4 Council - continues (page 4)
Link to previous page
Link back to page 1 of "4 Council"
Another emerging item of community interest and concern. (Continues from previous page.)
Following is a copy of George Parker's published response to a story the Geraldton Guardian ran referring to a number of ratepayers publicly objecting to the CEO land/loan deal.
"AS the immediate past president of Northampton Shire I was disgusted with the article "Loan anger: Shire to finance CEO's home" (Guardian 7/12/09).
The article implies the council is using its own funds to provide the loan.
This is incorrect.
The council will raise the funds through a banking institution, as with any loan, at the current interest rate.
If the CEO is provided the loan, he will be required to pay all principal and interest - and any other fees associated with the loan.
No council or ratepayer funds would be used.
The other fact touched on is that the council had to either:
CONSTRUCT a new residence to accommodate the new environmental health officer, which would come at a cost to the council and ratepayers.
OR, provide a self-supporting loan to the CEO. Then the residence he resides in, which is provided by the council, becomes available for the new environmental health officer. This option is preferred, as there is no cost to the council.
The other reason the council accepted the proposal of a self-supporting loan was mainly due to the ease and speed with which it can occur, once the proposed subdivision is complete.
This prevents delays in housing the two officers, at no expense to the council.
The comments from two residents in the article factually misrepresent the matter.
The Shire is not responsible for providing housing through Homeswest.
The suggestion that money could be better spent elsewhere is based on a false assumption.
The money could not be spent elsewhere as it is not council funds.
It is a loan for a specific purpose.
Further, the decision to progress this way was made in May 2009, then further ratified in September 2009, yet no person provided any comment or complaint to me or the council.
In addition, the Shire's adopted strategic plan makes the provision.
I quote: "Provide opportunities/incentives for staff to construct their own dwelling within the Shire."
Prior to its adoption, the strategic plan was sent to all postal addresses in the Shire seeking submissions. Only two were received and not on the subject of this matter.
The article also fails to mention legal opinion was obtained on the proposal to ensure the council could progress this option.
The Guardian was advised of this before the article went to press.
Legal opinion confirmed it was within the council's powers and provided the steps and formal agreements to be entered into to protect the council.
There are positive stories that could be written about the Shire.
In recent years the current CEO has, through his efforts and incentives, with the support of the council, obtained grants from various government organisations in excess of $1 million for community infrastructure.
This has included public toilets, extensions to visitor centres, libraries, recreation facilities and a doctor's surgery.
The Shire has also received grants for multi-million dollar road work projects.
The CEO has also instigated other multi-million dollar infrastructure, such as the new works depot and subdivision of council-owned land.
This has allowed the council to provide additional services and infrastructure over and beyond what the current annual budget allows.
Why not report on this?
An apology for incorrect reporting should be made to the officer and the Shire.
The KT have a simple response to George Parker's letter to the Guardian.
That is; Go to link "4 Council Page 3". Story 12/ & 13/.
"he is not the best but he is all we can afford", were your words Mr Parker, they are now published on the KT web site so it is only reasonable for this land/loan deal to be questioned and all credit to those who are willing to express an opinion without the fear of being discriminated against by this Council.
It seems ironic that you should be the one to call for an apology, while you were a councillor the word apology was thought by some not to be in your vocabulary. You now need to accept the fact that you and your style of governing is history. Questions will continue to be asked by concerned ratepayers as they become more aware of the fact that councils can be run by unopposed, unqualified village idiots who wouldn't know how to run a Shire's finances.
Also your list of "positive stories" all seem to be part of the normal day to day operations of any CEO/Council. May be some of these millions you speak of should have been redirected into investment housing where it would appreciate in value unlike your White Cliffs dirt road that will forever cost ratepayers to maintain.
To be continued.
The following correspondence was e-mailed to the KT with permission to publish.
"The Council is merely acting as a bank", Northampton Shire CEO Garry Keeffe told The Geraldton Guardian. That comment raises several questions, and gathering information in an attempt to answer them was as enlightening as it was confusing.
The justification for this loan and land deal employs flawed logic. It doesn't consider where the next CEO will be accommodated, and it ignores that building costs will rise in the future. Council, and therefore the community, doesn't seem to benefit in the long term. On the other hand Mr Keeffe certainly seems to. Also, if Council will not be "out of pocket" are we to believe that the CEO, not ratepayers, personally paid for the legal advice he sought regarding this loan?
