The City of Melbourne stands accused of altering the draft Residential planning zones outside of meeting with one version presented and adopted by council and another published as the final report by Council
The report has altered with at least one additional schedule slipped in to the mix. .
It is unclear what else if anything has been altered from the report presented and adopted by Council
This raises serious concerns as to the process and administration of planning. How many other reports have been doctored and changed from that adopted by the Council that we have not been told about. Can we rely on the reports tabled and presented to Council?
Showing posts with label Administration. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Administration. Show all posts
Tuesday, June 17, 2014
Thursday, May 09, 2013
Council's Embarrassing Moment as it slugs ratepayers and City commuters
The recommendation outlined in the notice paper listed
Recommendation from management
8. That Council:
8.1.approves the draft Council Plan 2009–13
for release for public notice (Notice)
from 10 May to 7June 2013
Should have been the 2013-2017 draft Council plan
Thankfully a member of the public altered the Council to the administrative oversight and the Council was able to amend the recommendation before it was too late. Had they not done so they would have had to convene another meeting to pass the correct motion, costing ratepayers 10s of thousands of dollars.
Wednesday, January 23, 2008
City Bureaucrats paid bonus for fixing their own mistakes
The Herald Sun is reporting that the City of Melbourne has paid over $170,000 bonus payments to the top five - this payment is on top of the lurks and perks that the City Council bureaucrats claim on a regular basis. Free car parking, petrol, use of executive cars, free booze and overseas trips. These are the same bureaucrats that caused the blow out in council expenditure and now they are been paid a bonus for fixing their mistakes. The truth is that the Council pays out this "optional" bonus payment without any real assessment of valuation of merit. The bonus was paid to Council staff who oversaw the corrupt management practices and budget blow outs. Even if they get it wrong they still get the full bonus payments. It is designer job in the city Council.
We also understand that the City Council employed former City Councillor, Kate Redwood at the recommendation and request of Catherine NG. Questions are being asked as to the legality of the employment contract and the possibility that Ms Redwood may have to repay the City Council the money she has been paid in compensation. Under the terms of the Local Government Act a City Council is not allowed to employ directly or indirectly a former city Councillor within two years of them ceasing to be a councillor. We understand that the Ombudsman and Auditor General Department has been asked to investigate the employment contract and to review the Council's appointment of Ms Redwood. If it turns out that the council has in fact acted illegally then those responsible should be held accountable, Catherine NG may have compromised the City Council in what is seen as a possible sweet heart illegal contract.
Council razor gang reaps reward
Ian Royall January 23, 2008 12:00am
FIVE Melbourne City Council bureaucrats who oversaw job losses and budget cuts last year have shared annual bonuses of more than $170,000.
The Herald Sun can reveal five department directors pocketed an average $34,000 each on top of their annual salary package of up to $272,000.
It angered unions and prompted calls for Lord Mayor John So to act.
It comes after dozens of executives at Town Hall received a 4.3 per cent pay rise three months ago.
Former chief executive David Pitchford won a $46,800 golden handshake when he left last month for a job in Dubai.
Documents seen by the Herald Sun under Freedom of Information laws show the directors received $170,757 in so-called "at-risk performance component".
Each director can get up to 20 per cent of their salary in an annual bonus.
How much each one received was kept secret.
The five to accept the bonuses were sustainability and regulatory services director Geoff Lawler, design head Rob Adams, finance director Scott Chapman, corporate services boss Martin Cutter and community and culture director Linda Weatherson.
Mr Lawler is also acting chief executive until Mr Pitchford is replaced.
Cr So said the chief executive had responsibility for the payments.
"The chief executive determines annual director performance bonuses in strict accordance with their employment contracts," he said.
But Cr Peter Clarke has accused Cr So of "simply letting the managers please themselves".
"I could well understand why people are unhappy at being sacked at the same time as people are getting paid extra for doing the sacking," Cr Clarke said.
Mr Lawler said directors' bonuses were considered "at risk".
"They are not guaranteed, and are carefully weighted against performance on an annual basis by the chief executive," he said.
Mr Pitchford approved the bonuses in November just weeks before he left.
Last year, more than 100 staff left the council and budgets were slashed.
Australian Services Union state branch secretary Brian Parkinson said: "Staff morale in the organisation is not good and this highlights how the upper echelons are just looking after themselves."
Mr Parkinson said the $170,000, equal to the salary of three or four workers, could have been used on services such as child care that had been cut in the past 12 months.
Former lord mayor Kevin Chamberlin said the rewards were ludicrous.
"Hard-working staff have had their lives destroyed, yet the directors get these pay bonuses," Mr Chamberlin said.
"The standard of governance is at an all-time low.
"How can the directors get this money when the municipality essentially went backwards?"
We also understand that the City Council employed former City Councillor, Kate Redwood at the recommendation and request of Catherine NG. Questions are being asked as to the legality of the employment contract and the possibility that Ms Redwood may have to repay the City Council the money she has been paid in compensation. Under the terms of the Local Government Act a City Council is not allowed to employ directly or indirectly a former city Councillor within two years of them ceasing to be a councillor. We understand that the Ombudsman and Auditor General Department has been asked to investigate the employment contract and to review the Council's appointment of Ms Redwood. If it turns out that the council has in fact acted illegally then those responsible should be held accountable, Catherine NG may have compromised the City Council in what is seen as a possible sweet heart illegal contract.
Council razor gang reaps reward
Ian Royall January 23, 2008 12:00am
FIVE Melbourne City Council bureaucrats who oversaw job losses and budget cuts last year have shared annual bonuses of more than $170,000.
The Herald Sun can reveal five department directors pocketed an average $34,000 each on top of their annual salary package of up to $272,000.
It angered unions and prompted calls for Lord Mayor John So to act.
It comes after dozens of executives at Town Hall received a 4.3 per cent pay rise three months ago.
Former chief executive David Pitchford won a $46,800 golden handshake when he left last month for a job in Dubai.
Documents seen by the Herald Sun under Freedom of Information laws show the directors received $170,757 in so-called "at-risk performance component".
Each director can get up to 20 per cent of their salary in an annual bonus.
How much each one received was kept secret.
The five to accept the bonuses were sustainability and regulatory services director Geoff Lawler, design head Rob Adams, finance director Scott Chapman, corporate services boss Martin Cutter and community and culture director Linda Weatherson.
Mr Lawler is also acting chief executive until Mr Pitchford is replaced.
Cr So said the chief executive had responsibility for the payments.
"The chief executive determines annual director performance bonuses in strict accordance with their employment contracts," he said.
But Cr Peter Clarke has accused Cr So of "simply letting the managers please themselves".
"I could well understand why people are unhappy at being sacked at the same time as people are getting paid extra for doing the sacking," Cr Clarke said.
Mr Lawler said directors' bonuses were considered "at risk".
"They are not guaranteed, and are carefully weighted against performance on an annual basis by the chief executive," he said.
Mr Pitchford approved the bonuses in November just weeks before he left.
Last year, more than 100 staff left the council and budgets were slashed.
Australian Services Union state branch secretary Brian Parkinson said: "Staff morale in the organisation is not good and this highlights how the upper echelons are just looking after themselves."
Mr Parkinson said the $170,000, equal to the salary of three or four workers, could have been used on services such as child care that had been cut in the past 12 months.
Former lord mayor Kevin Chamberlin said the rewards were ludicrous.
"Hard-working staff have had their lives destroyed, yet the directors get these pay bonuses," Mr Chamberlin said.
"The standard of governance is at an all-time low.
"How can the directors get this money when the municipality essentially went backwards?"
Sunday, June 03, 2007
John So Passes the Buck $300,000 Efficiency Report Sees Light of Day highlighting So's spend fest
Melbourne City Council's Efficiency Report, that was the subject of an investigation into Confidentiality breaches under Victoria's Local Government Act has finally been made public, having done the rounds and been widely circulated around Town Hall and leaked to the media.`
The report highlights what most had already known. The City Council is in financial trouble, John So has over spent and the bureaucracy was out of control with Senior Staff redesigning their job to suit their life style and putting on additional staff to deal with the issues that Senior Staff found not to their liking.
