NSW Ombudsman confirms maladministration at Canterbury City Council

The investigation by the NSW Ombudsman into the Conduct of Canterbury City Council has concluded and the findings in the Final report state Canterbury City Council FAILED.

Errs, contradictions, improper conduct, etc... at the senior management level and helm of Canterbury City Council.

Notice of the investigation was previously released at Sydney IndyMedia and although the headlines to it and the related issues appear in search engines - the careless, incompetent actions and inactions of the Council over the last near 7 years and earlier have been lost/destroyed.

The Mallone family are not surprised by the findings or recommendations by the Ombudsman. They have been telling the Council over and over again that the issues raised in 2003, 2005, 2007, 2008 and 2009 were handled with complete negligence by Council.

The General Manager Mr Jim Montague and Mayor Robert Furolo had refused to respond appropriately; to address the issues; or investigate the issues over the years. Their view was and remains, the cliff resides on private property therefore the unacceptable risk to people and property was not the responsibility of the Council in anyway. It was an amazing stance they took and that they continue to take knowing full well that Council actions and inactions created the instability in the first place.

When Council stormwater is collected, directed and simply dumped into private properties at the top of a cliff for some thiry or more years, how can this Council simply say the land owner is responsible?

When Council refuses landowners permission to remove damaging trees from the cliff over and over again, and post a geotechnical engineers report being provided to the Council, then again, how can this Council simply say the land owner is responsible?

When Council refuses to provide or address whether major works at the cliff top had Council approval, and it describes these major works as simply minor works and states to the Ombudsman that the works were certified in 2002, yet the Ombudsman finds no evidence of these works being minor nor certified and therefore there was no thorough assessment on the impact of these works to neighbouring cliff property owners land, then how can this Council simply say the land owner is responsible?

The NSW Ombudsman describes the many Council "failures" as "unreasonable conduct". The public would describe the many Council failures as incompetent, negligent and dishonest actions and inactions that occurred knowing full well that an innocent elderly woman was being held responsible and had been threatened with legal action.

These issues were serious safety issues that placed people at an unacceptable risk of injury and death. Geotechnical engineers clearly advised the risk of injury/death was unacceptable in 2003 (200 times above the acceptable standards), yet Council simply sent the problem back to Mrs Mallone's neighbours stating the land owner is responsible. Again, yes land owners are responsible to maintain their property but when Council actions and inactions are the direct result for a collapsing cliff then ultimately, Council was required to do more than pass the buck back to innocent land owners who were prevented from maintaining their land by Council.

Incredibly it wasn't until two full years later when Mrs Mallone (a 6% land owner of cliff) was informed of this 2003 geotechnical report and its recommendations that included, calling on Council involvement!

This Council negligence and refusal to get involved reoccured in 2005 & 2006 and then caused Mrs Mallone to be dragged into the Supreme Courts by her neighbours. For the next three years Council denied it's actions/inactions were negligent, nor the cause for her massive legal debt, now reaching near $250,000. They claimed over and over again the Council investigated the matter, yet the Ombudsman states it found no evidence of any investigations occurring.

Incredibly the General Manager was honored with a Public Service Medal in 2006.

Near five years of hell for an 82 year old woman left with a legal defence bill of near $250,000 and the NSW Ombudsman now confirms it found no evidence of any Council investigation occurring that Council claimed on at least three occasions, had occurred.

The Canterhury City Council Mayor and General Manager simply couldn't be bothered to investigate the complaints or issues raised, allowing the situation to simply worsen.

The first of 18 recommendations is that Canterbury City Council issue an apology to the Mallone family.

A safe Labor seat disgrace where this Council including its Councillors and MP's should hang their heads in shame for not only refusing to act but for refusing to apologise to the numerous innocent people that have had their lives destroyed by their failure to perform their duties.

When this is the conduct of a Council when people's lives were at risk then what conduct is occurring in this Council over the less important issues that Council handles?

The Council and the people: http://www.canterbury.nsw.gov.au
The photos and comments: http://picasaweb.google.com.au/supportmallone

Do you believe an apology is all Mrs Mallone is due?



This is exellent news. There is much more than an apology due Mrs. Mallone. The General Manager Mayor and Councilors because they all accomadated years of maladministration, should be refunding the cost to Mrs Mallone from their own pockets not the ratepayers. There are also grubby politicians at the State level who have questions to answer. It is important to identify Hornsby Council as another elected corporate entity which has been guilty of exactly the same abuse of due process, over years they have dug a debt hole of around forty millions of dollars for ratepayers and only now are responcible oversight bodies such as the State Ombudsman starting to do their jobs.
Well done Mark.
Edward James 0243419140 Umina CBD

Now if the NSW Ombudsman could inquire into well publicised allegations by Ed James about Gosford Council, and State MP's similar inaction.


A quote from the rotten council website: http://www.rottencouncil.co.uk/index.htm

Mayor Robert Furolo, General Manager Jim Montague and its Councillors need to realise that "Misconduct by Councils, when it occurs, harms not only the community they are elected to serve but the wider reputation of government as a whole across the entire country. We all should expect Councils to uphold the highest standards of integrity and carry out all its duties.", and not fail the people, as the NSW Ombudsman found.

So is the leadership of this Council proud of doing nothing for the near last five years? Was an 80 year old woman's life worth destroying simply to protect Canterbury City Council negligence?

A disgrace.

The Canterbury City Council General Manager Jim Montague, Mayor and MP Robert Furolo and its Councillors need not only apologise to the Mallone family as the NSW Ombudsman recommended, they need to apologise to the whole community they failed.

The incompetent and negligent handling of the threat to people's lives exposed in not only the NSW Ombudsman report but the numerous geotechnical reports submitted to Council leaves this Council management and leadership liable.

Misconduct is exactly that and these people truly do need to hang their heads in shame for sitting back or should we say becoming a part of the misconduct the NSW Ombudsman found.

This is an extract from the response of the Canterbury City Council General Manager Jim Montague (28 August 2007) to one of Canterbury MP Linda Burneys concerns raised to him.

Expenses involved. "There is no doubt that there has been considerable unavoidable expense associated with this matter. I am advised the strata owners of 78 Undercliffe, have been endeavouring for years to reach sort of financial agreement with Mrs Mallone to stabilise the cliff face. The failure to reach an agreement led to the commencement of proceedings in the Supreme Court".

So not only does he insinuate that Mrs Mallone deserved being sued in the Supreme Court but that it was of her own doing.

