Carol Altmann – The Terrier

Imagine, for a moment, you meet some people at the pub for drinks on a Saturday night, then wander across the road for a $546 group dinner, then grab lunch the next day, and charge the whole thing back to your boss with virtually no questions asked.

I know, I know, it doesn’t happen.

And yet it does, because this was about the level of scrutiny by the Warrnambool City Council for the credit card held by its tourism manager, David McMahon.

As we know, Mr McMahon racked up more than $10,000 worth of spending on this card for gatherings, meals, drinks, coffees and the like over 18 months from March 2017 until October 2018.

Given this is ratepayers’ money, you would expect that every single line of this spending would be scrutinised, cross-checked and at least backed up by decent receipts itemising everything that was bought.

You might even expect a clear record of who was there (how many council staff/how many guests), why the event was held, and what benefit it was to the council.

From what I have learned through this in-depth investigation, this was rarely the case.

We all know that Mr McMahon has to spend money on tourism-type stuff, like meet and greets, events, working with journos, showing people around, all that sort of thing, but it is for this very reason that – surely – the level of scrutiny should be even greater than for a desk-bound council worker ordering boxes of staples and Sticky Notes.

And yet so much of the paperwork provided for this credit card is vague at best and non-existent at worst.

Let’s go back to the Saturday night example.

On Saturday, 9 July 2017, Mr McMahon spent $48 on a round of drinks at the Seanchai Irish Pub in Liebig St. From there, it appears the group moved over to the Hairy Goat where $546 was spent on tapas and share plates, but not one beverage, as part of a convivial evening that wound up after 10pm.

The next day, around 2.30pm, Mr McMahon’s card spent $40 at the Cactus Jam Mexican restaurant.

That is more than $600 worth of ratepayers’ money literally chewed up in less than 24 hours at three different locations and yet there is just one itemised receipt – from the pub – and no indication of who was involved, or the reason, or what was the benefit to council.

For the WCC internal record system, these outings were simply described by Mr McMahon as  “promotions/meals” or “promotions/beverages”.

Here are more examples from documents released through Freedom of Information:

On Tuesday, 15 May 2018, Mr McMahon’s card was used to buy $146.30 worth of groceries from Coles, but the receipt was lost.

Mr McMahon, as per council policy, provided a stat dec that said the goods were cleaning products for a shuttle bus. This may be so, but on the council’s internal record Mr McMahon described the groceries as “stationery”.

So, was it pens or Pine O Cleen? Biros or bleach? Who knows? Who cares? We do.

On Saturday, 12 May 2018, a group of people travelled on the Warrnambool Westcoaster steam train, which ran from Melbourne to Warrnambool and back again, arriving in Melbourne on the Saturday night.

The group spent $195 on meals and drinks – the train was fully licensed, but we don’t know if these drinks included alcohol, because apparently the Westcoaster could not provide a receipt, so Mr McMahon signed another stat dec.

On Monday, 9 July 2018, Mr McMahon’s card was used to pay for tickets into Sovereign Hill at a cost of $149.60. The tickets were for two adults and a child who, I suspect, was enjoying the school holidays.

The only explanation given is “Vol Famil”, which is shorthand for taking a person (in this case, apparently a volunteer), to a place they have not been before. Why was a kid there? What came out of the visit?

On Monday, 3 September 2018, a very precise $434.90 was spent on hiring a room at the Lady Bay Resort with no further explanation provided. Was there an event? Why use the Lady Bay and not a council room? The WCC is yet to explain.

And lastly, on Friday, 19 October 2018, during a business trip to Denmark, WA, $40 was spent at the Ocean Beach Caravan Park on “tackle”. The sale was at 7.19pm. Tackle? Seriously?

And this is just a sample.

All of the above may be 100% justifiable, but the record keeping is appalling.

Despite this, it was all signed off by Mr McMahon’s superiors and paid for by you.

I asked the council if such receipts were considered acceptable, because it is one thing to keep a receipt for accounting purposes, and quite another to keep records for accountability.