In an extraordinary pass the buck John So tried to place the blame and responsibility onto the administration and the CEO, David Pitchford. Whist the CEOI must be held accountable for the financial and governance of the Council Council, and the Lord Mayor, John So, must also be held accountable. It is the role of the City Council to monitor the activities of the administration and set the financial parameters and project priorities.
The role of Lord Mayor is not just to be the cute cuddly icon of popularity. The Lord Mayor is paid over $110,000 per year plus additional benefits (Free food, drinks, a limousine and driver and a host of staff at his disposal- Estimated to be worth over $500,000 per year)
And the buck does not stop there. Other Senior Staff and Councillors are also accountable for the governance of our city.
Melbourne Green's Councillor, Fraser Brindley has tried to distance himself from the fall out that has been exposed by in the Council's $300,000 efficiency report by stating that
"Some of the really big substantial issues have been long known by a lot of councillors and we tried to do something about it but we have been blocked"
what Greens Councillor Brindley fails to mention is that he was part of the problem. Decision and documents that should have been made public have been considered behind closed doors, official meetings of the Council that do not comply with the provisions of the Victorian Local Government Act. Meeting that are illegal. In fact Councillor Brindley was one of the first to recommend that reports on Council financial expenditure be referred to these illegal meeting. meeting that still continue to be held today and are not challenged by Cr Brindley.
Costs associated with John So and his Gary Singer (Deputy Lord Mayor) are not disclosed on the Council expenses Quarterly Statements undervaluing the level of expenses claimed by the Lord Mayor and his Deputy. Costs associated with internal Catering and other costs continue to avoid public scrutiny.
The Local Government Act requites that all meetings of Council be open to the public and that only under certain circumstances can meetings be closed to the public. the need to maintain open and transparency is fundamental to good governance. Every time the Council refers document's to the closed illegal meetings of Council the public are denied access to information.
the Other issue that has not been addressed by the City Council, who are looking for ways to avoid accountability, is the role of the Council's internal Audit Committee. the report has highlighted many serious deficiencies in the Councils administration and the question must be asked why were some of these issues not highlighted by the Councils Audit Committee. The Audit Committee also meets in secret behind closed doors and its monthly reports are not made public.
The other checks and balance in the system is the role of the State Government and office of the State Auditor General and the State Ombudsman. whilst the Office of the Ombudsman has managed to highlight serious issues of corruption the Ombudsman's and the State Department of Local Government have not yet reviewed issues of Council governance and in particular culture of secrecy and avoidance, illegal meetings, decision made under delegation. A breading ground for corruption and and inefficiencies.
The buck stops here, here or here?
Peter Weekes The Sunday Age June 3, 2007
IT [Melbourne City Council] DOESN'T know how many highly paid staff it employs, it approves major projects without knowing the full cost while giving others the go-ahead with no funding, and the duplication between its departments has created "friction".
If it was a publicly listed company, shareholders would be demanding blood. But it's not. It is Melbourne City Council and these are just some of the findings of an independent review of the operational efficiency of Town Hall since John So was elected mayor in 2001 and forced through the appointment of his nominee for chief executive David Pitchford.
The report by Ernst & Young, which was commissioned by Mr Pitchford and the council, follows a series of internal reviews that one councillor said "merely papered over the problems".
"Some of the really big substantial issues have been long known by a lot of councillors and we tried to do something about it but we have been blocked," said Greens councillor Fraser Brindley.
The council is one of the largest in the country, with cash reserves of $117 million and total assets of $2.2 billion. But following the damning report and council's admission that this year's proposed operating budget is about $4 million in the red (despite the report finding annual savings of at least $11.4 million could be made) many are asking where the buck stops.
Some councillors, such as Catherine Ng, who was elected on the mayor's Living Melbourne ticket, argue that the fault lies with the administration led by Mr Pitchford. Others, including Cr Brindley, blame both Mr Pitchford and the Lord Mayor.
The report found that under the council's three differing reporting systems, the number of people earning more than $100,000 varies dramatically; that the council is often provided with insufficient financial information on projects; that financial forecasting is "unsophisticated and inconsistent" with council objectives; and that some departments have their own infrastructure plans with no reference to council-wide objectives.
The Mayor left it to Mr Pitchford to release the report but when asked later if the buck stopped with him, Cr So said: "The chief executive is responsible for the administration of the organisation. He is responsible for staffing and operations."
Professor Ian Ramsay, a corporate governance expert at the University of Melbourne, believes it is reasonable to draw parallels between how a business operates and how a democratically elected council serves its ratepayers.
While he hasn't followed the problems besetting Melbourne City Council, Professor Ramsay said: "Over many years, many public sector organisations have looked to the private sector to see what governance principles and policies may be appropriate to adopt."
Asked whether the buck stopped with the council or its chief executive, he said it depended on the issue. However, "in corporations law, the board is responsible for overall management of the organisation and a key responsibility is to appoint the chief executive, so generally ultimate responsibility would rest with the board".
The council was brought under corporations law by the previous Kennett government. It specifies that the council does not have the power to hire or fire, apart from the chief executive. Councillors say that this has meant they have had no control over soaring staff numbers, which the report found accounted for 97 per cent of the increase in total spending since 2002, despite "no corresponding significant improvement in services".
"I have tried my very best," said Cr Ng, "but if you don't have all the ammunition, you can't do anything. That's why we had to call for the independent report because we can't get the real data if the organisation is not providing that. Every time you ask for something they say it is fine but you can't get access to the books to check it."
One of the largest increases was in the marketing department, where the effective full-time staff has jumped 57 per cent since 2003 and now accounts for 11.75 per cent of the budget and continues to provide "the same functions".
"It's fat," said Cr Brindley. "If John (So) wasn't so vested in his approach we would have addressed this long ago. His cult of personality correlates perfectly with that trend in (marketing) growth."
He said Cr SOS chauffeur was one of those who was paid more than $100,000 once overtime was included, which was more than the base salary.
On the revenue side, the council is bound by the promise made by John So dominant Living Melbourne team not to raise rates during the current term, and is heavily reliant on parking metres.
However, only an estimated 10 per cent of infringements are detected, and a third are provisioned as doubtful debt. It has been a problem for about 15 years. To make matters worse, the council's computer system does not meet the requirements of its recently implemented Infringement Act.
The report also found that while Events Melbourne played an important role in positioning the city to attract tourism, "it was not yet fully effective", covering only about 10 per cent of events.
Welcoming the Ernst & Young report, Mr Brindley said: "Up until this point, the only scrutiny that we have had at Town Hall is the colour of the ice cream John So is licking with Megan Gale.
"Ernst & Young isn't saying abandon ship. These are problems that can be fixed and most councillors accept most of the findings."
The chairman of the Town Hall's finance committee, Brian Shanahan, said the council should adopt some of the report's recommendations immediately to negate at least part of this year's projected budget shortfall.
To council's cost...
■The Ernst & Young report says that unless dramatic changes are made, the council's cash reserves will be gone within a decade.
■Last week the council announced it would retrench 26 staff, with another 100 to go by year's end, saving $6 million.
■If parking infringement rates were lifted by 1 per cent, the council would earn an extra $2.6 million annually.
■Decisions made without full understanding of the costs include City Baths (under-costed by $974,660) and child care ($1.03 million).
■Funding allocation is robust for arts and culture, but subjective and inconsistent for Events Melbourne and Business Melbourne.
■The council charges lower fees for kerbside trading than any other capital city except Adelaide.
The report highlights what most had already known. The City Council is in financial trouble, John So has over spent and the bureaucracy was out of control with Senior Staff redesigning their job to suit their life style and putting on additional staff to deal with the issues that Senior Staff found not to their liking.
