by violence, or by threats or intimidation of ANY kind, hinders or interferes with the free exercise of any political right by another person is a crime under Criminal Code s.75, about which a complaint can be made to the police.
Political rights are not defined in Criminal Code.
Political rights include,
- To take part in the conduct of public affairs, directly or through freely chosen representatives – for example freedom of political communication
- To vote and to be elected at genuine periodic elections which shall be by universal and equal suffrage and shall be held by secret ballot, guaranteeing the free expression of the will of the electors;
- To have access, on general terms of equality, to public service in his country, by ICCPR Treaty Article 25 to which Australia is a signatory.
Example: Using the minor breach conduct rules vexatiously to punish an EM candidate for making political statements during LG election is a crime.
20 January 2024 Post
Stand Up Against Local Government and WALGA Secrecy – you can help
Game: Government Secrecy About Your Rates Money Expenditure
Umpire Oversight: Supreme Court – single judge
Umpire: FOI Commissioner
Goliath: WALGA
David: LGEMA
WA’s Freedom of Information Commissioner has decided that the LGEMA cannot access WALGA records because (notwithstanding it is a local government system statutory authority) the Commissioner has decided that WALGA is not subject to the FOI Act because it,
- is not a public body,
- does not serve a public purpose, and
- influences governments akin only to a lobbyist.
This unfortunate decision denies public accountability for WALGA’s indirect expenditure of public monies YOU are required to pay as LG rates: https://lgema.org.au/…/2024/12/F2023056_Decision_Comp.pdf
LGEMA does not have the funds for an appeal to the Supreme Court. LGEMA needs your help. A donation for LGEMA appeal costs can be made here. Sharing this post will help.
Thank you …. https://gofund.me/73aa97f7
————————————————————————————————————————————–
20 January 2025 Post
EM Bullying Part 25 by Threats, Misinformation
EMs may be advised that they cannot criticise a Council decision, with inference that they will be breached if they do.
This is wrong, unlawful advice and maybe a criminal threat.
High Court:
“ It is unacceptable, in our democratic society, that there should be a restraint on the publication of information relating to government when the only vice in that information is that it enables the public to discuss, review and criticise government action”:
“Commonwealth v John Fairfax &Sons Ltd (1980) 32 ALR 485” at para. 493
State Administrative Tribunal
- EMs may publicly disagree with Council decisions. Respecting Council decisions does not equate necessarily with agreement. Proper political communication for EMs means explaining to their electorate why they disagree with decisions in the proper discharge of their duties, if done courteously, respectfully. EMs do not necessarily undermine Council majority decision-making, when expressing concern about resolution legality: “Matheson and LG Standards Panel [2020] WASAT 26″
- an EM’s job should not be made even more difficult by the imposition of unworkable rules that, in effect, limit what they may say when they are undertaking these critical functions: “Bradley and LG Standards Panel [2012] WASAT 44”
- “threat” mean declaration of an intention, determination to inflict punishment, pain or loss on someone in retaliation for, or conditionally upon, some action or course; also called “menace”. • ordinary, natural meaning of threat in statutory offences applies to minor breach considerations: “Mummery and Local Government Standards Panel [2020] WASAT 158”
- to artificially, unrealistically inflate EM’s obligations might tend to have a ‘chilling effect’ on local political speech and communication, is a result which should NOT be attributed to Parliament: Matheson decision above.
To inhibit this freedom of political communication may be a breach of Criminal Code s.75 or a criminal threat under Criminal Code s.338A about which a complaint can be made to the police.
——————————————————————————————————————–
19 January 2025 Post
EM Bullying Lying, Misrepresentation Part 24
Any person required by law to give information, whether orally or in writing, to another person who gives false information in a material particular is guilty of a crime under Criminal Code s.170(1) about which a complaint can be made to the police.
Example: A EM who makes a breach complaint against an EM that includes false information? (as well as it being a LG Act offence).
Example: A CEO who provide false information on Council meeting agenda about a statutory business plan or a President or Mayor in answer to a public question?
——————————————————————————————————————–
18 January 2025 Post
EM Bullying Hindering Statutory Requirement A Crime Part 23
Any person who … does any act which by LG Act they are forbidden or required to do or omits to do any act which LG Act requires of the person is guilty of a crime by Criminal Code s.177 (unless LG Act already provides action/omission is a LG Act offence), about which police complaint can be made.
Example: Where a CEO refuses to produce a LG record to an Elected Member is a crime.
——————————————————————————————————————–
17 January 2025 Post
EM Bullying Unlawful Use of LG Computer Crime Part 22
A CEO or employee who acts on information obtained from the LG computer to supply any identification information about an EM with the intention that the material will be used to commit an indictable offence, commits a crime under Criminal Code s.490, about which a complaint can be made to police.
Example: CEO gives EM identification information to any person including another EM about an EM’s personal details, including information supplied by EM for rates purposes or in response to breach complaint for the purpose of hindering an EM’s political rights.
————————————————————————————————————————————–
16 January 2025 Post
EM Bullying Covert Surveillance of EM Crime Part 21
A CEO or other employee (without lawful authorisation) attaches, installs, uses, maintains, or causes to be attached, installed, used, or maintained, a tracking device to determine geographical location of a person, object without person’s express or implied consent of the person possessing, having control of that object is a crime by Surveillance Device Act 1998 s.7(1), about which a complaint can be made to the police.
Example: CEO or other employee authorises or does not deactivate; and uses installation of tracking device on EMs’ LG supplied phone or device.
————————————————————————————————————————————–
14 January 2025 Post
EM Bullying by Surveillance of EM Crime Part 20
LG employees, including CEOs, who open and view, EM postal mail without knowledge or written permission of EM commit a crime under Telecommunications and Postal Services Act 1981 (Cth) s.85L(1) about which a complaint can be made to the police about the CEO, whose function is to keep LG records properly, and the employee who opened the letter.
Example: Employee opens letter addressed to EM and passes opened letter to CEO, other employee and/or EM without the envelope to EM with LG received and date stamps on the letter.
————————————————————————————————————————————–
10 January 2025 Post
EM Bullying CEO Surveillance of EMs Part 19
LG CEOs or other employee who,
> without lawful authority install, use, maintain, or cause to be installed, used, or maintained, a listening device to record, monitor, or listen to a private conversation to which that person is not a party; or to record a private conversation to which that person is not a party > commit a crime under Surveillance Device Act 1998 s.5(1) about which a complaint can be made to the police.
Example: CEO or other employee listens to and/or records a confidential Council or committee meeting using existing in place recording devices, in which CEO has a conflict of interest, such as Council meeting about CEO performance at an Audit Committee meeting.
————————————————————————————————————————————–
9 January 2025 Post
EM Bullying EM Covert, Open Surveillance Part 18
CEOs or other employees who misuse knowledge gained from surveillance of EM emails and/or postal mail commit a crime under Criminal Code s.83 or s.440A, about which EM can complain to police.
Example: CEO makes conduct complaint about EM based only on information gained from reading the EM’s correspondence without EM’s express permission to access that information.