These are two different things, as the Victorian Auditor General recently pointed out very clearly in his report on corruption control within councils:

“Councils are accountable to the communities they serve and the ratepayers who fund their services,” he wrote.

 At the end of the day, it is about trust and, for ratepayers, that has been severely shaken.

The council’s answers via a spokesman are in full below.

Next: I have two, final stories to come this week as I build a picture here. Tomorrow night will be the first of those.

* * *

Q: The documentation includes several un-itemised receipts and at least one receipt written retrospectively. How do these receipts conform to the council’s credit card or procurement policy?

Council’s Credit Card Policy follows the ATO’s requirements for tax invoices.

Tax invoices for taxable sales of less than $1,000 must include enough information to clearly determine the following seven details:

that the document is intended to be a tax invoice

the seller’s identity

the seller’s Australian business number (ABN)

the date the invoice was issued

a brief description of the items sold, including the quantity (if applicable) and the price

the GST amount (if any) payable – this can be shown separately or, if the GST amount is exactly one-eleventh of the total price, such as a statement which says ‘Total price includes GST’

the extent to which each sale on the invoice is a taxable sale (that is, the extent to which each sale includes GST).

A receipt may be sought and obtained retrospectively for the reconciliation of credit card accounts.

Q: What is the council policy in regard to café or restaurant meals being purchased by staff at weekends, other than when travelling on official council business?

Some roles at the Council require work after hours and/or at weekends. These purchases would need to comply with Council’s reimbursement policies.

Q: What is the council policy on the use of a corporate credit card to purchase alcohol?

Under Council’s current travel allowance policy – adopted in November last year – purchases of alcohol are not to be reimbursed by Council as part of the meal allowance. This condition is also included in the Credit Card Policy renewed in November last year.

Terrier Tip Jar

Carol Altmann – The Terrier

Yet another layer has been added to the Warrnambool City Council credit card scandal, and this time it involves former CEO Bruce Anson.

You are not supposed to know this, but Mr Anson and tourism manager David McMahon last year spent $185 on a lunch, paid for by ratepayers via Mr McMahon’s credit card.

The lunch at the Pavilion on Tuesday 9 January was – it appears  – also attended by others, but who was there and why, remains a mystery.

The place was very public, but the public didn’t know that it was paying the bill.

That was kept under wraps. Until now.

The lunch receipt, with bits removed, was included in documents released after nine months and almost $200 in fees via Freedom of Information which has blown open thousands of dollars spent on Mr McMahon’s credit card on meals, coffees and drinks over 18 months.

I am starting to wonder if there was anyone within the upper levels of council who didn’t eat or drink with Mr McMahon at some point.

In this case, Mr McMahon wrote on the Pavilion receipt “Lunch with” but the council removed what followed because it was consider “not relevant”.

What I have since learned is that this lunch was with Mr Anson.

That is not relevant? Are you kidding me?

When the person at the table is the CEO of the council that is subject to a FOI application to scrutinise credit card expenditure, it is absolutely relevant.

Just ask the Victorian Auditor General who recently wrote an entire report on this very thing and exposed major flaws at Strathbogie Shire Council, which led to the resignation earlier this month of its CEO.

Mr Anson retired from the council in January this year.

Maybe the council FOI officer – who decides these things – thought because Mr Anson was now retired, he should be treated as a private citizen.

Sorry, but that just doesn’t wash.

Mr Anson was still CEO when the lunch happened and he was still CEO when the FOI into the credit card usage was lodged last October.

The big question is: what is there to hide?

What I want to know, as I am sure you do too, is why Mr Anson and Mr McMahon were having a $185 lunch on us, who was there, and did we get value for money in return for a spread including calamari and a grazing board?

(I asked the council these questions yesterday morning and it replied at 5.29pm tonight, not with the answers, but asking for a copy of the receipt I am referring to.)

The only reason I can see for Mr Anson’s details being removed is to avoid these exact questions.

I also want to know why Mr McMahon’s credit card was used to pay for the lunch and not Mr Anson’s? 

This is also important.

As was pointed out by a savvy reader (thankyou, Adrian), in business, the most senior person at the table usually pays the bill. Why?

