Update from Kangaroo Island Councillor Ken Liu, 2012.11.27:

Hi Gabriel,

I am able to update [the post] – “Councillor Liu asks the CEO to explain his allegations re who’s responsible for legal expenses — QoN 2011.11.09; Council decides to keep its reply secret” (http://www.buddhayatana.org/blog_KIpolis/?p=345), as the reply to my ‘questions on notice’ is no longer kept in Council’s confidential register. The response [by Mayor Jayne Bates] can now be published on your website.

********

Update from Kangaroo Island Councillor Ken Liu, 2012.01.28:

I would like to inform the community members who have commented on Council’s legal expenses that Council has finally replied to my QON (below) which I asked at the November [2011] Ordinary Meeting as to how the $12,822 legal expense was attributed to me, Crs Walkom and Chirgwin.  These questions were posted on KIpolis on 4/11/2011 under the title ‘Cr Liu asks the CEO to explain his allegations re who’s responsible for legal expenses QON 9/11/2011”.

However, Council’s reply was tabled in a closed meeting under provision of the Local Government Act and an order was also issued by Council to keep the document in confidence and not be released (please see resolutions below).  Although Crs  Walkom, Chirgwin and I voted against the proposal, the reply cannot be posted on this website for public information.

Ironically, the same Elected Members who voted to bring ‘the in-camera Item 20.3: legal expenses’ out of confidence at the October [2011] Council Meeting voted to keep Council’s response confidential (refer to Minutes 19.1 of Council Meeting 12/10/2011 below).

Minutes of Council Meeting (18/1/2012):

Item No 21.3
Report Title Cr Ken Liu – Question on Notice – Elected Member Legal Expenses

Moved Cr Davis, Seconded Cr Boxall

Council approves under the provisions of Section 90 (2) of the Local Government Act 1999 an order be made that the public be excluded from attendance at the meeting with the exception of the CEO & PLGGM, in order to consider, in confidence, a matter on the grounds of Section 90 (3) –
a) Information the disclosure of which would involve the unreasonable disclosure of information concerning the personal affairs of any person (living or dead); and
h) Legal advice.

CARRIED. Crs Liu, Walkom & Chirgwin voted against the motion.

 

21.3.1
Moved Cr Clements Seconded Cr Boxall

That Council approves:
a. That all documentation relating to the above matter be kept confidential, pursuant to Section 91 (7) (b) of the said Act.
b. Further, that pursuant to Section 91 (9) (a) of the said Act, that part “a” of this resolution shall cease from 30 June 2012.

CARRIED. Crs Liu, Walkom & Chirgwin voted against the motion.

*******

[Comment from the webmaster:
The left hand does not care what the right hand does ?…
For memory:]

Minutes of October 2011 Council Meeting:
Item19.1
Moved Cr Clements, Seconded Cr Denholm
That Council bring In Camera item 20.3 out of confidence.
CARRIED

Item 20.3: REPORT TITLE: LEGAL AND ADMINISTRATION EXPENSES
AUTHOR: ANDREW BOARDMAN, CEO

***********

Councillor Ken Liu’s Questions on Notice for the Kangaroo Island meeting of 2011.11.09

Re: Legal Expenses

I refer to the ‘legal Fees Summary Table’ presented to Council under Item 20.3 – CEO’s In-confidence Report at the October Meeting, in which it pointed to 13 items of legal expenses amounting to $12,822* incurred during 2010/11 which was attributed directly to 3 Elected Members (namely Crs Liu, Walkom & Chirgwin).  This expenditure was also reported in an article “Council calls in troops’ on the front page of The Islander (20/10/2011).

Question:

As I have since received a number of enquiries from community members relating to these legal expenses and given that this confidential material has now been made public and with the recent publicity in the local press, would the CEO provide information to the ratepayers of Kangaroo Island Council, on each of the 13 identified items of legal fees (below) accounted for by these 3 Councillors:

a)    By whom was the legal advice sought?

Answer by Mayor Jayne Bates:

This is detailed under each item listed.

b)    What was the justification for obtaining legal advice on the matter?

Answer by Mayor Jayne Bates:

The CEO of the Council may seek legal advice in relation to the duties and function of his position which can include but is not limited:

•       Ensuring decisions are legal and enforceable.

•       Ensuring the statutory responsibilities of the LG Act are observed and complied with.

•       Delegations are appropriate and implemented in a proper manner.

•       Issues relating to lease, by-law, planning advice etc.

•       OH&S provisions.

•       Issues relating to the day to day operations and affairs of the Council.

•       The Mayor may seek advice separately from the CEO, as per the “Mayor seeking legal advice Policy” which includes situations that require a response urgently including for an imminent Council meeting or other urgent matter. In Cases where the CEO has an interest.

•       Advice can be obtained as a matter of administrative necessity by the Mayor to ensure legality of the Council actions and decisions.

•       The Mayor will not confer with Staff where the legal advice relates to the CEO’s employment or other personal matters.

c)    Why was the advice not provided by Council’s administration?