In an extraordinary pass the buck John So tried to place the blame and responsibility onto the administration and the CEO, David Pitchford. Whist the CEOI must be held accountable for the financial and governance of the Council Council, and the Lord Mayor, John So, must also be held accountable. It is the role of the City Council to monitor the activities of the administration and set the financial parameters and project priorities.
The role of Lord Mayor is not just to be the cute cuddly icon of popularity. The Lord Mayor is paid over $110,000 per year plus additional benefits (Free food, drinks, a limousine and driver and a host of staff at his disposal- Estimated to be worth over $500,000 per year)
And the buck does not stop there. Other Senior Staff and Councillors are also accountable for the governance of our city.
Melbourne Green's Councillor, Fraser Brindley has tried to distance himself from the fall out that has been exposed by in the Council's $300,000 efficiency report by stating that
"Some of the really big substantial issues have been long known by a lot of councillors and we tried to do something about it but we have been blocked"
what Greens Councillor Brindley fails to mention is that he was part of the problem. Decision and documents that should have been made public have been considered behind closed doors, official meetings of the Council that do not comply with the provisions of the Victorian Local Government Act. Meeting that are illegal. In fact Councillor Brindley was one of the first to recommend that reports on Council financial expenditure be referred to these illegal meeting. meeting that still continue to be held today and are not challenged by Cr Brindley.
Costs associated with John So and his Gary Singer (Deputy Lord Mayor) are not disclosed on the Council expenses Quarterly Statements undervaluing the level of expenses claimed by the Lord Mayor and his Deputy. Costs associated with internal Catering and other costs continue to avoid public scrutiny.
The Local Government Act requites that all meetings of Council be open to the public and that only under certain circumstances can meetings be closed to the public. the need to maintain open and transparency is fundamental to good governance. Every time the Council refers document's to the closed illegal meetings of Council the public are denied access to information.
the Other issue that has not been addressed by the City Council, who are looking for ways to avoid accountability, is the role of the Council's internal Audit Committee. the report has highlighted many serious deficiencies in the Councils administration and the question must be asked why were some of these issues not highlighted by the Councils Audit Committee. The Audit Committee also meets in secret behind closed doors and its monthly reports are not made public.
The other checks and balance in the system is the role of the State Government and office of the State Auditor General and the State Ombudsman. whilst the Office of the Ombudsman has managed to highlight serious issues of corruption the Ombudsman's and the State Department of Local Government have not yet reviewed issues of Council governance and in particular culture of secrecy and avoidance, illegal meetings, decision made under delegation. A breading ground for corruption and and inefficiencies.
The buck stops here, here or here?
Peter Weekes The Sunday Age June 3, 2007
IT [Melbourne City Council] DOESN'T know how many highly paid staff it employs, it approves major projects without knowing the full cost while giving others the go-ahead with no funding, and the duplication between its departments has created "friction".
If it was a publicly listed company, shareholders would be demanding blood. But it's not. It is Melbourne City Council and these are just some of the findings of an independent review of the operational efficiency of Town Hall since John So was elected mayor in 2001 and forced through the appointment of his nominee for chief executive David Pitchford.
The report by Ernst & Young, which was commissioned by Mr Pitchford and the council, follows a series of internal reviews that one councillor said "merely papered over the problems".
"Some of the really big substantial issues have been long known by a lot of councillors and we tried to do something about it but we have been blocked," said Greens councillor Fraser Brindley.
The council is one of the largest in the country, with cash reserves of $117 million and total assets of $2.2 billion. But following the damning report and council's admission that this year's proposed operating budget is about $4 million in the red (despite the report finding annual savings of at least $11.4 million could be made) many are asking where the buck stops.
Some councillors, such as Catherine Ng, who was elected on the mayor's Living Melbourne ticket, argue that the fault lies with the administration led by Mr Pitchford. Others, including Cr Brindley, blame both Mr Pitchford and the Lord Mayor.
The report found that under the council's three differing reporting systems, the number of people earning more than $100,000 varies dramatically; that the council is often provided with insufficient financial information on projects; that financial forecasting is "unsophisticated and inconsistent" with council objectives; and that some departments have their own infrastructure plans with no reference to council-wide objectives.
The Mayor left it to Mr Pitchford to release the report but when asked later if the buck stopped with him, Cr So said: "The chief executive is responsible for the administration of the organisation. He is responsible for staffing and operations."
Professor Ian Ramsay, a corporate governance expert at the University of Melbourne, believes it is reasonable to draw parallels between how a business operates and how a democratically elected council serves its ratepayers.
While he hasn't followed the problems besetting Melbourne City Council, Professor Ramsay said: "Over many years, many public sector organisations have looked to the private sector to see what governance principles and policies may be appropriate to adopt."
Asked whether the buck stopped with the council or its chief executive, he said it depended on the issue. However, "in corporations law, the board is responsible for overall management of the organisation and a key responsibility is to appoint the chief executive, so generally ultimate responsibility would rest with the board".
The council was brought under corporations law by the previous Kennett government. It specifies that the council does not have the power to hire or fire, apart from the chief executive. Councillors say that this has meant they have had no control over soaring staff numbers, which the report found accounted for 97 per cent of the increase in total spending since 2002, despite "no corresponding significant improvement in services".
"I have tried my very best," said Cr Ng, "but if you don't have all the ammunition, you can't do anything. That's why we had to call for the independent report because we can't get the real data if the organisation is not providing that. Every time you ask for something they say it is fine but you can't get access to the books to check it."
One of the largest increases was in the marketing department, where the effective full-time staff has jumped 57 per cent since 2003 and now accounts for 11.75 per cent of the budget and continues to provide "the same functions".
"It's fat," said Cr Brindley. "If John (So) wasn't so vested in his approach we would have addressed this long ago. His cult of personality correlates perfectly with that trend in (marketing) growth."
He said Cr SOS chauffeur was one of those who was paid more than $100,000 once overtime was included, which was more than the base salary.
On the revenue side, the council is bound by the promise made by John So dominant Living Melbourne team not to raise rates during the current term, and is heavily reliant on parking metres.
However, only an estimated 10 per cent of infringements are detected, and a third are provisioned as doubtful debt. It has been a problem for about 15 years. To make matters worse, the council's computer system does not meet the requirements of its recently implemented Infringement Act.
The report also found that while Events Melbourne played an important role in positioning the city to attract tourism, "it was not yet fully effective", covering only about 10 per cent of events.
Welcoming the Ernst & Young report, Mr Brindley said: "Up until this point, the only scrutiny that we have had at Town Hall is the colour of the ice cream John So is licking with Megan Gale.
"Ernst & Young isn't saying abandon ship. These are problems that can be fixed and most councillors accept most of the findings."
The chairman of the Town Hall's finance committee, Brian Shanahan, said the council should adopt some of the report's recommendations immediately to negate at least part of this year's projected budget shortfall.
To council's cost...
■The Ernst & Young report says that unless dramatic changes are made, the council's cash reserves will be gone within a decade.
■Last week the council announced it would retrench 26 staff, with another 100 to go by year's end, saving $6 million.
■If parking infringement rates were lifted by 1 per cent, the council would earn an extra $2.6 million annually.
■Decisions made without full understanding of the costs include City Baths (under-costed by $974,660) and child care ($1.03 million).
■Funding allocation is robust for arts and culture, but subjective and inconsistent for Events Melbourne and Business Melbourne.
■The council charges lower fees for kerbside trading than any other capital city except Adelaide.
Saturday, June 02, 2007
Cock's Tender Up as Cull begins John So under pressure to make ends meet
Melbourne City Council begins to implement some of the recommendation contained in the $300,000 efficiency report as the Council begins to prune the bush and cut back on John So uncontrolled expenditure.
If anything John So has demonstrated that he has no idea of strategic investment. Wasted investments such as the Tourist Bus and lighting the Tan are just two examples of how out of touch with reality John So is from the day to day management of the Council.
John So last week faced a no-confidence motion amidst claims that he was a hands-off, removed from the coal-face, Lord Mayor.
