This is serious

IT would be an untenable situation if a Shire CEO had given councillors incorrect information causing them to breach proper procedures, then when called to account publicly he misled them (and the community) by falsely stating he had official advice that the information he had given was correct.

I’m not sure if this has happened, but consider the following;

-   -- At the April Council meeting, CEO Tim Clynch asked councillors to vote for a resolution to “de-construct” (demolish) historic Zinnekers House in Hampton Road. This motion contradicts a previous resolution by Council, passed in December 2010 that the house in question should be “retained”. Yet in written background information given to councillors, the CEO said there was no need to rescind the previous motion (which is required if a Council is going to reverse an existing position). 

-      --   At the July Council Meeting, Mr Clynch told Council and the gallery: “ Advice received from the Department of Local Government was that the decision by Council a few years earlier had been acted upon therefore it did not require a rescission.”

-       - -   Asked recently by a newspaper to provide a copy of the Advice he received, the CEO has responded that it was verbal advice during a telephone conversation.

-        -- Asked to identify the person in the Department from whom he received the Advice, the CEO has refused. 

So we (and the councillors) are now unable to verify whether the CEO did in fact receive Advice on the matter from the Department, as he stated.  This, in an organisation which claims to hold ‘open and accountable’ as one of its key values.

The CEO must verify that he did receive formal Advice and that Advice was as he stated, or he must resign.