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

Well this is intriguing – the release of the non-confidential part of the minutes from the Warrnambool City Council meeting where CEO Peter Schneider lost his head.

The minutes prise open, just a little, the tight clam shell around what happened that night of the long knives on 13 July, including the following facts:

Mr Schneider was sacked using a “no reason” clause in his contract;

The motion to sack the CEO was moved by Cr Kylie Gaston and seconded by Cr Sue Cassidy;

This same motion offered the role to the council’s Community Services director, Vikki King, who would start the very next day, 14 July;

Ms King was given a fresh set of “priority” goals or KPIs (key performance indicators);

The recruitment of a new CEO will start after the next council election in October;

The new Mayor – whoever that will be – will start that recruitment process;

The whole meeting lasted less than 90 minutes;

Mr Schneider was in the meeting for three minutes;

The council’s Director of Corporate Strategies, Peter Utri, and former Moyne CEO Graham Shiells, who is now a local government consultant, took the minutes;

Cr Peter Sycopoulis was the sole councillor to vote against the meeting going into confidence.

So we now know the council sacked the CEO without having to give a reason and did so before the next elected council, or Mayor, could have any say in the matter.

[As an aside, if the council elections are postponed because of Covid 19, the Mayoral election will still go ahead when Cr Tony Herbert’s time expires in November.

Given the 4/3 divide, Cr Herbert will not be Mayor again.

Cr Mike Neoh has already said he wants to run for Mayor a sixth time, and Cr Sue Cassidy is champing at the bit, so if the elections are postponed, the new Mayor will be one of the Four Horsemen who lopped off Schneider’s head.].

So what was the motivation behind this coup?

We still don’t know, but there are suspicions and theories, as there always is when there is secrecy.

One theory is the CEO became unpopular while cutting staff to save the council money, because, as our Mayor told us, the council was “unsustainable in its current form”.

The Mayor was quite right.

At least $31 million a year – every single dollar collected in rates – was going toward 730 staff salaries, and the number of people on $100,000-a-year-plus was growing.

In fact figures given by the council to a parliamentary inquiry in 2016 said the council had 21 officers each earning a total salary package of more than $120,000 a year.

That sounds like a top-heavy outfit to me, especially for a city of only 35,000 people. 

Many senior positions remained vacant under Mr Schneider’s rule.

As it happens, Ms King’s own five-year contract was due to expire in early August.

Mr Schneider might have been on to something in terms of removing or blending jobs, because Ms King is now both acting CEO AND head of Community Services.

Wow, talk about multi-tasking.

Another position to keep an eye on is the Governance Officer, a $140,000 a year role created under former CEO Bruce Anson, which has been vacant since December.

The previous person in the job, Anne-Marie Neal, is taking the council to court in a WorkCover claim over a series of events that is also subject to much speculation.

In the meantime, applications to fill that role closed on 24 July.

There is a lot going on, and there is still a lot to uncover – but uncover it, we will.

[For some unexplained reason, the 13 July minutes made available remain “unconfirmed” despite being voted on at the August meeting. I have asked why. The minutes, which must be published under the Local Govt Act, were released after requests from terriers. You can read them here.]

If you would like to support The Terrier, please visit the tip jar.

Terrier Tip Jar

[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, including information on local politics that should be in the public domain, but isn’t. It is a place where you can also have a look behind the scenes of Bluestone, including our Freedom of Information applications, some email exchanges (where appropriate and when dealing with official spokespeople, not our private sources) and anything else we think you might find interesting. If you have something you would like to submit, please email us at editor@bluestonemagazine.com.au[author_info][/author_info] [/author]

This email exchange between Bluestone and the Warrnambool City Council relates to our piece on the $178,000 cost of upgrading the changerooms at the Warrnambool pool (Aquazone), which included retiling, replacing mirrors and toilet partitions:

——————

Is it correct that:

1. The cost of the tiling and associated works in the male and female changerooms has escalated from $120,000 to more than $180,000?
If so, what is now the expected cost of these works?
(See story from Nov 2014 which refers to $120,000 project: http://www.standard.net.au/story/2709187/temporary-change-rooms-for-aquazone-pool-upgrade/)

No. The contract awarded to (name removed by Bluestone) last year was $178,000 for stages 1 and 2.

(Figure provided to Standard a year ago is likely to have referred to an earlier estimate)

2. Has the contractor had to go back and repair or change work in the male changerooms already completed as part of the contract?

Yes. Some rework on the male changerooms was carried out and work deferred on stage 2 until this was completed.

3. Who is the contractor completing this work?

(name removed by Bluestone)

4. When is the project expected to be completed?

Stage 2 will be completed by the end of November.

—————–

Remember this shed?

It is the former home of Porter’s cabinetry and was bought in February this year by the Warrnambool City Council from its new owner, developer and former councillor Graeme Rodger, for $40,000.

As we reported exclusively at the time, there was a catch – the $40,000 shed would cost up to another $90,000 to remove and relocate, making it far from a bargain. No wonder the council tried to re-sell it at auction a month later, in March, but it was passed in for $20,000.

A few weeks later, in answer to questions from Cr Brian Kelson, council CEO Bruce Anson revealed the shed was destined for council land in west Warrnambool, where it would be placed on an existing concrete slab update: bitumen flooring. Building another concrete slab would, of course, add to the rising cost of this “bargain” shed.

As we write, the shed is still sitting on Graeme Rodger’s land off Wangoom Road while a housing estate takes shape around it.

But we can tell you this:

the council received a quote of $170,000 to pull apart, relocate and rebuild the shed in west Warrnambool which, added to the $40,000 it paid, would have made the total cost of this used shed $210,000.

it didn’t accept the quote.

instead, the council will pay Graeme Rodger $63,000 to pull apart and relocate the shed. This is shaping up as a great result for Mr Rodger, who will now receive more than $100,000 for a shed that nobody else wanted. Now that is a deal!

the attempted auction of the shed through Brian O’Halloran & Co, including a newspaper advertisement promoting its sale, was blamed on a breakdown in internal council communications.

the shed is due to be moved early next year.

One question which remains is how much the shed will cost to reconstruct and refit at its new location. We will get back to you.