This is one of the main problems identified with the populist direct election models. If Melbourne was sincere about good governance then it would scrape the hybrid direct election model, expand the city boundaries and the size of the elected City Council. The Lord Mayor, or at least the chairman of the Council, should be apointed from and by the elected Councillors.
There still is a long way to go and more cut backs can be expected. Still unknown is the extent of redundancy and breach of contract payouts the Council has to fork out. Again pointing to further stuff-ups and blow-outs in the City Council's Finance.
Finance Committee Chairperson Brian Shanahan has been the one that has had to take the flack and the task of doing all the hard work. Last week Shanahan voted no-confidence in John So as the Council's leader. Shanahan also voted against the Council's budget. Shanahan now needs to consider whether he will continue to prop up John So and remain his silent puppet or resign from being Chairman of the Council's the Finance Committee.
Senior executives to go in council cull
Clay Lucas, The Age May 30, 2007
Melbourne City Council could cut up to 100 staff in a second round of redundancies, a report reveals.
The council is expected to save $1.5 million by sacking 26 people, including several senior executives, in the first round of redundancies, announced earlier today.
It would save a further $5.7 million in redundancies in the second round, the report says.
In the first round of redundancies, the Council will sack several senior executives, including its controversial spin doctor.
The council is set to reveal 26 redundancies as part of its biggest shake-up in 14 years, theage.com.au understands, with up to 100 more to go in the coming months.
Two directors, 10 executives and 14 staff are among those expected to be made redundant today.
Corporate affairs director Hayden Cock, whose package is worth $220,000, is believed to be among those to be made redundant.
Chief executive David Pitchford notified each of the 26 staff this morning.
The move follows the completion last month of a $300,000 report by consultants Ernst & Young on how the council could cut costs.
The report found a massive blowout in labour costs at the council, huge problems with its parking officers, a blowout in executives at the council on more than $100,000, and an explosion of spending on marketing.
Lord Mayor John So, who did not return calls, will come under immense pressure now the confidential report is public.
The report's highly critical findings have found many problems at the council have emerged since 2002 - the year after Councillor So became Lord Mayor.
Other related coverage Links from the Age
Mayor survives attacks, but loses Dalai Lama fight
Big-spending mayor goes for broke
Rare revolt on budget as So confirms job cuts ahead
Budget blow-out a 'turn on' for media man So
If anything John So has demonstrated that he has no idea of strategic investment. Wasted investments such as the Tourist Bus and lighting the Tan are just two examples of how out of touch with reality John So is from the day to day management of the Council.
John So last week faced a no-confidence motion amidst claims that he was a hands-off, removed from the coal-face, Lord Mayor.
This is one of the main problems identified with the populist direct election models. If Melbourne was sincere about good governance then it would scrape the hybrid direct election model, expand the city boundaries and the size of the elected City Council. The Lord Mayor, or at least the chairman of the Council, should be apointed from and by the elected Councillors.
There still is a long way to go and more cut backs can be expected. Still unknown is the extent of redundancy and breach of contract payouts the Council has to fork out. Again pointing to further stuff-ups and blow-outs in the City Council's Finance.
Finance Committee Chairperson Brian Shanahan has been the one that has had to take the flack and the task of doing all the hard work. Last week Shanahan voted no-confidence in John So as the Council's leader. Shanahan also voted against the Council's budget. Shanahan now needs to consider whether he will continue to prop up John So and remain his silent puppet or resign from being Chairman of the Council's the Finance Committee.
Senior executives to go in council cull
Clay Lucas, The Age May 30, 2007
Melbourne City Council could cut up to 100 staff in a second round of redundancies, a report reveals.
The council is expected to save $1.5 million by sacking 26 people, including several senior executives, in the first round of redundancies, announced earlier today.
It would save a further $5.7 million in redundancies in the second round, the report says.
In the first round of redundancies, the Council will sack several senior executives, including its controversial spin doctor.
The council is set to reveal 26 redundancies as part of its biggest shake-up in 14 years, theage.com.au understands, with up to 100 more to go in the coming months.
Two directors, 10 executives and 14 staff are among those expected to be made redundant today.
Corporate affairs director Hayden Cock, whose package is worth $220,000, is believed to be among those to be made redundant.
Chief executive David Pitchford notified each of the 26 staff this morning.
The move follows the completion last month of a $300,000 report by consultants Ernst & Young on how the council could cut costs.
The report found a massive blowout in labour costs at the council, huge problems with its parking officers, a blowout in executives at the council on more than $100,000, and an explosion of spending on marketing.
Lord Mayor John So, who did not return calls, will come under immense pressure now the confidential report is public.
The report's highly critical findings have found many problems at the council have emerged since 2002 - the year after Councillor So became Lord Mayor.
Other related coverage Links from the Age
Mayor survives attacks, but loses Dalai Lama fight
Big-spending mayor goes for broke
Rare revolt on budget as So confirms job cuts ahead
Budget blow-out a 'turn on' for media man So
Wednesday, May 09, 2007
John So trims the bone But leaves the fat on the plate
Melbourne City Council forks out $300,000 in another round of consultants reports to recommend where it should save costs but so as to not be held accountable as to its choice of implementation the menu will not be published
Source: The Age
There is no doubt that the City Council is overstaffed and over governed. Finances in the City Council are overstretched with John So having raided the Councils reserves on an unchecked spending spree reducing the Councils working capital ratio to the lowest on record.
The City Council is facing a major crisis in the retail sector as the cost of doing business in the City Center soars and customers prefer to shop else where where parking is free and their dollar goes further. The City center is no longer the home of Melbourne entertainment or shopping. Major cultural assets such as the Museum of Victoria have been located at the outskirts of the city centre instead of taking center stage.
The city is facing serious decline as a result poor planning and governance policies undertaken over the last 10-15 years. Rob Adams should either take on more responsibility or be sacked, he has created his own portflio and job description excluding the tasks that he does not want and can not to deal with.
The Council administration has become fat and non-productive. It exist to support itself taxing the life from the city itself. Walk down Melbourne's Swanston Street and you will soon see the quality of retail more $2 junk shops and sex shows then Kings cross.
We have no doubt that the City can and should undergo a major cut back in the top end. Two directorships at least should be scrapped and their functions merged.
The Ernst & Young consultants report should be published. the ratepayers and citizens of Melbourne have a right to know the true extent and recommendation that are before the City Council prior to the City Council doing a butchers hatched job to dress the mutton up as being lamb.
Council rejig to cut jobs
The Age - May 9, 2007
RADICAL overhaul of Melbourne City Council appears certain, after consultants recommended the sacking of at least two layers of senior management in a secret report.
A number of top-level staff — including two directors — are likely to lose their jobs in what is looming as the biggest shake-up at the council in 14 years.
Senior staff today will be given the report on how the council can cut costs — for which consultants Ernst & Young were paid $300,000.
But the confidential document — which contains crucial financial recommendations — will be kept from the public for several weeks until budget negotiations near completion.
Council chief executive David Pitchford last week forced councillors to sign confidentiality agreements before they were given a copy of the report.
The nine councillors were warned they risked being sacked if they discussed publicly any of the report's findings before its official wider release on June 3.
However, one councillor, who spoke on condition of anonymity, has described the report as "a bombshell".
The Age believes Ernst & Young has recommended how the council can cut its costs by more than $5 million.
In part, the report recommends slashing senior staff numbers, which have almost doubled under Mr Pitchford, who is Victoria's highest paid council officer on a salary of up to $396,000.
At least 85 staff at the council are on salaries in excess of $100,000; when Mr Pitchford became chief executive in 2003 there were 46 in that bracket.
Lord Mayor John So last night said: "Like any organisation, (the council) can actively find opportunities to do things better, smarter and cheaper."
The Age believes the report finds the council:
■ Should reduce its number of directors from seven to five.
■ Needs to undergo a structural reorganisation.
■ Should reduce its salary bill by cutting the number of staff paid more than $100,000.
■ Is too reliant on consultants.
