It's better to be thought a fool...

The lamentable state of our Shire Council is reflected by a situation where someone like Tony Pratico could be Shire President.

Suffice to say he is not cut out for the job, and every time he opens his mouth it is proven.

In today’s Manjimup-Bridgetown Times he attempts to  justify another big rate increase of 5.9 per cent, way above the rate of inflation.  He starts by linking it to cuts in Royalties for Regions, which is a furphy. Those grants have nothing to do with recurrent expenditure and normal Council projects.

Mr Pratico then proves that he does not understand the basic concept of sustainability.  He says: “Councils which have unsustainable rate rises – and I mean very low – get into all sorts of bother and then have to have rate increases of 25 per cent.”

Yoo-Hoo! Mr Pratico?  Something which is sustainable is something which theoretically can go on forever. Rate increases above the rate of inflation are obviously unsustainable.  I’ll explain why…  If you keep charging people more and more every year (in real terms) eventually an ever-increasing proportion of people will be unable to pay. They would be forced to leave and live elsewhere. Think about it.

On the other hand, a rate increase equal or below the rate of inflation is sustainable. To achieve this simply means that ways must be found to spend less. Councillors and staff would have to roll up their sleeves and undertake the task of “living within their means”, by finding ways to do things more efficiently, cutting waste and if necessary cutting back on staff and services which can no longer be considered essential.

But this is too hard. Our lazy Council takes the easy way out every year and simply grabs more money from ratepayers and keeps hiring staff.  The same article in today’s paper says the Shire has hired a new engineering technical officer, another customer-services officer and a community landcare officer (but grants will “help” to pay for this one). And see below how Mr Pratico and the other councillors recently voted in favour of giving themselves big increases on the generous allowances they receive for going to meetings.

What is really unsustainable is to keep doing the same things the same way every year.

What is really unbearable is to have Mr Pratico trotting out pathetic, patronising excuses using big words he doesn't understand.

Spending our money on themselves

The post below and others like it have little impact on our councillors and staff.

The July Council meeting lasted one hour. Each of the councillors was paid $465 for this. Afterwards they adjourned for a ratepayer-funded meal and alcoholic drinks. Every councillor voted in favour of every suggestion by the Council officers. No ideas were put forward by any councillor. Most of the meeting was spent discussing who would go to this year's Local Government Association Annual Meeting in Perth. Six councillors and the CEO will go, at a cost to us ratepayers of $14,000 in meeting fees, accommodation, travel and meals.

More pay for just turning up

It has been pointed out here that our elected councillors don’t do much these days.  They meet twice a month, and often the meetings are concluded in less than an hour.  This is because the councillors themselves seldom put forward any proposals – some never do – but simply rubber-stamp the decisions of Council staff.

Nevertheless they have shamelessly decided to grant themselves a pay rise.

Last month, they voted unanimously that councillor pay should go up a hefty 17.8 per cent to $8,250 a year, with another $2000 to cover the cost of having a computer at home.  That works out to around $465 for each of these meetings where most of them rarely utter a word (just raise their hand up to vote yes to every officer recommendation).

The President Tony Pratico voted in favour of giving himself a whopping 29.6 per cent pay rise to $18,150 a year, plus the $2000 allowance. That works out to $915 per meeting. He also votes yes to every officer recommendation, but has to chair the meetings and read things.

A perpetual state of status quo

I’ve finally figured out why we are stuck in a rut with this moribund, uninspired and uninspiring Council.  It has become a self-perpetuating machine.

Here’s how it works:

Our charismatic CEO hires lots of staff and treats them well. He also looks after the councillors, providing them with resolutions to vote on and projects to approve which they can then call achievements. He puts on nice food and alcoholic drinks after every meeting and regularly takes them and their spouses out to dinner with his senior staff and their spouses (all on the ratepayers purse). Everyone is happy.

Comes the time for an election or by-election. Friends, relatives and associates of the councillors and the Council staff are encouraged to run. When it comes to voting, most of the community are apathetic because they have been told in the Council newsletter and the compliant local media that everything is hunky-dory. But there is one group of highly-motivated voters --  council staff, councillors and their friends and relatives, who are naturally keen to maintain the status quo.  Because the CEO has hired so many staff, these insiders and their circles of friends and family make up a big enough section of the population in this small community to ensure, because they will always vote, that one of their own is elected.

In the recent election, we saw the outgoing councillor Brian Moore replaced by his wife Joanne. How cosy!  Another candidate was the husband of a former councillor. One of the current councillors is the father of a Shire staff member.

