Misconduct finding against Mayor Williams

Queensland’s peak disciplinary body for local councillors has found that Mayor Karen Williams’ failure to declare and manage a conflict of interest at a council meeting on 21 February was “misconduct”.

The conflict of interest

At this meeting, councillors, including the Mayor, voted on a motion to end litigation about the Mt Cotton biomass plant. The project developer was Cleveland Power Pty Ltd, a subsidiary of Darwalla Milling Co Pty Ltd. Mayor Williams had a conflict of interest on this matter because in 2016 she received a $2,500 donation from Darwalla.

The video recording of this meeting shows that the matter concerning Cleveland Power (Item 6)  was dealt with in 18 seconds with no discussion by any councillor.

This raises the question: had the matter previously been discussed and perhaps informally decided by councillors at one or more non-public meetings of councillors?

If this was the case, the further question would then be: was Mayor Williams’ interest in the matter raised with other councillors at any such non-public discussion about Cleveland Power?

Mayor Williams’ conflict of interest in relation to Cleveland Power/Darwalla has been a matter of public record since June 2016 yet no other councillor reminded the Mayor of her legal obligations at the Council meeting on 21 February.

Mayor Williams told the Remuneration and Discipline Tribunal “I have a previous history of declaring all conflicts of interest when required, and when such conflicts exist have removed myself from the decision making process by leaving Council chambers”.  She went on to say:

I admit I am aware of an association between Cleveland Power and Darwhalla (sic) Milling, however in this regard my diligence with respect to my staged process of deciding whether an MPI [material personal interest] or conflict of interest existed was amis (sic) in the circumstances, because the matter was introduced as a late agenda item on the morning of the meeting on 21st February 2018 and in this instance Darwhalla was not referred to in the agenda item.

On 25 February Redlands2030 published a story about Council’s various dealings with the Mt Cotton biomass plant over many years since 2004 which, coincidentally, is the year when Karen Williams was first elected to Council.

This story revealed that Mayor Williams had received a $2,500 donation from Darwalla and had not declared a conflict of interest at the meeting on 21 February. Our story also noted that prior to Karen Williams being elected Mayor in 2012, Darwalla donated $2,000 to the pro-Williams election campaign mounted by the Concerned Redlands Residents Association (CRRA).

The sanction for misconduct is … an admission of error

The Tribunal ordered that Mayor Williams make an admission of error at an ordinary Council meeting, noting that this had already been done at the Council’s meeting on 24 October.

By making an admission of error and apology prior to the Tribunal’s determination, Mayor Williams may have hoped to mitigate the consequences of her misconduct. In its determination report the Tribunal commended Mayor Williams for her mea culpa and imposed no further sanction.

At the time Mayor Williams made her admission of error and apology, her fellow councillors and the public were unaware that the matter was likely to be determined by the Tribunal as misconduct.

This instance of mayoral misconduct in now recorded in the Councillor Complaints Register.

Mayoral confusion

Karen Williams’ defence against public suspicion, in this case, is that she temporarily forgot the well-documented association between one of her financial donors, and a company embroiled in long-term litigation with the council she heads.

It’s a worrying memory fail, because it raises the possibility she now receives so many donations from companies whose fortunes ride on council decisions, she simply can’t keep track of them all.

Negligence is sometimes a mitigating factor, but it’s never an excuse.

This is not the first time that Mayor Williams has seemingly been unaware of her need to declare and deal with a conflict of interest.

Mayor Williams previous history

Mayor Williams statement to the Tribunal that she has “a previous history of declaring all conflicts of interest when required” is questionable.

Redlands2030 has previously reported that the Mayor voted on a development application by McKenzie Aged Care Group even though she had received a $5,000 donation from a related body corporate known as Bay Street Group Pty Ltd.

The Mayor claimed she was unaware of the relationship between these two companies, even though an ASIC search revealed they had common directors.

Redlands2030 asked Mayor Williams, back in 2016, the following question:

If you have not been aware of any relationship between the two entities, can you advise what you understood at the time this gift was given and received about the nature of “Bay Street Group” and why you thought this Victorian entity chose to give you $5,000?

We are still waiting for a response.

Redlands2030 has reported on another instance where Mayor Williams left the Council chambers due to a conflict of interest over a substantial matter involving Ausbuild who had given her $4,000. The matter was about to be resolved in her absence but there was a surprisingly unnecessary lunch adjournment. During this break in the formal minuted meeting Mayor Williams was reported to be discussing the Ausbuild matter with officers and some councillors.

Redlands2030 has also raised concerns about Karen Williams’ inadequate declarations of her interests in relation to the Shoreline project which obtained a contentious development approval from Council in 2015.

In September 2015, a few months before the local government elections, Karen Williams said she was referring herself to the Crime and Corruption Commission (CCC)  to “clear her and council’s officers of any wrongdoing”. The CCC responded quickly saying that “the information the Mayor provided did not raise a suspicion of corrupt conduct.”

Since the local government elections in 2016 the CCC has investigated corruption in several south-east Queensland councils. A number of mayors, chief executive officers and other officials in various other south east Queensland councils are facing criminal charges. The Ipswich council has been sacked.

Belcarra reforms

Following the Crime and Corruption Commission’s investigation and report into Operation Belcarra, various local government reforms were legislated by State Parliament including a ban on political donations by developers and more stringent rules about how local councillors declare and manage any conflicts of interest.

Under these new laws, councillors who declare conflicts of interest are now required to leave the room while their colleagues decide whether or not the conflicted councillor has a conflict and if so whether they should be allowed to participate in discussion of and voting on the item.

At Council’s meeting on 10 October (item 12.7) councillors had to apply these new laws to a perceived conflict of interest involving Cr Mark Edwards. It took quite a while to get it right. While chairing the meeting an obviously frustrated Mayor Williams described the new laws about conflicts of interest as “just the most ridiculous piece of legislation”.

Perhaps Redlands councillors need a bit more training in how to deal with conflicts of interest, properly.

Redlands2030 – 14 November 2018