■ Should consider farming out some services, including child care, to the private sector.
The likelihood of a major restructure comes despite Mr Pitchford last year reorganising the council to try to make it function more effectively.
The Lord Mayor came under fire last night for allowing the report to be made confidential.
"John So should not allow this sort of thing to go on behind closed doors," former lord mayor Kevin Chamberlin said.
"This is a misuse of the confidentiality provisions of the Local Government Act. It is using the act to hide financial information from the public that will embarrass the council."
A second councillor told The Age the Ernst & Young consultants had "identified some very serious inadequacies within certain departments".
"It implies what a lot of us have been wanting: a shrinkage of directors," the councillor said.
Mr Pitchford last night defended having spent $300,000 on the report.
"This is not a public review," he said. "It is for internal purposes. The report will remain confidential until its findings and recommendations can be fully assessed."
Source: The Age
There is no doubt that the City Council is overstaffed and over governed. Finances in the City Council are overstretched with John So having raided the Councils reserves on an unchecked spending spree reducing the Councils working capital ratio to the lowest on record.
The City Council is facing a major crisis in the retail sector as the cost of doing business in the City Center soars and customers prefer to shop else where where parking is free and their dollar goes further. The City center is no longer the home of Melbourne entertainment or shopping. Major cultural assets such as the Museum of Victoria have been located at the outskirts of the city centre instead of taking center stage.
The city is facing serious decline as a result poor planning and governance policies undertaken over the last 10-15 years. Rob Adams should either take on more responsibility or be sacked, he has created his own portflio and job description excluding the tasks that he does not want and can not to deal with.
The Council administration has become fat and non-productive. It exist to support itself taxing the life from the city itself. Walk down Melbourne's Swanston Street and you will soon see the quality of retail more $2 junk shops and sex shows then Kings cross.
We have no doubt that the City can and should undergo a major cut back in the top end. Two directorships at least should be scrapped and their functions merged.
The Ernst & Young consultants report should be published. the ratepayers and citizens of Melbourne have a right to know the true extent and recommendation that are before the City Council prior to the City Council doing a butchers hatched job to dress the mutton up as being lamb.
Council rejig to cut jobs
The Age - May 9, 2007
RADICAL overhaul of Melbourne City Council appears certain, after consultants recommended the sacking of at least two layers of senior management in a secret report.
A number of top-level staff — including two directors — are likely to lose their jobs in what is looming as the biggest shake-up at the council in 14 years.
Senior staff today will be given the report on how the council can cut costs — for which consultants Ernst & Young were paid $300,000.
But the confidential document — which contains crucial financial recommendations — will be kept from the public for several weeks until budget negotiations near completion.
Council chief executive David Pitchford last week forced councillors to sign confidentiality agreements before they were given a copy of the report.
The nine councillors were warned they risked being sacked if they discussed publicly any of the report's findings before its official wider release on June 3.
However, one councillor, who spoke on condition of anonymity, has described the report as "a bombshell".
The Age believes Ernst & Young has recommended how the council can cut its costs by more than $5 million.
In part, the report recommends slashing senior staff numbers, which have almost doubled under Mr Pitchford, who is Victoria's highest paid council officer on a salary of up to $396,000.
At least 85 staff at the council are on salaries in excess of $100,000; when Mr Pitchford became chief executive in 2003 there were 46 in that bracket.
Lord Mayor John So last night said: "Like any organisation, (the council) can actively find opportunities to do things better, smarter and cheaper."
The Age believes the report finds the council:
■ Should reduce its number of directors from seven to five.
■ Needs to undergo a structural reorganisation.
■ Should reduce its salary bill by cutting the number of staff paid more than $100,000.
■ Is too reliant on consultants.
■ Should consider farming out some services, including child care, to the private sector.
The likelihood of a major restructure comes despite Mr Pitchford last year reorganising the council to try to make it function more effectively.
The Lord Mayor came under fire last night for allowing the report to be made confidential.
"John So should not allow this sort of thing to go on behind closed doors," former lord mayor Kevin Chamberlin said.
"This is a misuse of the confidentiality provisions of the Local Government Act. It is using the act to hide financial information from the public that will embarrass the council."
A second councillor told The Age the Ernst & Young consultants had "identified some very serious inadequacies within certain departments".
"It implies what a lot of us have been wanting: a shrinkage of directors," the councillor said.
Mr Pitchford last night defended having spent $300,000 on the report.
"This is not a public review," he said. "It is for internal purposes. The report will remain confidential until its findings and recommendations can be fully assessed."
Wednesday, April 25, 2007
Saving Money the Hard Way $250,000 in consultants fees to tell Melbourne's $400,000 CEO how the City could save money
Melbourne $400,000 dollars man spends $250,000.00 seeking advice on how to manage the City. (I thought that was why we were paying him such a hugh salary)
Clay Lucas of The Age exposes the extravagant waste of money consumed by Melbourne's highest paid public servant.
David Pitchford's contract was recently renewed by the City Council who whilst voting to extend his contract cut-back the term of his appointment which is normally for five years to just over two years.
Information and talk around the Town Hall is that David Pitsford is actively looking around for alternative employment but like that of his predecessor, Michael Malouf, he options are limited along with his management skills.
David Pitchford was also implicated in the Parking Fine affair that resulted in the State Ombudsman raiding the Council Offices in order to secure information on the cover-up of corruption in the Council's administration. The City Council rewarded David Pitchford for his efforts by paying him a substantial performance (sic) bonus.
Council CEO forks out to save
Clay Lucas The Age April 25, 2007
VICTORIA'S highest-paid council officer has spent more than a quarter of a million dollars on management consultants — to tell him how to save money.
Melbourne City Council chief executive David Pitchford, who last month was reappointed on a salary of up to $396,000 a year for almost three years, has overseen a $300,000 cost-cutting report by consultants Ernst & Young.
Councillors said yesterday that cutting spending on child care was likely to be an area of focus for the consultants, who will release their report next week. Retrenching some of the council's 1131 staff may also be considered in the wide-ranging cost review.
Councillors asked why so much had been spent on consultants and the time of the council's senior directors (at least six of whom are on $200,000-plus salaries) to do a review for which the chief executive should have taken responsibility.
"He does not like to take tough decisions," said Cr Peter Clarke. "He likes to have a report by someone else to fall back on."
Mr Pitchford, rehired unanimously by the city's nine councillors in March on a salary of $332,000 and an annual bonus of up to $66,000, wants Ernst & Young to find where savings can be made within council.
Their brief requires them to find savings in council spending, assess the "value for money" of council services and find ways of reducing labour costs.
The firm is also the council's internal auditor, a contract worth $580,000 over three years.
The management experts are the latest in a string hired by Mr Pitchford to instruct him since he was manoeuvred into his position by Lord Mayor John So in September 2003.
In 2004, the council paid $45,000 for consultants to tell staff they should work according to a new acronym: ERIC, which stood for excellence, respect, integrity and courage.
The following year, Mr Pitchford paid Royce Public Relations $52,000 to recommend the council hire a new PR boss; they got media manager Hayden Cock for $220,000 a year.
During his own rehiring process in March, Mr Pitchford oversaw spending of $4000 on human resources consultants Mercer.
They came back with a report recommending that his annual salary should rise as high as $492,000, but that $410,000 was an acceptable midpoint. The council settled on $332,000.
Mr Pitchford was on leave yesterday, but council finance spokesman Brian Shanahan defended Mr Pitchford's decision to commission the cost-cutting review.
"The common practice is to get independent reviews done to assist decision making," he said.
But councillors would resist reducing spending on child care, regardless of the report's findings. "There is no way we should pull back on our commitment to child care."
If Ernst & Young does recommend reducing spending on child care, it could be a case of life imitating art: in the 2001 ABC TV show Grass Roots, the fictional chief executive of Arcadia Waters Council called for a consultant's report to justify privatising child care.
Clay Lucas of The Age exposes the extravagant waste of money consumed by Melbourne's highest paid public servant.
