Ratepayers Victoria Inc is at Yarraville Festival

Our stand with Maribyrnong Ratepayers Group at the Yarraville Festival 2019 on the weekend, brought concerned residents together.
They shared experiences of the effect of unfair Rate assessments (and other Council practices), that make living in the municipality more costly.
One ratepayer that paid us a visit was Jerry Creaney (from next door Williamstown) who had a lengthy chin wag with our Vice President of Ratepayers Victoria, Frank Sullivan.
We are pleased to announce that a Ratepayer Group for Hobsons Bay is now underway. https://www.facebook.com/Greenwichcove/

Charges for former council manager

VICTORIA’S premier anti-corruption commission has laid 79 charges, including obtaining property by deception, making false documents, using false documents and misconduct in public office, against a former Frankston Council manager.
The charges were laid on 14 January after an IBAC investigation into whether “improper procurement practices were used to obtain Frankston City Council funds.”
A supplier of services to council, an owner of an electrical company, was on 7 January charged with 78 similar offences.
The investigation was opened after Frankston Council self reported suspicions of a possible breach.
An IBAC statement said that “under mandatory notification requirements that came into effect in 2016, all heads of Victorian public sector departments and agencies, including council CEOs, must by law notify IBAC of any matter they suspect, on reasonable grounds, involves corrupt conduct.”
The charges are expected to be heard at the Melbourne Magistrates Court on 30 January.
Frankston Council CEO Dennis Hovenden said “approximately 12 months ago council officers identified possible breaches in process involving a former council manager.
“Once aware, council immediately reported the possible breach to IBAC and has since been assisting with the investigation.
“As the matter is now before the court, council will be making no further comment, other than to say the manager in question is no longer an employee of Frankston City Council.”
First published in the Southern Peninsula News – 29 January 2019


Recent questions put to Bayside Council have managed to expose the systematic “creaming off”, of a substantial part of the General Rate.
Council, in its budget documents, shows how the General Rate, User Rates and Charges, and Other Income, is to be spent. This information is presented, in considerable detail, in the Annual Budget and Source of Capital Funds document.
When these funds are assigned to be spent, the financial interest of ratepayers is protected by a simple clause in the Procurement Policy. This clause states:
“6.1.11 Responsible Financial Management
The principle of responsible financial management must be applied to all procurement activities. This includes ensuring that existing funds within an approved budget, or source of funds, is established prior to the commencement of any procurement action, for the supply of goods, services or works.”
There are numerous instances of Council staff improperly spending money without proper budget authority. The most obvious of these instances is found in the Budget Surplus. This is, however, only part of the funds misused. In the 2018/19 budget, the rates planned to be collected, which are not assigned a purchasing task, reaches more than $38 million. When this is compared to the amount planned to be raised by the General Rate, of $74,160,052. It represents 51.26% of the rate.
Council may dip into the surplus rates if a need arises during the year. However, this transfer of purpose cannot be made unless the formal process of preparing a revised budget is carried out.
Bayside Ratepayers’ Group is suggesting to all ratepayers in Bayside that they could defer payment of 51.26% of the Residential Rate. This will protect ratepayers’ money against misuse until such time as Council introduces a revised budget. If the revised budget is not approved, ratepayers can look forward to a credit, of a greater amount than that deferred, being properly credited to their account on 30th June. This is not a refusal to pay the rate – it is simply a deferment until such time as proper spending authority is obtained.
End of Page; Rev1, 220119. Discussion to bra.reynolds088@gmail.com

Bully boy Lake still at it

bully boy Cr Lake still a bully
Posted on November 2, 2018 by ratep
Cr Lakes history with Monash Council in regards to his constant bulling is well documented and goes back a long way.
To name a few.
• Verbal and sexist remarks to Cr Mc Gee – this matter was referred to the Sexual Discrimination Committee.
• As Mayor his intrusion at Cr Morrissey’s place of business that resulted in a court order against Lake.
• Cr Jenny Solity who had a mental break down over his attacks on her.
• Not forgetting his misleading accusation at a council meeting in regards to Huntingdale Hall Management of inappropriate management of hall funds, causing my wife Beaty Davis, who was at that time the Secretary, to stress out so much to see her name dragged through the newspaper, that she had a heart attack.
This accusation was later proven by a council audit officer to be a false and misleading accusation.
• Today’s (Tuesday 30/10/18) Herald Sun is another example of his bullying.
His comment that stated the President of the Mulgrave Club: quote The country clubs directors are Pasty old white men.
Lakes comment resulted in a complaint to the Human Rights Committee.
Not forgetting in 2013 Lake was dumped as candigate for Hotham when it was reported he verbally abused a female councillor at a council meeting
The list goes on and on.
Any apology by Lake now would be meaningless.
Councilor Lake should be stood down subject to the complaint to the Victorian Equal Opportunity and Human Rights.
Finally the Mayor Cr Paul Kisaris should not have allowed Councilor Lake to continue with his bullying comments at a council meeting.
Jack Davis
Ratepayers vic

