Former Deputy Mayor Jesse Jacobs had been sanctioned over an extraordinary breach of local government regulations dating back to 2021 that saw a park on the street he resides on receive a $150,000 upgrade.
The ruling from the Local Government Standards Panel appeared on their website only recently after Cr Jacobs was unsuccessful in a State Administrative Tribunal appeal against the decision.
The complaint, from Mayor Patrick Hall, alleged that Cr Jacobs, who was Deputy Mayor at the time, failed to declare a clear conflict of interest on multiple occasions which resulted in funding of $150,000 being approved by Council to upgrade an area of public open space known as the Gianatti Parklands, which is located on Gianatti Ramble in East Cannington.
On July 21, 2020, Cr Jacobs moved a petition to upgrade the park, a petition started by a close neighbour and signed by Cr Jacobs’ wife.
In November 2020, Director Warren Bow send an email to elected members advising the City had been successful in obtaining a significant sum of unbudgeted grant funding through the Federal Government’s Local Roads and Community Infrastructure Program and listing proposed projects.
Gianatti Parklands was not on that list, however by the time Agenda Papers appeared for the Strategic Issues Briefing on November 19, Gianatti Parklands had been added, with Cr Jacobs speaking strongly in support.
The funding was decided at a council meeting on December 8, 2020, with Cr Jacobs failing to declare an interest despite living in close proximity to the parklands.
He spoke against a motion by Cr Amanda Spencer-Teo to remove Gianatti Parklands from the funding.
Mr Hall contended that if councillors had been aware of the conflict, the public perception, if the matter were made public and raised by the media, there was a likelihood that council may not have endorsed funding for the project.
Cr Jacobs was given an opportunity to respond to the complaint however he failed to do so within the required timeframe.
The panel found that in the first three instances where Cr Jacobs could have disclosed his interest, he was not required to do so.
However the panel found he was in breach when he failed to declare an impartiality breach at the council meeting.
In determining the penalty, the panel disregarded Cr Jacobs belief he should receive no sanction, noting that based on his comments, he appeared to be unclear as to the relevant types of interest that must be disclosed.
The panel ruled that within four months, Cr Jacobs should undertake a training course in conflicts of interest.