David Pitchford's contract was recently renewed by the City Council who whilst voting to extend his contract cut-back the term of his appointment which is normally for five years to just over two years.
Information and talk around the Town Hall is that David Pitsford is actively looking around for alternative employment but like that of his predecessor, Michael Malouf, he options are limited along with his management skills.
David Pitchford was also implicated in the Parking Fine affair that resulted in the State Ombudsman raiding the Council Offices in order to secure information on the cover-up of corruption in the Council's administration. The City Council rewarded David Pitchford for his efforts by paying him a substantial performance (sic) bonus.
Council CEO forks out to save
Clay Lucas The Age April 25, 2007
VICTORIA'S highest-paid council officer has spent more than a quarter of a million dollars on management consultants — to tell him how to save money.
Melbourne City Council chief executive David Pitchford, who last month was reappointed on a salary of up to $396,000 a year for almost three years, has overseen a $300,000 cost-cutting report by consultants Ernst & Young.
Councillors said yesterday that cutting spending on child care was likely to be an area of focus for the consultants, who will release their report next week. Retrenching some of the council's 1131 staff may also be considered in the wide-ranging cost review.
Councillors asked why so much had been spent on consultants and the time of the council's senior directors (at least six of whom are on $200,000-plus salaries) to do a review for which the chief executive should have taken responsibility.
"He does not like to take tough decisions," said Cr Peter Clarke. "He likes to have a report by someone else to fall back on."
Mr Pitchford, rehired unanimously by the city's nine councillors in March on a salary of $332,000 and an annual bonus of up to $66,000, wants Ernst & Young to find where savings can be made within council.
Their brief requires them to find savings in council spending, assess the "value for money" of council services and find ways of reducing labour costs.
The firm is also the council's internal auditor, a contract worth $580,000 over three years.
The management experts are the latest in a string hired by Mr Pitchford to instruct him since he was manoeuvred into his position by Lord Mayor John So in September 2003.
In 2004, the council paid $45,000 for consultants to tell staff they should work according to a new acronym: ERIC, which stood for excellence, respect, integrity and courage.
The following year, Mr Pitchford paid Royce Public Relations $52,000 to recommend the council hire a new PR boss; they got media manager Hayden Cock for $220,000 a year.
During his own rehiring process in March, Mr Pitchford oversaw spending of $4000 on human resources consultants Mercer.
They came back with a report recommending that his annual salary should rise as high as $492,000, but that $410,000 was an acceptable midpoint. The council settled on $332,000.
Mr Pitchford was on leave yesterday, but council finance spokesman Brian Shanahan defended Mr Pitchford's decision to commission the cost-cutting review.
"The common practice is to get independent reviews done to assist decision making," he said.
But councillors would resist reducing spending on child care, regardless of the report's findings. "There is no way we should pull back on our commitment to child care."
If Ernst & Young does recommend reducing spending on child care, it could be a case of life imitating art: in the 2001 ABC TV show Grass Roots, the fictional chief executive of Arcadia Waters Council called for a consultant's report to justify privatising child care.
Friday, February 02, 2007
Training Snedden Billy's daughter gets Council to fund party politics
The Age today has reported that Liberal Party Councillor Fiona Sneden coaching lessons. State MP Louise Asher's former chief of Staff, Brett Barton, was paid $5,600 to advise Cr Sneden. Councillor Sneden's expenses were made known following publication of the the City of Melbourne's Councillor expense.
Missing from the councillor expense statements are costs related to Councillor's allowances and additional expenses that the council has not disclosed. Creative accounting and hidden costs are an art form when it comes to the corrupt Council administration.
It appears that the Council administration, having been caught out, has gone back and modified past expense statements to include expenses that were not previously reported. Under Council guidelines all expenses should be finalised "acquitted" within one month of the expenses occurring. review of the published statements indicate that the summary results published by the City Council are false and incorrect. (It looks as though the Council Goverance/Finance department can not add up correctly).
Questions are still outstanding with the Council administration filing to respond to previous correspondence highlighting a number of issues identified in relation to the accuracy of Council's expense and travel statements.
Last year the City Council was subject to an Ombudsman investigation that showed up similar problems in relational to the City Councils accounting and administration. A number of Council staff reigned and or were allocated alternative employment following the Ombudsman inquiry. Former City Council's Legal Officer Alison Lyon resigned and Linda Weatherson as been removed from her role as Council governance director. Ms Weatherson was implicated in the "Acquittal" scandal related to a previous cover-up of undisclosed Councillor expense in 2003.
Despite promises made by the City Councillors, Melbourne's City Council's "Car Fee City policy", costs related to John So and Gary Singers Council funded Limousines still do not appear in the Councillor expense statements.
It is estimated that the associated missing costs adds around $2,500,00 per year to the costs of servicing our City fathers and daughters. Including in this estimate is the costs of Internal catering and the Council's free open booze bar, the later which the Age reported as possibly contributing to Cr Sneden's $1,000 in fines and a loss of her driving licence for 4 years.
Responsible Governance - No Way.
City council paid Liberal staffer $5600 to mentor Cr Sneden
February 2, 2007
Source: The Age
MELBOURNE City Council has paid $5600 for Liberal Party blue-blood Fiona Sneden to receive mentoring from a Liberal Party strategist.
The payments, of around $220 a week over the past six months, were paid to Brett Barton, former chief of staff to Liberal MP Louise Asher.
Cr Sneden last night defended the use of ratepayers' money to pay for professional mentoring, saying it was about getting better results for the council, not personal improvement.
"Professional mentoring is all about me being better prepared to deal with issues that face my constituents," Cr Sneden said.
Cr Sneden said Mr Barton provided her with "leadership coaching", not counselling.
"The coaching means understanding and how to deal with aspects of council. It means basically anything that I need mentoring for.
"I have a part-time secretary but I felt that there was not the support or the mentoring that was required," said Cr Sneden, who argued that councillors at the City of Melbourne were not adequately supported.
"It is considered part-time employment and Town Hall does not provide any expert advice."
Her adviser Mr Barton has worked for several high-profile Liberals, most recently Liberal major projects spokesman David Davis, in the lead-up to last year's state election.
Mr Barton could not be reached for comment last night. But Louise Asher said Mr Barton was an experienced adviser with "a good political nose".
A list of councillor expenses released by Melbourne City Council this week also revealed that, in 2006, Cr Sneden claimed $35,072 in expenses — $20,000 more than any of eight other Melbourne councillors over the same period.
Former lord mayor Kevin Chamberlin said it was a disgrace that the city council was paying for its elected representatives to be trained to be more effective councillors.
"This is a direct result of the election system put in place by the Bracks Government that was deliberately designed to get elected poor quality councillors," Mr Chamberlin said. "The constituents have well and truly been paying for it for a long time, and not just in money."
Cr Sneden, 50, is the daughter of former federal Liberal leader Sir Billy Sneden.
Last year she pleaded guilty in the Melbourne Magistrates Court to drink driving.
She was fined $1000 and lost her licence for four years.
Missing from the councillor expense statements are costs related to Councillor's allowances and additional expenses that the council has not disclosed. Creative accounting and hidden costs are an art form when it comes to the corrupt Council administration.
It appears that the Council administration, having been caught out, has gone back and modified past expense statements to include expenses that were not previously reported. Under Council guidelines all expenses should be finalised "acquitted" within one month of the expenses occurring. review of the published statements indicate that the summary results published by the City Council are false and incorrect. (It looks as though the Council Goverance/Finance department can not add up correctly).
Questions are still outstanding with the Council administration filing to respond to previous correspondence highlighting a number of issues identified in relation to the accuracy of Council's expense and travel statements.
Last year the City Council was subject to an Ombudsman investigation that showed up similar problems in relational to the City Councils accounting and administration. A number of Council staff reigned and or were allocated alternative employment following the Ombudsman inquiry. Former City Council's Legal Officer Alison Lyon resigned and Linda Weatherson as been removed from her role as Council governance director. Ms Weatherson was implicated in the "Acquittal" scandal related to a previous cover-up of undisclosed Councillor expense in 2003.
