Carol Altmann – The Terrier

What a difference a year makes.

This time a year ago, the Warrnambool City Council was in the absolute doldrums, with community satisfaction at an all-time low.

The annual satisfaction survey clearly showed Warrnambool was fed up with what had been years of suffering under a deeply divided council and a toxic internal culture – the good ol’ mate’s club – that had been allowed to flourish.

It’s two years, almost to to the day, since I wrote my first piece on the council credit card abuse.

Last year’s shocking survey result was not a consequence of just one bad year, but years of wobbling off course.

In seven of the past 10 years, for example, the council struggled to score any better than 50/100 for “overall direction”.

In 2015, it fell to just 38/100 on that score.

Last year, it bottomed out at 32/100.

As was said at the time of CEO Peter Schneider’s arrival in 2019, he inherited a shit show.

But this week, just days before Mr Schneider resumes his role after being removed illegally on 13 July, the council has bounced back big time.

The latest survey shows it has improved on every single measure.

The biggest leap was in “overall direction” which skyrocketed from 32 to 59 points.

[At this point, I have to dip my hat to the long-suffering WCC customer service team who, despite everything that has been thrown at them, have consistently scored really well in these surveys.

Being on the front line at the WCC cannot be easy.]

Enormous change has swept through the WCC these past 12 months, including the election of a brand new council in October and a change of several senior officers, right up to this week’s resignation of former Acting CEO Vikki King.

The latest Acting CEO Gary Gaffney also made an instant impact, despite only being in the place for a few weeks.

Not only was Mr Gaffney direct and decisive, he made a point of getting to know the people who worked for him – the staff – and the people he worked for, the citizens of Warrnambool.

The challenge for Mr Schneider is to maintain this momentum.

There can be no going back now.

The people have made it clear what they want and expect and the WCC is clearly tracking in the right direction.

Mr Schneider now has 12 months, before his contract will be up for renewal, to show his strengths and the next community survey results – also due in 12 months – will be a true test of his success.

Carol Altmann – The Terrier

UPDATED: All seven of the new Warrnambool City councillors are poised to step up and ban racehorse training on beaches west of Thunder Point.

[I have updated this story to include Cr Max Taylor, who has replied tonight.]

With the recent release of the council’s draft Wild Coast Landscape Management plan, they are in the box seat to do it.

And based on answers to questions I sent to all seven councillors last week, they are ready to put this long-running and ugly fight to an end.

If they don’t, the WCC might as well set up a vegetarian burger bar outside 25 Liebig St and sell steak sandwiches, such would be the hypocrisy in a management plan that is packed – at long last – with ways to protect the wild coast from Levy’s Beach to Spooky’s Beach from further harm.

For some reason the Warrnambool Racing Club – apparently in defiance of the changed mood of many local trainers – can’t seem to let Levy’s and Spooky’s go.

This is despite the demise of king-pin trainer Darren Weir, sustained community anger, no racehorse training on the beach for more than four years, a loss of social licence, and the absolute privilege of training at Lady Bay.

Despite all of this, the WRC, according to a recent media report, just keeps picking the scab.

The WRC keeps waving a red rag….it might still come back in and use Spooky’s beach….maybe it will, maybe it won’t.

For this, we can thank the majority of former councillors who ignored the wishes of the wider community, agreed to the law change, split the place open, and left behind another shit show for the new council to clean up.

Given we now have fresh eyes on this old headache, last week I asked our new councillors two simple questions: the first was whether they supported commercial racehorse training in the wild coast area.

Six of those who responded said no, they did not, or as Mayor Vicki Jellie put it, “absolutely not”.

(Cr Taylor responded after the deadline but tonight said he was opposed).

Cr Angie Paspaliaris said she was a WRC member, sponsor, and a race goer, but she, too, was “hesitant” to support racehorse training in the area, given the strong community opposition.

Seven out of seven, even including a “hesitant”, is a whopping turnaround.

I also asked the councillors a second question, which was whether they would support an amendment to change the planning rules to once again ban racehorse training in this area.

Four of the six who responded said a firm yes, they would.

Mayor Jellie went further, saying not only did she support changing the planning rules, she was asking WCC staff how it could be done.

Cr Paspaliaris said she would consider it, and Cr Blain said he thought the council saying no to racehorse training would be enough.

[You can read the councillors’ answers in full here.]

All of this is a big vote of support not only for the community’s wishes, but for the draft management plan.

