News 
 Local News 
 News 
 Politics 
 Councillor Burns' bid to sack council 

Councillor Burns' bid to sack council

25 May, 2009 04:53 PM
NEWLY re-elected Division 4 councillor John Burns has had a busy first week - bringing the actions of Redland City Council to the Crime and Misconduct Commission (CMC), the Department of Local Government and an internal council investigation.

Not one full day into the job on Monday, he delivered a letter to Local Government Minister Desley Boyle calling for the sacking of the whole council, including himself, over what he claims is preferential treatment given to a councillor over her North Stradbroke Island development application.

Mayor Melva Hobson has rejected Cr Burns' claim, saying any DA related to a councillor was subject to even higher scrutiny.

Cr Burns also triggered an internal investigation by council chief executive Gary Stevenson into comments attributed to Deputy Mayor Toni Bowler in The Courier-Mail last month.

The investigation has since been referred to the CMC and then returned to council's chief executive's jurisdiction.

Cr Burns’ complaints all stem from a decision made by a majority of councillors last month to overturn an officer’s recommendations and grant an extension on fellow councillor Toni Bowler’s application for a North Stradbroke Island apartments development.

The development application was originally lodged nearly nine years ago, and the officer’s report stated the plans no longer complied with changed zoning in the area.

But Councillors Mayor Melva Hobson, Wendy Boglary (Div 1), Debra Henry (Div 3), Barbara Townsend (Div 5), Murray Elliott (Div 7) and Helen Murray (Div 10) rejected the officers’ recommendation.

Cr Kathy Reimers (Div 8) and Cr Craig Ogilvie (Div 2) missed the vote, Cr Bowler declared her interest and left the meeting and Cr Karen Williams (Div 9) voted against it.

Cr Williams has since lodged a complaint to Mr Stevenson, separate to Cr Burns, alleging the councillors failed to declare conversations with Cr Bowler about the DA, which she claims to have overheard.

Cr Burns instead complained to Mr Stevenson that Cr Bowler had cast doubt on the integrity of council officers by describing their report as “questionable” in The Courier-Mail, and complained to Ms Boyle of “suspect voting patterns”.

“I explained to the minister that on my estimates, Cr Bowler stood to save between $70,000-$85,000 in redrawn plans, altered designs and compliance with the new bushfire overlay,” Cr Burns said.

“I called on the mayor to show me one single other case where an extension was granted despite going against a changed planning scheme, where the DA was eight years old and where several extensions had already been granted, and she hasn’t.”

The councillors voting against the recommendation maintain their decision was based on a “commonsense” approach to the situation, with the inconsistencies in the plan only minor and that development stalled due to further conditions placed on the plans by the council in previous years.

Cr Boglary said previous mayor Don Seccombe and Cr Williams had overturned an officer’s recommendation in 2007 regarding a Wellington Point DA, not only granting a four year extension, well beyond the 12 months usually granted, but also despite changes in local zoning.

“This was the same situation – [only] a few minor issues and they used commonsense and overturned the officer’s recommendation to grant the extension,” Cr Boglary said.

Cr Ogilvie said Cr Burns’s criticism was “the pot calling the kettle black” and part of a “misinformation campaign [designed] to return the council to the pro-developer glory days”.

Cr Burns passed his letter to the minister via his predecessor, former Division 4 councillor and now Redlands MP Peter Dowling, who said he would have had questions about the approval if still a councillor, but was only facilitating the correspondence and not taking an active role in the complaint.

Ms Boyle said the letter had been received and a response would be forthcoming pending further investigations.

“I understand the matter was referred to the CMC by the council’s chief executive and that the CMC subsequently referred the matter back to the council to investigate in the first instance,” Ms Boyle said.

“The chief executive of the council has advised the Department of Local Government that the investigation is under way.

“It would be inappropriate of me to comment until the outcome of that investigation is known.”

- Journalist's note: This story has been changed. The comments under investigation by the council and made in The Courier-Mail were actually from Deputy Mayor Tony Bowler, not Mayor Melva Hobson as stated in an earlier edition. The Bayside Bulletin apologises for the error.

Print
Increase Text Size
Decrease Text Size
Page:
1

comments


Date: Newest first | Oldest first
Talk about the boys club, I think it's more like money for the women club in council.

For the Mayor and the Councilors to allow such a development approval of the Deputy Mayor's property on Stradbroke Island to proceed is a farce.

Anyone else would have to resubmit new drawings and pay new council costs of at least $80,000 plus aditional extra units gained - say another $700,000 or $800,000.

-comment edited

Posted by Ray, 25/05/2009 6:28:36 PM
This is the lot who went into the last election with a squeaky clean image and blackened the previous council as being in the hands of the developers.