Snouts in the trough

Heradsun 27/12/18
John Masanauskas
And Laura McFadzean
Snouts in the trough
Council CEOs earn more than our Premier

Local Council bosses in Melbourne are getting average annual Salaries higher than Premier Daniel Andrews.
Municipal chief executive officers are earning up to $460.000 as councils face growing pressure to rein in rate rises and other operational costs.
In 2017-18 the average pay packet for a metro council CEO was about $392,000 a Herald Sun survey has found.
By comparison, Mr Andrews gets $383,703 a year plus allowances, while Prime Minister Scott Morrison earns $527,852 plus allowances.
The top CEO earner last year was City of Melbourne boss Ben Rimmer with a package of $460,000.
Mr Rimmer left this month after a tumultuous year which saw the resignation of former Lord Mayor Robert Doyle over a sexual harassment scandal.
Other well paid chiefs included Greater Dandenong’s John Bennie $440,000 Boroondara.s Phillip Storer $430,000 and Mornington Peninsula’s former boss Carl Cowie $410,000 Ex-Victoria Police chief commissioner Simon Overland took home $340,000 as CEO of Whittlesea, council Earlier this month five councillors refused to attend a council meeting in protest against Mr Overland continuing in the role amid the Lawyer X scandal.
MR Overland said in a video message the police issue had nothing to do with his work at Whittlesea , but a council meeting’s agenda last Friday had a notice of motion about “employment matters involving CEO” The matter was held in secret and no information about the result has been released by council.
Among lower paid metro chief executives were metro chief executives were Maroondah councils Steve Kozlowski and Nillumbik Shire’s former CEO Mark Stoermer ON $330,000.
A Ratepayers Victoria spokesperson Jack Davis SAID COUNCIL CEO’S were on fat salaries while rates were excessive.
“Council have all got their Snouts in the Troughs”he said.
“There’s no trnansparency the more the CEO’S GET THE MORE the counncillors get.”
Mr Davis said CEO selection processes were out of date,and laws were needed to ensure councils were accountable to their communities.

Ratepayers concern ignored

A controversial proposal to develop Dorothy Laver Reserve in Glen Iris came to a head on December 10 with six councillors voting to proceed against a wave of protest from residents and the lacrosse cricket club who has called the reserve home for decades. At the end of this meeting, dozens of angry residents loudly protested within chambers.

Dorothy Laver herself welcomed the Camberwell Lacrosse club to the reserve named in her honour in the early 1980’s. The club have cohabited with the Glen Iris Cricket club and recreational users ever since.

The development will see the location become a soccer facility which the Council refer to as a “community facility”. The rate paying residents are angry that they are losing access to the reserve for the exclusive use by a soccer club who represent approximately 1.5% of the Boroondara population. One of the clubs, the Alamein FC was established in 2015.

The ever changing and confusing public relations disaster has been steered by Officers for months and was originally based on a proposal to lay $4.5m worth of synthetic turf in the area which severely floods up to twice a year.

Residents and environmental groups fought for months to have the synthetic turf proposal abandoned, and it was only a week before the December 10 vote that the Officer conceded the synthetic should be abandoned. The scope of works, changed only a week before the vote and without community consultation has now added road and bike path realignment, road work and creation of additional car spaces by removing vegetation.

A traffic and environmental impact study has not been done, and residents are angry that hundreds of extra cars resulting from a soccer development will add to the already dangerous and congested residential streets never designed for such high levels of traffic.

No allowance has been given for the demand on parking by the East Malvern Football club on the adjacent oval who rely on this area for parking. In addition, Stonnington residents living in close proximity to Dorothy Laver Reserve were not notified by Boroondara Officers of the proposed changes.

Cr. Jim Parke questioned why it had taken a $5000 consultant report to confirm what everybody already knew – it was a flood zone. Officer Mackinnon argued that he had based his proposal on information from Melbourne Water flood charts. The proposal, described by Cr. Jim Parke as “a train wreck” has torn at the very heart of the community, created anguish and hurt amongst sports clubs but united the community.

There is deep distrust towards Boroondara council now by residents who feel there has been no transparency and no proper community consultation. The proposal passed on December 10 is significantly changed from the original, which the community argues should have resulted in its full abandonment.

Councillors Jim Parke and Felicity Sinfield agree, both of whom motioned and argued the merits for its abandonment.