————————————————————————————————————————————-
8 January2025 Post
EM Bullying Possible EM Responses Part 17
EMs bullied in LG workplace can consider following if appropriate/safe:
- call out bully behaviour publicly when it happens without labelling bully
- ensure at least one sympathetic EM/other person on alert at any gathering/meeting to move beside you if approached by bully
- NEVER interact with bully without witnesses, always take someone with you to meetings
- make, keep screen shots of any electronic evidence; emails etc might disappear/be “lost”
- keep private contemporaneous chronological diary of all adverse verbal or otherwise bullying interactions, and name and contact details of any witness; and how you felt at time in response
- report CEOs’ bullying behaviours to Council and/or the LG Minister and/or the PSC and/or WorkSafe
- visit GP as necessary to obtain treatment and referral, medical certificate thus ensuring relevant medical records of harms suffered WITHOUT disclosing any confidential information in certificates given to LG (may not be treated confidentially);
- ask GP certificate to recommend leave or attending meetings electronically or rearranging meeting seating away from bully
- use qualified Counsellor for support, noting if using LG EAP program, confidentiality cannot be assured
- apply for Misconduct Restraining Order against bully
- make complaint to police for harassment interfering with your freedom of political communication or if the bullying amounts to criminal threat; noting WA Police Force Charter of Rights is expressed to rely on cooperation of all community members to make WA a safe and secure place; and citizens’ moral obligations include to assist and support their police, and report information relating to any offence.
————————————————————————————————————————————–
7 January 2025
EM Bullying and EM Behaviour Conduct Rules Are Bad Part 16
EM Conduct Rules prohibit bullying, harassing, offensive language, disparagement of Council and committee members, candidates and employees, and imputations of dishonest or unethical motives: 2021 Conduct Rules Division 3 BEHAVIOUR cl.8-10, about which an EM behaviour complaint can be made by bullied EM according to Council MAJORITY adopted procedure.
Conduct Behaviour complaints rarely lead to resolution, are a failed never-can-work approach, and can be and are used to bully “non-compliant” ungroomable MINORITY EMs.
See Part 1 to 15 under
————————————————————————————————————————————–
6 January 2025 Post
Supreme Court, SAT Confirm Gosnell’s Land Use Decision
Property developer loses novel approach to manipulating land use zoning.
WA Supreme Court clarified proper approach to determining “uses of land”, “classification of land use” in deciding whether or not multiple uses constitute a new single use or separate uses.
Court noted SAT member remarks as follows, … “if Happy Cruising’s position was accepted it ‘would have the potential to transform land use planning, essentially because it would open up a very convenient opportunity for enterprising business operators to transform prohibited non discretionary uses into permissible discretionary uses simply by adding another use to the same site’” and that, … “various uses do not combine to create a separate single use”.
HAPPY CRUISING PTY LTD -v- CITY OF GOSNELLS [2024] WASC 464
HAPPY CRUISING PTY LTD -v- CITY OF GOSNELLS [2024] WASC 464 – eCourts Portal
——————————————————————————————————————–
5 January 2025 Post
New Offices of Information Commissioner, Chief Data Officer & New privacy laws for LG
28 November 2024: WA Parliament enacted “Privacy and Responsible Information Sharing Act 2024” , part operative since 6 December 2024.
New Information Commissioner Act 2024 part operative since 7 December 2024.
Both Acts will not become fully operative until proclaimed.
Acts intended to,
• protect privacy of personal information handled by public entities including LGs, RLGs, Ministers, Parliamentary Secretaries, contracted (to public entities) service providers
• be centred around Information Privacy Principles (IPPs)
• provide framework to authorise responsible sharing of information held by public entities, including LGs and RLGs
• establish offices of Information Commissioner AND Chief Data Officer.
Acts will require Councils to work on and comply with enacted provisions before they become obligatory (which prudent Councils will NOW require) by,
• appointing privacy AND information sharing employee roles
• adopting, publishing compliant privacy AND information breach response policies
• undertaking Privacy Impact Assessment (PIA) prior to undertaking a ‘high privacy impact function or activity‘ which is ‘likely to have a significant impact on the privacy of individuals‘
• some protections of individuals privacy on LG public registers.
Links to Bills which contain all provisions including those not yet enacted are here:
Information Commissioner
Links to Bill as enacted so far,
————————————————————————————————————————————–
3 January 2025 Post
Live Streaming, Recording Council meetings
From 1 January 2025 all Class 1 & 2 LGs (classes defined in LG (Constitution) Regulations 1998) must publicly live stream all Council meetings so that,
• all reasonable steps taken to ensure members of public at meeting informed beforehand of live public broadcast, recording
• both visual and audio are broadcast live
• quality sufficient to hear ALL deliberations and communications
• any delay ONLY that inherent in live broadcasting technology
• in event of technological failure, everything done that is reasonably practicable to make improvised recording
• recording must be publicly available within 14 days on LG website
noting restricted applicability to confidential parts of meetings.
• record of recording kept for at least 5 years, which is CEO responsibility
Noting these are minimum requirements, which can be adopted by ANY LG Council.
————————————————————————————————————————————–
1 January 2025 Post
Happy New Year
To all LGEMA members and local government activists working in the public interest for better outcomes for our community from local government.
Bring on our as yet unknown 2025 successes!
————————————————————————————————————————————–
24 December 2024 post
Happy Christmas 2024 from LGEMA
Thank you to every Elected Member and Community Activist working towards local government good governance and wise expenditure of the municipal funds.
It is hard, often harmful to self, but rewarding work when we have wins. Collaborative teamwork works.
We have had a busy year with LGEMA forums, submissions and member support.
LGEMA highlights this year have been,
• partnering with you to reach your LG goals (which in turn helps us better recognise the gaps to agitate about)
• supporting Nedlands EMs to obtain an independent forensic accountant report, which included formal recognition that Councils not bound by their own Procurement Policy (which we all knew anyway)
• successfully agitating for formal recognition that EMs are protected from harm by WorkSafe legislation, including protection from harm from bullying (which we all knew anyway); and increasing recognition that bullying is a weapon used to avoid scrutiny
• improving LGEMA website; now with facebook posts uploaded to website; formal good governance policies > so far on tree preservation and domestic cat containment, and lots more coming.
A special thank you to all our LGEMA Committee members, John, Lorna, Daniel, Sally, Anne, Andrew; an additional burden to their already high workloads.
Let’s see what we can achieve together in 2025 on a shoestring for LG good government.
————————————————————————————————————————————–
4 January 2025 Post
Fixing and Messing with State Audit Act > Mexican Standoff?
Labor majority parliament enacted “Auditor General (Amendment) Act 2022” which received Royal Assent 29 November 2022 but which has not been proclaimed so is not operative.
Auditor wanted and was given,
• explicit access to records covered by public interest immunity, legal professional privilege
• immunities, privilege preservation if Auditor accesses documents,
especially important where government body claiming such protection stops them from giving records to Auditor, which is time consuming refusal to overcome, hinders Auditor productivity
However, Auditor did NOT need, want or ask for, but was given novel (untested elsewhere) provisions, with Auditor’s legal advice confirming adverse impact of proposed new provisions as follows,
• diminish Auditor’s discretion to report in public interest thus impacting Auditor’s independence
• ambiguous (poorly drafted) reduction of Auditor access to some records, which may require litigation to resolve
• requires Treasurer (an MP) to be included in procedural fairness processes for all performance audits
• overly detailed, bureaucratic, problematic provisions
• confidential Audit reports can only be given to executive government (Cabinet) and not to relevant parliamentary oversight committees where they currently go and should remain so.
What audit is government scared of?
Let’s hope all INDEPENDENT candidates in upcoming state election undertake to give State Auditor,
• what she needs
• unimpeded audits
• proclamation of provisions auditor urgently needs
• no proclamation of provisions Auditor does not want.