Aside from his $120,000 CEO salary, Mr Keeffe enjoys ratepayer-funded perks, which include a car with unlimited fuel and maintenance; free fully maintained Council accommodation; fully paid utilities - power, phone and water; and more. He must also enjoy that his employer generously agrees to his requests for things most employees wouldn't dare ask for.
Council unanimously agreed to a re-negotiated employment contract for the CEO at the December 2005 Council meeting, which included a pay increase due to take effect in July 2006. Following a break for afternoon tea, the then President said he had failed to inform Council that the CEO had requested that the increase take effect immediately, not when it was actually due six months later. Council again unanimously agreed.
That is history now, but perhaps it sheds light on why the CEO suggested this self-supporting loan and land deal - why wouldn't he? It seems where he is concerned Council is so agreeable!
In his interview with The Geraldton Guardian Mr Keeffe drew attention to the fact that before he could buy the land, Council was required to advertise it. That is surprising, because under the heading 'Community Consultation' in the September 2009 Agenda it states that advertising would occur "once the lot has been created and the sale is progressing". What response then, when the community does object after advertising: too late for objections now folks, the deal's already done?
The land in question is part of the old Northampton school oval, and Mr Keeffe has requested that Council sell it to him "at cost price". What exactly is cost price on land that presumably cost Council nothing to begin with? Why such reluctance to divulge the loan details? Is it coincidental that items 7.4 (c) and (e) i and ii of the Northampton Shire Freedom of Information Statement are worded to ensure public requests for details of this loan remain publicly inaccessible? How did it read before it was reviewed - one month before the loan came up as an Agenda item?
Things don't seem quite right, do they? Northampton Shire Council needs reminding that the CEO works for it, not the other way around. Perhaps if councillors started honestly assessing the CEO's performance during the one year left of his contract the result might be a (replacement?) CEO who asks a lot less for himself and delivers a lot more for the community.
Name with-held by request.
Firstly the KT would like to congratulate this ratepayer for publicly commenting and doing the research to further help expose this unbelievable decision of Council. Thank you for having the courage to participate.
Things the KT believe need to be considered-: (in no special order)
- Why would a person being paid over $2,000 per week need to borrow $400,000?
- Is this going to be an investment property for the CEO?
- Will the CEO be requesting more money to offset supplying his own accommodation?
- Will the CEO be asking for more money to pay for his utilities? (power, gas, water etc.)
- Is the CEO cementing himself into a secured position?
- If our Shire is to amalgamate will the CEO be out of a job?
- Is this why the CEO has encouraged Council to oppose any amalgamation?
- How much interest will the CEO be paying?
- Are the ratepayers going guarantor for this loan?
- How much will the ratepayers be out of pocket after our community representatives vote to give away one of our most valuable assets at "cost of development" to the CEO, an employee?
- How much of a future financial gain will the ratepayers loose after one of their assets (land) is sold at todays discounted price?
- How much of a financial gain will the CEO obtain when he sells his discounted property?
- Will the ratepayers be left to pay for the administration costs of this CEO/Council deal as they were with the land deal Council did with Cr Ron Allen?
- Who in this Council is voting in the interest of the ratepayers?
- Who is out smarting who?
- Is this Council being lead or mislead by the CEO?
- If there are any signed partitions sent to Council objecting to this mismanagement of one of our community's assets, will they be binned in the same manner as the 140 were with the Cr Ron Allen land deal? The then President stating in Council that Council was not obligated to pay attention to any one of the 140 partitions.
- Have these Councillors forgotten their sworn commitment to "Serve the Community" If they have then we remind them with the following.
Just Another Reminder.
A Councillors Job is;
- To effectively represent the wishes and interests of Ratepayers.
- Develop and encourage a positive, harmonious and respectful attitude within the Community.
- Provide leadership and guidance to the Community.
- Facilitate communication between Council and the Community.
- Develop and encourage a sense of community within the shire.
- Plan for the prosperity and future of the Community.
- Above all, the needs of the Community must be paramount.
One is left believing that we the ratepayers are being played for naive fools. If any of these Councillors have just the smallest amount of HONESTY / INTEGRITY they will be seen to vote against this deal and in doing so request each councillors' vote be recorded in the minutes to, 1:- Show the ratepayers just who is representing them in an honourable way and; 2:- Clear themselves of being implemented in any decision that would attract a future CCC investigation.
