Shellharbour City Council should be sacked, a special government inquiry was told yesterday.
There was sufficient evidence to replace all councillors with an administrator for the next four years, counsel assisting the commission Daniel Meltz said.
Mr Meltz also told general manager Brian Weir that he was "the only potentially affected member of staff".
In his closing submission, Mr Meltz outlined a number of reasons for sacking the council:
- The role the dominant ALP caucus played in decision-making. He argued that councillors were not fulfilling their responsibilities to act in the public's best interest when they voted along party lines.
- Mr Weir had not had the statutory annual performance reviews during the past term because he and the mayor considered it inappropriate while some councillors were under investigation for alleged leaks to a website.
- Staff were unhappy about their relationships with councillors, some complaining of intimidatory tactics and being unable to involve councillors in drafting crucial policy because of continued leaks.
- Councillors often did not follow the advice of staff on tenders and development applications such as the waste contract and a prohibited equestrian centre proposal for sensitive land at Dunmore.
- Widespread complaints of council meetings descending into chaos, made worse by "juvenile behaviour" from some residents and Mayor David Hamilton's temper and lack of control.
Mr Meltz said Commissioner Richard Colley had three options: take no action; sack the councillors but allow the September local government elections to go ahead; or dismiss the council and appoint an administrator until the next election in 2012.
He said that he supported the final option.
"My submission is that there is sufficient basis to make such a recommendation in accordance of your terms of reference," he said.
Some councillors had submitted in evidence that only certain councillors deserved to be sacked.
Mr Meltz said this option would have been available if they had taken action earlier to expel or censure individuals, but now it was all or nothing.
His summary worked through a wide-ranging list of complaints about the council.
He said that when the council's expensive court action against two independent councillors accused of leaking information continued for a number of years the department had withdrawn its support, but councillors were split in their interpretation of this move.
The council had disbanded its code of conduct committee for months, creating a backlog of more than 25 unresolved complaints.
Significant costs had been incurred by three consultants who ran the committee.
Mr Meltz said eight months after the eight ALP and five independent councillors were elected in 2004, Mayor David Hamilton had written to them highlighting code of conduct issues.
He had included the general manager's October 2004 memo that referred to the "deteriorating situation over the last six months".
When the Department of Local Government reviewed the council in 2005, it found a raft of problems and issued recommendations.
The council had failed to use the recommendations.
Mr Meltz said Mr Weir had updated the department throughout the past four years on the council's progress, or lack of progress, to clean itself up.
His last letter, three weeks before the minister announced the inquiry in April, stressed the situation had substantially deteriorated to the point he was unable to fulfil his duties.
In October the mayor and councillors Barry Bird, Helen Gillett and Christine Jeffreys had all penned letters to the department.
Mr Meltz said Local Government Minister Paul Lynch had sent former minister Ernie Page to read the riot act to councillors in late 2007, warning their sacking was imminent if there were not drastic changes.
Mr Weir's final letter on March 18 had told the Government there had been no improvement since Mr Page's visit.
Email a friend
Favourites
Del.icio.us
Facebook
Digg
StumbleUpon
MySpace
Reddit
Newsvine
LinkedIn
Kwoff
Twitter