Wyndham deputy mayor, Josh Gilligan, has launched an extraordinary attack on his colleagues claiming he feels “sick and embarrassed” to have to serve alongside “such incredibly poor elected officials”.
The criticism, which is likely to further inflame tension on council, came in a letter that Cr Gilligan addressed to the mayor and his fellow councillors in relation to an upcoming VCAT hearing involving himself and Cr Jasmine Hill, who is appealing against her suspension for misconduct.
Cr Hill was found guilty of bullying two council staffers by the Councillor Conduct Panel (CCP) in November after a complaint was lodged by Cr Gilligan.
Last week lawyers for Wyndham council notified VCAT that they would not join Cr Gilligan as a party in the upcoming appeal.
At Tuesday night’s council meeting, a notice of motion from Cr Gilligan asking that the council fund his legal representation for the appeal, as it had for Cr Hill’s defence before the CCP, was defeated by six votes to two.
In the letter seen by the Star Weekly, Cr Gilligan said that these decisions breached the council’s zero tolerance towards bullying and that in the future it would be used as a case study for how not to handle such matters.
“A majority of my colleagues have chosen to send a clear message to our workforce this week — the right to a safe and healthy workplace at Wyndham is not a given anymore,” Cr Gilligan wrote in the letter.
“Shame on each and every councillor who has used their authority to create this scenario.”
In response, Wyndham mayor Jennie Barrera said that the matter was still subject to legal proceedings and that any further comment risked being prejudicial to the outcome.
After beginning her four month suspension from council in December, Cr Hill lodged an appeal with VCAT just before Christmas and was reinstated pending the outcome.
Cr Hill’s appeal is set to be heard in June.
Cr Gilligan said in the letter that while Cr Hill had a right to appeal, he was angered by the way she had been welcomed back onto council while he was being left to fight the matter on his own.
“You won’t see me in a photo alongside a bully because I value my integrity and solitary for those workers over Facebook likes. It makes me sick and embarrassed to have to serve alongside such incredibly poor elected officials,” wrote Cr Gilligan, noting there are “some caught up in this who supported strong moral action on this matter all the way”.
Cr Hill declined to comment.
Despite introducing the notice of motion to ensure fairness in legal representation, Cr Gilligan, along with Cr Hill, had to leave the chamber while it was debated due to conflict of interest.
Some councillors, including Cr Robert Szatkowski, expressed surprise at the motion, noting that it wasn’t included on the draft agenda for the meeting.
Cr Szatkowski went on to argue against it on the grounds that Cr Gilligan brought the original case against Cr Hill of his own accord and that as council was not a party to it, it shouldn’t spend ratepayers’ money funding the case.
He also noted that as the defendant, Cr Hill had the right to seek council funding for her CCP hearing, but that she was not being funded for her VCAT appeal.
“Neither party has funding for this process and that is procedural fairness,” he said.
Cr Adele Hegeditch added an amendment that any funding to Cr Gilligan be capped at $50,000, close to the amount council is believed to have contributed to Cr Hill’s defence.
Cr Hegedich and mayor Jennie Barrera voted to support Cr Gilligan’s motion.
Cr Mia Shaw was absent.