Yet the facts were:

  • Mrs Mallone hounded Council to address Council stormwater causing damaging and cliff collapses in the 1980's.
  • Mrs Mallone and neighbours of many many years, continually requested permission to remove damaging trees from the cliff but Council refused that permission.
  • Mrs Mallone pressured No.78 Undercliffe in 1999 to address the trees damage to Council (in the hope of the voice of 18 Unit Owners would have Council wake up) but Council refused permission stating "Council does not believe there is a problem with the roots of the trees".
  • No.78 provide Council with the Shirley Consulting Engineers 2003 geotechnical report and call on assistance. Council send it back to them stating it is not their problem.
  • No.78 attempt to go it alone and request permission to remove trees. Council refuses permission. No.78 wait for the next collapse...
  • Two years on from the SCE 2003 report No.78 call in the firm Douglas Partner in 2005 who provides them with a near identical geotechnical report and now and only now is Mrs Mallone made aware of the SCE 2003 and DP 2005 and told she needs to agree and fund their demands.
  • No.78 requests Council to issue Orders to Mrs Mallone to perform the cliff instability issues. The council does nothing.
  • Mrs Mallone questions No.78 on whether they will be addressing the report issues to Council and neighbouring properties as suggested in the report. The response is, No.78 shares no boundaries with Council or other properties therefore it is a matter for her to address.
  • Mrs Mallone undertakes this in Aug 2005 and her involvement in this issue now begins.
  • Mrs Mallone discovers in Feb 2006 that again Council has done nothing.
  • Mrs Mallone address Councils negligence to Councillor Ian Latham who instigates Council to get off its backside. Council begins that that hears No.78 are commencing legal action against Mrs Mallone and decide to......do nothing.
  • Council documents are retrieved under subpoena but Council never documented ANYTHING.
  • Mrs Mallone defends herself in the Supreme Court and finds herself in Dec 2006 with a Supreme Court decision in her favour but left with a legal debt of near $190,000.
  • Mediation and a contribution of $40,000 to the cliff works is required to end the threat of No.78 continuing with this farcical.

For the next two years, demands were placed on Council to explain but not only did the Council outrightly refuse to answer or address the issues raised, it also refused to investigate the complaints.

Again, the Canterbury City Council General Manager Mr Jim Montague advises Mrs Mallone's MP on 28 August 2007 that "the strata owners of 78 Undercliffe, have been endeavouring for years to reach sort of financial agreement with Mrs Mallone to stabilise the cliff face. The failure to reach an agreement led to the commencement of proceedings in the Supreme Court."

Just one sample of the misconduct of Canterbury City Council and it's leadership team.

One rotten Council is putting it mildly.

Local news coverage in the Canterbury and Bankstown Express on Page 4 can be seen at http://bit.ly/bzwqre

For those with problems or slow connection the same story can be viewed at


Our thanks go to the Canterbury and Bankstown Express for their excellent coverage of this issue over the past year and a half and for being one of the few media organisations prepared to release the real story to the citizens of the Canterbury City Council locality.

Ultimately at the end of the day our fight (which is not over) was not only for our own benefit but for the benefit of all who reside in the locality.

Maladministration in Council affects everyone and Mrs Mallone was simply one individual who unfortunately copped the full brunt of the repercusions of this Councils maladministration, but......there were many others that were also hit by it.

This must surely be a message to the General Manager, Mayor, MP's and Councillors that they are required to perform their duties as their role directs them to and that they were elected to do. To simply sit back and condone it, is not and was not their duty.

Our thanks also to go the officers of the NSW Ombudsman that gave us all some faith, that not all Govt departments perform in this negligent, irresponsible manner.

If you have the time, please congratulate the editor of this paper.

This Council needs to held fully responsible for this issue and without the full public support this Council will do nothing other than avoid its obligations. Mrs Mallone wasn't the first victim of this Council negligence nor will she be the last if this doesn't occur.

Successive Ministers for Planning and Local Government, in fact the office of Premier and Cabinet could be held responsible as so many elected reps have accommodated the maladministration and abuse of due process. Premier Keneally was planning Minister for a time presiding over this farce. Canterbury City Council was exposed by Mark Mallone determined pursuit of lazy inept elected reps and public servants, who continue to use public money to protect themselves from the consequences of their own actions and inactions. Have the CCC Councillors called for those responsible to refund all of the Mallone family cost. Has the Minister for Local Government moved to sack the incompetants responcible? Edward James

Have the Councillors called for those responsible to refund all of the Mallone's cost? NO but...

At tomorrow nights meeting the General Manager has requested that a farewell be funded by Council (the ratepayers) for the retirement of two directors who failed Mrs Mallone. See the Council meeting agenda (http://www.canterbury.nsw.gov.au/resources/documents/OA100225agenda.pdf)

The General Manager who has condoned this maladministration for years obviously has his priorities quite wrong.

The past response from this NSW Labor government (Dept of Local Governement) in short is for Mrs Mallone at the age of 82 to take legal action against this incompetent, inept Canterbury City Council.

The full response is here: https://docs.google.com/fileview?id=0BzZvmrzLjd00ZGE1ZDcxNWQtNWJjOS00NDM...

Another past response from this NSW Labor government which again states it is basically not their responsibility to address incompetent, inept or improper conduct within a Local Council, so send the old woman down to the Community Legal Office action.

It clearly states, this is a private matter between your mother and the incompetent, inept Canterbury City Council that the NSW Ombudsman has now unanimously stated FAILED her and her neighbours.

This response can be viewed here: https://docs.google.com/fileview?id=0BzZvmrzLjd00OWNmZjc5NzUtYTUzOC00Mjc...

The General Manager Mr Jim Montague has performed his obligation to apologise as the NSW Ombudsman directed him to do.

Do you believe this apology that can be read at


is the APOLOGY that Mrs Mallone at the age of 83 deserves?

She incurred a $250,000 debt because of the incompetent handling of issues by this Council yet this Council believes it can simply provide her with a letter that is word for word what the NSW Ombudsman advised this incompetent, ignorant and inept Council to apologise for.

What a disgraceful act.

This is what Canterbury City Council including its Mayor Robert Furolo and Councillors believe the ratepayers of Canterbury City Council are to be treated.

When will these people stand down and let people capable of representing the Canterbury City Council ratepayers, takeover.

Email: supportmallone@gmail.com

How can the City of Canterbury treat a elderly lady like this. Easy, they are a business and do not care about the people. I would like to see all the Councillors and GM sacked, if any private company acted this way there would be an uproar.

