Rodney Stevens
A written and a public apology at last week’s Council meeting was requested by the Yamba Community Action Network Yamba CAN Inc. over a statement made in the July Clarence Valley Council meeting business papers regarding Council’s investigation into Government Information Public Access GIPA documents requested by the group which they claim is incorrect.
At the February 27, 2024, Clarence Valley Council CVC meeting, Cr Karen Toms moved a motion which was seconded by Cr Debrah Novak that the General Manager advise, by way of a report the:
- allocation of resources required to respond to GIPAs submitted by Yamba CAN since January 2022.
- allocation of resources required to respond to RFI (Request for Information) submitted by Yamba CAN since January 2022.
- any cost implications of delays to delivering the Yamba Community Precinct project since January 2022.
The motion was carried 5 votes to 4, with Cr’s Peter Johnstone, Steve Pickering, Allison Whaites, Debrah Novak and Karen Toms in support and Cr’s Greg Clancy, Bill Day, Jeff Smith and Ian Tiley against.
In the February Council business paper it states in a comment by GM Laura Black, “I anticipate it will take a couple of months to gather the information and present it in a way that is meaningful, and therefore the report would likely not be before Council until May 2024, if resolved.”
The report has still not been provided to Council.
But in the July 23, 2024, CVC meeting business papers – Council Meeting Checklist – Update on Actions Taken on page 176, it reveals the outcome of the February motion will take even longer to compile due to legal action taken against Council. (see story Yamba resident takes Council to Land and Environment Court last week’s edition).
“10 Jul 2024 2:07pm: Staff responsible for collating information have been diverted to prepare and respond to legal action taken against Council by an executive member of YambaCan,” the July business papers state.
Yamba CAN Inc. wrote to Council on July 18, 2024, requesting “Council amend the incorrect and offensive statement in the July 23, 2024, Business Paper Action Schedule by removing the statement in the Comments column.”
“At no time did Yamba CAN Inc Committee authorise an executive member, or any other member, to take legal action against Council,” the letter states.
“Yamba CAN Inc has not caused any delay of the Report about the allocation of resources required to respond to GIPAs and RFIs submitted by Yamba CAN Inc, and delays to delivering the Yamba Community Precinct project.
“Please inform if the legal action mentioned was on Yamba CAN Inc’s letterhead and was this so-called legal action signed off, actually stipulating it was done by an executive member of Yamba CAN Inc.”
Cr Day asked the GM at the July 23, 2024, Council meeting “has Yamba CAN’s letter been received and what was the response.”
The GM responded “Yes, the letter has been received but no response has been provided yet and legal action is being taken against Council by someone we have been advised is an executive member of Yamba CAN.”
Yamba CAN Inc. told the CV Independent they are not aware of any documents concerning legal action against Council that state that an executive member of the organisation is a party to.
“An individual can take up matters personally and legally against Council whether they are a member of Yamba CAN or not, we are in a democratic society,” a Yamba CAN Inc. spokesperson said.
At the July 23, 2024, CVC meeting, councillors voted on the officer’s recommendation that 1. The schedule of actions on Council resolutions be noted and those resolutions marked as complete be removed from the rolling checklist.
Cr Day moved an amendment to the motion to add point 2, which was seconded by Cr Clancy, and after consultation with the GM, the Mayor, was not ruled out of order, that Council:
- If the statement in the attachments in the Business Paper Checklist are not correct and no legal action has been taken by an executive of Yamba CAN on Yamba CAN letterhead, that the Business Paper be corrected, and an apology be written and sent to Yamba CAN.
Cr Toms refuted Cr Day’s amendment stating that Yamba CAN should have provided to Council who were on their executive.
Yamba CAN asked Cr Toms, do all Committees provide details of their executive, and are still awaiting a response from the GM that the legal matter was lodged on Yamba CAN letterhead, signed off by a Yamba CAN executive.
Cr Day’s amendment was lost 5 votes to 4, with Cr Toms, Whaites, Pickering, Novak and Johnstone voting against.
The officer’s recommendation was then carried 6 votes to 3, with Cr’s Johnstone, Novak, Pickering, Tiley, Toms and Whaites voting for, and Cr’s Clancy, Day and Smith against.