Because it stops a senior person from hiding their credit card expenditure behind a more junior person.

It also stops potential collusion (ie. you pick up the bill on your credit card and I will sign off on it).

I am not suggesting for one minute that this has happened here, but it exposes – yet again – the way things have operated within the WCC when it came to the use of corporate credit cards.

We have already seen how loose that goose has been with Mayor Tony Herbert and Cr David Owen being caught up in hundreds of dollars worth of breakfasts paid for by Mr McMahon’s card.

And now we have the former CEO himself making at least a cameo appearance in the rot.

This cameo might explain why when I lodged an FOI for Mr Anson’s credit card usage several years ago, only a sprinkling of transactions showed up.

Things were being paid for by other means.

I have to tell you, the council fought tooth and nail to have chunks of information removed from this current credit card FOI before it was released.

One of the reasons given was because some of the bills had been repaid, they believed it no longer mattered: “move along, nothing to see here…”

As we know, Terriers don’t give up that easily.

 

I also fought tooth and nail, all the way to the Office of the Victorian Information Commissioner, to have these receipts included.

Why? Because the amounts could have been repaid after I lodged my FOI, to avoid public embarrassment.

And even if they were paid before I lodged my FOI, I believe the public still has a right to know what had gone on and why.

I now know that between $5000 and $6000 was repaid, but, as it stands, the council has still not released the missing receipts.

Under the rules, if I want those missing bits, I have to lodge another FOI.

And if I don’t get them a second time around, I can ask for a review via the commissioner.

It is exhausting and expensive and enough to make you give up.

But we don’t, do we? No, we don’t.

I have two more stories to come.

Again, I want to say that this is the Terrier Tip Jar at work. Every cent you throw into the jar goes toward fighting for transparency and the occasional packet of Panadol. If you would like to be a part of it, you can find the Tip Jar here.

[printfriendly]

[author] [author_image timthumb=’on’]http://the-terrier.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/vault3.jpg[/author_image]Welcome to The Vault – this is where Bluestone will place all sorts of subscriber-access-only material. If you have something you would like to submit, please email us at editor@bluestonemagazine.com.au[author_info][/author_info] [/author]

By Carol Altmann

[box]Bluestone would like to acknowledge subscriber PT for funding the Freedom of Information application used for this piece.[/box]

[dropcap style=”font-size: 60px; color: #A02F2F;”] B[/dropcap]luestone subscribers will know that we cop quite a lot of flak for continuing to ask questions about the sacred cows of Warrnambool including Flagstaff Hill, Fun4Kids and the increasing secrecy and lack of transparency around how the Warrnambool City Council runs its affairs – but as long as there are huge gaps in the information, we will keep asking.

Like why is there no formal report on the 2015 Fun4Kids Festival that cost ratepayers $450,000 to run?

Bluestone has just uncovered this fact and it is staggering, irrespective of your views on Fun4Kids or whether it has picked up tourism gongs.

Anyone who has ever dealt with public funds will know that full disclosure on how that public money was spent and the results of that spending is standard procedure.

It’s called accountability.

Indeed I remember when working for the might of News Ltd that we were expected to account for every dollar we claimed when working on a story, right down to producing a receipt for a $10.50 pizza – after all, Rupert might be a very wealthy man, but he was still the boss.

Yet the Warrnambool City Council has spent almost half a million dollars of public money on an event that, until now, has always produced a full report on its budget and the festival results.

When we asked the council media manager for a copy of the 2015 Fun4Kids report, he said the key results of the festival had already been released to the media.

So, what was told to the media via the council’s media unit should be enough.

Well some journalists in Warrnambool might be happy to swallow the pre-chewed lines delivered by the council, but Bluestone is compelled to dive deeper.

So when the council told us that “about 15,000” people attended the 2015 festival and that 24% of these were from Melbourne and that they surveyed 1000 of these patrons for their views, we wanted to know more.

Can we have the full report? We asked.

Nothing was forthcoming, so we lodged a Freedom of Information asking for two things:

i) the report and/or documents prepared for the council relating to the financial results of the 2015 Fun4Kids festival

ii) the report and/or documents prepared for the council relating to the patronage, including any breakdowns or analysis on these figures.