This draft plan really gets it.

It sets out plans for CCTV cameras to catch hoons, for unofficial tracks to be closed off, for ravaged areas to be revegetated, for the indigenous community to be intimately involved in future decision making and management, for better dog walking controls, and for the wildness of this area to be preserved for future generations who, like us, will wonder how motorbike rallies were ever allowed at Tower Hill.

Yet tucked in the middle of this plan is the steak sandwich – the racehorse training that would allow up to 100 racehorses a day.

The experts who put this management plan together are powerless to change the law, but our new councillors can.

That time is now.

[You can read more about the wild coast plan and have a say until 30 March here.]

Q: Do you support commercial racehorse training in the wild coast precinct? 

Would you support the removal of the planning amendment which currently allows this activity and, if so, will you put forward a motion to request that the Planning Minister remove this amendment?

Mayor Vicki Jellie:

I do not support racehorse training in the wild coast precinct – absolutely not.

Yes, I would support the removal of the planning amendment and have made inquiries with associated WCC staff as to how this can occur, and have received options of how this can happen.

Deputy Mayor Richard Ziegeler:

I do NOT support commercial racehorse training on any of the beaches.
I support the removal of the amendment and would so vote.

Cr Otha Akoch:This issue of racehorse training on the beaches is not popular as far as community is concerned. As a councillor, I will go with the community in supporting the removal of the amendment.

Cr Debbie Arnott:  I do not support race horse training in the wild coast and I would support an amendment.

Cr Angie Paspaliaris: I have a responsibility to acknowledge the community’s unrest and opposition that commercial horse training at Levy’s/Spooky’s provokes, which means I am hesitant to support commercial horse training in the wild coast precinct.

I am a WRC member and sponsor, a race goer; as a Councillor, my balanced view is that it is not unreasonable to expect that the Warrnambool Racing Club has the capacity to adjust and adapt its approach and operations in order to address and respect the environment, community concerns, and a changing society.

I would consider an amendment.

Cr Ben Blain: “With the information presented to us currently on this issue, I couldn’t support this proposal.

I believe there would need to be more work done with all stakeholders in relation to any proposed changes of use in this precinct. As far as I am aware there is no active interest from trainers to use this precinct at the moment. I think the current arrangements in relation to horse training in other areas meet the trainers needs.

“I don’t see removing the planning amendment as necessary, if council aren’t supportive of the the proposal it won’t happen…even if the amendment was removed, the planning minister can always reinstate it if there is support for the proposal in the future.

Cr Max Taylor: I am against the training of racehorses at Levy’s Beach and west of there, including Spooky’s.

Carol Altmann – The Terrier

The story behind the axing of the Warrnambool City Council CEO is becoming murkier, with news that the very expensive lawyers involved didn’t charge a cent.

I can tell you the lawyers did in fact charge the council, but then they pulled the bill.

But let’s go back a step.

In one of the most staggering revelations of this whole messy affair, Cr Sue Cassidy told the Standard on Thursday that, “no legal fees were charged by our solicitors” for advice around the dumping of CEO Peter Schneider.

Cough! Splutter! Choke!

When, in the long history of the esteemed legal profession, have you ever heard of top-class lawyers from Melbourne working for free?

Why would any lawyer knock back a lazy $650 to $800 an hour to provide advice on how to sack a CEO?

We now know the four councillors involved sought legal advice and didn’t just Google “how to dump a CEO and still get re-elected”.

This was a very serious matter, given they were about to toss the CEO out the door and hand the cost to ratepayers . That cost, so far, is hundreds of thousands of dollars – around $400,000 in fact.

Yet Cr Cassidy tells us the lawyers never charged a cent for what must have been considerable, specialist advice.

Well of course they charged the council – they sent a bill – but there’s a twist.

They later tore it up.

“Council received a bill that was later withdrawn,” a council spokesman told me today via email.

What? Withdrawn?

Righto, we are in seriously weird territory.

Why would a law firm invoice the council for legal services, and then withdraw that bill?

I asked that question back to the council.

The council didn’t ask why, the spokesman replied.

Oh come on. Seriously?

A top law firm wipes off a bill for what must have been thousands of dollars worth of work and the council just shrugged?

Nothing makes sense and we are – still – not being told the full story by the council, or the four councillors involved: Crs Neoh, Cassidy, Gaston and Owen.