Despite promises made by the City Councillors, Melbourne's City Council's "Car Fee City policy", costs related to John So and Gary Singers Council funded Limousines still do not appear in the Councillor expense statements.
It is estimated that the associated missing costs adds around $2,500,00 per year to the costs of servicing our City fathers and daughters. Including in this estimate is the costs of Internal catering and the Council's free open booze bar, the later which the Age reported as possibly contributing to Cr Sneden's $1,000 in fines and a loss of her driving licence for 4 years.
Responsible Governance - No Way.
The above graph shows consolidated reported Councillor's expenses for the mid term of the current Council Dec 2004 to Dec 2006 (Including the adjustments made to the 'dodgy' July to October 2006 statements)
City council paid Liberal staffer $5600 to mentor Cr Sneden
February 2, 2007
Source: The Age
MELBOURNE City Council has paid $5600 for Liberal Party blue-blood Fiona Sneden to receive mentoring from a Liberal Party strategist.
The payments, of around $220 a week over the past six months, were paid to Brett Barton, former chief of staff to Liberal MP Louise Asher.
Cr Sneden last night defended the use of ratepayers' money to pay for professional mentoring, saying it was about getting better results for the council, not personal improvement.
"Professional mentoring is all about me being better prepared to deal with issues that face my constituents," Cr Sneden said.
Cr Sneden said Mr Barton provided her with "leadership coaching", not counselling.
"The coaching means understanding and how to deal with aspects of council. It means basically anything that I need mentoring for.
"I have a part-time secretary but I felt that there was not the support or the mentoring that was required," said Cr Sneden, who argued that councillors at the City of Melbourne were not adequately supported.
"It is considered part-time employment and Town Hall does not provide any expert advice."
Her adviser Mr Barton has worked for several high-profile Liberals, most recently Liberal major projects spokesman David Davis, in the lead-up to last year's state election.
Mr Barton could not be reached for comment last night. But Louise Asher said Mr Barton was an experienced adviser with "a good political nose".
A list of councillor expenses released by Melbourne City Council this week also revealed that, in 2006, Cr Sneden claimed $35,072 in expenses — $20,000 more than any of eight other Melbourne councillors over the same period.
Former lord mayor Kevin Chamberlin said it was a disgrace that the city council was paying for its elected representatives to be trained to be more effective councillors.
"This is a direct result of the election system put in place by the Bracks Government that was deliberately designed to get elected poor quality councillors," Mr Chamberlin said. "The constituents have well and truly been paying for it for a long time, and not just in money."
Cr Sneden, 50, is the daughter of former federal Liberal leader Sir Billy Sneden.
Last year she pleaded guilty in the Melbourne Magistrates Court to drink driving.
She was fined $1000 and lost her licence for four years.
Thursday, January 11, 2007
Legionella plagues Melbourne City once again This times it's Melbourne City Council's show case eco-center 'Council House2' that's effected
Melbourne is once again inflicted with the potential outbreak of the deadly Legionella bacteria which has previously claimed lives and resulted in the closure of Melbourne's Aquarium.
Now it is the City Council's newest and latest pride and joy the Council House2 that is infected with the deadly bacteria.
Legionella found in Melbourne building
Source: The Age
The potentially deadly bacterium legionella has been found during an inspection of the cooling system of Melbourne City Council's new green Council House 2 building.
Low levels of the potentially deadly bacterium have been found in the cooling system less than six months after the $51 million building opened.
The council said that the legionella was a low risk strain that did not pose a risk to staff or the public.
The discovery did not reflect badly on the building's cutting edge reputation, Lord Mayor John So told Fairfax.
Staff were told of the test result last week.
The Human Services department has since inspected the building in Little Collins Street and declared no risk to staff working there.
Five-hundred-and-forty council staff work in the 10-storey building.
Now it is the City Council's newest and latest pride and joy the Council House2 that is infected with the deadly bacteria.
Legionella found in Melbourne building
Source: The Age
The potentially deadly bacterium legionella has been found during an inspection of the cooling system of Melbourne City Council's new green Council House 2 building.
Low levels of the potentially deadly bacterium have been found in the cooling system less than six months after the $51 million building opened.
The council said that the legionella was a low risk strain that did not pose a risk to staff or the public.
The discovery did not reflect badly on the building's cutting edge reputation, Lord Mayor John So told Fairfax.
Staff were told of the test result last week.
The Human Services department has since inspected the building in Little Collins Street and declared no risk to staff working there.
Five-hundred-and-forty council staff work in the 10-storey building.
Sunday, December 17, 2006
Welcome to the Danger zone December is the time when most radical changes in government policy occur removed from public scrutiny and review
December, the period in the lead-up to the Christmas holiday season and the time when governments schedule policy changes to limit or avoid public scrutiny or review.
The City of Melbourne is renowned for using this media free and period for making decisions that are likely to cause embarrassment or create a community backlash. It is a period where the community's eye and attention is focused on other interests and Local Council is the furthest thing from their mind. Its the time when governments make their worst decisions.
The City of Melbourne is no exception. Planning approval for the redevelopment of the Hilton in East Melbourne is on the agenda and so we are told is a major restructure within the town hall. Although we can not find any details of the report on the Council's agenda papers. The City Council is no longer open and transparent with many decisions being made under delegation, behind closed doors and removed from the public eye.
Were are told that the senior management is about to undergo a major reshuffle of responsibilities.
Linda Weatherson, City of Melbourne's Governance Director of Corportate Performance has been side line and removed from the Governance portfolio (Something that is seen as a bonus as Ms Weatherson, along with former City Council legal Officer Alison Lyon, presided over the worst administration in Melbourne City Council's recent history resulting in an Ombudsman inquiry that touched on the heart of corruption and poor governance within the City Council)
Terry Makings has become the most influential and overloaded Director taking on all City Council statutory obligations.
Hayden Cock has been given an expanded portfolio of corporate affairs having extended beyond the media propaganda role he was first appointed to.
Rob Adams continues to design his job and although he is on extended leave based in Italy funded by the City of Melbourne is responsible for urban design and major projects.
The fact still remains that the City Council is top heavy and in need of serious review and reform. The number for directors should be cut back. Directors remuneration should be removed from the enterprise bargaining process and tighter controls placed on remuneration packages and bonus payments.
Question why has this information been withheld from public view? The proposed changes require changes in the legal authorisation and delegations which are governed by statute.
The public have a right to know the full details of the proposed changes and the likely effect it will have on the delivery of services and costs of Council. The City Council administration must be open and transparent if we are to eliminate corruption from City Hall.
The City of Melbourne is renowned for using this media free and period for making decisions that are likely to cause embarrassment or create a community backlash. It is a period where the community's eye and attention is focused on other interests and Local Council is the furthest thing from their mind. Its the time when governments make their worst decisions.
The City of Melbourne is no exception. Planning approval for the redevelopment of the Hilton in East Melbourne is on the agenda and so we are told is a major restructure within the town hall. Although we can not find any details of the report on the Council's agenda papers. The City Council is no longer open and transparent with many decisions being made under delegation, behind closed doors and removed from the public eye.
Were are told that the senior management is about to undergo a major reshuffle of responsibilities.
Linda Weatherson, City of Melbourne's Governance Director of Corportate Performance has been side line and removed from the Governance portfolio (Something that is seen as a bonus as Ms Weatherson, along with former City Council legal Officer Alison Lyon, presided over the worst administration in Melbourne City Council's recent history resulting in an Ombudsman inquiry that touched on the heart of corruption and poor governance within the City Council)
Terry Makings has become the most influential and overloaded Director taking on all City Council statutory obligations.
Hayden Cock has been given an expanded portfolio of corporate affairs having extended beyond the media propaganda role he was first appointed to.
Rob Adams continues to design his job and although he is on extended leave based in Italy funded by the City of Melbourne is responsible for urban design and major projects.