OAG Annual Report where this is reported is here https://lgema.org.au/zhl
——————————————————————————————————————–
3 January 2025 Post
Live Streaming, Recording Council meetings
From 1 January 2025 all Class 1 & 2 LGs (classes defined in LG (Constitution) Regulations 1998) must publicly live stream all Council meetings so that,
• all reasonable steps taken to ensure members of public at meeting informed beforehand of live public broadcast, recording
• both visual and audio are broadcast live
• quality sufficient to hear ALL deliberations and communications
• any delay ONLY that inherent in live broadcasting technology
• in event of technological failure, everything done that is reasonably practicable to make improvised recording
• recording must be publicly available within 14 days on LG website
noting restricted applicability to confidential parts of meetings.
• record of recording kept for at least 5 years, which is CEO responsibility
Noting these are minimum requirements, which can be adopted by ANY LG Council.
——————————————————————————————————————–
2 January 2025 Post
Our Very Own Sports Rorts?
OAG finds state government (DLGSC) processes for selecting, assessing, approving 474 Community Sporting and Recreational Facilities Funds grants valued at $261million, was not transparent: OAG 2023-2024 Annual Report page 94
——————————————————————————————————————–
1 January 2025 Post
LGs Not Safe from Harm by Departing Employees
Staff Exit Controls at Large Local Government Entities OAG Report 25: 2023-24 (Armadale, Canning, Gosnells, Joondalup, Rockingham, Stirling, Swan, Wanneroo)
Audit assessed effectiveness of CEO’s staff exit controls which found no effective processes in place to “regularly review staff exit information allowing effective oversight and monitoring of end to end processes and ensure compliance with policies and procedures” and “ [LGs] not mature in assessing risk and adjusting staff exit controls to take account of high integrity positions”.
Stirling had highest head count, most staff exits of sampled LGs.
Only Rockingham was critical of audit findings, which criticism OAG rejected.
Specific adverse findings included,
Armadale: limited fleet asset documentation available, security access analysis data not available, vehicle return forms are not used, exit checklists not required
Canning: security access analysis data not available, no exit checklists, not possible to obtain complete information on individual exit security cancellation dates, exit checklists , completion of process confirmation not in place
Gosnells: limited fleet asset documentation was available, security access analysis data not available, vehicle return forms not used
Joondalup: security access analysis data not available
Swan: no exit checklists, exit checklists and completion of process confirmation not in place
Wanneroo: security access analysis data not available
Audit outcomes clearly CEOs’ performance issue for Council to resolve, direct with statutory report, action plan.
OAG made 4 recommendations in 28 June 2024 report with due dates for LG Council (cannot be delegated) responses possibly as follows:
29 September 2024: latest date for response and action reports to LG Minister
17 October 2024: latest date for CEOs to put response and action reports on LG websites
December 2024: month by which OAG recommendations to be implemented
Any LGs who have not published statutory report, action plan by due dates, and/or which have not implemented recommendations can be referred to Legislative Assembly’s Public Accounts Committee.
All Councils (whether or not audit sampled LGs) will adopt best practice “Staff Exit Control Policy” as recommended by OAG in report’s best practice recommendations.
——————————————————————————————————————–
31 December 2024 Post
LG Servers At Risk from Fire, Climate Conditions, Unlawful Access
OAG Performance Audit of LG Physical Security of Server Assets Report 20: 2023-24
Sixteen (16) sampled, unidentified non-metropolitan LGs from Gascoyne, Goldfields, Great Southern, Kimberley, Pilbara, Wheatbelt audited by OAG as to safety of onsite physical server assets. (Councils should know if their LG sampled).
OAG found most sampled LGs need to better protect server assets, made seven (7) recommendations for improvement of CEOs’ server management, which clearly a concerning CEO performance issue.
All 16 LG Councils (cannot be delegated) required to prepare, adopt report, action plan for LG Minister within three months of the OAG report being tabled in parliament. Within 14 days of giving report, action plan to LG Minister, CEOs required to publish them on LG website; with due dates possibly being,
• 25 September 2024: latest date to send report and action plan to LG Minister
• 15 October 2024: latest date for CEO to publish report and action on LG website
Any LG which has not published report, action plan by due dates, and/or which has not implemented recommendations can be referred to Legislative Assembly’s Public Accounts Committee.
Prudent Councils (whether or not they were audited) will adopt best practice outlined in report Appendix 1 as Council’s “Physical Security of Server Assets Policy”.
——————————————————————————————————————–
30 December 2024 Post
Champagne and Raw Oysters
OAG Report Local Government Management of Purchasing Cards.
OAG made performance audit report 12 June 2024 about Cities of Albany and Kalgoorlie-Boulder, Shire of Murchison management of purchasing cards (including credit cards, store cards, fuel cards, taxi cards).
OAG found variable controls around purchasing cards issue, use, cancellation, leading to poor oversight of expenditure of municipal funds.
OAG identified Council Policies, such as “Purchasing Card Management Policy” adopting OAG best practice at Appendix 1 of report, as important preventive control to assist employees’ purchase decisions to reduce unreasonable, excessive spending; noting report’s case studies of champagne and raw oysters purchases on LG purchasing cards for employee, workshop functions.
OAG made 6 recommendations to improve CEOs’ performance of purchasing card management.
All 3 LG Councils (cannot be delegated) were required to prepare a report and action plan to LG Minister within three months of OAG report being tabled in Parliament; and publish report and action plan on LG website within 14 days of them being given to LG Minister, with due dates possibly being,
• 13 September 2024: latest date to send report, action plan to Minister
• 3 October 2024: latest date for CEO to publish report, action plan on LG website.
——————————————————————————————————————–
29 December 2024 Post
OAG 2023 – 2024 Annual Report
• 147 LG entities, over 24,000 employees manage $54 billion assets
• too many LG audit weaknesses not being resolved quickly enough
• too many LGs not audit ready for auditor
• shortcomings in some LGs increase their audit costs
• some LGs unable to produce records in timely manner to auditor
• average number of days to finalise an audit opinion 78 days (target 68 days)
• average cost of LG audit $71,240
• 2 LGs received disclaimer of opinion > being the most serious outcome: (Nedlands, Halls Creek)
• 12 LGs received qualified audit opinion
• 1,191 audit findings being 718 financial management issues, 473 information system control issues
• only 88 LGs of 145 LGs surveyed LGs responded to OAG survey about OAG auditors
Audit Committees should always meet with auditor after OAG audit report delivered without ANY employees including CEO being present for at least part of meeting.
LGEMA – Local Government Elected Members Association
Craig Ross report at Nedlands and subsequent ongoing work at Nedlands thanks to a brave Council majority, will give OAG more insights into LG mismanagement causes.
#localgovernmentfinances #localgovernmentaudits #localgovernmentmanagement
————————————————————————————————————————————–
27 December 2024 Post
SAT, Shire Planners Wrongly Interpret Planning Scheme
Supreme Court on judicial review allowed McComish appeal against development refusal.
A model scheme text provision incorporated into a planning scheme is of NO effect to the extent it is inconsistent with a deemed provision in a planning scheme, which apparently SAT and LG planners did not know.