[dropcap style=”font-size: 60px; color: #A02F2F;”] A[/dropcap]fter the obligatory 45-day wait, the council’s Freedom of Information officer Wendy Clark, who is also chief executive officer Bruce Anson’s personal assistant, came back with this jaw-dropping response:

“I have found no documents that meet the terms of your request…”

This means, we must assume, that there were no reports prepared for the council.

Ms Clark then attached two documents that, we must also assume, amount to the full documentation available on the results of Fun4Kids 2015.

One was a single budget line reference and the other was five paragraphs that included not one single figure, but plenty of motherhood statements like:

“The Fun4Kids Festival achieved a positive percentage increase in the metropolitan market, while maintaining regional attendances. This outcome is a key growth strategy for the festival moving forward.”

I don’t know about you, but whenever I read those last two words – “moving forward” – I know we are deep in the river of public relations spin and far from the shores of plain speaking.

[dropcap style=”font-size: 60px; color: #A02F2F;”] I[/dropcap]n a similar vein, you may remember the uproar that followed the sudden removal of a row of old tea tree along Pertobe Rd just before Christmas.

The trees were removed, we were told, after an arborist inspected them and found them to be unsafe due to infestation by a certain worm and cracking.

A Bluestone reader dared to ask more. In early January, she asked for a copy of the arborist’s report (or at least more detail) and whether the trees would be replaced.

She is still waiting for a reply, let alone any more information.

Such queries could normally be thrashed out  by elected councillors in general council business, but that, as we know, has been abolished and now councillors are timed for how long they talk, even though meetings were usually over within a couple of hours.

All councillors, not just some, should be demanding more, not less, transparency on behalf of ratepayers.

The fact they aren’t, and that this sort of “trust us” mentality is gripping the council, is of serious concern to anyone who remembers that it is the ratepayers who, just like Rupert, are the boss.

Find more in The Vault here…

Trees, transparency and the truth

Wilma Wright, FOI and more

The big shed schemozzle: we follow the money

…and more

Analysis – Carol Altmann

[dropcap style=”font-size: 60px; color: #A02F2F;”] B[/dropcap]efore I write one word about the upgrade of Patloch Lane – the first of what is intended to be several lane upgrades around the Warrnambool CBD – let me say this: all of the artists involved have done great work.

It is not their fault that the rushed job that became the laneway upgrade is nothing like what was originally proposed and does not address some of the fundamental issues that were raised for this thoroughfare, including that very few people used it, and they still don’t.

I doubt, for example, that many people have sat on the two stunning, spotted gum seats hand-crafted by Lillier Fine Furniture. These bench seats are totally wasted by being stuck at the very end of the lane: they should be in one of the main streets – Liebig, Lava, Timor or Koroit streets – where the seating is metal, peeling and plain ugly.

Warrnambool City Council, for all of its grand plans, has a tendency to go for near-enough-is-good-enough and what is often promised is rarely delivered in full or at a level of quality where it can work well for years.

This applies to the big things – such as the upgrade of the Warrnambool railway station precinct which in 2010 was flagged to become a “public space that the city can be proud of” but remains a pedestrian/traffic nightmare – right down to one of Cr Peter Hulin’s favourite topics, the $100,000 disabled access ramp at the main beach which is regularly buried in sand.

It is one thing to bring in the experts to help develop inspiring plans, but it is another to actually deliver these plans through a combination of lobbying state and federal governments for funding, combined with clever decision making and prioritising at a council level.

Which is why I am writing this piece, because there are lessons to be learned from the microcosm of Patloch Lane as Warrnambool waits patiently for the long-awaited upgrade of Liebig St that has been years in the making and is now expected to start in 2017,  a year later than hoped.

If we can’t get one laneway just right, what are the hopes of getting an entire street upgrade right without the temptation of cutting corners, or by-passing the input of the experts? Both of these things happened with Patloch Lane.

Let me explain.