Elected corporate entities are at best opportunist pack animals, but they are answerable to ratepayers. When you ask how is it possible for Canterbury City Council to treat an elderly lady like Mrs Mallone this way? The answer is ratepayers collectively have simply let it happen; this whole corrupt process has taken several years. State level elected reps have let local government party members bring their parties into disrepute with impunity. The Minister for Local Government should have been buried in thousands emails and letters all of them CC to this string calling publicly for the sacking of the council including the cowards in management. An apology and only that is spitting in the face of honest taxpayers who are paying these parasites. From the Office of Premier and Cabinet on down their collective lack of appropriate political response in all this should be like a red flag to a bull. These politicians are our representatives and every day this farce is allowed to continue, it continues as a mark of disrespect for the constituents of every politician who insist on ignoring the inaction of their brothers and sisters in the political milieu. Premier Keneally should have this pointed out to her because her government is ignoring the political and legal entitlements of good honest people. Hidden in the pages of the NSW Ministerial Code of Conduct is the line a Minister should exercise his influence in the best interest of his constituents. The malfeasance and denial of natural justice are not just part of actionable illegal activity as corrupt process. This is also an important political issue which exposes the short comings of councils all over the state of NSW. Short comings identified by hundreds if not thousands of disenfranchised taxpayers. The mistake we all make is sending our complaints to ICAC and elsewhere and not at the same time carefully publishing them for everyone to read. Defamation is something to be concerned with but writing as a rate payer about the council as an incompentant or worthless burden on honest taxpayers is fair comment particulary if truth is the basis for the comment see ringland v ballina shire council supreme court of appeal 1994 Edward James Umina CBD 0243419140

A public outcry is required asking:

How the General Manager, Mayor or Councillors believe this apology is what Mrs Magda Mallone deserves?
Why the NSW Ombudsman did not identify or refer to a number of the corrupt conduct issues to ICAC?
Why Councillors, the Mayor and MP did not refer the corrupt conduct issues to ICAC?

Unauthorised works to land in the years 2000 that created conditions for instability to a cliff area required Canterbury City Council to investigate the issues raised over and over again to it. Not for the most incompetent and dishonest of Councils in NSW if not Australia to simply dismiss all issues as irrelevant and expect a near 80 year old woman and widow to address the complex issues that arose from Canterbury City Council negligence.

Did any of these people open their eyes or ears when they inspected the report or the many site visits that occurred? Look at the photos at http://picasaweb.google.com.au/supportmallone and tell the public how Council saw this cliff as the responsibility of an elderly pensioner.

A Supreme Court decision found it wasn't, so what makes the General Manager, Mayor and Councillors believe it was and continue to this day stating it was.

Look at the size of the boulders, trees, their roots, etc.... Canterbury City Council refused approval for them to remove these trees and then says to Mrs Mallone "oh shit we truly stuffed up here, oh well, it's your land so it's your problem".

The General Manager Mr Jim Montague must address to the Australian public why he personally chose to ignore his responsibilities and duties. Why he advised MP Linda Burney that the concerns she was raising to him were the result of Mrs Magda Mallone failures, when Canterbury City Council and he himself was well aware Unit Owners and Mrs Mallone had directed the issues to Canterbury City Council and it was his office that failed to address the issues has Canterbury City COuncil has an OBLIGATION and DUTY to do.

The Canterbury City Council Mayor Robert Furolo, a Councillor and Member of Parliament must address to the Australian public why he personally chose to ignore his responsibilities and duties.

All Canterbury City Council Councillors must address to the Australian public why they personally chose to ignore their responsibilities and duties.

This Councils duty is not to condone corrupt conduct.

Canterbury Bankstown Express community paper again exposes the disgraceful Council and its disgraceful apology.

Please email the above link or a link to this web site being

to the people you know to ensure the wider public including those within the Canterbury City Council area are made of aware of the corrupt goings on in this Council. A council previously referred to in the local community papers and parliament as the "Chamber of Secrets".


NSW Ombudsman report states:

Under the State Records Act (Par 2-10) the General Manager (in this case Mr Jim Montague PSM) is responsible for ensuring the City of Canterbury complies with the regulations and requirements of the Act.

So the Canterbury City Council General Mr Jim Montague a Public Service Medal recipient in 2006, FAILED to perform his responsibilities.

NSW Ombudsman report also states:

Public officials must ensure that the decisions they make or the advice they give to decision makers is based on facts. Adequate inquiries should be made to obtain all the relevant information and to ensure that the available information is factually correct.

Information that is factually correct Mr Montague - not incorrect information used solely to discredit Mr Mallone to other public officials.

So again, the Canterbury City Council General Jim Montague himself and a Public Service Medal recipient in 2006, again FAILED to perform his responsibilities.

ICAC needs to investigate this and we question whether the MP Linda Burney, the Mayor/MP Robert Furolo or any of the lazy Councillors of Canterbury City Council have addressed any of these matters to ICAC, and if not WHY not? Questions also need to be asked why the NSW Ombudsman omitted this.

The General Manager of Canterbury City Council is required to stand down or apologise to Mrs Mallone for all of his FAILINGS?

A disgrace.

Why did the NSW Ombudsman not address one of the complaints from Mr Mallone ?

Complaint No.4 in the NSW Ombudsman Final Report (Report Page 4 or PDF Page 7) states:

4. The advice the General Manager had provided to the local Member of Parliament which Mr Mallone alleged had been written solely in an attempt to discredit his concerns regarding the unacceptable risk to people and property that was continually being ignored by the Council and unit owners.

Is the answer to that question - because had the Ombudsman investigated that complaint, the Ombudsman would have been required to have stated the words "Corrupt conduct" in its findings and that would therefore also have required the Ombudsman to have referred to the matter to ICAC.

The complaint above relates to the General Manager providing misleading and well known factually incorrect statements to MP Linda Burney who raised her concerns to the GM. The full PDF document can be read here.

In summary MP Linda Burney raised concerns regarding issues Mr Mallone had raised in his email:

  • Use of the affected area by children and adults.
  • The Council GM response was: I am advised that this statement is not correct and that in fact the strata owners have constructed a 1.8m temporary fence at the base of the cliff to prevent access to the area. Additionally a clothes line originally located at the base of the cliff has been relocated.

    Yet the Council GM failed to state: • The temporary fencing is located solely at the rear of the property. • NO temporary fencing has existed around the public accessible area for the last four (4) years. • No12 and No14 cliff areas remained open to the public. • The clothes line was relocated to the original location that it had been removed from. • The protection barrier system protecting the clothes line area and building for the last 20 years was removed.