——————————————————————————————————————–
27 December 2024 Post
Victorian LG Minister sets Annual LG Rate Cap
Victoria has,
• Government policy called” Fair Go Rates system” introduced in 2016 (LG rates had been increasing by average 6% annually, since its introduction average rate cap has been 2.3%
• LG Ministerial power to annually cap LG annual rates and municipal charges(but not waste service rates/charges)
• LG Ministerial guidelines for use of rates and charges
• Essential Services Commission who reports to Minister about LG compliance with rate cap, and produced a 2015 “Council rate capping and variation framework review”.
Some LG CEOs with compliant Councils may reduce services and infrastructure instead of cutting operational costs so they can blame state of affairs on rate capping.
——————————————————————————————————————–
2 December 2024 Post
Magic Circle or Donkey Sanctuary or Purple Circle
Nurse Lucy Letby was a UK serial baby killer who remained undetected for so long because of lack of accountability of health boards and managers, and doctors’ and nurses’ fears that making a complaint would be career ending; because managers care more about a hospital’s reputation than patient safety.
Ring a bell?
For over 20 years inquiries had been unsuccessfully recommending strengthening accountability of NHS managers by establishing a management regulation board to ensure inquiry recommendations are adopted and implemented, and underperforming managers are banned from holding senior management positions.
Ring more bells?
Poorly performing NHS managers in the so called “Donkey Sanctuary” are just moved on and around, just like “purple circle” LG CEOs.
Doctors and nurses face their relevant registration boards and can be deregistered, as can be Elected Members be suspended or dismissed by LG Minister.
Ring even more bells?
A podcast has been running about “The Trial of Lucy Letby: The Inquiry” into NHS management.
Episode 22 The Magic Circle has so many correlations with WA local government that it is worth a listen; if only to know as local government activists we are not alone in what we see, struggle against.
——————————————————————————————————————–
21 December 2024 Post
OIC Decides WALGA Not Subject to FOI Act
LGEMA v WALGA [2024] WA Information Commissioner 16 decision published yesterday by OIC, nearly TWO years after review sought.
OIC decided WALGA is not subject to FOI Act notwithstanding WALGA accepted it IS subject to FOI Act and made no submissions, and notwithstanding precedent to the contrary that is arguably binding on OIC.
OIC decided that WALGA,
• Does not have ANY statutory powers requiring it to do anything
• Is simply a lobbyist on matters affecting its members, supporters
• Is merely a local government advocacy body
• Is NOT established for any public purpose.
It is a pity LGEMA does not have resources for a Supreme Court appeal against this troubling and almost inexplicable decision.
Read the decision here: https://lgema.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/F2023056_Decision_Comp.pdf
——————————————————————————————————————–
18 December 2024 Post
Gosnells Unlawfully Approves Own DA
City of Gosnells and WAPC approved use of land by Gosnells for compost manufacturing, soil blending, and other uses including dog kennels.
Affected resident commenced judicial review in Supreme Court, which was successful. City of Gosnells unsuccessfully appealed single judge decision to Court of Appeal.
Court of Appeal found that proposed uses satisfied definition of noxious industry, which was not permitted use of land on which is was approved, and thus Gosnells lost its appeal.
So LG and WAPC statutory planners got it wrong. Why? How? How much did it cost everyone (residents and ratepayers) to find this out?
Development assessment process in WA is not sustainable, does not achieve planned outcomes or take sufficient consideration of local amenity; which is exacerbated and fostered by absence of third party merits review rights in the State Administrative Tribunal.
Decision helpfully explores what is and is not part of a development application, which Gosnells and its lawyers did not know; and has given us binding definitions and/or scope of ”classification of use”, “public works”, “civic use”, “kennel use”, “industry noxious use”.
See City of Gosnells v Reid [2024] WASCA 155
————————————————————————————————————————————–
12 December 2024 Post
Amended Local Government Act 1996
The LG Act, as amended yet again, by Local Government Amendment Act 2024 is here
DLGSC is writing, possibly with only WALGA and/or LG Pro input, the following regulations:
• residential crossovers approvals
• alfresco dining approvals
• CEO performance indicators
• online registers
• standardised meeting procedures
• council plans
• community engagement charter
• communications agreements.
If Councils, community groups or EMs want input into any of these regs, make submission NOW cc to LG Minister, whether or not submissions have been called for.
Inexplicably, roles of Council by new s.2.7; mayor by amended s.2.8; EMs by new s.2.10; CEOs by new s.5.41; have been changed.
Inexplicably: notwithstanding recommendation from parliament’s serious misconduct inquiry that CEOs be required by LG Act to act in GOOD FAITH (because of evidence committee heard) it is not in amended Act.
——————————————————————————————————————–
28 December 2024 Post
EM Bullying and LG Workplace Part 15
EM WorkSafe protection jurisdiction has been recently recognised by WorkSafe after intensive lobbying by LGEMA. https://www.worksafe.wa.gov.au/bullying
EMs are protected from harm, including psychological harm from bullying and harassment, by workplace health and safety laws.
LGs, Councils, CEOs have statutory obligations to maintain safe LG workplace.
EMs can complain to WorkSafe about bullying by CEO, other employee, other EM.
On receipt of bullying complaint WorkSafe,
• may investigate
• will decide whether or not to bring an action
• can issue improvement notice to the LG employer
• does not have authority to enforce disciplinary action
• cannot order compensation
• can make a stop bullying order.
Accordingly, to make WorkSafe bullying complaint EMs need to clearly state to WorkSafe who the bullies are, why they bully, who benefits from the bullying, who has a conflict of interest/bias in outcome of the bullying complaint; and where more harm will be caused by particular WorkSafe approaches such as WorkSafe using the CEO as WHS Act officer where CEO is the bully.
Bullying must be ongoing to trigger WorkSafe jurisdiction to make a stop bullying order.
————————————————————————————————————————————–
23 December 2024 Post
EM Bullying LG Counselling Programs Part 14
Most, if not all, LGs subscribe to an Employee Assistance Program (EAP) > free counselling services to LG employees.
Prudent Councils do not exacerbate bullying by ensuring that,
• EMs and employees have confidential and private access to EAP
• counsellor procured by CEO is fully qualified psychologist, as otherwise harm report may not be accepted by courts, WorkSafe or WAIRC, and counsellor may not be bound by confidentiality; noting CEO decision not to procure fully qualified psychologist should be big red flag to Council
• participants’ privacy is safeguarded noting one LG manager witnessed HR openly discuss which staff had accessed EAP; “It was a very toxic work culture, and I was bullied in there, and was also offered EAP… But knowing what had happened to other staff, and then being asked for my identification was so uncomfortable, that I ended up not using the EAP …“
——————————————————————————————————————–
21 December 2024 Post
EM Bullying or Performance Management Part 13
EMs concerned about CEO’s performance were taken to Fair Work Commission by aggrieved CEO who thought he was being bullied, wherein FWC found the,
“… anti-bullying jurisdiction should not be used as ‘a means of hampering, or even stopping justified disciplinary action, implemented by an employer, as a reasonable management response to an employee’s poor performance or misconduct … “
Fair Work Act 2009 s.789FC Application for an order to stop bullying: [LG CEO] Stephen Cain v [EMs] Stuart Downing; Logan Howlett; Lee-Anne Smith; Kevin Allen [2020] FWC 1914 PERTH, 8 May 2020.
Arguably this complaint was a form of Elected Member bullying.
Noting, since 1 January 2023, only WA Industrial Relations Commission (WAIRC) or WorkSafe can respond to WA LG bullying complaints, FWC no longer has jurisdiction.