[dropcap style=”font-size: 60px; color: #A02F2F;”] T[/dropcap]hrough a combination of Freedom of Information applications, questions to council and talking directly with people involved in the original Patloch Lane project, Bluestone has been able to piece together a picture of a lost opportunity to do something truly special for the city.

In a nutshell, Patloch Lane was to be a functional and striking art project that grew from the council’s Hidden Histories project, a series of art events that tapped into the lesser-known stories of our city. (The State Government provided $150,000 for the Hidden Histories project, including the laneway works).

Patloch Lane was intended to show what was possible, while at the same time becoming the first link in a chain of integrated laneway upgrades across the CBD, rather than a mish-mash.

[dropcap style=”font-size: 60px; color: #A02F2F;”] T[/dropcap]o this end, in late 2013 the council invited the highly regarded Professor Paul Carter and his team from the School of Architecture and Design at RMIT University* to oversee the Patloch Lane design as part of a wider brief to develop a “Hidden Histories” public art strategy for the CBD. (*RMIT was paid $53,625 for its work on the Hidden Histories project).

In consultation with the council and community stakeholders, Prof Carter and his team developed a concept – ‘Breaking Wave’ – that included a canopy structure down Patloch Lane, new paving that could be engraved as an artwork, light sculptures and an audio installation that would recreate the sound of a wave breaking as you walked through the lane, giving people a huge incentive to use it.

It was bold and exciting and was budgeted at around $90,000 – which is what the council had earmarked for the laneway – excluding engineering works and new paving to replace the cracked concrete which, as Prof Carter had pointed out, was a basic necessity for any upgrade in Patloch Lane.

[dropcap style=”font-size: 60px; color: #A02F2F;”] T[/dropcap]he council was inspired enough to ask Prof Carter to provide a detailed breakdown of costs. That was in late 2014 and Prof Carter, in turn, asked if the council could provide an estimated cost for the engineering works and paving.

It was never provided, so Prof Carter suggested developing a scaled down version of ‘Breaking Wave’ at the laneway entrance, which would be a much cheaper option, but still a ‘lure’ for passersby.

Again, this went no further, so Prof Carter submitted his Hidden Histories public art strategy in early 2015 which included recommendations on how ‘Breaking Wave’ could be developed, and left it there.

What Prof Carter didn’t know was that the council in late 2014, around the time he was asking for engineering costs, had already hired another consultant (One Design Collective) to help bring a different version of Patloch Lane to life.

The “upgrade” itself was all done within about three weeks from early June and, despite being involved since 2013, Prof Carter was told nothing about it.

[dropcap style=”font-size: 60px; color: #A02F2F;”] A[/dropcap]nd while the Patloch Lane artists – including Fiona Clarke, Kate Gane, Jessica Meggs – have done a great job with the “ocean” brief they were given, the final $52,000 project was ultimately done in a rush and on the cheap.

(By comparison, as Bluestone has written this week, $178,000 is being spent re-tiling the Aquazone changerooms…)

The whale etching, for example, is engraved into cracked old concrete that will eventually have to be replaced, and there is still no incentive for anyone to actually use the laneway. It is already looking unloved.

All of these same artists could have been involved in bringing something truly special to life: what a wasted opportunity.

In the meantime, Prof Carter remains hopeful his ‘Breaking Wave’ will still show up somewhere in the CBD renewal.

I hope he is right.

[box]The full breakdown of the Hidden Histories $150,000 project fund: $29,536 – Patloch Lane physical works; $22,827 – commissioning artists work in Patloch Lane; $8690 – One Collective Urban Design Studio, Patloch Lane upgrade consultancy in Jan/Feb 2015 ; $53,625/$4950 – RMIT University/Material Thinking for “Hidden Histories: A Public Art and Spaces Strategy” and development of concept plan for Patloch Lane, both overseen by Prof Paul Carter, Aug 2013-Feb 2015; $32,000 – The F Project, Hidden Histories Laneway Festival Jan-May 2014 including a Patloch Lane mural.[/box]

More reading – Have you seen what’s in The Vault?

