District of Grant Council Mayor Richard Sage apologises after Ombudsman finds he committed misconduct

After years of “wreaking havoc” a country mayor has apologised for his misconduct but only after the SA Ombudsman stepped in and fed up councillors say it is “too little, too late”. See the latest.

A country mayor has publicly apologised for his behaviour – but only after multiple complaints regarding his conduct led to a SA Ombudsman investigation.

Ombudsman Wayne Lines found District Council of Grant Mayor Richard Sage committed misconduct in public administration by failing to declare and appropriately deal with a conflict of interest and refusing to follow the council’s Charter of Agreed Behaviours.

District Council of Grant Mayor Richard Sage. Picture: Jessica Ball

Mr Line recommended council require Mr Sage undertake conflict of interest training, reprimand him should he fail to commit to the charter and make a public apology.

At Monday night’s meeting, Mr Sage declared a conflict of interest and vacated the chair before elected members voted he could return to say his actions had been a mistake.

“In hindsight I allowed my emotions to rule my actions with regard to not declaring a conflict of interest and not dealing with the matter appropriately,” Mr Sage said.

“The Ombudsman was quite clear in his determination that in trying to defend myself gave rise to me not complying with the Local Government Act with regard to the conflict of interest.

“I know I publicly stated that I wouldn’t sign up to the Charter as I have had difficulty with the expectations of access to my diary that contained my work roster for various reasons including confidentiality.

“I agree to support council’s Charter of Expected Behaviours and I’d like to formally apologise to the council.”

Council acknowledged the apology and was satisfied Mr Sage had undertaken the required training on April 30.

Councillor Megan Dukalskis said Mr Sage had tarnished the council’s reputation and amended the motion to have him cover the cost of the training.

“We have already paid for this training, which he attended and chose not to abide by,” she said.

“I’m fed up with a fallout caused by Mayor Sage in the course of failing to abide by our Code of Conduct.

“Our council had been made a mockery by these behaviours and I cannot believe how much time and effort has been devoted to cleaning up the damage.

“The human costs are immeasurable and the financial costs are unwittingly borne by our ratepayers.

District Council of Grant Mayor Richard Sage walking into the council meeting ahead of his public apology after the SA Ombudsman found he committed misconduct. Picture: Jessica Ball

“We have seen the key, long term, dedicated by staff leave our organisation, which are irreplaceable on many levels, which may be attributed to this issue.”

Councillor Shirley Little seconded the amendment saying the events leading to the decision spanned years and had led to the loss of “very knowledgeable and valuable staff” – some of whom were present at the meeting.

“I am personally devastated with the loss of these people and I believe it is too little, too late and these bridges will never be mended,” she said.

“As a long term elected member I apologise to the staff who found their positions within the council were no longer tenable.”

A letter written by Mayor Sage during the investigation said the charter was not valid with many of the rules “determined by staff through hallway discussions … as a control measure” and were impacting his obligation to represent the community.

“I have refused to commit to the charter because it was not compliant with my beliefs, and I consider it not lawful and that it is still a work in progress and a point of conjecture,” Mr Sage said.

“I have never refused to follow the Charter of Expected Behaviours except where it compromises my obligations of those who have elected me to represent them and the obligations under the Local Government Act, so that I can legally represent my constituents.”

While Mr Lines said it was not necessary to consider each alleged breach, he rejected Mr Sage’s argument saying the charter has been endorsed by council only months earlier.

South Australian Ombudsman Wayne Lines. Picture: Tait Schmaal

“It is sufficient to point out that (Mr) Sage has himself accepted that he has breached various provisions under the charter,” he said.

Mr Lines also found he should have declared a material conflict of interest and left the chambers during an October 1, 2019 Special Meeting called to discuss his alleged charter breaches during interviews with Triple M Radio and the ABC.

During the Triple M broadcast Mr Sage criticised the previous chief executive and the “toxic” culture of the council.

Mr Lines said the mayor’s reasoning for his actions was “somewhat inconsistent”.

“On the one hand, he has stated that the outcome of the meeting had the potential to damage his reputation and position as mayor, therefore having a direct personal consequence for him, but at the same time stating that there was no benefit or detriment to him,” he said.

Mr Line found there was no need to further investigate a second alleged conflict of interest in relation to a replacement for the mayoral vehicle on October 4, 2019 as the agenda item was set aside to be considered at a later date.

He also found Mr Sage had not breached the Code of Conduct by disclosing information relating to the chief executive recruitment process when he advised staff council employee Jane Fetherstonhaugh had been offered the position but turned it down.

Then District Council of Grant acting chief executive officer Jane Fetherstonhaugh. Picture: Supplied

He instead wrote to council with an informal recommendation.

Co-complainants submitted a statement describing the consequences as “weak” and calling for a public apology and commitment to the charter after a provision report was handed down.

“We feel the penalty is not severe enough for the mayor,” the statement read.

“As a result of his refusal to abide with the Charter of Behaviour he has wreaked havoc on the council resulting in the Deputy CEO not taking the CEO position and then leaving the council … He has previously apologised to the council as a report from an ombudsman and nothing changes.”

Council is required to report back to the Ombudsman by June 1 outlining what steps have been taken.