CEO Tim Clynch has just been given another pay rise, but he continues to hire staff to help carry out the duties he is supposed to perform. The Shire now has more than 50 staff members, so many that Mr Clynch has recently decided he needed to hire a part-time Human Resources Officer. So until the growth of the population here outstrips the growth in Shire staff numbers, or until we amalgamate with another Shire, it seems nothing will change.

By-election race explained

What passes for news media in this part of the world has done a predictably mediocre job of covering the Council by-election, failing to identify a single issue and falling back on standard “candidate profiles”.

So let me deconstruct some of the tired platitudes served up by the candidates in last week’s Manjimup-Bridgetown Times.

Joanne Moore.  Shamelessly standing to take over her husband Brian’s seat, despite the fact that if elected will have the same financial conflict of interest which he cited as his reason for resigning. (See post titled ‘From one conflict to another’ below)

“Clearly the time has come for maintenance of what we have in roads, rather than the sealing of existing roads.”   Meaning: The road to my house is sealed, so bugger everyone else – especially Southwell!

“I’m a down-to-earth person who is not afraid to speak my mind.”  Meaning: Although I’ve been to several community meetings and never uttered a word, I did poke my tongue out at someone once, which I thought spoke volumes.

Peter Quinby.  Used to put his name to poisonous letters to the paper penned by his councillor wife. They’ve heard councillor pay is going up and they miss the free dinners, so its his turn to warm a seat.’

“It is unrealistic to expect rates to increase in relation to the CPI. Equally, unless the Shire delivers a constant package of works and services, rates are likely to increase as new services are supplied. I would pay particular attention to the budget to ensure the Shire gives value for money.”  Meaning: no-one knows.

“I believe local government should support development in the community largely by getting out of the way.”   Meaning:  Let’s continue to do nothing, and just enjoy the free drinks and meals.

Marta Sandberg.  Famous for having her deceased husband cryogenically frozen.

“Services are a lot like infrastructure. We have to balance what we want with what we are willing to pay.  All in all, I think Bridgetown has found a pretty good compromise.”   Meaning:  I have no new ideas on the way forward, but I’m bored and getting on Council might be interesting.

John Nicholas.  This is his third try at getting on Council. If he misses out this time will go down as the Nathan Buckley of Bridgetown politics – the best candidate never to win a seat.  (Buckley best AFL player who never played in Premiership).

“ I am open to the notion of alternative management of shire services to permit shire funds to be focused on essential  services.”   Meaning:  Money can be saved by contracting out the work of the Council works crew and reducing the number of  full time employees.

Gerry Georgatos & Jenny Kaeshagan.  Not sure of the wisdom of partners running together.  They are both great candidates, but standing together may cost them votes.  They have each put forward strong and interesting cases for a fresh approach to managing Council affairs and community issues.

Along with John Nicholas, they are the stand-out candidates, offering the best chance for much-needed reform of this moribund Council.

The CEO cannot be questioned, apparently...

The irony didn’t hit me until later…

I went along to the May Council meeting last Thursday to ask a couple of questions.  I was going ask the CEO why he had been selectively applying the convention, enshrined in Council Policy, to give a Certificate of Appreciation and councillor nameplate to outgoing councillors.

You see, this little tribute to departing councillors was religiously followed until Cr William Moyes and myself lost our seats at the elections 18-months ago.  No tributes, no nameplate presentation, no invitation to drinks for us. In fact, we heard there were high-fives exchanged at the Council offices upon announcement of the poll results. 

So I asked CEO Tim Clynch if he believed Council Policies should be adhered to without favouritism or personal prejudice.

Before Mr Clynch could speak, President Tony Pratico, intervened and declared my question was out of order. Questions could not be asked of the CEO, he said.  In my time on Council and attending Council meetings, I have heard dozens of questions put to the CEO during question time and answered by him.

At the previous Council meeting in April, five questions were asked, 3 directed to the CEO.  At the March meeting there were 22 questions asked, 14 answered by the CEO, 6 by the President and two answered by both of them.

But I realised later, my question did get answered – by Mr Pratico. Yes, this Council does selectively apply its policies according to favouritism and personal prejudice. If you are someone like me who dares to question and (heaven forbid) criticise the current regime, the rules are changed, you lose your rights and are shunned.

 

 From: Bridgetown-Greenbushes Shire  'Council Values'

• Acceptance of community diversity
• Openness and accountability
• Equity and fairness for all