Let these Councillors also be reminded of the following;
The meaning of the phrase ACTING CORRUPTLY (For public education purposes as defined by Civic Legal Advice) ...... any public officer who, without lawful authority or a reasonable excuse:
(a) acts upon any knowledge or information obtained by reason of his office or employment;
(b) acts in any manner, in the performance or discharge of the functions of his office or employment, in relation to which he has, directly or indirectly, any pecuniary interest, or
(c) acts corruptly in the performance or discharge of the function of his office or employment; so as to gain a benefit, whether pecuniary or otherwise, for any person or so to cause a detriment, whether pecuniary or otherwise, to any person ....
The meaning of the word MISCONDUCT - Wrong or bad conduct; mismanagement.
And when used in Local Government. (For public educational purposes as defined by Civic Legal Advice)
Misconduct occurs where a public officer abuses their position for personal gain or to cause detriment to another person or acts contrary to the public interest. Misconduct would also include conduct that has an element of dishonesty and could reasonably be interpreted as a disciplinary offence justifying dismissal if the disciplinary processes of the Public Sector Management Act 1994 were applied. Elected Members should conduct themselves at all times with stringent regard to good practices and good governance and with integrity.
Also for public educational purposes, here is a copy of the "Declaration By Elected Members". It is written; "A person who has been elected as a council member must make a declaration before acting in the office".
Local Government Act 1995
DECLARATION BY ELECTED MEMBER
I, .......Jo Blogs..........of........TrustTown..........having been elected to the office of .........Shire Councillor .........
declare that I take the office upon myself ,and will duly, faithfully, honestly,and with integrity fulfil the duties of the office for the people in the district according to the best of my judgment and ability,and will observe the code of conduct adopted by ....Our Shire.......under section 5.103 of the Local Government act 1995. (Italics mine)
A Shire Councillor is now individually legally responsible for their decision making!
The KT believe our community is entitled to honest and competent Local Government representation, delivered in a civil non discriminant manner.
The sentences highlighted in red are considered most important.
To be continued.
We invite other ratepayers to also voice an opinion on our web site. (Names with-held upon request)
While searching for some answers to the CEO land/loan deal an e-mail was sent to our new Councillor Jessica Booth, asking her for her help to record all votes concerning the CEO land/loan deal as the KT believe any ratepayer would have the right to. Other questions were also asked in an effort to respond to rumour.
Following is a copy of the e-mail and a copy of her response.
20th December 2009.
Hi Jessica (Kalbarri Councillor)
Hope all is well with you and your family.
I am writing to inform you of the mounting concern ratepayers are having with the deal council is doing for the CEO, land+loan.
The KT is following it at the moment and have published comments on the www.kalbarritruth.com web site. (page 4 Council)
This may end up with an official complaint going to the CCC to have it investigated.
In my opinion it is important for you to consider your vote and ask you to fully recording all Councillors votes on this subject.
As one of our Shire Councillors I would also like you to respond to the questions:- Is it true that he (CEO) owns a house at Horrocks? If so why another one?
In anticipation of your timely response,
Barry and the team at KT.com
PS As a ratepayer of more than 25 years I personally look to you, because of your past experiences to head up the changes many believe are necessary to bring harmony and unity to our Shire. You will always have my full support if you are seen to show respect for the needs of our Kalbarri community.
Cr Booth's responce;
From: Jessica Booth & Ian Bursnell mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org
Sent: Monday, 21 December 2009 6:39 AM
To: 'Barry Kramer'
Cc: Gordon D Wilson
Subject: RE: Dear Councillor
Firstly, as you are fully aware, I am not authorised to speak on behalf of Council and you need to contact the authorised persons for information, that being the current president Gordon Wilson, the CEO Garry Keeffe or alternatively you could source a written response to the Geraldton Guardian written by the past President George Parker to fully explain the business decision made by Council in regard to this issue.
Secondly, I have read your comments on your website and it would appear that you have sourced the initial information presented by the reporters in the Geraldton Guardian and used this information to your own advantage on your website without providing the follow up information or ensuring that your source is correct. These actions do not provide the harmony and unity you say you are seeking, they appear to be intended to create just the opposite. I do not believe there is mounting concern on this issue. There were some questions a couple of weeks ago that have been fully answered, but nothing further has been mentioned to me by the people of this town for some time since so I can only presume they have considered the facts and find there is nothing underhanded or hidden occurring here.