Cr. Steve Hurd has described the protest as “childish tantrums” with “bullying” that was “disgraceful”. He stated that it did the protest “no good”. Mayor Jane Addis wrote in one email that the unrest in the community had been caused by “a handful of residents telling so many lies”.

The community continue to question the future of development at Dorothy Laver Reserve and what the cost will be. Boroondara continue to state that they support the facility as a ‘WNPL’ (Premier League soccer) site, yet deny they will support mandatory WNPL facility requirements such as electric scoreboards, 1.8m fencing, PA systems and undercover seating.

There are currently 2,600 petition signatures and over 1200 letters of objection were submitted to Councillors and the CEO. Protest signage and orange ribbons supporting the Save Dorothy Laver Reserve campaign continue to cover the neighbourhood.

Protest lobby representatives continue to lobby for the development to be abandoned and that all avenues will be investigated to receive fair representation of the community’s wish to retain Dorothy Laver Reserve as it is.
Boroondara resident and Ratepayer

keep an eye on council rates

Ratepayers Victoria Inc
October 2018 ·
This is the third year that a cap on council rates has been imposed by the State Government. The maximum rates are allowed to increase in 2017-18 is 2.25%.

The cap only applies to rates and not other council fees or charges. We have already seen some councils trying to get around the rate cap by introducing a new charge, e.g. City of Yarra trying to slug residents with a new cash grab of $247 to have rubbish collected….

Its only a matter of time Victoria is heading down the same road as the Paris Riots

Council rates and charges are become a serious concern for rate payers
The current model presents the biggest cost or impost or burden to people. Farmers and small businesses. Cost shifting over the past 30 years from State to Councils has resulted in increases to rate which have become unaffordable. The groundswell of discontent is because of the inability to pay resulting as a major factor of poverty and significant impediment to people, farmers, families and small businesses. Council rates are causing people hardships to an extent they are humiliate and despair to those that have difficulty or cannot pay. Council rates are causing significant financial strain which directly contribute to mental stress and family and business problems and breakdowns.
Over 3 decades successive State Governments have either forced or hoodwinked Councils to force ratepayers to fund goods and services that have traditionally been provided by the State. There seems no end to this trend whereby the State Parliament has deduced Councils to mere tax collectors for the State. We have arrived at a point in time where State taxes have been conveniently disguised as Council rates simply to shift the burden from the State to Councils for no other reason other than to improve the State budget. At this rate of transfer of responsibility will render the States irrelevant.
The fact that Victorian Councils are able to calculate and impose rates which vary wildly create anomalies which are in fact corrupt by definition. If the value of land and improvements is the basis on which the ability to pay is based, then this assumption must be applied across all Victorian Councils in order to be fair, just and equitable to all. In this respect the argument is that people who own properties with the same value pay the same Council rates. After all, how can owners of properties of the same value be asked to pay vastly different rates? If people cannot afford the goods and services then they cannot be expected to fund something they cannot afford. If the State government wishes to provide goods and services for which the ratepayers cannot afford then the money must come from the State Treasury! Councils demand huge rate for vastly different amounts for no apparent reason.
Council rates must be based on a formula taking into account of actual income and the ability to pay within household and business expenditure. Either all land is subject to be rated, or no land at all, because too few are forced to pay way too much.
Jack Davis
Ratepayers Victoria Inc

Ratepayers Victoria Inc
October 10 ·
This is the third year that a cap on council rates has been imposed by the State Government. The maximum rates are allowed to increase in 2017-18 is 2.25%.

The cap only applies to rates and not other council fees or charges. We have already seen some councils trying to get around the rate cap by introducing a new charge, e.g. City of Yarra trying to slug residents with a new cash grab of $247 to have rubbish collected….

credit card fraud

For some time now ,Ratepayers Victoria have been concerned about the lack of control of council credit cards here in Victoria

It has recently reported in the media that the Auditor General in South Australia has ordered an audit on all council credit cards in S.A. due to the misuse of these cards

This recent report from New South Wales indicated that a council employee at the town of Hay ,a country town in NSW ,has misused the council credit by up to $500.000 and the Local Government Minister has now demanded answers as to how this has happened and has said that new measures would be put into place to ensure that these cards are properly used

Ratepayers Victoria did put in a submission to the recent review of the local government act that as there is no accountability with the council credit cards in the present 1989 LG Act ,that the council audit committee of a council who meet every three months , monitor these credits cards to ensure that they are been used correctly

Our request was completely ignored

RPV can assure you our ratepayers ,who pay these council credit cards ,that we will continue to fight to get changes in the new local government act that there is accountability of the use of these cards

It is your money ratepayer

Jack Davis