{"id":90464,"date":"2014-11-30T22:30:26","date_gmt":"2014-11-30T12:30:26","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/southburnett.com.au\/news2\/?p=90464"},"modified":"2020-08-24T10:04:44","modified_gmt":"2020-08-24T00:04:44","slug":"tribunal-dismisses-latest-complaints","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/southburnett.com.au\/news2\/2014\/11\/30\/tribunal-dismisses-latest-complaints\/","title":{"rendered":"Tribunal Dismisses Latest Complaints"},"content":{"rendered":"\n\n\n
\n\n\n\n
\"\"<\/center><\/p>\n

Councillor Takes Comfort From Ruling<\/strong><\/p>\n

Cr Damien Tessmann, (above), told\u00a0southburnett.com.au\u00a0today that he had always maintained he was not given the opportunity to defend himself during the consideration of the original allegation that he misled Council.<\/strong><\/p>\n

“The thrust of my comments before complying with the requirement to apologise at the February meeting was along this theme,” he said.<\/p>\n

“With this finding, the Tribunal has agreed that I did not get that opportunity to defend myself.<\/p>\n

“The Panel\u2019s investigation against me, I believe, was essentially along the lines of being charged with a crime, investigated by the police and having the matter heard in a court without an opportunity to defend yourself.<\/p>\n

\u201cI understand that the Tribunal could not re-examine the original sustaining of the complaint that I misled Council as the Local Government Act expressly rules out any appeals, something I wished to have appealed through legal avenues but again the Act ensures such decisions are beyond the reproach of even the Supreme Court.<\/p>\n

“I do feel some level of vindication that the Tribunal agreed I did seek an opportunity to present my defence to the Panel and was denied it.<\/strong><\/p>\n

\u201cThis is why the LGAQ wholeheartedly supported the motions I put forward and why the Local Government Act needs a major shake-up in this regard.<\/p>\n

“I will continue be at the forefront of lobbying the government for this to occur and will continue to campaign for fair and decent treatment of all Councillors by the Department with the State Government.”<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

November 30, 2014<\/strong><\/p>\n

The Local Government Remuneration and Discipline Tribunal has dismissed complaints against South Burnett councillor Damien Tessmann which were lodged in the wake of his “February apology”.<\/p>\n

On February 18, Cr Tessmann read out a prepared statement to Council\u00a0after he was ordered by the Local Government Regional Conduct Review Panel to apologise to fellow Councillors for allegedly providing misleading information at a Council meeting in 2012.<\/p>\n

Cr Tessmann read out his statement but remained adamant he had done nothing wrong, saying he had not had the opportunity to defend himself and “murderers, rapists and paedophiles have access to a fairer trial … even though we are democratically elected representatives of our community”.<\/p>\n

Two South Burnett residents then lodged separate complaints claiming Cr Tessmann had engaged in misconduct by “exercising his responsibilities in a way that is not honest or impartial by making inaccurate, false and misleading statements to Council about the conduct of a discipline matter previously determined by a Regional Conduct Review Panel”.<\/p>\n

Given the seriousness of the allegation, the complaints of misconduct were referred to the\u00a0Local Government Remuneration and Discipline Tribunal.<\/p>\n

The Tribunal ruled on Friday that the allegations had not been sustained.<\/strong><\/p>\n

The Tribunal noted that Cr Tessmann had believed he would have an opportunity to state his case with the Regional Conduct Review Panel before any decision was made on the original complaint against him.<\/p>\n

“This was as a result of a communication breakdown at various levels including a lack of clarity in the Department’s Notice of Hearing and a belief by Cr Tessmann that in being requested to provide telephone contact details he would be contacted by the Panel,” the decision notes.<\/p>\n

“The Tribunal also came to the conclusion that Cr Tessmann genuinely believed he had arranged to make a verbal submission to the Panel before<\/em> it decided his case. ”<\/p>\n

The Tribunal recommended that the content of the Department’s Notice of Hearing letters be clarified and improved to mitigate the risks of further misunderstanding about procedures for hearings in future cases.<\/p>\n

* * *<\/strong><\/h2>\n

Background To The Tribunal’s Ruling<\/strong><\/h3>\n

In January this year the Review Conduct Review Panel (RCRP) ordered Cr Tessmann to issue an apology and pay a $1000 fine in response to a complaint lodged by Windera resident Ralph Percy linked to the sale of a portion of Adermann Park in Kingaroy to St John\u2019s Lutheran School.<\/p>\n

Mr Percy\u2019s complaint alleged Cr Tessmann had provided misleading information to the South Burnett Regional Council at its meeting on June 20, 2012 and\/or its meeting on July 18, 2012, regarding the support of the Adermann family for the sale of part of the park.<\/p>\n

Mr Percy also alleged Cr Tessmann had not engaged in meaningful community consultation about the matter.<\/p>\n

The RCRP rejected the half of Mr Percy\u2019s complaint relating to community consultation but found \u201con the balance of probabilities\u201d Cr Tessmann had misled fellow councillors about the Adermann family\u2019s views.<\/p>\n

However, Cr Tessmann said he had circulated the Adermann family\u2019s actual response to his fellow Councillors via email prior to the meeting to ensure they were fully appraised of the family\u2019s views.<\/strong><\/p>\n

He said his statements in the Council chamber had simply been a broad summary designed to protect the family\u2019s privacy.<\/p>\n

Cr Tessmann tried to appeal the decision on the grounds that he had not been given the opportunity to present this evidence to the RCRP.<\/p>\n

But under the current Act, the RCRP\u2019s decisions cannot be appealed.<\/p>\n

In February, Cr Tessmann paid the $1000 fine and made a public apology at the SBRC\u2019s public meeting in accordance with the RCRP\u2019s instructions.<\/p>\n

Related articles:<\/strong><\/p>\n