How long does the CMC take to get itself moving?

Can we expect a decision before Christmas?

The council cannot continue to function while this is unresolved.

What has happened, as reported, just does not sit well.

It may well be all above board, but some explanation from the councillors is needed to help us poor ratepayers to understand how this has occurred.

Thank you John Burns for trying to get the situation looked at.

Posted by burdened, 25/05/2009 6:42:31 PM
After hearing of the Deputy Mayor Bowler's huge bonus by not having to re submit new plans like the rest of the public, saving her $80,000 - do they think we are all stupid?

[...]

I don't think so if this matter isn't handled correctly by the Minister Ms Boyle I think her head should roll as well.

Comment has been edited.

Posted by Valerie, 25/05/2009 6:43:38 PM
This is absolutely ridiculous. Does Burns really think that he can sue the ENTIRE council?

There are things that need to be done around the Redlands but Burns priority is elsewhere. Grrr.

Posted by Theresa, 25/05/2009 7:00:15 PM
All this council wants to do is argue amongst themselves and do nothing for the area.

I say sack the lot of them and start again. [...]

We have the dearest rates in Queensland and what do we get. Zilch.

Comment has been edited.

Posted by p davis, 25/05/2009 7:42:32 PM
Those in positions of trust need not only to act appropriately, but need to be seen to act above and beyond the generally accepted ethical standard of the community.

Councillor Burns obviously recognizes this.

We can be sure, following a fresh election, that he would not actually want to be sacked.

However if the actions of these other Councilors are proven to warrant dismissal, then the community should have the opportunity to reexamine and re-elect the whole Council as they see fit.

For Councillor Bowler to make an application for development which is inconsistent with the plans and environmental stance that she has claimed to champion for so long exposes a breathtaking level of hypocrisy.

We can only asume that Councillor Bowler has been in her position so long that she thinks people will continue to vote for her regardless.

Councillor Bowler is a developer, plain and simple. This in and of itself may not be a problem provided rules are adhered to, however this particular representative has made a career of criticizing others for less, and ingratiating herself to green groups.

Good on Councillor Williams for standing her ground in the face of obvious bullying.

One has only to listen to the minutes of the development assessment meeting (which are available as public record for those who might be interested) to hear the meeting chairman Councillor Murray Elliott bullying the Mayor, and then worse, for the Mayor to sit down and take it.

We have a council where it appears Councillor Reimers and Ogilvie were either too afraid or too spineless to stand up to Councillor Bowler’s friends and vote no, even when they knew that was what was required.

Instead they conveniently disappeared from the meeting citing other commitments, these supposedly more important than doing what they were elected to do.

I hope this whole sorry episode is recognized by Councillor Bowler as the catalyst for her to take a good hard look at herself.

Good on you Councillor Burns, and Councillor Williams for standing up to the Bullies. Thanks.

Posted by Turtle, 25/05/2009 8:28:59 PM
Interesting story indeed! Looks like John Burns is going to cast his nets a long way. You ever know he might catch a big fish or or ten.
Posted by Mud crab, 25/05/2009 11:47:12 PM
Well here we go - first of all Theresa - Cr Burns is not trying to SUE the council he is asking for them to be sacked - so whats more important than the accountability of our civic fathers and mothers and grandmother - if the head is rotten the body wont function.

Now we have Cr Bolgary saying its happened before with Secombe and Williams - well Cr Bolgary maybe it did - however it didnt involve a councillor and Deputy Mayor.

Good old Cr Olgilvie says its the pot calling the kettle black - Craig you didnt even vote on this issue - you were busy doing other things..........

Posted by TheWatcher, 26/05/2009 8:04:02 AM
Congratulations to Cr Williams.

At least we have one well balanced, professional cr with a bit of common sense on council.

I would like to throw out a challenge to Cr Bowler.

You stood on a platform of anti development, pro environment.

Why don't you do the right thing and withdraw your application and resubmit it to be assessed under the new planning scheme which is supposedly more environmentally responsible.

Or even better replant the whole area with native flora. I suspect Developer Bowler will just lie low, hoping it all blows over and simply say 'it wasn't my decision'. No comments from CARP, surprise surprise.

Really is a case of do as I say not as I do.

Posted by jumpy, 26/05/2009 11:32:05 AM
Welcome back Burnsie and here we go again - boys verses the girls - girls verses girl. Let's take up Burnsie's suggestion - sack the Council and simply make the Redlands a division of BCC.

PS Harry is related to housewife who is also know to bulldozser...I think you get the point.

Posted by Harry, 26/05/2009 1:27:38 PM
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5  |  next >

Most popular articles




 SEND...
 SAVE...
 SHARE...