State Ombudsman orders Gawler Council to censure councillor Ian Tooley for failing to apologise
It has cost Gawler ratepayers thousands of dollars, taken almost two years to resolve and involved an investigation by the State Ombudsman — only to end with a councillor getting a slap on the wrist.
North & North East
Don't miss out on the headlines from North & North East. Followed categories will be added to My News.
A Gawler councillor censured for failing to apologise for multiple breaches of the council’s code of conduct has described the process as “a waste of time and ratepayers’ money”.
State Ombudsman Wayne Lines investigated Cr Ian Tooley after a complaint was laid against him by Gawler Mayor Karen Redman.
In an official report, Mr Lines recommended Cr Tooley should be censured by Gawler Council for failing to apologise at two meetings for the breaches.
Ms Redman went to Mr Lines after Cr Tooley argued he should be allowed to read a personal statement as the apology.
The statement dealt with various events involving Cr Tooley and several councillors which began in February last year.
They included two committee meetings at which Cr Tooley allegedly swore at other elected members, allegedly telling one of them he was “a f......g low life”.
The events led to a councillor lodging a code of complaint against Cr Tooley which was investigated by an Adelaide law firm at the cost of $11,000.
The inquiry by Kelledy Jones found Cr Tooley had breached the council’s code of conduct 13 times during the committee meetings, email exchanges with chief executive Henry Inat and a media interview with a local newspaper.
Kelledy Jones recommended in November last year that Cr Tooley should be ordered by the council to apologise.
The apology was put on the agenda for council meetings in April and May, leading to verbal exchanges between Cr Tooley and Ms Redman over his personal statement.
Ms Redman then went to Mr Lines, who found Cr Tooley guilty of misconduct and recommended the council censure him.
The matter was discussed at a recent council meeting, where Ms Redman declared a conflict of interest and absented herself.
Cr Tooley again tried to read his personal explanation but was refused permission by acting chairman David Hughes.
Elected members voted 5-5 on whether Cr Tooley should be censured, with Cr Hughes using his casting vote.
Cr Tooley said it was a disappointing outcome for Gawler ratepayers, who had spent $11,000 on a “pointless exercise”.
“This whole thing has achieved absolutely nothing,” he said.
“I was investigated for a series of trivial items put together over six months for a code of conduct which was a weaponised attack against me.
“At the end of almost two years, what has happened? Has there been an improvement with the relationships on council? No. They are even more acrimonious than they were before.”
Cr Tooley, a former high school principal, said there had been no attempt at mediation before the code of conduct complaint was investigated.
“These complaints should go through a grievance process to see if they can be resolved before money is spent on lawyers,” he said.
“Instead, they are a waste of time and a waste of ratepayers’ money.”
Cr Tooley said the dispute could have been resolved if he had been allowed to read his statement.
“I was never given an opportunity to deliver my apology statement,” he said.
“Would I have apologised at the end of reading it? Now they will never know.”
Cr Tooley said the censure motion had no real adverse impact.
“All that has happened is I have been given a slap on the wrist,” he said.
“The whole thing has been nonsense and unnecessary. It’s just been plain dumb.”
Ms Redman declined to comment.
HOW THE IAN TOOLEY SAGA UNFOLDED
February 13, 2018:
Cr Ian Tooley clashes with Gawler Council’s infrastructure committee chairman Cr Kevin Fischer about meeting procedure, banging the table with his fist. He is asked to leave the meeting but refuses. Cr Fischer adjourns the meeting. Cr Tooley allegedly tells Cr Paul Koch outside the meeting that “there are two f.....g rules at this council, rules for some, rules for others”.
February 27, 2018
Cr Tooley tells a full council meeting that his behaviour at the infrastructure committee meeting was caused by his belief that he was being “bullied”. He says councillors “are treated differently, some are shown leniency and favouritism while others are shut down”. He agrees he refused to leave the meeting and criticised Mayor Karen Redman and chief executive officer Henry Inat.
April 10, 2018:
Cr Koch obtains permission to make a personal statement to a meeting of the infrastructure committee that Cr Tooley’s behaviour had “created an unsafe environment and workplace”. Cr Tooley objects but is not given permission to respond. An argument develops over the minutes from the February meeting. Cr Tooley allegedly tells Cr Adrian Shackley that he is a “f......g low life” and also abuses Cr Koch. Cr Tooley then holds up a handwritten sign with the word “ambush”.
April 11, 2018:
Cr Tooley sends an email to Mr Inat, Cr Fischer and Ms Redman complaining about Cr Koch being allowed to make a personal statement criticising him to the infrastructure committee. Cr Tooley asks four questions, saying Mr Inat and Cr Fischer had “failed to uphold correct meeting procedure”.
April 23, 2018:
Mr Inat responds to Cr Tooley’s email but inadvertently sends the correspondence to other elected members, along with legal advice he had received about Cr Koch’s statement to the infrastructure committee. Cr Tooley emails Mr Inat, expressing his disappointment and embarrassment that his private correspondence has been shared with other councillors. Mr Inat apologises, provoking an angry response from Cr Tooley.
April 25, 2019:
Cr Tooley tells the Gawler newspaper, The Bunyip, there are factions within the council. He says he and other councillors “are treated badly, unfairly, differently and, in this case, spitefully in the chamber”. Cr Tooley says he has complained regularly to Ms Redman and Mr Inat about “discrimination, double standards, trickery and an unlevel playing field”.
July 23, 2018:
Cr Koch lodges a code of conduct complaint against Cr Tooley with Ms Redman. Law firm Kelledy Jones is engaged to investigate the complaint.
November, 2018
Five new councillors are elected at the local government elections. Kelledy Jones delivers its report. Finds Cr Tooley breached the council’s code of conduct 13 times. First meeting of newly elected council votes to order him to apologise.
April 23, 2019:
Cr Tooley’s public apology is put on the agenda for a full council meeting but he instead insists on first reading a personal explanation. Ms Redman refuses to grant permission, asking him if he intends to apologise. Cr Tooley says he will not be making an apology if he cannot read his statement.
May 2, 2019:
Ms Redman complains to State Ombudsman Wayne Lines that Cr Tooley has failed to comply with an order by the council to apologise. Cr Tooley tells investigators that he wanted to make a personal statement but did not want to apologise.
May 28, 2019:
Cr Tooley is given another opportunity to apologise at a full council meeting. Cr Tooley disputes the accuracy of the minutes from the April meeting. Ms Redman asks him several times if he intends to apologise. Cr Tooley repeatedly refuses, saying he remains dissatisfied with the accuracy of the minutes.
May 31, 2019:
Mr Lines decides to conduct a full investigation into the complaint against Cr Tooley.
August 27, 2019:
Ms Redman adjourns a meeting when Cr Tooley refuses to stop reading a personal statement questioning decisions made by council while he was on annual leave for two months. He accuses Ms Redman of using “typical bullying tactics” to stop him speaking.
November 18, 2019:
Mr Lines finds Cr Tooley has breached the Local Government Act by failing to apologise and is guilty of misconduct. He recommends Cr Tooley is formally censured.
November 26, 2019:
Full council meeting considers code of conduct complaint against Cr Tooley. Ms Redman declares conflict of interest and leaves the meeting. Cr Tooley seeks leave to make his personal statement but is refused permission by acting chairman David Hughes. He says he has been “denied natural justice” and leaves the meeting. Councillors vote 5-5 on whether to censure Cr Tooley. Cr Hughes uses his casting vote to make the vote 6-5 in favour.