Lei Parker - 13 February 2018
Lei Parker made the below comments at the Ordinary Council Meeting 13 February 2018.
I am here today to request an explanation from Council and Councillors of a very concerning anomaly that has been discovered in the Council meeting agenda and minutes of April 26th, 2016.
Councillors have been provided a copy of this presentation to ensure they can see exact extracts of the minutes and agenda as supporting evidence.
The meeting of that day listed a confidential Property Matter CON16/008. 
The description of CON16/008 does not “sufficiently identify the item in order to inform the public that that item will be dealt with at the meeting”. (as per the OLG’s letter below)
As evidenced by the agenda of the day and by the Live Streaming archive CON16/008 was the last item on the agenda, where Council moved into Confidential to return soon after, announcing their determination and also revealing that it was a Property Matter relating to an easement on George Bass Drive.
Being the last item on the agenda the live streaming archive, not surprisingly records the Council meeting was then closed.
It has now been discovered that while the published minutes recorded CON16/008 another Confidential matter was dealt with during confidentials. The minutes record CON16/009.
Also of concern is CON16/008 which records in the minutes that the property matter was in regards to George Bass Drive there is NO detail provided for CON16/009 in the minutes other than it was a Property Matter with a file number of E12.6442 as a reference.
Councillor review of the agenda and live streaming will confirm there was NO mention at all of Confidential Item CON16/009, including any reference of it being raised as Urgent Business.
By Council’s own Code of Meeting Practice:
I seek an explanation today from Council as to why the minutes of April 26th 2016 are NOT a full and accurate record of the proceedings of that day. By whose authority was item CON16/009 added to the minutes?
It was also noted that the minutes of April 26th, 2016 were adopted at the following Council meeting on May 10th, 2016. By Council’s Code of Meeting Practice it is required that the Chair then sign the minutes, as prepared by the General Manager, as being a true record of that meeting.
Did the Mayor of the day, Lindsay Brown sign the minutes of April 26th 2016 as being true and correct knowing that they were not; having participated in voting on CON16/009 during Confidentials?
Of further concern is to discover that the file reference given for the CON16/009 Property Matter is E12.6442, the reference number Eurobodalla Council uses on matters relating to the Mackay Park precinct redevelopment.
Councillors note: As you can see in the extract below of the 29th August 2017 agenda clearly associates the project and the file number.
The date of the Council meeting of CON16/009 was April 26th 2016, three days before Council exchanged contracts on the sale of the Batemans Bay Bowling Club land, which is part of the Mackay Park precinct.
By his own admission, in a Council Media Release dated April 29th, 2016 titled "Council buys Batemans Bay Bowling Club site" then mayor Brown stated:
It now appears that the "Confidential Meeting" referred to by then-mayor Lindsay Brown was the Council meeting where Property Matter CON16/009 was dealt with, in confidential, behind closed doors, as recorded in the minutes.
Can Council please offer the community an explanation as to how CON16/009 came to be minuted yet was NOT part of the Council meeting, as evidenced by the agenda and by the Live Streaming archive?
*************************************************************
Of continuing concern is the fact that this is not the first time we have had to discuss the way Eurobodalla Council deals with Confidential Matters
On the 13th of July 2017 the Office of Local Government wrote to the General Manager following a complaint that the Agenda of June 13th, 2017 did not sufficiently identify two Confidential Matters pertaining to the General Managers contract; listing them only as Personal Matters. 
In that letter Council were reminded of Section 9 (2A) of the Local Government Act 1993 of the importance of “sufficiently identify an item in order to inform the public that that item will be dealt with at the meeting”.
and given an official yet polite slap on the hand with the advice that: 
In a follow up email on July 24th 2017 Council was once again clearly advised by the Office of Local Government of the requirements of the Act which was quite pointed that the purpose of Section 10A “does not allow councils to make secret decisions."
And of equal importance and specific guidance the OLG wrote " ... in the circumstances where the council has already adopted the minutes of the meeting of 13 June 2017, any amendments to the minutes will need to be made by way of a council resolution”
That advice from the Office of Local Government has still not been acted on even though the minutes in question have since been amended.
Of interest is the Mayoral Minute of 25/07/2017 where Liz Innes stated “Council’s practice, over many years, has been to prepare two separate set of minutes to reflect open session of Council and closed session of Council.”
“Advice from the Office of Local Government (OLG), received Monday 24 July 2017, indicates that this long standing practice is incorrect and the full resolution adopted by the Council in the closed part of the Council's meeting must be recorded in the open minutes of that meeting. Notwithstanding it has been a practice in many local councils.”“As a result, I recommend that we make all confidential minutes from this council term public, noting that we redact the names and addresses from the minutes to protect confidentiality.”
How does the Mayor qualify her statement that breaches of statutory requirements "has been a practice in many local councils". Please name these “many local councils” Madam Mayor that you appear to be aware of.
The Mayoral Minute also advised that Council had decided to draw a line in the sand and only correct any breaches of Confidential Matters from the start date of the current Council being September 2016
With the anomaly surrounding CON16/009 of April 2016, and the way it was dealt with and recorded, it is more than apparent that Council has been breaching Section 9 (2A) of the Local Government Act for some time.
An explanation to the community, as an URGENT Matter would be appreciated.
Council's reply
A report on the purchase of the Batemans Bay Bowling Club was tabled as a confidential Mayoral report at the Ordinary Council Meeting of 26 April 2016. This is consistent with Clause 5.7 of Council’s Code of Meeting Practice and Local Government Regulation 243.
This report was discussed and deemed to be confidential as it dealt with the purchase of the Bowling Club, including the potential price. This report was discussed and resolved in confidential. Consistent with the practice of the time, it was recorded to the public in the open minute CON16/009 listed in the Ordinary Council minutes of 26 April 2016. As you have noted the purchase of the Batemans Bay Bowling Club was communicated via a media release to the whole community three days after the Council meeting.
It has been brought to our attention that the webcast of the Ordinary Council Meeting of 26 April 2016 shows that when Council came back into open session, the resolution of a second confidential report CON16/008 (in relation to an easement over a property on George Bass Drive) was read in summary form as was the current practice, but the resolution of CON16/009 was not read out. This was an administrative oversight. As this meeting was almost two years ago, it is unclear why the resolution was not read out in summary form as was the usual practice at the time, but it was most likely due to the fact that it was a confidential Mayoral Minute
tabled at the meeting and not listed on the agenda.
In relation to your concerns with reporting of issues in the public minutes, it is important to note that advice from the Office of Local Government was received on 24 July 2017 and a Council resolution was passed at its meeting on 25 July 2017 regarding the confidential minutes to be made public for this current Council term. The resolution associated with CON16/009 was in fact made by the former Council term and is not subject to the resolution of 25 July 2017.