Carol Altmann – The Terrier

If everything that dumped Warrnambool City Council CEO Peter Schneider says in his affidavit is true, our council has gone bad.

Mr Schneider’s allegations – which will be put to the Supreme Court on Thursday for a directions hearing – paints a picture of a toxic council, broken by old rivalries and unhealthy, cosy relationships that must end.

And they can only end by a metaphorical deep clean at the next election.

I am hopeful that the full affidavit can be published after Thursday, under the protection of the court, but many of the allegations are out there and they are ugly.

They include the decade-old hate fest between Crs Mike Neoh and Kylie Gaston and their nemesis Peter Hulin which just rolls on.

It includes concerns about the “close relationships” of some councillors to senior council staff, including the Director of Community Development Vikki King, now acting CEO, and former governance manager Anne-Maree Neal.

And it also raises claims that three councillors – Neoh, Gaston and Cr David Owen – allegedly rated Mr Schneider so poorly in a review in May that the consultant, Peter Berry, who was running the review said it could only have been motivated by “vindictiveness” and “spite”.

These are strong words.

And then there is my personal favourite: Cr Neoh allegedly laying the heavy on Mr Schneider for his handling of the credit card saga.

We all know, from the council’s own statements, that it was former CEO Bruce Anson who allowed David McMahon to repay money, to keep his job as a senior manager, and who kept the whole thing under wraps.

Just a blip.

No wonder ratepayers are starting to wonder if Mr Schneider was dumped because he wasn’t up to the job, or dumped because he wasn’t Mr Anson, or dumped because he got along with Cr Hulin.

One thing is certain, the push to get rid of Mr Schneider became dirty, very early.

Here is something you don’t know:

You may recall that Cr Gaston, in a string of questions to Mayor Tony Herbert at this month’s council meeting, asked why he and Cr Sue Cassidy had met at Mr Schneider’s private home for two hours’ on a Sunday in February.

Cr Gaston told the council a number of “red flags” were raised at this gathering.

What I have since learned is that Cr Cassidy had, by that time, received highly confidential documents, anonymously, in the mail, about Mr Schneider’s job application.

From what I understand, these documents related to personality and psychological testing that formed part of the job application.

This is highly personal stuff, and so very few people connected to the council had access to these documents.

Yet they were mailed – anonymously – to Cr Cassidy, and for a reason. Who was behind that move?

No wonder Cr Cassidy was keen to talk to Mr Schneider, face-to-face, in February.

Interestingly, Cr Cassidy was not among the councillors named in Mr Schneider’s affidavit as having acted with “spite” or “vindictiveness” in his May review.

Perhaps, in May, Cr Cassidy still thought he was doing a good job.

Cr Cassidy has declined to comment on this leaked document and Cr Herbert would only say “there were some concerns about confidential information that was sent to Sue.”

On top of all this, Mr Schneider’s affidavit also refers to a particular email written by Cr Gaston.

This email, written in July,Gas allegedly confirms Cr Gaston was seeking legal advice back in February about Mr Schneider’s contract.

In other words, several councillors were starting to seek legal advice on how to get rid of him and how much it would cost.

Who did these councillors expect to pay for this advice? Remind me again?

The Local Government Inspectorate is looking into all this and its findings can’t come soon enough.

Neither, in my view, can the election when ratepayers and residents will decide whether this is the sort of council we want to serve us, or whether it is time for a generational change.

Carol Altmann – The Terrier

Tonight I want to pause and reflect on this simple fact: the Warrnambool City Council is now the subject of not one, not two, but three investigations.

One of those investigations is the Ombudsman’s inquiry into the misuse of corporate credit cards.

The second is the council’s own internal inquiry into these credit cards.

The third is a Worksafe investigation into alleged bullying.

And the fourth – revealed here on Friday afternoon – is an investigation by the Local Government Inspectorate into the sacking of the former CEO Peter Schneider by Crs Sue Cassidy, Mike Neoh, Kylie Gaston and David Owen.

What a freaking mess.

And all of it – ALL of it – will come at a cost to ratepayers, which is the bottom line of this latest disgraceful manoeuvring, backroom dealing and secrecy.

We are footing the bill.

We will pay for Mr Schneider’s payout, whatever that is, because we still don’t know.