Instead the story drips out in little dark droplets of detail that we all have to try and piece together.

The former CEO has been gone almost two months and we still don’t have the full picture.

As was revealed here, the Local Government Inspectorate is now investigating to see if there were any breaches of the Local Government Act.

Regardless of why the CEO was dumped (“no reason” is the official reason), this whole thing has been handled appallingly on behalf of the people of Warrnambool who, from my reading, are justifiably angry and embarrassed.

Western Victoria Upper House MP Bev McArthur this week raised the whole mess in Parliament, and pulled no punches:

“My question is to the Minister for Local Government and concerns the recent turmoil at Warrnambool City Council and the choice facing voters at the forthcoming October elections.

As the minister knows, the chief municipal inspector has announced an investigation into the sacking of the council’s CEO.

This shoddy backstairs intrigue saw four councillors conspire to seek legal advice behind the backs of their colleagues without spending authorisation and spring the sacking on an otherwise well-regarded CEO whilst simultaneously appointing an existing director to the job.

I welcome this review and thank the minister for his assistance in securing it. On top of this, last December the Victorian Ombudsman began investigating potential credit card fraud at Warrnambool City Council.

The question I have for the minister is: can he ensure that all relevant information from both reports will be released prior to the upcoming local government elections?”

—–

Questions upon questions – and they will keep coming until we get all the answers.

The Terrier telethon is now on! If you would like to support The Terrier, please visit the tip jar.

Terrier Tip Jar

Carol Altmann – The Terrier

Lawyers for sacked Warrnambool City Council CEO Peter Schneider have issued defamation proceedings against four councillors.

Those four councillors are Cr Mike Neoh, Cr Kylie Gaston, Cr Sue Cassidy and Cr David Owen.

This partly explains the flurry of confidential business happening behind closed doors at the council meeting last night.

The second matter, according to sources, is believed to relate to lawyers for Mr Schneider arguing that he be reinstated as CEO: in other words, he gets his job back.

There is a precedent for such a thing, with a sacked CEO of Logan City Council, in Queensland, being given her job back after challenging the motives of the seven councillors who deposed her.

Wouldn’t that be a turn up for the books!

With the council elections just two months away and a new council to be elected, it may not be as unthinkable as it sounds.

And the third matter, twisted up in all of the above, is understood to be a heated, ding-dong, hair-pulling (except for Cr Sycopoulis, no offence to him), full-blooded barney over who should pay for the legal expenses racked up so far and those yet to come.

Should it be the individual councillors involved in the coup? Should it be ratepayers?

Discuss.

I emailed all seven councillors today to ask for comment on the legal action, whether ratepayers would be footing the bill, and how much had been spent so far on council lawyers.

Only three replied by deadline and no prizes for guessing who.

Here are their statements in full:

Mayor Tony Herbert:
“Thanks for your email.

As you are aware I am unfortunately unable to confirm most of your queries although some of the info might be able to be sought through channels of FOI. We lost the resolution on the night of the 13th July regarding confidentiality.

It is a very unfortunate situation the council has decided to thrust itself into especially in light of the further and greater impacts of the pandemic on council, staff, council budgets and our community ongoing.

I certainly would have preferred when such significant costs have been incurred, to have spent funds in a more productive and positive way…as a stimulus for our community post COVID for example.

I also implored councillors on a number of occasions to take alternative actions to manage our CEO  through discussion and negotiations rather than this drastic and expensive action as our only management tool!

As far as legal costs questions, I’m unable to comment at this time.

Hopefully things will become clearer.

One thing I will add further, is that personally,  I feel the community has a right to know what happened in the lead up to the sudden termination, reasons for  the termination and also the costs.”

Cr Robert Anderson: 

“Thank you for your email Carol, unfortunately because of the confidentiality on the above subject I am unable to make any comment.”

Cr Peter Sycopoulis:

“Thank you for your enquiry. Due to confidentiality requirements, I am not at liberty to provide an answer to your questions. What I can confirm however, is that I personally have not received correspondence from any law firm in relation to this matter.”

So the council is about to enter a legal shitestorm, to be frank, and – so far – we are officially being told nothing.

Please keep this in mind when we all vote in October.

Think about integrity, transparency, openness, honesty, accountability and the-right-to-know: these, to me, are now the key themes of election 2020.

If you would like to support the work of The Terrier, please consider throwing something in the tip jar.

Terrier Tip Jar