————————————————————————————————————————————–
18 December 2024 Post
Court Recognition of Ratepayer Harassment by Employees EM Bullying Part 12
WA Supreme Court Acting Master Gething noted … affidavits filed by [a ratepayer] set out a number of instances of what I might describe as harassment by employees of the Shire: see Wintle v The Yilgarn Shire Council [2015] WASC 445 at para.1
——————————————————————————————————————–
17 December 2024 Post
EM Bullying Council Culture Review Response Part 11
One of CEOs’ most powerful tools is control of procurement.
Providers will not want to upset CEOs (who will inform their CEO network). Providers may be manipulated into providing what is in CEOs’/Council majority best interests to ensure they are CEO preferred providers.
CEOs should NEVER procure culture reviews.
Culture review draft and final report outcomes should ALWAYS be procured and seen by Council BEFORE CEO or any employees.
Otherwise:
• draft final report may be required to be changed by CEO before it is seen by Council
• final report may be refused or not accepted by CEO, and never received by LG or see the light of day
• bullied employees, minority EMs will be blamed for causing disharmony where it is the CEO (who is hiding something such as workplace bullying) and Council majority (who are asleep at the wheel or protecting CEO) who are the problem.
Culture reviews should ONLY be procured by Council using its statutory powers to obtain reports independent of CEO; because CEO is responsible for LG culture and LG culture is a CEO performance matter.
Otherwise review wastes municipal funds, exacerbates problem.
——————————————————————————————————————–
16 December 2024 Post
EM Bullying Parliamentary Response Part 10
Effective 7 December 2024, Parliamentary “reform” includes,
• repeal ie removal of EMs’ District community guidance and leadership roles > Really!!
• doubled penalty for breaching a local law to $10,000
• doubled penalty for EM not voting at Council or committee meeting to $10,000
Parliamentary bullying?
——————————————————————————————————————–
15 December 2024 Post
EM Bullying Catastrophic Outcomes Part Nine
LG inquiry followed murder of Manager of Operations, where murderer’s sentencing judge stated, “On the one hand, it seems you were mistreated in the workplace. Your co-workers manufactured allegations against you, hoping to have you relocated or dismissed. On the other hand, you also broke various codes of conduct and at times you were aggressive towards your co-workers.”
This Victorian IBAC Commission of Inquiry by female KC into Moira Shire Council 26 February 2023 (leading to Council dismissal) revealed good reason to think catastrophic events may have been preventable and that ruthless treatment of minority EMs, by majority EMs and CEOs, showed how tyranny of majority can produce catastrophe:
• … [CEO] had also developed a deep antipathy to one of the minority Councillors which affected her ability to play any conciliatory role …
• … Conduct Panel (like WA Standards Panel) applications … made against Councillors who were not aligned with the former Mayor and his supporting group of Councillors… [were] primarily a product of the fractured working relationships within the Council and that they were, for the most part, personality based… [amidst] growing dysfunctionality, political infighting and personality driven dynamics of the Council …
• … minority group of Councillors struggled to get traction in this environment. Three of them were subject to Councillor Conduct Panel [CCP (like WA Standards Panel)] applications by the former Mayor and his supporting Councillors seeking findings of serious misconduct but all of the applications were unsuccessful. Two councillors against whom applications had been made subsequently resigned from Council…
• … unsuccessful CCP (Panel) applications against three minority group councillors also cast serious doubt on the commitment and capacity of the Mayor and his supporters within the Council to work together in the best interests of the community as required … Their partisan use of CCP processes against fellow Councillors was inimical to the harmonious operation of the Council to which they had been elected…
• … Councillor who resigned was highly respected in the community and had contributed very positively to the Shire over a long period of time. He was one of the minority group of Councillors most active in bringing scrutiny to and questioning proposals before Council…
——————————————————————————————————————–
14 December 2024 Post
EM Bullying Bystander Part Eight
Council is a bullying bystander if it condones bullying behaviours by ignoring, not confronting bullying behaviours.
Councils who are bullies or bullying bystanders when EMs being bullied are failing their ethical, moral and safe workplace obligations to that EM.
EM, employee bullies improperly use “performative conflict” rather than respectful “deliberative dialogue” at meetings.
EMs, employees must be free from bullying in speaking to each other, and free from ignorance about which oversight bodies to complain to with effect when unsafe workplace issues such as bullying arise.
Haynes in Royal Commission into banking reported that, … the culture of an organisation is what people do when no-one is watching …
——————————————————————————————————————–
13 December 2024 Post
EM Bullying in a Bullying Culture Part Seven
Workplace bullying,
• is always about failed organisational structures
• reveals warning signs of dysfunctional ways of working
• may be the warning sign to Councils that CEO’s performance reviews are not addressing fundamental flaws.
Councils’ non-delegable role, responsibility is to establish a safe workplace organisational structure, which it is employed CEOs’ function to implement.
Short term consequences of bullying cultures include,
• promotion of poor performers
• reduced career prospects for strong performers
• corruption
• resignations of EMs, employees in frustration, disappointment
Long term consequences of bullying cultures include,
• significant productivity losses
• poor customer service.
Repeated, multiple bullying complaints may be LAST HURRAH of failed LG structure.
————————————————————————————————————————————–
12 December 2024 Post
EM Bullying, Safeguarding Responses Part Six
EMs must be constantly vigilant against coercive bullying & goading behaviours using LGEMA’s time honoured responses so as to avoid consequences including:
• seek support
• don’t respond, don’t email back, never respond to lawyer’s letters without legal advice
• have support witnesses if you do respond, such as by loudly and publicly naming, calling out bully at time of bullying without criticising in way so as to breach conduct rules
• NEVER meet, talk with a bully alone, formally or even informally at a party/Council dinner, for ANY reason; always move to company if alone and approached by bully
• don’t use adjectives
• use “I” not “you”
• NEVER use characterising words such as you are “a bully”, “corrupt”, “useless”, “misleading”, “ignorant”
• keep behaviour, conduct rules at forefront of mind in all interactions with bullies
• screen shot, download all e-record evidence that might later be “lost”, deleted
• privately DOCUMENT bullying interactions contemporaneously and keep records safe
• remember complaints/inquiries to WALGA, DLGSC may be reported back to bully leading to more bullying even if confidentiality is promised
• complain formally to Council in confidential session
• complain to WorkSafe, ask witnesses to complain to Worksafe
• apply for Misconduct Restraining Order
————————————————————————————————————————————–
11 December 2024 Post
EM Bullying by Goading Part Five
Some CEOs/Mayors seeking to influence EMs in CEOs/Mayors’ own self-interest may exercise grooming techniques to establish an influencing relationship with EM.
When grooming, fear and bullying do not work, GOADING might follow; all of which are coercive control techniques.
Goading behaviours can lead EMs into speaking in ways that generate EM minor breach complaints, which gives bully facts to make multiple complaints against goaded EM.
“grooming” in a political sense means predatory act of manoeuvring another person into a position that makes them likely to trust groomer
“goading” means prodding person to act in damaging way that they otherwise would not have.
————————————————————————————————————————————–
10 December 2024 Post
EM Bullying Horsemen Part Four
Bully’s Four Horsemen of Apocalypse are,
• Criticism: attacking, putting down EM’s personality, character rather than their governance behaviours (complaint addresses a specific action, non-action, ie different from criticism).
• Contempt: any statement, nonverbal behaviour that attacks EM’s sense of self with intention to insult, psychologically abuse EM
• Defensiveness: making excuses, cross-complaining, “yes-butting”
• Stonewalling: taking evasive action such as tuning out, turning away; refusing to address issue; addressing issue that is not issue complained of as response; stony silence; monosyllabic answers; changing the subject.
