CEO sacking: Secret meetings and confidential documents

Confidential documents relating to the former CEO were sent anonymously to Cr Cassidy. Image: Governmentnews.com

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.




CEO dismissal: time to come clean on the costs

The four W’bool City councillors behind the coup: Mike Neoh, Kylie Gaston, Sue Cassidy and David Owen. Original images: WCC.

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




CEO sacking: prising open the clam of confidentiality

Acting W’bool City Council CEO Vicki King replaced CEO Peter Schneider who was sacked by the council just three months before the election. Images: WCC

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




Sacked WCC chief launches legal action against councillors

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




Lyndoch Living concerns amid pandemic met with silence

Questions around two people from Melbourne entering Lyndoch and a delay in the issuing of masks to all staff have failed to produce a murmur from the Lyndoch board.

Carol Altmann – The Terrier

This past week has seen two extremely serious issues arise at Lyndoch Living aged care in the face of the Covid-19 pandemic and yet the response from the board is a wall of silence.

First, Lyndoch only issued masks to all of its staff yesterday: 12 days after the Federal health minister declared masks mandatory for staff in all aged care homes in Victoria.

Second, Lyndoch allowed two people from Melbourne into its facility last Thursday and Friday, despite that city being in full lockdown and a declaration from the Victorian Chief Health Officer that, as of last Wednesday night, tightened access to aged care homes even further.

(https://www.dhhs.vic.gov.au/visiting-care-facilities-covid-…)

I asked the board members – chair and MPower CEO Kerry Nelson, hairdresser and W’bool City Councillor Sue Cassidy, accountant Kane Grant from Sinclair & Wilson, retired academic Rob Wallis, nursing academics Suzanne Coulson and Lorraine Mielnik, agriculturalist Ron Page, WCC manager Andrew Paton and real estate agent Percy Eccles – if they were concerned and if they intended to investigate.

Silence.

Not a single word.

I am not sure who the board represents, but it is clearly not the community.

We have not been given any explanation, or had any response to these concerns, from the CEO, the chair, or the board.

Lyndoch is community owned in theory, but it might as well be owned by Bupa.

 

Fortunately there are still people who will speak up for us and the most vulnerable people in our community in the face of this devastating pandemic.

South-west Victoria Upper House MP Bev McArthur said by email last night that she was “alarmed” by the allegations around people from Melbourne entering Lyndoch and would be investigating the matter further.

“There is no question that aged care facilities should have bulletproof infection control strategies, and we already have seen the tragic consequences of failures in this area,” she said.

“I will certainly contact the senior management of Lyndoch Living to ask for explanation of this apparent incident, and reassurance that proper controls are in place to protect vulnerable residents and indeed the whole local community.”

Local MP Roma Britnell was less direct. She suggested concerns about any breaches of the restrictions could be forwarded to the police.

As of today, Victoria is moving toward compulsory masks in public and even tighter restrictions on social contact and travel.

In this climate, I cannot understand why any aged care facility would be taking any risks unless it was absolutely unavoidable.

What is Lyndoch’s reasoning for its actions of the past week?

As it sits, we – the broader community – still have no answers to that question.