Lastly, your questions are irrelevant to this issue. Conditions of employment contracts between an employee and an employer do not take into account any assets of that employee, so the bottom line is that I don't know the answers and see no need to find out.
I will cc a copy of my response to our President Gordon Wilson, so he is aware of your concerns if you choose to contact him for further comment.
Dear Cr Booth thank you for your timely response. However your response is considered misguided and a little ill-mannered.
We respectfully question, where were you asked to speak on behalf of Council?
As for speaking for yourself you will find your Council Policy 1.2 states "A Councillors right to express a personal opinion on any issue of public interest is recognised", its called freedom of speech, don't worry there is nothing to be afraid of.
In your e-mail you accuse Mr Kramer (ratepayer) of using public information to his advantage, "used this information to your own advantage on your website". Please be informed that both Kramer and the KT web site act as messenger, the web site continues to exists because of a lack of local government accountability, if doing what one can to change that in the hope of getting a better class of councillor is the advantage you speak of, so be it. Accountability happens to be something you promised to be one of your goals as a councillor, "to ensure open and accountable Government" were your written words.
The history of this Council will show there has been plenty of intimidating and bullying but little accountability, you are on record saying that you are not interested in the past, fair comment. However it is said those who ignore history are destined to repeat it. As for the job of creating community harmony and unity this belongs to you and the Council you now belong to, don't be afraid to get on with it.
You write that "you could source a written response to the Geraldton Guardian written by the past President George Parker to fully explain the business decision made by Council in regard to this issue." (Geraldton Guardian?) One may ask why wasn't this explained in the minutes of the Council Meeting, this being the official place for ratepayers to find Council decisions and reasons for decisions? As a Councillor you may also see a need to keep our community better informed by taking the initiative and writing a monthly councillors' report in the Kalbarri Town Talk.
May you be reminded that it was your choice to offer to serve our ratepayers over the next 4 years.
Some may see it as we have done that the way you have chosen to respond to a ratepayers request for help and your response to some simple questions could indicate that you are not the person for the job?
Speaking from experience this is what life is like working beside some in our community. You would have first been encouraged to take a position on the front line (councillor). You would have also been encouraged by them to use this position and place yourself above the community. You would have been well advised on who to hate. After a skirmish such as this they will patronize you, use sympathy to raise your self-esteem, reload you with spite and send you back to the front line. Those we speak of would be extremely pleased to have someone new to use and hide behind.
The KT wish to encourage not condemn new Councillors, but they will need to demonstrate total understanding, tolerance and respect for ratepayers to deserve that encouragement. You are new to the task, there is a lot to learn and there is a lot you won't be told and will have to learn for yourself, With this hiccup aside we look forward to publishing your achievements as one of our first trustworthy, open-minded and effective Community Representative.
The Post Script (PS) comment made by Kramer in his e-mail stands, but with a greater focus on your personal performance as one of our Shire Councillors.
The ratepayer's request for you to record all Councillor's votes is yet to be answered.
As previously stated members of the KT are at peace in the knowledge that what they do they do for others, out of that comes a sense of worth.
Continuing the search for answers to what many see as an inappropriate Council decision, (land/loan deal) the following e-mail (displayed in black print) was sent to the Shire President, Cr Gordon Wilson. He chose to answer the questions by adding an insert to the dot points, displaying his comments in two different colours of print as follows;
28th December 2009
Dear Mr Kramer
I will answer your questions as an insert per your dot point
----- Original Message -----
From: Barry Kramer mailto:email@example.com
To: firstname.lastname@example.org mailto:email@example.com
Sent: Wednesday, December 23, 2009 10:04 PM
Dear Cr Wilson
As a ratepayer of this shire for over 25 years I ask you as the current Shire President (Council spokesperson) the following questions as I am concerned about the loan/land deal you and your council have offered the CEO Garry Keeffe.