EMs on receiving end will seek help and support, and document.
#localgovernmentcorruption #localgovernmentbullying #localgovernmentwesternaustralia #localgovernment #bullying #bullyingtechniques
————————————————————————————————————————————–
9 December 2024 Post
EM Bullying Purposes Part Three
Bullying,
• is a management distraction technique directed to turning EMs towards responding to bullying and self-protection AWAY from issue(s) they are seeking to ventilate, which the bullies do not want exposed or have attention on.
• is a disruption technique to make a workplace so toxic that no-one wants to be there questioning.
• stems from insecurity, power dynamics, personal issues, lack of proper training in management and meeting techniques and/or to hide ignorance, lack of skill, maladministration and/or corruption.
• is power abuse by pusillanimous individuals or groups such as some LG CEOs and some Council majorities.
EMs will recognise that being targeted by bullies is NOT and is NEVER their fault.
————————————————————————————————————————————–
8 December 2024 Post
EM Bullying LG Culture Part Two
“Openness to criticism and learning plays an important role in building an effective LG culture, whether it be in supporting an innovative culture, a risk management culture or a compliance culture. Organisations that respond to external criticism defensively or dismissively put at risk their ability to build an effective governance culture and embed the characteristics of a learning organisation” Australian National Audit Office.
CEOs and majority Councils exercising excessive secrecy and using bullying as a tool (propped up by DLGSC) are not serving their communities and are causing serious harm to EMs (many of whom are LGEMA members) seeking to lift the veil.
————————————————————————————————————————————–
7 December 2024 Post
EM Bullying Culture Part One
Courage is fire, and bullying is smoke: Benjamin Disraeli
In the opinion of the Inquiry shortcomings in culture and governance were core to the failings at the City: City of Perth Inquiry Vol.3, especially Vol.3.1 page 13
A “Bullying Culture” can be viewed like an iceberg: mostly out of sight where there is a safe showing surface culture, while a deeper malignant hidden culture hides below the surface.
Bullying is recognised as a corruption red flag.
Councils are required to ensure that EMs and employees are protected from harm by bullying, including by training and adopting a policy that clearly identifies a safe pathway (devoid of retribution) for complaining.
————————————————————————————————————————————-
6 December 2024 Post
Australian Productivity Commission
LG Addresses Facing Climate Risk
LGs in making development decisions; and subdivision, rezoning, LPS recommendations are required to take this into account by LG Act s.3.1(1A)(a)(ii), and all employee report to Council templates are required to address all s.3.1(1A) considerations to avoid risk of litigation against decisions …
“ … Ongoing warming risks are degrading Australia’s stock of physical capital … The degree of climate risk (from riverine flooding, coastal inundation, bushfire, subsidence, wind) facing 15 million addresses in 544 Australian LG areas between 2020 and 2100, is based on topography, biomass coverage, meteorological patterns and climate projections out to 2100.
“ … 383,300 addresses are high-risk properties and projected number to increase to 735,654 by 2100, warning that ongoing development … in high hazard areas or continued use of inadequate building standards … will substantially increase this number .”
————————————————————————————————————————————–
5 December 2024 Post
LG Budget Reviews
Since 30 June 2023, LG budget reviews must be undertaken by CEO between 31 December > 29 February, presented to Councils on or before 31 March.
EMs and community should be advised clearly, logically and transparently about,
• progress of budgeted capital works projects
• every proposed budget adjustment
• unexpected operational costs.
EMs should be putting their questions, budget requests in NOW for inclusion in review.
In Toodyay Inquiry Report Findings 12 and 13, Toodyay CEO/Council held to have breached Financial Regs Reg.5(g) and Reg.33A(4) by not submitting Budget Review to DLGSC for 2018-19 financial year, which begs regulatory question: Does DLGSC have a monitored check list?
————————————————————————————————————————————–
1 December 2024 Post
LG Public Interest Disclosure (PID) Act Whistleblowing Disclosures
CEO must appoint a PID reporting to person. Council can appoint some or all EMs as PID person. LG’s internal PID procedures are a public record required to be published.
PID whistleblowing complaints can be made about a,
• “public authority” (includes local, regional governments, regional subsidiaries)
• “public officer” (includes LG EMS and employees)
• “public sector contractor” (includes LG contractors)
• any body established for a public purpose under a written law (arguably includes all bodies established under LG Act such as LG Grants Commission, WALGA), in relation to,
• improper conduct (abuse of authority >using public office for personal gain; Misuse of resources > unauthorised access to computer systems or use of property and equipment; Fraud > claiming, falsifying timesheets, expenses, travel, leave entitlements, medical certificates; Breach of trust >misusing information for personal benefit; Conflicts of interest > gifts, hospitality, benefits)
• act or omission that is an offence under written (State) law
• substantial irregular, unauthorised or mismanagement of public resources
• act, omission that involves substantial risk of injury to public health, prejudice to public safety, environmental harm
• matters covered by WA Ombudsman Act (Parliamentary Commissioner Act 1971 s.14)
————————————————————————————————————————————–
30 November 2024 Post
EM Conduct Breach Complaint Help
Notwithstanding abhorrent encouraging bullying coercive-control secrecy provision relating to EM conduct breach complaints, any LG employee such as a governance employee, may be open to a complaint to the police for committing a crime if they advise EMs that they cannot tell ANYONE about the complaint.
Details available to LGEMA Members. Please contact LGEMA and enquire about membership for more information. Email lgema@iinet.net.au
——————————————————————————————————————–
29 November Post
Integrity Framework
Many LGs Have No Integrity Frameworks. Prudent Councils will be providing for development/strengthening robust Integrity Framework in upcoming budgets using PSC templates here … https://www.wa.gov.au/…/integrity-framework-resources
PSC State of the WA Government Sector Workforce 2023-24 Report shows for LG that 145 LGs (including 8 regional LGs):
• have average of 63.5% permanent full time FTEs, 12.7% permanent part time FTEs
• have 18,923 FTE employees, of which 56.2% female
• have median FTE salary $76,005 • gender pay gap widened, with median salary for women 0.9% lower than men, up from 0.2%.
• around 25% employees completed aboriginal awareness training in last 3 years Scrutiny data shows that:
• public authorities reported finalising 2,476 discipline processes in 2023-24, where more than one third (34.7%) related to LG employees
• of 500 PSC finalised “minor misconduct” complaints, 69 were from LG; with major percentage of total from assault, bullying, harassment
• Equal Employment Opportunity & Integrity and Conduct has annual collection samples from every LG Many disturbing LG answers, can be seen in PSC statistical bulletin.
https://www.wa.gov.au/…/state-of-the-wa-government…
——————————————————————————————————————–
28 November 2024 Post
Bill 181 Passed by WA Government – already Compromised Elected Members – Whistleblower Safety Blown up By Parliament
See our Media Release on Bill 181 here:
——————————————————————————————————————–
23 November 2024 POST
Site Inspection & EM Role
“It is well known that part of a politician’s role is to assist in the resolution of a constituent’s problems. As the Tribunal acknowledged, seeking to involve politicians to assist with the resolution of problems is a common and legitimate approach to problem-solving in our democracy”: Lovegrove Investments Pty Ltd v Shire of Waroona [2024] WASC 321 para.86
An EM cannot attend a site inspection on behalf of the LG (unless delegated to do so by Council) because this is an operational matter.