Answer by Mayor Jayne Bates:

In relation to issues where the CEO had a conflict or the advice was of administrative necessity the Mayor sought the advice as appropriate. In all other areas, the CEO of the day sought the advice.

d)    Substantiate how the legal expense was attributed to that particular Elected Member(s)?

Answer by Mayor Jayne Bates:

This is detailed under each item listed.

*Note 1: I have compiled this report from my records, matching advice received to dates and descriptions of invoices and given brief explanations. Copies of advice are available for perusal.

Where the advice has been obtained by the CEO Carmel Noon, the description of the invoice has been used. I have not requested that staff resources are used to do a search for this advice prior to Council reviewing this report and determining if this information is sufficient, or alternatively further information is required.

Graham Walkom:

(1) Bullying & Harassment ………………            $2,360

Answer: December 2011. Advice sought by Mayor in regards to bullying and harassment concerns raised by the CEO in regards to communications with Cr Walkom. Further advice was sought in relation to OH&S duties and responsibilities of the Council in regards to the CEO in ensuring her bullying concerns were handled appropriately. This advice was not passed on to Council as the incident reports were at this stage not released to Council due to the pending investigation. Copy of written advice available for perusal.

(2) CWMS …………………………………            $185

Answer: March 2011. Advice sought by the CEO C Noon in regard to the rescission motion received from Cr Walkom for the March Council meeting.

(3) Meeting Procedure …………………..            $601

Answer: January 2011. Attendance to advice re Cr Walkom’s Question on Notice. Invoice description does not detail who requested the advice, but presume it was the CEO C Noon. Cr Walkom had numerous Questions on Notice in the January meeting, and the invoice does not detail which one(s) were referred for legal advice.
(4) Personal Statement ………………….            $2,449

Answer: April – May 2011. All advice sought by the CEO C Noon and the invoice references advice on minuting personal statements, public access to personal statements, perusal of emails, telephone attendance.

Ken Liu:

(5) EM ……………………………………..            $601

Answer: April 2011. Invoice description: Perusing email from C Noon and draft reply in part re Cr Liu’s question on notice.
(6) Ombudsman ………………………….            $92

Answer: Incorrectly allocated as “Ombudsman” when it was in relation to access to incident reports. Now reallocated under (8)
(7) CWMS motion ………………………..            $1,102

Answer: December 2010. Advice sought by Mayor re legality in relation to notice of motion by Cr Liu in regard to suspending the process for the Penneshaw CWMS. Including attendance emails, drafting advice, settling advice and phone call. Advice was that the motion was ultra vires and beyond the powers of the Council. Cr Liu subsequently altered his motion. Copy of advice available for perusal.
(8) Code of Conduct & Incident Reports            $521

Answer: March 2010. Advice sought by Mayor re final notification to Cr Liu and Ms. Liu following finalisation of their code of Conduct complaint against the CEO, and resolution of their access to the report.. Including drafting letter to Cr and Ms Liu, reviewing email from Cr Liu, reviewing Warner report, and phone discussion. Letter of advice emailed to Cr Liu on March 2nd 2011. Copy of advice available for perusal.

May 2011. Advice sought by Mayor in relation to Cr Liu’s request to access CEO incident reports. Advice emailed to all councilors on May 11th 2010. Copy of advice available for perusal.

KL & GW [Ken Liu & Graham Walkom]:
(9) Code of Conduct ……………………..            $1,201

Answer: January 2011. Advice sought by Mayor in relation to concerns raised by Cr Liu in regards to the process of his code of conduct complaint against the CEO. Advice Emailed to Cr Liu on January 25th 2011. Copy of email available for perusal.

January 2011. Teleconference with Michael Kelledy and Wendy Campana re process of Code of conduct complaint against the CEO by Cr Liu and Cr Walkom. Discussion included the process of current Staff code of Conduct provisions, Cr Liu’s and Cr Walkom’s concerns, and issues of process raised by the CEO.

RC/GW/KL [Rosalie Chirgwin / Graham Walkom / Ken Liu]:
(10) EM ……………………………………            $462

Answer: March 2011. Advice sought by the CEO C Noon. Invoice references advice re EM code of conduct and meeting procedure.
(11) Ombudsman ………………………..            $2,482

Answer: Advice sought over August and September by Mayor, Mr. Coombe and Mr. Boardman in relation to the Ombudsman’s investigation of the Mayor instigated by Cr’s Walkom, Liu and Chirgwin. Attendance included perusal of provisional report, drafting advice, drafting response, OH&S provisions, advice to Mr. Coombe re reporting matter to the Elected Body, advice to Mr. Boardman on confidentiality provisions.

Rosalie Chirgwin:
(12) Code of Conduct ……………………            $165

Answer: March 2011. C Noon seeking advice on Code of conduct Panel including drafting advice.
(13) Code of Conduct ……………………            $601

Answer: July –August 2011 John Coombe seeking advice re Cr Chirgwin in relation to the Code of Conduct. Attendance included perusal of emails, drafting advice. Attendance re Mayor telephone advice in relation to process.

Total ……………………………………….            $12,822*