  • Resumption of land.
  • The Council GM response was: The Supreme Court stated "the real villain appears to be the person who carelessly quarried in the area in the first half of the century....". To my knowledge there has never been any suggestion that council should resume the affected area.

    Yet the Council GM failed to state: The Supreme Court directly after the above statement stated "However, neither this person, nor the local council who, over objection of neighbours, sanctioned the building of the plaintiff’s building close to the cliff face are sued. The action is between the plaintiff and the proprietor of the relevant part of the cliff face in nuisance and for a quia timet mandatory injunction". Nor did advise MP Burney that he had not read the transcript of the court case that contains the resumption of land by Council statement by Justice Young.

  • Removal of trees.
  • The Council GM response was: Council issued approval for the pruning of trees located on the boundary between 12 and 14 Osroy to allow the construction of a garage on the boundary line.

    Yet the Council GM failed to state: The DA to construct this garage SETBACK by 250mm from the boundary line had conditions attached that were: No 14 has been informed of his responsibility to take all necessary care and precautions to protect your proerty including fencing and existing trees along the common boundary. Additionally, the required setback of 1 metre and onjections relating to windows and privacy issues were discarded with by Council because the trees would shield the issues raised. Yet just 7 days after this, this incompetent Council approved the pruning down of twelve (12) trees and the complete removal of an older well established pine tree that No 14 had just been notified of having to take all necessary care with.

  • Expense involved.
  • The Council GM response was: "There is no doubt that there has been considerable unavoidable expense associated with this matter. I am advised the Strata Owners of 78 Undercliffe have been endeavouring for years to reach some sort of financial agreement with Mrs Mallone to stabilise the cliff". He also added "The failure to reach an agreement led to the commencement of proceedings in the Supreme Court".

    Here the Council GM incredibly and incompetently made numerous errors that his position requires he does not make. Firstly, how does he classify it as an unavoidable expense? It occurred because his Councils unreasonable conduct of Canterbury City Council as stated and proven by the NSW Ombudsman. Secondly, Strata Owners addressed the issue to Canterbury City Council in May 2003, spent the next 2 years endeavouring to determine how did this incompetent Council approve this building below this dangerous cliff, and then and only then did they address the issues to Mrs Mallone in June 2005. When they also made their unreasonable demands and then dumped the whole issue on her to resolve with Council. So it wasn't the failure of Mrs Mallone to reach an agreement with the Strata Owners that led to the proceedings in the Supreme Court, it was the failure of Canterbury City Council identified clearly in the NSW Ombudsman report that led Strata Owners to attempt to hold Mrs Mallone responsible for the ignorant, incompetent, negligent, dishonest and corrupt conduct of Canterbury City Council.

The Council GM began that correspondence to the MP Linda Burney with: You specifically requested clarification on a number of issues...

Clarification does not equate to corrupt conduct.

So how did the NSW Ombudsman omit this complaint entirely from the Final report?

The General Manager response to MP Linda Burney has a complete disregard to the Canterbury City Council Code of Conduct Policy 23-032-1 reviewed in January 2005 that clearly states:

We are a responsible and customer-focused council serving the people of Canterbury, and we provide quality service in all of our activities in order to achieve this future.

An important way in which we can continue to be a responsible council is through a strong ethical culture.

Honesty and integrity in the way we do things as an organisation will give us strength, resilience, and effectiveness.

This Code of Conduct is an important foundation for a strong ethical culture. It articulates the standards of behaviour expected of councillors and staff and gives us a basis for our decision making process.

This code has the full support of Councillors, the General Manager, senior management and staff.

Councillors, members of staff of council and delegates of the council must comply with the applicable provisions of this code of conduct. It is the personal responsibility of all council officials to comply with the standards in the code and regularly review their personal circumstances with this in mind. Failure by a member of staff to comply with council’s code of conduct may give rise to disciplinary action.

The Local Government Act 1993 requires every council to adopt a code of conduct that incorporates the provisions of The Model Code of Conduct for Local Councils in NSW.

This Code should be read in conjunction with the Act. However, nothing in this Code overrides or affects the Act or any other law. 

Purpose of the code of conduct:

The model code of conduct has been developed to assist council officials to:

  • understand the standards of conduct that are expected of them;
  • enable them to fulfil their statutory duty to act honestly and exercise a reasonable degree of care and diligence (section 439);
  • act in a way that enhances public confidence in the integrity of local government.
  • identify and resolve situations which involve conflict of interest or improper use of a position;
  • discourage improper conduct on the part of any such person and to protect persons making legitimate disclosures of fraud, maladministration and serious and substantial waste.

The Model Code of Conduct for Local Councils in NSW is based on the following Key Principles:

4.1 Integrity

You must not place yourself under any financial or other obligation to any individual or organisation that might reasonably be thought to influence you in the performance of your duties.

4.2 Leadership

You have a duty to promote and support the key principles by leadership and example and to maintain and strengthen the public’s trust and confidence in the integrity of the council. This means promoting public duty to others in the council and outside, by your own ethical behaviour.

4.3 Selflessness

You have a duty to make decisions solely in the public interest. You must not act in order to gain financial or other benefits for yourself, your family, friends or business interests. This means making decisions because they benefit the public, not because they benefit the decision maker.

4.4 Objectivity

You must make decisions solely on merit and in accordance with your statutory obligations when carrying out public business. This includes the making of appointments, awarding of contracts or recommending individuals for rewards or benefits. This means fairness to all; impartial assessment; merit selection in recruitment and in purchase and sale of council’s resources; considering only relevant matters.

4.5 Accountability

You are accountable to the public for your decisions and actions and must consider issues on their merits, taking into account the views of others. This means recording reasons for decisions; submitting to scrutiny; keeping proper records; establishing audit trails.

4.6 Openness

You have a duty to be as open as possible about your decisions and actions, giving reasons for decisions and restricting information only when the wider public interest clearly demands. This means recording, giving and revealing reasons for decisions; revealing other avenues available to the client or business; when authorised, offering all information; communicating clearly.

4.7 Honesty

You have a duty to act honestly. You must declare any private interests relating to your public duties and take steps to resolve any conflicts arising in such a way that protects the public interest. This means obeying the law; following the letter and spirit of policies and procedures; observing the code of conduct; fully disclosing actual or potential conflict of interests and exercising any conferred power strictly for the purpose for which the power was conferred.