However, an EM can undertake a site inspection on behalf of themselves to inform EM about a constituent complaint.
https://lgema.org.au/eCourtsPortalDecision
——————————————————————————————————————–
22 November 2024 POST
Successful Judicial Review Overturns Development Approval
Supreme Court judicial review decision shows how a development approval can be infected with jurisdictional error by,
- not complying with scheme deemed provisions and wrongly applying inconsistent planning scheme provision
- not giving active or positive consideration to proposed development’s consistency with zone objectives
- misconstruing zone objectives,
leading to Supreme Court writ of certiorari to quash decision and send back to LG to make again. Unusually, Shire did not make any submissions to court to defend its decision once it had seen applicant’s case/pleadings.
“George & Anor v Shire of Irwin & Anor [2024] WASC 418”
https://lgema.org.au/9RleCourtsPortalDecision
——————————————————————————————————————–
21 November 2024 POST
Fire Break Notices Mean What They Say
Congratulations to Shire of Waroona for not permitting a firebreak notice to be used to justify unlawful land clearing and for issuing remedial Direction to cease the unlawful development, restore the land which required planting of endemic flora and fauna, and relocating cleared trees and branches back to the unlawfully cleared area, see:
“Lovegrove Investments Pty Ltd v Shire of Waroona [2024] WASC 321”
https://lgema.org.au/kSFeCourtsPortalDecisions
——————————————————————————————————————–
20 November 2024 POST
Watercourse and Wetland Protection by LG Local Laws
WA Supreme Court has reminded us of power of LGs to stop or restrict take of water from wetlands and watercourse on private property for private use through a local law.
This long sorry saga from Denmark shows how Councils must be vigilant about dam building and fresh water taking, and retrospective approvals.
A former World Bank vice president advised us in 1995 that, “i]f the wars of this century were fought over oil, the wars of the next century will be fought over water “
And so it was in “Crossley v English [No 2] [2024] WASC 268”
https://lgema.org.au/A9deCourtsPortalDecisions
——————————————————————————————————————–
13 November 2024 POST
No LG wanting a fair election would use postal voting
Postal ballot tampering in two more Victorian LGs, after similar problems in another Victorian LG in 2020.
——————————————————————————————————————–
12 November 2024 POST
LG Contractors
Widespread use of LG contractors:
- enfeebles LG workforces
- masks poor workforce capability
- reduces employee accountability
- leads to provision of reports sourced by CEOs or other employees, which may not be independent or unbiased, obtained to support employees’ position or opinion; and which may be labelled not accurately as peer advice, expert report, expert recommendation, expert opinion, an audit or legal advice, say for the purpose of avoiding employees exposure to disciplinary measures, minimising performance consequences of administrative wrongs, or to promote a particular outcome desired by CEO/other employee, which Council does not want; and thus can be used to buttress CEOs’ personal objectives by rebutting Council or community opinion or aspirations, with contractors masquerading as unbiased experts.
The consulting industry weakens our business, infantilizes our governments, and warps our economics “The Big Con: How the Consulting Industry Weakens Our Businesses, Infantilizes Our Governments, and Warps Our Economies”, by Mariana Mazzucato and Rosie Collington, 7 March 2023 | ISBN 9780593492673
——————————————————————————————————————–
7 November 2024 POST
Volunteer Thank You and Warning
It is timely to remember that all your posts, emails, messengers, even as as a volunteer who is not a party to a proceeding, can be subpoenaed by a court in material proceedings; as all volunteers who have been supporting former Nedlands Elected Member Andrew Mangano through his defamation trial (for something he said in a Council meeting) have discovered.
Be wary what you say in discoverable communications!
On World Volunteer Day 6 December, we get ready to thank all LGEMA Elected Member, former Elected Members and Associate Members for the work you do to foster better local government in the public interest.
On World Volunteer Day, how will your LG recognise your volunteer work ?
https://www.volunteeringaustralia.org/get-involved/events/international-volunteer-day/#/
——————————————————————————————————————–
2 November 2024 POST
Kate Chaney Sustainability Fair
Claremont Showgrounds 10am – 4 pm. LGEMA is partnering to share a stall with Urban Bushland Council. Come and see us there!
https://www.katechaney.com.au/curtin-sustainability-fair-2024
——————————————————————————————————————–
2 November 2024 POST
LG whistleblowing
Public Interest Disclosures (PIDs) (whistleblower complaints) can be made anonymously (or not anonymous) to Ombudsman about EMs or employees.
PID complaints that relate to offence under ANY written law (including LG Act), can be made to police anonymously.
https://www.ombudsman.wa.gov.au/Complaints/PID.htm
——————————————————————————————————————–
30 October 2024 POST
Impact of State Agreements on LGs
On 30 October 2024: OAG published report on “Management of State Agreements” by Department of Jobs, Tourism, Science and Innovation (JTSI).
JTSI records state agreement proponents spent approximately over $665 million on WA community and social benefits in the 2021-22 financial year, which included community grant programs, social investment, local government support.
OAG reports that LG entities and regional development councils advised that they would like more collective approach when state agreements are updated and varied to ensure local communities interests are appropriately considered. Some LGs also asked for more input into any community development or funding initiatives by proponents.
OAG met with,
- Shire of Collie
- City of Karratha
- Shire of Ashburton.
Does anyone know if this consultation reached Council, Elected Members or the community?
Management of State Agreements – Office of the Auditor General
——————————————————————————————————————–
29 October 2024 POST
OAG Audit of LG Road Maintenance
OAG currently auditing LGs’ road maintenance. OAG advises,
- LGs spend significant budget portion on transport, primarily the local road network.
- Well-maintained local road networks contribute to positive safety, economic and social outcomes for the community.
- Local roads in regional areas have been identified at most risk of maintaining, most in need of funding and where councils require greater support to help manage these roads.
- Roads which are not maintained impact people, the economy, road safety and creates a financial liability into the future. There is a risk that roads may deteriorate if maintenance needs are not met.
OAG is assessing if regional LGs effectively manage local roads’ maintenance.
OAG performance criteria will include, but not limited to:
- Do LGs have appropriate information and data on condition of the roads they own/or are responsible for?
- What funding is available to LGs and are they accessing available funding?
- Do LGs have a structured and risk based process to prioritise, d fix roads in poor condition?
Please send in your stories to OAG
——————————————————————————————————————–
28 October 2024 POST
Façade of Councils in Control of Zoning, Subdivision and Development
LG Councils are merely administrators of planning policy outcomes and development decision outcomes, as state government agents.
LG Councils have few finalisation powers and many of those have shifted to their CEO (residential dwellings) and will shift to their CEO (DAPs) under Local Government Amendment Act 2024.
Councils do all the work and bear the administration costs (employ planners, implement required process and practice, call for and receive and process submissions and prosecute unlawful development etc etc) and take the heat/reputational harm for outcomes state government controls/decides.
State governments responsible for development amenity outcomes.
System set up for and embedding development corruption in WA and rewarding political donors.
A really angry Council might stop making development decisions, make their statutory planning employees redundant. and let all DAs go to SAT as deemed refusals because that’s where they go anyway if Council does not approve a development… but then the LG Minister might sack them for trying to protest about what the state government is doing to the amenity of their District.