The fact still remains that the City Council is top heavy and in need of serious review and reform. The number for directors should be cut back. Directors remuneration should be removed from the enterprise bargaining process and tighter controls placed on remuneration packages and bonus payments.
Question why has this information been withheld from public view? The proposed changes require changes in the legal authorisation and delegations which are governed by statute.
The public have a right to know the full details of the proposed changes and the likely effect it will have on the delivery of services and costs of Council. The City Council administration must be open and transparent if we are to eliminate corruption from City Hall.
Saturday, October 28, 2006
Melbourne City Council's Travel register Missing data and inconsistencies in the information provided raising concerns to the accuracy of Council's financial accounts
The Lord Mayor and Councillors
Auditors and members of the Council Audit Commitee
City of Melbourne
Dear Councillors and Auditors
In reviewing the recently published Travel Register we have identified a number of inconsistencies that raise ongoing questions pertaining to the quality of data and the accuracy of the report. (See below)
In comparing the information contained in the recent publication dated October 27, 2006 with data from the previously published register (July 2006) we have identified the following:
1. Data that was previously recorded but is missing from the current report
2. Data that is included in the current report but was excluded from the previous report
3. Data that has been changed since the previous report publication
The Victorian local Government Act and regulations require the City Council to maintain a register of Councillor and Council Staff Interstate and Overseas Travel.
Previously the Council register was maintained in the form of a physical book and as such any modifications or deletions were readily identified.
I wish to express my ongoing concern that the current Council Travel Register is akin to an electronic white board and that information is readily removed, excluded or modified with no apparent means of validation or verification as to the accuracy of the information provided. In the absence of a sequential fixed record id there is limited opportunity to audit the information recorded in the Council's register.
It is the duty of the elected Council to ensure that the administration and the requirements of legislative reporting are in fact true and correct and not misleading
In view of ongoing concern related to the costs associated with the City of Melbourne's Interstate an overseas travel I request that the Council provide further details and explanation as to the identified inconsistencies in the information published.
This raises further concern related to the administration, accuracy and correctness of the Council's financial accounts.
Should you require further information I can be contacted via return email
Yours faithfully
Anthony van der Craats
http://melbournecityCouncil.blogspot.com
Auditors and members of the Council Audit Commitee
City of Melbourne
Dear Councillors and Auditors
In reviewing the recently published Travel Register we have identified a number of inconsistencies that raise ongoing questions pertaining to the quality of data and the accuracy of the report. (See below)
In comparing the information contained in the recent publication dated October 27, 2006 with data from the previously published register (July 2006) we have identified the following:
1. Data that was previously recorded but is missing from the current report
2. Data that is included in the current report but was excluded from the previous report
3. Data that has been changed since the previous report publication
The Victorian local Government Act and regulations require the City Council to maintain a register of Councillor and Council Staff Interstate and Overseas Travel.
Previously the Council register was maintained in the form of a physical book and as such any modifications or deletions were readily identified.
I wish to express my ongoing concern that the current Council Travel Register is akin to an electronic white board and that information is readily removed, excluded or modified with no apparent means of validation or verification as to the accuracy of the information provided. In the absence of a sequential fixed record id there is limited opportunity to audit the information recorded in the Council's register.
It is the duty of the elected Council to ensure that the administration and the requirements of legislative reporting are in fact true and correct and not misleading
In view of ongoing concern related to the costs associated with the City of Melbourne's Interstate an overseas travel I request that the Council provide further details and explanation as to the identified inconsistencies in the information published.
This raises further concern related to the administration, accuracy and correctness of the Council's financial accounts.
Should you require further information I can be contacted via return email
Yours faithfully
Anthony van der Craats
http://melbournecityCouncil.blogspot.com
| Data previously reported and pubklished in July 2006 but now excluded from Travel register report published October 27, 2006. | ||||||
| Division | Name | Location | Cost | Date From | Date To | |
| ASSETS AND SERVICES DIVISION | Chris Adams | Rutherglen | $178.00 | 31-May-2006 | 1-Jun-2006 | |
| DESIGN & CULTURE DIVISION | Bob Rosen | Sydney | $2,227.90 | 6-Apr-2006 | 7-Apr-2006 | |
| MARKETING AND COMMUNICATIONS DIVISION | Paul Davies | Sydney | $419.11 | 13-Dec-2005 | 13-Dec-2005 | |
| MARKETING AND COMMUNICATIONS DIVISION | Richard Jeziorny | Sydney | $419.11 | 13-Dec-2005 | 13-Dec-2005 | |
| Included in new dataset but not reported in the previous quarter published July 2006 | ||||||
| Divison | Name | Location | Cost | Date From | Date To | |
| ASSETS AND SERVICES DIVISION | Elizabeth Brown | Brisbane | $1,948.00 | 24-Sep-2005 | 3-Oct-2005 | |
| ASSETS AND SERVICES DIVISION | Vicki Main | Brisbane | $1,298.97 | 27-Sep-2005 | 2-Oct-2005 | |
| ASSETS AND SERVICES DIVISION | Colleen Lazenby | Adelaide, Alice Springs | $1,664.17 | 1-Oct-2005 | 9-Oct-2005 | |
| ASSETS AND SERVICES DIVISION | Marianne Glen | Adelaide | $1,276.31 | 5-Mar-2006 | 13-Mar-2006 | |
| CORPORATE PERFORMANCE DIVISION | Cecilia | Canberra | $2,735.48 | 20-Feb-2006 | 22-Feb-2006 | |
| DESIGN & CULTURE DIVISION | Matthew Plumridge | Hobart | $331.64 | 7-Nov-2005 | 8-Nov-2005 | |
| DESIGN & CULTURE DIVISION | Matthew Plumridge | Canberra | $823.06 | 10-Nov-2005 | 11-Nov-2005 | |
| DESIGN & CULTURE DIVISION | Rob Adams | Sydney | $454.11 | 17-Nov-2005 | 17-Nov-2005 | |
| DESIGN & CULTURE DIVISION | Rob Adams | Adelaide | $337.47 | 1-Dec-2005 | 1-Dec-2005 | |
| DESIGN & CULTURE DIVISION | Andrea Kleist | Adelaide | $606.09 | 4-Mar-2006 | 7-Mar-2006 | |
| DESIGN & CULTURE DIVISION | Bob Rosen | Sydney | $2,227.90 | 5-Apr-2006 | 9-Apr-2006 | |
| MARKETING AND COMMUNICATIONS DIVISION | Karen Gilbert | Brisbane | $290.53 | 23-Feb-2006 | 25-Feb-2006 | |
| SUSTAINABILITY & INNOVATION DIVISION | Geoff Lawler | Canberra | $0.00 | 25-May-2006 | 26-May-2006 | |
| Data that has changed since the previous report published in July 2006 | ||||||
| Division | Name | Location | Previous Reported Cost | Date From | Date To | NewCost |
| COUNCIL | Brian Shanahan | Sydney | $1,504.64 | 7-Jun-2006 | 9-Jun-2006 | $1,504.61 |
| ASSETS AND SERVICES DIVISION | Dale Stewart | Tasmania | $1,135.79 | 9-Oct-2005 | 13-Oct-2005 | $1,551.24 |
| ASSETS AND SERVICES DIVISION | Colleen Lazenby | Adelaide | $510.00 | 23-May-2006 | 24-May-2006 | $507.84 |
| FINANCE DIVISION | Susan Kempson | Gold Coast | $1,680.98 | 1-Nov-2005 | 6-Nov-2005 | $1,545.49 |
Update Sunday 29, 2006
From: Ng Catherine
Sent: Sunday, 29 October 2006 11:34 AM
To: Pitchford DavidSubject:
FW: Melbourne City Council's Travel register Missing data and inconsistencies in the information provided raising concerns to the accuracy of Council's financial accounts
Hi David
Could you please prepare a briefing note for the Council on your investigation on this matter and addressing the issues raised in this email.
Thanks.
Best regards
Catheirne
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)