4.8 Respect

You must treat others with respect at all times. This means not using derogatory terms towards others, observing the rights of other people, treating people with courtesy and recognising the different roles others play in local government decision-making.

Obviously the General Manager of Canterbury City Council has never read this Code Of Conduct Policy.

Obviously the Councillors of Canterbury City Council have either never read this Code Of Conduct Policy or never understood it.

It does come come as any surprise.

There is an unwritten law that councils are not answerable to anyone. This is the problem. Governments of all persuasions do not want accountability.

I have had similar issues with Gosford City Council. They permitted the house next dooe to me to be used as a venue contrary to the zoning. This went on for 4 years and left me with an affliction and the inability to earn a living. I referred the matter to the Ombudsman who concluded that the council had "responded to the allegations", but the Ombudsman did not question the fact that the general manager was not truthful in his response and that the use was not a permitted use for the residential 2(a) zoning.

After prolonged pressure to the state government the use was stopped next door but it still occurs everywhere else in the shire and is endemic. However this council is bullet proof as the state government refuses to do its regulatory job and get involved. The then Minister for Planning Frank Sartor issued a directive to the Planning Department to put "controls in place" but this council just ignored the requirement when it came time to discuss the new LEP with the Planning Department. Both sides just lied. I know this because I spoke to both parties BEFORE they met.

What we have is layers of government who want to tackle all the soft options but none of the real issues in society. They are a gutless bunch of self interest people who appear to want nothing more than to kiss babies, get re-elected and then retire with the instant and over generous pension. The general public are no more than the milking cows.

Welcome to society. It is a disgrace. But then you know the old saying........society gets the government it deserves. I have indicated to our councillors that I will form a political party, find 10 decent human beings and run against them if they do not solve this issue. Is anyone interested in joining me and we'll consider more in a similar venture?

michael jakob

The following document gives you and an insight into why our Councillors, especially those of the Canterbury City Council, have been incapable of performing their duties in line with the Local Govt Act and their own Code of Conduct policy. Actions that resulted in a useless, incompetent and dishonest mob.

This PDF document is written by an ex Canterbury (East Ward) Councillor. A Councillor who performed his duty in June 2006 for Mrs Mallone but followed that by FAILING her. Why? Only he can answer why he then FAILED her, never addressed the maladministration that had occurred nor that which then continued to occur after that time when this Council chose and left a trail of dishonest conduct when it attempted sweeping it all under the carpet. Actions and inactions that had a catastrophic effect in all respects on Mrs Mallone and her family, and on innocent people well into the future.

Unfortunately following those events, Mr Ian Latham never stood for re election! Nor to answer why he FAILED to address the maladministration identified by Mr Mallone and verified by the NSW Ombudsman office.

The document to read can be found at http://www.nsw.nationaltrust.org.au/conservation/files/Suburbia%20Latham...

It is worthy of a read and is a great insight into Canterbury City Council, it's Councillors and how and why they have managed to not perform their duties that is required of a Council. How they sit and do nothing, waiting on someone to direct them to. Even then, with difficulty!

The Greens candidate Linda Eisler who has now taken the ALP Councillor Latham's position, is simply there because Councillor Latham never stood for reelection. We question whether she or any Green candidate will be there again when the community hears of her comments in her email to the Mallone supporters but directed at Mr Mallone.

Her comments (email) can be seen in the comments area of http://indymedia.org.au/2010/03/17/environmental-vandalism-by-canterbury... followed by the Mallone supporters response.

The second link in the above post (http://indymedia.org.au/2010/03/17/environmental-vandalism-by-canterbury...) has been removed!

We can only 'presume' the Council or the Greens Councillor herself, did not approve of their comments being broadcast to the wider community.

What is the role of a councillor?
232 What is the role of a councillor?

(1) The role of a councillor is, as a member of the governing body of the council:
• to provide a civic leadership role in guiding the development of the community strategic plan for the area and to be responsible for monitoring the implementation of the council’s delivery program
• to direct and control the affairs of the council in accordance with this Act
• to participate in the optimum allocation of the council’s resources for the benefit of the area
• to play a key role in the creation and review of the council’s policies and objectives and criteria relating to the exercise of the council’s regulatory functions
• to review the performance of the council and its delivery of services, and the delivery program and revenue policies of the council.
(2) The role of a councillor is, as an elected person:
• to represent the interests of the residents and ratepayers
• to provide leadership and guidance to the community
• to facilitate communication between the community and the council.
What is the role of a councillor?
232 What is the role of a councillor?

(1) The role of a councillor is, as a member of the governing body of the council:
• to provide a civic leadership role in guiding the development of the community strategic plan for the area and to be responsible for monitoring the implementation of the council’s delivery program
• to direct and control the affairs of the council in accordance with this Act
• to participate in the optimum allocation of the council’s resources for the benefit of the area
• to play a key role in the creation and review of the council’s policies and objectives and criteria relating to the exercise of the council’s regulatory functions
• to review the performance of the council and its delivery of services, and the delivery program and revenue policies of the council.
(2) The role of a councillor is, as an elected person:
• to represent the interests of the residents and ratepayers
• to provide leadership and guidance to the community
• to facilitate communication between the community and the council.

REGULATIONS OF ACTS ARE ALTERED FROM TIME TO TIME I suspect there are some big changes in the first dot point since I last read this important Section of the Local Government Act. But the bottom line in all this is taxpayers have stood by and watched without interest while elected reps do what they can or feel like. People do from time to time stand to do their civic duty but they soon discover they will be in conflict with and for the most part at the mercy of the big players sitting on the council. Until we have an interested and involved proletariat to support the pursuit of good honest open government people who stand up either in government or outside government we will continue to be hammered. Edward James 0243419140

Some of us who have compared notes for several years, have no faith in ICAC. Jerold Cripps is no longer the current chair and Irene Moss was no better before him. There is no real accountability. I make and publish allegations identifying problems with Gosford City Council and I assure you after almost ten years fighting a published fight. I have some feedback and direct involvement in Hornsby councils purchase of an expensive hole in the ground, where mismanagement has hung a huge debt around the necks of ratepayers for the next twenty years, and more than a passing interest in Canterbury City Council malfeasance relating to the mistreatment of Magda Mallone. I am certain our elected reps at the State level are culpable in all these sins against the people. Certainly the Premier and Cabinet have accommodated what we the people perceive as systemic corruption in so many councils. Cessnock is no surprise. Read Joanne McCarthy story here

There is no way honest people can justify waiting till the election before joining thousands of disenfranchised voters in publicly questioning the probity of entities like ICAC and the State Ombudsman and the NSW Office of Premier and Cabinet, I have been publishing allegations and naming names in full page ads for over a year. If you are as unhappy as I am start sending your questions to me and I will publish them. Or Google Magda Mallone on the Sydney independent media site and become involved first hand in public trust journalism! Why wait till another election to get started act on yiour own behalf now. Edward James POB 3024 Umina 2257 ..0243419140

Quite an interesting read at http://www.nsw.nationaltrust.org.au/conservation/files/Suburbia%20Latham...

