spreads (2).gif

Show us the signed minutes of the CON

Dear Beagle Editor, To solve the issue of what you call the Conundrom of CON16/009 only requires one of the Councillors asking to see the signed minutes of the meeting. As Lindsay Brown was the chair at the following meeting on May 10th, 2016 and called for the minutes of the previous meeting to be confirmed. This was done by Councillor Burnside and Councillor Schwartz. Councillor Gabi Harding did raise an issue with the minutes being that they had error messages on them where one might expect a link from the index to a page. That error still remains on those minutes. Somewhere there is either a hardcopy or a scanned image of those signed minutes. Do those minutes have CON16/009 in them as per the published copy on Council's website? If so then the Chair knowingly signed those minutes and as such knowingly signed that CON16/009 was part of that meeting and dealt with in Confidentials, as clearly stated in the minutes. If the hard copy has been signed then the General Manager, who is charged with the preparation of Agendas and Minutes knowingly allowed the inclusion of CON16/009 to the minutes whilst fully aware that there was no corresponding agenda item and that, by live streaming, had not been been publicly declared as being "dealt with" in Confidentials as is required by the Act. If Councillors want to know what the exact rules pertaining to minutes and signatures they are available in full detail in the OLG Meetings Practice Note August 2009 under section 11.2, Signing Council Minutes Name and address supplied


COMMENTS : Due to the risks associated with comments from unidentified contributors that expose The Beagle to possible legal actions under the NSW Defamation Act 2005 No 77 anonymous or Nom de Plume comments will not be available unless the author is known to the editor by way of a verified email address or by association.

Others who provide their REAL NAME (first name AND Surname) and a verifiable email address (it won't be published) are invited to comment below. (yes it is a pain but please comply - it would be a  shame to see your comment deleted)

Those contributors KNOWN to us and verified may continue to use their First Name or Nom de plume for ease. The primary need for all of this is due to traceability should a legal action arise.

If you need anonymity email us via our normal or encrypted email accounts

Please note that if you are looking for a previous comment that is no longer visible please contact us.