Why would a person being paid over $2,000 per week need to borrow $400,000?This is a personal question and should be asked of the CEO direct
Is this going to be an investment property for the CEO?NO! this is a residencial home
Will the CEO be requesting more money to offset supplying his own accommodation?The CEO is a contracted senior employee and his present contract will not be altered
Will the CEO be asking for more money to pay for his utilities? (power, gas, water etc.)The answer is as per dot point 3
Is the CEO cementing himself into a secured position?As a spokesperson my opinion is no
If our Shire is to amalgamate will the CEO be out of a job?The amalgamation issue is far from resolved so the question is irrelevant
Is this why the CEO has encouraged Council to oppose any amalgamation?Council has not apposed amalgamations and it is councils decision alone not the CEOs
How much interest will the CEO be paying?When and if a loan is taken out the interest rate will be the call on that day as per the bank policy. It will have no impact on council,and will be cost neutral
Are the ratepayers going guarantor for this loan?No, the CEO is guarantor for the loan,.This will be outlined in a legal loan aggreement as a recommendation from council lawyers
How much will the ratepayers be out of pocket after our community representatives vote to give away one of our most valuable assets at "cost of development" to the CEO, an employee?This question is possibly pre-empting a council vote,however the ratepayers will not be out of pocket and i have been informed the difference between cost development and market value will attract FBT and will be covered by the CEO
How much of a future financial gain will the ratepayers loose after one of their assets (land) is sold at to-days discounted price?The ratepayers will not be out of pocket as the difference between cost development and market price will attrect fringe benefit tax and will be covered by the CEO
How much of a financial gain will the CEO obtain when he sells his discounted property?If the CEO left the employ of council before payingout the loan,he would be required to pay the council the balance,or the shire would have first option to purchase. These measures are yet to be outlined in a legal aggreement as per a legal opinion from coucil lawyers
Will the ratepayers be left to pay for the administration costs of this CEO/Council deal as they were with the land deal Council did with Cr Ron Allen?As previously stated,it will be cost neutral to council
Who in this Council is voting in the interest of the ratepayers?This present day council is very ratepayer savvy and in there short time working together have shown a very high regard for ratepayer interest
The rest of these questions are very irrelevant,very ill informed and stupid,and i see no need to answer them
Who is out smarting who?
Is this Council being lead or mislead by the CEO?
If there are any signed partitions sent to Council objecting to this mismanagement of one of our community's assets, will they be binned in the same manner as the 140 were with the Cr Ron Allen land deal? The then President stating in Council that Council was not obligated to pay attention to any one of the 140 partitions.
I Look forward to receiving your answer to these questions in a timely and professional manner.
End of the Shire Presidents' e-mail.
The KT believe 14 of the questions put to Cr Gordon Wilson, Shire President were answered by him in a timely and somewhat professional manner, something expected of a person in his position, but sadly it appears the Shire President just couldn't help himself, he had to finish by trying to belittle the person asking the questions by writing, "The rest of these questions are very irrelevant,very ill informed and stupid,and i see no need to answer them"
For just a moment it was thought things may have changed for the better, thinking we now had a Shire President who was open to questions and prepared to supply answers without the usual Northampton Shire Council sarcasm. Hope quickly turned to disappointment.
The KT take this opportunity to inform Cr Wilson that he is by choice a servant of the ratepayers and needs to communicate in a more respectful manner and not use words like stupid when he refers to ratepayer's questions. In this instance we believe sarcasm was used to intimidate or belittle a ratepayer. After enduring the last two Presidents enough is enough!
As for the answers he has offered to the questions asked, we let the readers and the ratepayers pass judgment on his ability to do the job as a respectful, trustworthy Shire President.
(The KT is baffled at what the CEO's FBT has got to do with the ratepayers being out of pocket?)
Readers, please feel free to e-mail the KT with your comments. (disregarding the President's spelling mistakes)
To be continued.
Another item of interest that further identifies this council, its President and its Dept. President.
Below is a copy of the letter of concern received at the KT's email address from a concerned Kalbarri rate payer. She reports she was a victim of bullying by a Kalbarri Shire Councillor Lou Parker who is also the Deputy President of the Shire, elected by Council.
"AUSTRALIA DAY SPIRIT
GOOD ON YOU LOU
Kalbarri councilor LOU PARKER should be congratulated for his outstanding performance as a bully and intimadater. As a elected community representative and leader he should hang his head in shame for his actions.This particular event took place on Australia day morning at 8am while setting up the sausage sizzle stall for the purpose of fund raising for the ST JOHNS AMBULANCE fund in kalbarri.When the two male volunteers left to pick up supplys he decided to confront the female helper in a rude and nasty manner telling her to remove everything away for sports and rec who where starting to cook at 1pm.When she explained he would have to wait for the people in charge he still insisted she move everything NOW.He then tried to intimidate her with how important sports and rec was.All this to a lady who has lived here for 8 years who spent years every fair using her car to pick up a trailor ,barbque ,tables,chairs with all proceeds going to sports and rec.This and further incidents were witnessed by people from northampton,geraldton and dongara who enjoy coming to our town to sell . The tension he created on the day was disgusting and very avoidable. We as a community need to support the people who made the day so special .Kate does a wonderful job with the fares.Brett did a lot of fundraising for the fireworks CONCERNED RESIDENT NAME AND ADDRESS WITHHELD."