It explains the irresponsible leadership of Canterbury City Council and seems to place the blame for this onto the people of the community.

More news coverage of the disgraceful apology from Canterbury City Council in the Torch Publishing - Cooks River Valley Times paper reported by Fatima Mrad is viewable at http://bit.ly/TVT_April1_Pg5

and a story on one of the many Councillors who FAILED Mrs Mallone is on the facing page http://bit.ly/TVT_April1_Pg4

The NSW Ombudsman report stated: "It was apparent from this investigation that there is a lack of leadership from the senior management of the Council around good conduct."

Yet we still have Councillors, the Mayor and the General Manager of this Council still refusing to acknowledge all of their failures nor give Mrs Mallone the apology she deserves.

A disgrace.

See Torch Publishing Contacts http://www.torchpublishing.com.au/contact.html

Similiar to the past Canterbury Bankstown Express stories at http://bit.ly/Express_Battle, http://bit.ly/Express_Feb_23 and http://bit.ly/Express_disgrace

the Cooks River Valley Times http://bit.ly/TVT_April1_Pg5

and now the Canterbury Bankstown Torch join in on exposing the incompetent, negligent and unreasonable conduct of Canterbury City Council http://bit.ly/Torch_Pg3

The General Manager Mr Jim Montague, Mayor Robert Furolo (MP) and the Councillors of this Council need to apologise to the community they serve for failing to ensure this Council performs the duty they were and are required to perform.

Yet the General Manager Jim Montague, the Mayor Robert Furolo and the Councillors continue to ignore the issues.

Issues of an inadequate Council stormwater system. Issues of trees continuing to cause havoc on the cliff and cliff areas.

Issues that cause put people in danger.

On the evening of April 8th during an extremely short but heavy down pour boulders, rock and debris litter the paths, streets and properties surrounding and below the cliff.

Yet as stated, all we have this Council doing is:


The only sensible thing stated by the Mayor in that statement is: "We're elected by our residents to provide leadership and guidance, represent their interests and encourage communication between Council and our community." Unfortunately for Mayor Robert Furolo, the NSW Ombudsman has clearly identified "This Council FAILED that."

Maybe the Mayor should explain this statement: "For his constituents he has been a consistent and sincere advocate on behalf of the residents of East Ward. His record of Councillor requests shows a genuine dedication to the people he represents and an ongoing and unsurpassed commitment to improving the safety, accessibility and appearance of our City." As not only did Councillor Favorito fail the Earlwood and Undercliffe residents, so did all other Councillors and the Mayor himself.

Hence the General Manager has ratepayers fund retirement parties.... http://www.canterbury.nsw.gov.au/resources/documents/OA100225agenda.pdf

Further Canterbury City Council criminal negligence http://express.whereilive.com.au/news/story/criminal-negligence/

Canterbury City Council Mayor Robert Furolo addresses trivial issues to the media and the public. http://bit.ly/ExpressMayorLetter1


Canterbury City Council General Manager Jim Montague addresses funding requirements for retiring directors.


Rather than:

* The maladministration identified by the NSW Ombudsman investigation http://bit.ly/cHxhdO
* The major unauthorised works identified in that same report.
* The environmental vandalism works that were authorised to proceed by Council without the required Development Application process occurring identified in that same report.
* The negligent manner of Council drainage works identified in that same report.
* The dishonest Council management statements made in that same report.
* The dishonest Council GM statements to MP Linda Burney that were NOT investigated nor explained in that report.
* The lack of leadership in this Council identified in that same report.
* The lack of any involvement or mention of Councillors and the Mayor in that same report, even though they were fully aware of the incompetent, ignorant, inconsistent and dishonest statements of Council management - yet failed to act on the maladministration being identified to them.

* Negligent drainage and more OCTOBER 2009 http://bit.ly/ParrySteps1
* Negligent drainage APRIL 2010 http://bit.ly/ParrySteps2
* Negligent drainage, tree management, unauthorised works, maladministration, etc... 2003 - 2010 http://bit.ly/CCCPhotos1

But the Canterbury City Council Mayor Robert Furolo is "NOT HAPPY WITH USE OF WORDS" (http://bit.ly/ExpressMayorLetter1
) and requires the media and the public to know that.

How many deaths and injuries have and must occur before Canterbury City Council perform their duties as they are required to perform rather than the disgusting attitude they have that degrades and demoralises the honest and hard working Council workers?

Before you preach this garbage Mayor Robert Furolo http://bit.ly/MayorMsg2, do us all a favour and lead by example.

The Mayor and Councillors are required to apologise to Mrs Mallone publicly for failing her with their unreasonable conduct.

Canterbury Council Mayor Robert Furolo and its General Manager Jim Montague (PSM-Public Service Medal recipient) have appeared on Page 1 playing ball http://bit.ly/MayorAndGMPlayBall ignoring their own FAILINGS...

Failings clearly seen here http://bit.ly/ParrySteps (Oct 2009) and more recently here http://bit.ly/ParrySteps2 (Apr 2010).

Failings clearly identified in the NSW Ombudsman report PDF - http://bit.ly/cHxhdO that was issued in Feb 2010.

East ward Councillors Carlo Favorito (IND), Bill Kritharas (ALP), Linda Eisler (GRE) should hang their heads in shame for refusing to ensure their incompetent, dishonest and negligent Council has permitted, enforced and ignored these drainage and tree related issues to continue to this day put the public and the community they serve at risk of injury of not death.

Obviously this political Greens representative don't give a damn about the people or the environment. Lee Rhiannon must be proud.

A disgrace.

Canterbury Council sister cities have a lot to learn from this criminally negligent Council. A Council that the NSW Ombudsman stated lacked leadership.

Mayor Robert Furolo and General Manager Jim Montague must be proud of this lack of leadership to show themselves playing ball on a Page 1 newspaper.

40 years of Council ignoring a collapsing cliff caused by their negligent decisions yet.

The General Manager, Mayor and Councillors accept injury and death as....as what Councillor Eisler? Simply a mistake because Council cannot get things 100% right!