——————————————————————————————————————–
25 October 2024 POST
Court of Disputed Returns
Court of Disputed Returns Hearing into the Fremantle Election, commenced by Maria Vujcic complaint finished yesterday, decision reserved. Neither the WAEC commissioner or deputy Commissioner gave evidence. Congratulations to the many concerned community members who came to court and testified – a stressful challenge for anyone and one which WAEC Commissioner did not undertake. WAEC employee evidence was disturbing, extraordinary and breathtaking to observers in its disclosures which prompted the Magistrate to state near the end of the final day,
“It is not my role to punish the WAEC”. which prompts us to ask everyone to ask, Whose role is it?
One suggestion is the OAG. On the OAG “contact us/have a say” website portal please ask the OAG to obtain and read the hearing transcript and audit the WAEC conduct of LG postal elections before the next election. No sensible LG would hold a postal election until such an audit has been carried out.
https://audit.wa.gov.au/contact-us/
——————————————————————————————————————-
22 October 2024 Post
New State Planning Policy 3.7 on Land Use and Bushfire Risk
24 September 2024: DPLH released new SPP 3.7 Planning for Bushfire Prone Areas to be operational from 18 November 2024 to provide the foundation for land use planning to address bushfire management in Western Australia. It is to be used to inform and guide decision makers, referral agencies, and landowners/proponents to help achieve acceptable bushfire protection outcomes.
SPP 3.7 applies to all bushfire prone designated land
SPP 3.7 Clause 7.3 provides as follows:
Siting in BAL-40 or BAL-Flame Zone i.
… presumption against approving development site(s) or habitable building(s) in areas with radiant heat impact exceeding 29kW/m2 (BAL-40 or BAL-FZ).
… siting of habitable building not considered vulnerable may be considered in following limited circumstances,
- lot created prior to December 2015; and
- demonstrated site characteristics and/or environmental, biodiversity or conservation values that prevent the achievement of a radiant heat impact not exceeding 29 kW/m2 (BAL-29); and
- demonstrated that building footprint reduction or redesign to manage or mitigate the risk, is not practical or appropriate.
https://lgema.org.au/9f5StatePlanningPolicy3.7
——————————————————————————————————————–
18 October 2024 Post
LG Tree Local Planning Policy
All LGs wanting to preserve and enhance their urban tree canopy for climate change adaptation, our native fauna, human health and safety, and to increase property values will:
- Adopt a tree protection local planning policy (which sets Council’s strategic position, is not binding on decision makers but informs local laws and scheme amendments to make tree protection binding), and then
- Make appropriate budget allocations for tree protection and preservation; and then
- Make a Local Law to protect trees on local government property (including verges), and then
- Make an amendment to their planning scheme to make significant tree protection on private property binding (which the planning minister may reject, as he did in Nedlands, but sends strong message to state government if enough councils do this).
LGEMA Urban Tree Canopy Law and Policy Reform
A stepped program for Elected Members and community members aspiring to protect and enhance the urban tree canopy here
——————————————————————————————————————–
17 October 2024 Post
Grey Corruption of WA Development Assessment SEEDS Rot of Local Amenity
Planning Scheme Regs requires Local Planning Strategy (Strategy) and Planning Act requires Local Planning Scheme (Scheme) for each LG.
GREY CORRUPTION is legislated/lawful corruption.
- WAPC can approve, amend or refuse Strategy adopted by Council and Planning Minister (being member of a party that receives donations from property developers) can refuse, amend or endorse Scheme adopted by Council.
- The Strategy must be adopted in compliance with Planning Scheme Regs requirements and must precede or be prepared concurrently with Scheme and on which the Scheme must be based.
- The Strategy is the Policy on which the Scheme is based but is not binding on decision makers unless it is in a binding Scheme requirement.
- Planning Regs (made by Governor on recommendation of LG Minister – being member of a party that receives donations from property developers) provide mandatory model Local Planning Scheme, which LGS must use but which can be added to but cannot be departed from.
- Schemes have black and white requirements and in between are discretionary decisions.
- Discretionary decisions foster grey and direct corruption, which is where deteriorating amenity of your local area Rot starts.
- The Rot is fostered by the absence in WA of neighbour (third party) merits review of development approvals that harm them (WA only state or territory without them), where each political party receives donations from property developers who di not want TPMARs
- The Scheme is binding subsidiary legislation.
- The Planning Minister can change a Scheme/all schemes without consent of Council/Councils against which there is no appeal or review right, and Minister has complete control of all zoning decisions.
- The Planning Minister (being member of a party that receives donations from property developers) and parliament decide which development decisions have to be decided by SDAU, DAP and who sits on those bodies.
- The Planning Minister (being member of a party that receives donations from property developers) regulates many of the development costs incurred by LGs, which are often below actual cost of delivery of an assessment service, which difference the ratepayers pay.
- Departure from legal requirements of Planning Act or Scheme in any DEVELOPMENT DECISION can be taken to the Supreme Court by affected third parties.
- Affected third parties CANNOT seek review in State Administrative Tribunal (SAT) of the merits of a development APPROVAL, which is an unmeritorious departure from a state or local planning policy, which harms the neighbour.
- Developers in receipt of a development REFUSAL CAN seek merits review in SAT.
- SAT members are appointed by the government and those who review development decisions are not necessarily legally qualified.
- Absence of third party (neighbour) merits review rights are legislated grey corruption.
- Liberal, National and Labor parties receive political donations from property developers.
- Liberal, National and Labor parties do not support third party (neighbour) merits review rights.
#planninganddevelopment #greycorruption #development corruption
——————————————————————————————————————–
16 October 2024 Post
Victorian IBAC (WA CCC equivalent) Operation Leo
Operation Leo showed Councillors (EMs) at Moonee Valley Council (MVC) sought to influence MVCC decisions, sought preferential outcomes to benefit their personal relationships and interests, especially in relation to a sporting club.
In response to LG corruption vulnerabilities, shown in Operation Sandon and Operation Leo, IBAC recommended,
- mandatory training for EMs), which includes training on governance, leadership, and integrity
- uniform mandatory code of conduct for all EMs
- tightening regulation of pre-council meetings, prohibiting ‘en-bloc’ or collective voting where multiple agenda items are voted on at the same time
- improved record-keeping of meetings
- tightening governance of conflicts of interest including improving transparency of conflict of interest disclosures
- prohibiting conflicted EMs from attempting to influence other councillors
- strengthening complaints processes, ensuring any sanctions for misconduct are adequate, transparent
- separation between the duties and powers of EMs and employees to promote confidence in the impartiality and rigour of employee’s advice, recommendations
- community should be able to clearly see how, why a decision was made, what information, advice and consultation council considered, which legislative requirements (when relevant) council followed
- include in EM Model Code of Conduct clear expectation that EMs report suspected corrupt conduct; includes guidance on how EMs should report such conduct, including how to ensure compliance with the Public Interest Disclosures Act
IBAC Operation Leo special report – October 2024.PDF
In WA, we have most of what IBAC recommended but have not seen any noticeable improvements. Each Council can adopt proposed changes not operative in WA.
————————————————————————————————————————————–
15 October 2024 Post
Office of Auditor General & LG credit cards, gifts and roads
OAG upcoming local government audits reports on LG Performance need your input
Email your concerns and stories to OAG at have your say
Purchasing Cards: are there effective controls of issue, use, cancellation
Gifts and Benefits: policy and regulation compliance, records, appropriate accepting and declining, management of arising conflicts of interest
https://audit.wa.gov.au/audit-program/audits-in-progress/
——————————————————————————————————————–