The KT forwarded a copy of this email to Cr Jessica Booth trusting she would pass it on to the Shire President Cr Gordon Wilson of which she did. (A copy of Booth's email has been moved to the 'Email' section of the KT web site) The idea of passing it to Wilson via a Kalbarri Councillor was to make sure more than one person knew about the complaint. This started a series of events that confirm the KT's theory that you need no qualifications, knowledge or experience to hold a position of influence in WA Local Government (The Boys Club)
The KT/Kramer sent an email to the Shire President Cr Gordon Wilson in support of the rate payers request for justice. As follows;
Councillor Gordon Wilson
President Shire of Northampton
Dear Cr Wilson
You are now in possession of a written complaint sent to you by Cr Booth. That complaint documents the bullying behaviour of one of 'your' Councillors, Cr Lou Parker.
(Cr J Booth has informed us that she passed it on to you.)
The way you choose to handle this complaint will be seen as a test of your ability to carry out the functions expected of any Shire President.
To help you in your decision making the KT offer the following;
"Those who are the most effective in their role as president,
are very mature in their understanding of the job;
know the rules inside out;
do not seek personal power and have not sought the position to obtain power.
And finally but most importantly,
have a deep knowledge and understanding of human behaviour and what makes people behave and communicate as they do.
They understand conflict and know how to manage it."
The person who sent the KT this email wants to remain anonymous so as a ratepayer myself I ask to be informed of your/Council's decision concerning this complaint and it will be forwarded to the author, it will also be published on the www.kalbarritruth.com website.
This is a matter of grave concern but Cr Parker should not be subjected to a "kangaroo court" like what happened previously to another councillor.
In anticipation of your timely response,
The President of the Shire of Northampton Cr Gordon Wilson supplies us with his official response/decision as follows;
From: Gordon Wilson mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org
Sent: Wednesday, 17 February 2010 9:39 PM
To: Jessica Booth & Ian Bursnell
Cc: Garry Keefe
The supposed actions of Lou on Australia Day has nothing to do with council. I understand Lou was acting in a voluntary capacity at the event and council isnt responsible in that context. The day wasn't a council event.
The offer of advice Barry has given is not needed because he is not the president and the constant way he berates council and councillors makes him a very ineffective voice in the scheme of community going forward
If the person who sent kt the email has not got the balls to put their name too their sent letter i would refrain as to a reply
Jessica could you please pass this reply onto Barry,as i dont have his email,and i would suggest if Barry likes to champion his electors,that he prints this reply in its entirety
Kramer then responds by emailing Cr Gordon Wilson, President of the Shire of Northampton,
----- Original Message -----
From: Barry Kramer mailto:email@example.com
To: firstname.lastname@example.org mailto:email@example.com
Sent: Sunday, February 21, 2010 7:50 PM
Thank you for your response Cr Gorden Wilson, Shire President. (Via another Councillor)
Your response will be passed on to the young lady who made the complaint of bullying.
You would do well to know your job and its responsibilities Mr President as;-
"A Councillor does not cease being a councillor merely because they are attending a meeting or a function or an activity outside of an official Council meeting".
source; Office of Minister for Local Government and Regional Development (LGRD)
We await your investigation and your written response to this complaint.
Do any of the following attributes apply to this President in the role he played handling this rate payer's complaint?
Those who are the most effective in their role as president,
And finally but most importantly,
- are very mature in their understanding of the job;
- know the rules inside out;
- do not seek personal power and have not sought the position to obtain power.
have a deep knowledge and understanding of human behaviour and what makes people behave and
communicate as they do.
They understand conflict and know how to manage it.
source; Office of Minister for Local Government and Regional Development.
The unprincipled, sarcastic response received from the Shire President must confirm he is not the person for the job. This shire will not progress as one would hope while people like this hold positions of influence and while head office do nothing to better it. After enduring the last two Presidents the KT believe enough is enough.
This Council's incompetence and mismanagement is in kind defrauding the ratepayers.
It's time Cr Gordon Wilson, Shire President showed a bit of leadership or move aside.
Link to the Presidents official responce.