Incompetence at the senior management level of Canterbury City Council.

And while the debris sat out there for over three weeks, the Mayor Robert Furolo and General Manager Mr Jim Montague(PSM) were out and about do a publicity shoot.

That's right the helm of this Council, a Council that was found lacking in leadership was out and about playing ball. See them here or here http://www.torchpublishing.com.au/read/Torch_Canterbury_21_April_2010/images1/001.jpg.

Yep stuff the safety of ratepayers. Stuff the environmental damage caused by this stormwater.

Their priorities are to put their faces on the front page of the local paper and hide the truth from the public.

The Council response to this Parry Steps issue is, we are not going to do anything about the stormwater issue. Here is the complete unedited response:

On Fri, Apr 30, 2010 at 1:50 PM, Chris Lenard wrote:

I refer to your email yesterday to Councillors Hawatt and Nam, into which you "cc'd" the General Manager. The General Manager has asked me to respond to you on his behalf.

As discussed, the area the subject of your email was inspected yesterday (separately by Bob Bullivant and I) and found to be in a generally clean and tidy condition. Accordingly based on those findings, there is no present need for attention to the area. The area in question is (and will continue to be) subject to regular inspection and (where found to be necessary) maintenance attention by our work gang operating in that area.

Thank you for letting us know of your concerns.

Chris Lenard

Manager Corporate Projects

Canterbury City Council

9789 9435 9787 3064

What a disgraceful response from a Council that the NSW Ombudsman recently advised FAILED on numerous issues.


Peter this side from Canada. There is much more than an apology due Mrs. Mallone. The General Manager Mayor and Councilors because they all accomadated years of maladministration, should be refunding the cost to Mrs Mallone from their own pockets not the ratepayers. There are also grubby politicians at the State level who have questions to answer. It is important to identify Hornsby Council as another elected corporate entity which has been guilty of exactly the same abuse of due process, over years they have dug a debt hole of around forty millions of dollars for ratepayers and only now are responsible oversight bodies such as the State Ombudsman starting to do their jobs.
Well done Mark.


Liberal Councillors Ken Nam and Michael Hawatt standout from the crowd.

FILE NO: O-8-1 PT2
Min. No. 105 RESOLVED
(Councillors Nam/Hawatt)
THAT a detailed report be provided to Council in relation to this matter.

So, questions must be asked why Mrs Mallone's East Ward Councillors Carlo Favorito (IND), Bill Kritharas (ALP) and Linda Eisler (GRE) FAILED to perform this action long ago.

A disgraced ALP dominated Council that will most likely return some bureaucratic crap full of the same dishonesty returned to the NSW Ombudsman. Dishonesty that the NSW Ombudsman referred to as errs and contradictions.

Yes, that's right everyone.

The Canterbury City Council General Manager Mr Jim Montague continues his admissions and apologies for the unreasonable conduct he and his staff conducted themselves in. Conduct that solely equated to maladministration.

Maladministration that destroyed an elderly woman.

Read the misleading and dishonest crap this man dishes out while he apologies to Mrs Mallone at http://bit.ly/CCCAdmitsMaladministration

A General Manager who succeeded to bring his whole Council into disrepute simply to cover his own inactions.

A man at the helm of a Council that the NSW Ombudsman investigation described as "lacking leadership".

A man that has a management team incapable of performing their duties without the conduct that equates to maladministration.

You would have thought this man would have learnt by now to ensure he had people capable of ensuring they were able to speak and write on his behalf without the errors they keep making. It seems this inability to provide the facts is incestual in this Council.

A man who not only disgraced this Council but simply continues disgracing the Council along with himself.

An ALP dominated Canterbury City Council that believed sitting around ignoring the facts would benefit the Council. Instead all they did was disgrace themselves and fail everyone they stood to representative of.

ICAC finds councils at high risk: http://smh.com.au/nsw-uuur.html

Therefore I would consider a Council told by the NSW Ombudsman that it "lacks leadership" would be an extreme risk.

When will ICAC investigate Canterbury City Council?

When will the NSW Premier, the NSW Minister of the Local Government or the NSW Ombudsman replace this Council with one that does not lack leadership?

When will the General Manager of this Council earn the Public Service Medal he received?

How many people must die or be injured before this Council address its failures?


STAY TUNED - as more of Canterbury City Councils corrupt practices are revealed shortly.

A NSW Ombudsman officer response (http://bit.ly/OmboNegligence) advises us that this Council employs professionals and if the public is not happy with the expert opinion of these professionals (who had recently been found by the NSW Ombudsman to have failed the same complainant), then it is the complainants responsibility to seek and fund the true 'experts' opinion on whether the public are at risk.

One would presume that this (http://bit.ly/ParrySteps1) occurence in Oct 2009 and then this (http://bit.ly/ParrySteps2) occurence in Mar 2009 is enough to suggest that the Council response of: "there is no present need for attention" is just a continuance of what the NSW Ombudsman investigation found and reported on Feb 1 2010.

That is, a report that not only stated this Council lacked leadership, but that this Canterbury City Council failed to perform its duties and that this was because of its unreasonable conduct and refusal to abide its own Code of Conduct.

Maybe the office of the NSW Ombudsman and this incompetent and dishonest Council can explain this collapse not to far from the above area over the June 2010 long weekend: http://bit.ly/BayviewCollapsePhotos1

We emphasise it is not the same area as above but it is just a short stroll away and is directly related to a Council incapable of performing its duties with the honesty that the public deserve. A Council intent on seriously injurying someone if not killing someone.

This is the garbage report provided to the Council meeting by the General Manager (http://bit.ly/GM_Dishonesty1).

A road embankment collapse on to a footpath in Bayview Ave Undercliffe/Earlwood occurred during the June long weekend.

Photos taken and published at that time can be seen here http://picasaweb.google.com.au/SupportMallone/BayviewAvenueCollapse

Yet two full months later it remains exactly as seen in those photos.

Nevertheless the Mayor and MP of Canterbury City Council Mr Robert Furolo, the General Manager Mr Jim Montague (a public service medal recipient) could proudly invite Council ratepayers and residents to last Saturday's launch of the Gardens of the World at Gough Whitlam park some 100 metres away from this unaddressed negligence.

Both of these proud men at the helm of this Council can be seen here http://www.flickr.com/photos/canterburycity/4899973604/in/photostream/

Questions must be asked on what the Canterbury City Council east ward Councillors (Linda Eisler, Carlo Favorito and Bill Kritharas) are doing for the East Ward residents that utilise this footpath.