The WCC’s big shed shemozzle, part 2 

Behind the scenes of an ugly pre-selection battle or ‘How Michael Neoh lost Liberal support’

OPINION – CAROL ALTMANN

[dropcap style=”color: #a02f2f;”] P [/dropcap]lans to introduce a new trader levy to raise $3 million over five years for Commerce Warrnambool have taken a dramatic twist.

A Facebook post by Commerce Warrnambool (CW) president Tony Herbert has revealed that CW is no longer seeking $600,000 a year from the trader levy, but $300,000 – with the remaining $300,000 to come straight from the Warrnambool City Council coffers.

This new idea is central to the negotiations between CW and the Warrnambool Traders Action Group – with Mayor Michael Neoh sitting in the middle – to try and reach a compromise, after the initial levy proposal sparked an angry and rolling protest.

It might look like an attempt at a compromise, but to me it sounds like policy on the run and former Labor leader Kevin Rudd is living proof of where that can lead: disaster.

Commerce Warrnambool no doubt has noble intentions in trying to raise funds to spend on promoting Warrnambool, but its proposals continue to raise more questions than they answer.

Shifting half of the cost burden from traders to general ratepayers does not change the need for a full and robust discussion on how the funds will be spent.

It also raises the question of whether this is the best use of $1.5 million of public funds. (Especially when the council is already spending close to $1 million a year on propping up Fun4Kids and Flagstaff Hill).

Indeed this new idea, if it is accepted, only widens the discussion – from traders to the general community – and we should now all be invited to have a say.

Bluestone Magazine is not alone in its concerns.

[dropcap style=”color: #a02f2f;”] A [/dropcap]s it so happens, not only did we stumble across Mr Herbert’s Facebook post today, but the council sent us a wad of documents in response to a Freedom of Information request we lodged in late May regarding the levy.

We are still working our way through these documents and will reveal more over time, but email correspondence between the council’s Director of City Growth, Bill Millard, and Commerce Warrnambool as recently as April this year indicates that both councillors and Council Chief Executive Officer Bruce Anson wanted to see much more detail on how the first $600,000 would be spent.

“I think one of the things you guys do need to work on is answering the question that Bruce asked Richard (Montgomery, from CW) ie. what is the $600k going to spent on in year one, remembering that council needs to sign on to the quantum and the KPIs,” Mr Millard wrote on March 6.

“Personally, I think you need to be definitive here. It will hurt your overall push if the councillors don’t know what the money will be spent on.”

You were not wrong there, Bill!

Mr Millard wrote another email dated April 1 – just weeks before the levy process was approved by the council – indicating councillors were still seeking critical details.

The email is too long to reproduce in full here, but it summarises the questions from councillors, including, again, the need for some firm details on how the money will be spent in the first year, how Commerce Warrnambool decided on the figure of $600,000 as an annual total, and what was the level of support for the levy among traders.

I would strongly argue that these questions still stand.

[dropcap style=”color: #a02f2f;”] I [/dropcap] spoke to Mr Herbert today and he said he was hopeful of reaching some middle ground, although he did not wish to go into any further detail because the negotiations were at a critical stage.

“Members of Commerce Warrnambool and Warrnambool Traders Action Group are working together with the council to try and get an outcome that is hopefully more suitable,” he said.

The trader action group has put forward a compromise of their own which, I understand, has already been knocked on the head by Commerce Warrnambool.

Their suggestion was to withdraw the levy proposal, have key members of the action group join the Commerce Warrnambool board and start from scratch as a united group.

This united group would review the business plan, look at how other towns run their Chambers of Commerce and come up with a fresh approach to council by November.

Perhaps that would provide the breathing space that this whole messy proposal so desperately needs.

[button link=”http://the-terrier.com.au/subscribe-2/” type=”icon” icon=”heart” newwindow=”yes”] Did you enjoy this story? Please subscribe here to help Bluestone thrive.[/button]

You can find more Opinion pieces here…

Forget cover ups: roll right over Rolf

Community vision should extend city wide: Julie Eagles

Flagstaff Hill at $15 million crossroad

Scrap trader levy and start over

Motor museum to revive Fletcher Jones

Traders are right to be asking questions