The Four Horsemen involved in lopping off the CEO’s head were happy to swing the sword, but haven’t had the spine to reveal how much it will cost ratepayers, because that information will undoubtedly upset voters as they head toward the October election.

The councillors don’t want that bitter truth spoiling their campaigns.

Best to distract ratepayers with other shiny things, like bike paths and taverns and new grass at Reid Oval.

And the four councillors involved in the coup brought in all the lawyers they needed to get rid of Mr Schneider, and guess who pays for that?

We do.

How much was spent on these lawyers? We don’t know.

And who decided to get that legal advice?

It sure as heck wasn’t supported by all seven councillors, because three of them – Crs Tony Herbert, Peter Sycopoulis and Robert Anderson – were dead set against the whole idea.

This begs another key question: can four councillors rack up a legal bill without the approval of the other councillors?

I am no expert on the finer details of the Local Government Act but the Inspectorate is, and I hope it will pull this question apart during its investigation, because, as a ratepayer, I have a vested interest.

We all have a vested interest, because the four councillors involved have been spending my money – and yours – and we deserve to know the full story.

Rates notices are going out as we speak and blowing people away: I am getting messages every day from people shocked by how much we pay in Warrnambool compared to other cities.

I am also talking to people worried about what lies ahead as the full economic impact of the C19 virus kicks in.

And yet here are four of our councillors, blowing hundreds of thousands of dollars on lawyers and payouts for reasons which are all secret.

The inspectorate’s investigation will probably take some time, but my hope is that the four councillors who are now part of this investigation will step up themselves and tell the public the full story about this coup and the cost.

They know the truth.

As we inch closer toward the October election, there will be many shiny distractions and photo ops and promises, but the two things that I am hearing voters want the most right now are transparency and integrity.

Transparency and integrity.

Over to you, councillors.

If you would like to support the work of The Terrier, please make a contribution to the tip jar.

Terrier Tip Jar

Carol Altmann – The Terrier

The votes are in and….drum roll…. Warrnambool City Cr Mike Neoh has won Stunt of the Year, even though it’s only July.

Cr Neoh’s bold, Superman-underpants call for the WCC staff survey results to be released was never going to happen and he knew it.

Former CEO Bruce Anson would not release them. Former CEO Peter Schneider would not release them. And guess what? (Envelope please….)

New CEO Vikki King – anointed to the post this week by Cr Neoh and three other councillors – won’t release them either!

What a stellar performance of bullshite at its best!

So here we are, none the wiser as to what evidence pressed the eject seat under former CEO Schneider on Monday night.

I asked all the councillors today whether they would press Ms King to release the results.

Only Mayor Tony Herbert replied. His reply is worth reading in full and so I am posting it below.

Our council is broken, bleeding and stinks to high heaven. More to come, in coming days.

From Mayor Herbert:

“Thanks for your question.

As stated previously, the staff survey this year as with other years, was conducted with a high level of confidentiality which I believe must be respected. Maybe the next one, if staff were informed that their results in whatever format council decides, are going to be made public and the staff are aware of this, I might support being made public.

The staff already feel they are under the community microscope with the various forms of media ready to publicise anything they do wrong. Everyone makes mistakes, but it’s becoming too public.

Myself, I have doubts about the motives behind the call for staff survey results being made public.

It’s such an operational issue and as I used to be reminded regularly about this in my early days as a new councillor.

The staff, and all their related issues are the sole responsibility of the CEO. Surely staff survey results ,whether it be detail or higher level is for the CEO to decide not individual councillors. Councillors don’t actually have the control to do whatever they wish. They have to first and foremost act within the WCC code of conduct and the Act.

Given the staff sentiment also at the moment, I would prefer the staff to feel our genuine care for them rather than further humiliating them.

There was a staff suicide last year and many of them are still dealing with that event. They need support not more public attention.

Thanks for your query, but it’s a resounding “no support” from me.”

Carol Altmann – The Terrier

Questions: Are we about to throw $1 million of ratepayers’ money down the drain because the four horsemen of the apocalypse decided to sack the WCC chief without warning?

This is the figure being floated about and because Crs Owen, Neoh, Gaston and Cassidy refuse to tell us the full cost of their night of the long knives last Monday, I am going to say it must be close to the truth.

The math makes sense: 2.5 years left on a $340,000 contract, plus paying the acting CEO another $340,000, plus legal fees, leave entitlements etc.