Obviously the investigation by the NSW Ombudsman and the final report issued by the Deputy Ombudsman that stated this Council lacked leadership was a complete waste of the NSW taxpayers money. That report can be read in it's entirety here: http://bit.ly/cHxhdO

An investigation into an issue that destroyed an 80 year old woman's life and left her with a debt now exceeding $250,000.

A disgrace.

Three months later the incompetent and negligent Canterbury City Council have done nothing to address the collapse on to the footpath.

The NSW Deputy Ombudsman Mr Chris Wheeler must be happy with the message he and his office sent this Council.

This comes as no surprise. It appears council inaction and ineptitude is rife. The ombudsman should look into Marrickville council also. It happily allowed a $4mil 27 factory unit development not 20 meters from residential properties. Two years in development now with construction work from 7am to 6pm Mon - Sat with no noise mittigation and no D.A. requirement of noise impact statement. Councils just don't care and for sure developers like Anthony Antoniou don't.

The NSW Ombudsman report states:

On 17 November 2009, a draft report was issued to the Minister for Local Government. She was advised it was my intention to publish my final report and she was entitled to request a consultation in accordance with section 25 of the Ombudsman Act before the report was published. The Minister advised me on 25 January 2010 that she did not require a consultation. She also advised me that the Division of Local Government will include Canterbury City Council in the Promoting Better Practice program in the next 12 months so that a further review can be conducted.'

How or why did the Minister of Local Government not require consultation on this issue?

We don't need or want Council to PROMOTE better practice - the Canterbury City Council ratepayers want a Council to CONDUCT better practice.

We also require a Council to have leadership and not as the NSW Ombudsman staff found which was:

It was apparent from this investigation that there is a lack of leadership from the senior management of the Council around good conduct, especially with regard to the requirement to keep records in accordance with the State Records Act. Both Mr Montague and Mr Jauncey advised that their busy work schedules interfered with their ability to keep records of meetings, discussions and oral advice.

Clearly, if Mr Montague or Mr Jauncey could not cope with their so called busy work schedules then clearly they should have resigned, as ultimately their inability to perform their duties is what caused an 83 year old pensioner woman to end up to this day with a debt well in excess of $250,000.

The NSW Premier and Minister for Local Government have some questions to answer especially considering 8 months later this incompetent, dishonest and negligent Council has still not addressed the NSW Ombudsman recommendations regarding the unauthorised building works on No 14 Osroy Avenue that geotechnical experts claimed 4 years ago that was creating conditions for instability to a cliff that would naturally therefore pose a significant risk to people and property living approximately just over 1 incredible metre from the base of this 25 metre near vertical cliff.

A filthy disgraceful act by Canterbury City Council, the Member for Canterbury Linda Burney and this inept NSW Government.

And while Canterbury City Council refuses to address the unauthorised and non compliant building works that a Supreme Court also supported required to be addressed (3 full years ago).

This corrupt Council and its Councillors have
1. one Mrs Mallone's neighbours tear down a harmless unauthorised carport.
2. another of Mrs Mallone's neighbours tear down a harmless unauthorised shed that was non compliant.
3. and yet another of Mrs Mallone's neighbours tear down a harmless yet unauthorised shed that was also non compliant.

Three individual neighbouring properties of Mrs Mallone have Council address unauthorised works that were somewhat harmless yet unauthorised works that a geotechnical firm critised, that a Supreme Court acknowledged and that the NSW Ombudsman stated "Council's failure to deal with this matter is difficult to understand." remain UNADDRESSED.

UNAUTHORISED BUILDING WORKS that are CREATING CONDITIONS FOR INSTABILITY to MRS MAGDA MALLONE'S PROPERTY who has been left with a debt nearing $300,000 because of the maladministration in Canterbury City Council yet this filthy Council who had these works raised to them in August of 2005 remain adamant that they do not answer to anyone.

AGAIN the NSW Premier, the Minister for Local Govt, the Member for Canterbury and the NSW Ombudsman are a disgrace to every NSW citizen in continuing to permit this General Manager, it's Mayor and it's Councillors to do NOTHING.

And yet another of the incompetent management of this NSW State Labor govt and this corrupt Canterbury City Council.


When will Council and it's Councillors be sacked?

Was the General Manager entitled to a Public Service Medal in the midst of this maladministration?
Were the senior management due the gratitude they were given at retirement following the release of the NSW Ombudsman report?
Were the gratitude really due to Councillor Carlo Favorito for his long standing when he failed Mrs Mallone?
Was Councillor Kritharas entitled to his recent promotion to deputy Mayor?

All while this Council continues to treat Mrs Mallone in this dishonest manner.

The answer is NO.

The NSW Ombudsman just released a report (tabled at a Council Meeting on Monday) on Manly Council which damns the GM and his staff over dealings with two different sets of ratepayers over a period of 8 years! They had a compliance officer who was completely discredited as lying about his qualifications, lying to ratepayers (email evidence), lying to Court. When we wrote to the GM with the evidence he sent a letter back threatening us with a defamation suit. The Omb called this compliance officer "appallingly dishonest". BELIEVE IT OR NOT ON MONDAY THE COUNCILLORS GAVE VOTE OF CONFIDENCE FOR THE GM AND HIS STAFF! 8 years of abuse and they give him a vote of confidence! WE HAVE TO MAKE COUNCILS ACCOUNTABLE. HAS ANYONE EVER SUCCESSFULLY SUED THEM??? MANLY IS A DISGRACEFUL COUNCIL. MANLY IS RUN LIKE A PRIVATE KINGDOM BY THE GM AND COUNCILLORS. MINISTERS WHERE ARE YOU!!!!!!

Another Council slammed by the NSW Ombudsman.


and yet the Mayor and most likely the Councillors refuse to acknowledge it (see http://manly-daily.whereilive.com.au/news/story/mayor-denies-cover-up-an...).

Not dissimiliar to the NSW Ombudsman investigation into Canterbury City Council (see that full unedited report at http://bit.ly/cHxhdO) and similiarly a Mayor and Councillors who have refused to address the recommendations in that report. An investigation that occurred because the Council negligence, inept, incompetent and unreasonable conduct identified in that report caused a now 83 year old pensioner woman to end up with a financial debt now nearing $300,000.

Is it not time that the NSW Ombudsman stop simply slamming Councils and stop these Councils from continuing as Canterbury City Council has done since release of the report, continuing to refuse to perform their duties as they are required to do?


You can contact me through the supportmallone@gmail.com email address.