‘Conflict’ erupts at Bass Coast Shire over email ban

CR LES Larke’s emails have been blacklisted by Bass Coast Mayor, Cr Michael Whelan.

The first sign of trouble came last Wednesday, November 16 when Cr Larke declared a ‘Conflict of Interest’ in the Election of the Mayor and left the council chamber.

After being contacted by the ‘Sentinel-Times’, Cr Larke explained why:

“It’s a delicate one. I’ve been told that I can’t send emails to the Mayor, Cr Whelan, that they’ll be redirected to a staff member, who’ll decide if they’re appropriate or not to be forwarded on to the Mayor,” said Cr Larke.

“And any emails, where I copy in all councillors, will also be forwarded on to a staff member, who will decide if they can be sent on.

“It affects the way I can operate as a councillor, as a representative of the community,” he said.

“Initially there was no explanation and then I was told by the CEO that she had responsibility for workplace occupational health and safety and those were the grounds for not forwarding on my emails to Michael.

“At no stage have the emails I’ve sent to the Mayor been anything other than respectful and cordial, certainly no bullying or abuse.

“That’s where it stands, with no process, no right of reply, and no timeline. That’s what I’ve got a problem with,” said Cr Larke this week.

“So, when the vote for the mayor came up on Wednesday, I thought ‘how can I participate in that’ when it’s still going on. I felt I had a clear conflict of interest under Section 127 of the Local Government Act 2020.”

Cr Whelan responded this week, claiming it wasn’t the first time a mayor had had to divert Cr Larke’s emails.

“He’s got form on this,” said Cr Whelan.

Cr Larke is also not the only person in the Bass Coast Shire to have his emails blocked, but he is the only councillor.

Under the shire’s controversial ‘Unreasonable Conduct by Customers Policy’, up to six Bass Coast Shire residents and ratepayers have been warned off; among them are the president of the Bass Coast Ratepayers and Residents Association, Kevin Griffin, and the former secretary of the Wonthaggi RSL Sub-branch, Rod Gallagher, who had an exchange of emails with shire CEO Ali Wastie, a few years ago, about the choice of a student rather than a councillor to lay a wreath on Remembrance Day 2020.

Mr Gallagher said the shire had initially agreed the Young Citizen of the Year would lay the wreath, on behalf of the council, which was involved in the election process at the time, with the choice endorsed by several community groups, as the young person had proposed to read out the names of local lodge members who had died in either world war, including both her grandfather and great uncle who had died as prisoners of war.

“Late on Tuesday, the day before Remembrance Day, the council claimed they tried to contact me about a change. They advised that the Young Person of the Year would still attend on Wednesday (November 11, 2020) but since the council election results had been gazetted earlier than expected, they wanted one of the new councillors to lay the wreath on behalf of the shire,” Mr Gallagher said.

The late change posed all sorts of problems for the RSL, first and foremost the disappointment of having to tell the young lady her services were no longer required, but also, the order of service had already been endorsed, as RSL protocol requires, by RSL Victoria.

Mr Gallagher admits the resulting emails to the CEO were “candid”, even “strongly worded” but at no stage could they be considered abusive.

“On the Remembrance Day last year, I asked the Councillor attending the Inverloch service to check the status of this ban. Two weeks later I received email advice that the ban was considered by an independent person and had been extended for another 12 months,” Mr Gallagher said.

The dispute is one of the reasons why he’s no longer the RSL Sub-branch Secretary, although he was drafted in, at short notice, as a Vietnam Veteran, to take charge of this year’s Remembrance Day event.

Kevin Griffin has also attempted to challenge his email ban.

He believes the shire simply got sick of receiving his emails, raising legitimate questions on behalf of his members, not because of any allegations of bullying or abuse.

At the time the council introduced the Unreasonable Conduct by Customers Policy last year, it was claimed that one customer had sent more than 400 emails, in little over a year, to councillors and council.

“In a very small number of cases, some customers behave in ways that are inappropriate and unacceptable, despite our best efforts to help them,” the shire said when introducing the policy in March 2021.

“They are aggressive and/or verbally abusive towards our people. They threaten harm and violence, bombard our offices with unnecessary and excessive phone calls and emails, make inappropriate demands on our time and our resources and refuse to accept our decisions and recommendations in relation to their complaints.

“They may also use social media platforms to damage Council’s reputation and brand. When customers behave in these ways, we consider their conduct to be unreasonable.”

Under the policy, the council even has the option of completely terminating a customer’s access to council.

Neither Mr Griffin nor Mr Gallagher, and now Cr Larke, have been offered a satisfactory explanation.

“I wasn’t aware of Cr Larke’s ban, but it’s clearly a major overreach by the mayor and the shire’s administration.”

While the two local ratepayers have been blacklisted under the new Unreasonable Conduct by Customers Policy, of May 2021, Cr Larke's issues don’t appear to fall under the Councillor Code of Conduct 2021 policy.

“I couldn’t say for sure what brought it on expect that I was planning to move a ‘Notice of Motion’ at the September (2022) meeting, querying the Mayor’s role in arranging a candidates’ forum of which the sitting Member, Jordan Crugnale, was also critical.”

At the time, Ms Crugnale labelled the move by Cr Whelan, to arrange an “invite only” candidates’ event, on behalf of the council, as “inappropriate and bizarre”.

She said she would not be attending the October 12 event, to be held at the Silverwater Resort, San Remo, because it was “entirely inappropriate for local government to be hosting and/or facilitating a state election candidate meet and greet”.

The event was ultimately cancelled.

Cr Larke proposed to move the following motion at the September 2022 council meeting:

“That the Mayor show cause why the Mayor should not stand down from the Mayoral position, given the ‘Community Leaders and Candidates Breakfast’ matter, and in my view, the likelihood that Council’s reputation and advocacy strategy has been significantly undermined in the lead up to the Victorian State election.”

Cr Larke said he gave the Mayor the opportunity to explain his actions, in trying to organise the event without consulting fellow councillors, however while no explanation was forthcoming, Cr Larke withdrew the motion.

“I drew up the Notice of Motion on September 9, gave Michael the opportunity to reply, then withdrew the motion and Michael requested that the CEO block my emails,” said Cr Larke.

“I can’t say if that was the driver, but I received advice from Mr Mack (Wayne Mack, the shire’s General Manager Business Transformation) that any email sent by me to Cr Whelan would be redirected to a staff member’s mailbox.

“It was implemented by the CEO without investigation, explanation or right of reply and that’s where it stands, with no timeline.”

Cr Larke has so far ruled out taking the matter to the Local Government Inspectorate for investigation but, as last Wednesday’s Conflict of Interest action indicates, it leaves a cloud hanging over the council and also, overshadows Cr Whelan’s reappointment for a second term as mayor.

The mayor has acknowledged to the ‘Sentinel-Times’ this week that he was annoyed by Cr Larke’s use of the Notice of Motion opportunity.

“He’s using it as a tactic to attack me as mayor which is not what it’s for. It’s a distraction and should be treated as such.”

Cr Whelan said matters of substance from Cr Larke would still come back to him for action as required.