A FRANKSTON councillor could be sent to arbitration to fight misconduct allegations for the second time in two years.

An arbitration process has been initiated between Frankston Council and Cr Steven Hughes. The application was made after seven other councillors signed a written dispute statement alleging he had engaged in misconduct.

The Times asked Frankston Council for the specifics of the allegations. Council CEO Phil Cantillon said “information relating to an internal arbitration process, other than the arbiter’s finding and reasons, is confidential information in accordance with Section 145 of the Local Government Act 2020. On this basis, it would be inappropriate for council to provide further comment at this time.”

All councillors with the exception of Hughes and his son Cr Liam Hughes signed the written dispute statement. Those councillors voted to apply for arbitration at their last public meeting, but did not publicly disclose the details of the allegations being made.

One signatory to the statement, Cr Kris Bolam, said at the meeting that the allegations consisted of “a number of issues that range from behaviour towards councillors, behaviour towards staff, and behaviours towards the community”.

Just last year, Steven Hughes was suspended for a month after the completion of a separate arbitration process. Hughes was hauled into arbitration after making a series of social media posts comparing council’s local laws to those in the Soviet Union and North Korea (“Rebel councillor suspended over Facebook posts” The Times 31/8/21).

At the last council meeting Steven Hughes told councillors he believed the alleged misconduct related to an April meeting which was largely focused on the proposed Frankston Toy Library funding cut. Hughes has been opposed to council’s plans to cut the toy library’s grant funding.

Hughes told The Times last week that he is “unable to speak about the items brought against me due to the confidential nature of the proceedings. However, I will say that there is a significant difference between how I view my obligations as a representative of the Frankston people, such as fighting for rate reduction and community group support, and some of the other councillors’ views.”

Frankston Council did not answer questions about how much the process will cost ratepayers. They also did not comment on how much last year’s arbitration process cost.

Steven Hughes has been campaigning for a rate cut since being elected. When asked about entering a potentially costly arbitration process, he said “you can’t put a price on fighting for the financial justice for Frankston residents and community groups.”

“The overall cost of staying silent cannot be measured and right now, there are a lot of hardworking people in our community who are feeling the brunt of exorbitant rates, with a further council-approved 3.4 per cent on average increase on the way,” he said.

The motion approved by council to begin the arbitration process also read that if Steven Hughes comes to council to take part in a negotiation meeting about the dispute before 21 June, the arbitration application may be withdrawn. Hughes indicated to council that he would not be available to take part in the process until 11 August, but later told The Times that he would make an effort to avoid entering into arbitration.

“I am always willing to work with council and other councillors in the best interests of the Frankston residents. Absolutely, we as a group of councillors should avoid going to arbitration,” he said. “It is odd to announce in an open forum that a discussion date urgently needs to be set in order to avoid arbitration. In essence, this unnecessarily preempts the arbitration process.”

Hughes told last week’s meeting that he only heard about the 21 June deadline that day.

Council CEO Phil Cantillon confirmed that the arbitration may not proceed if the matter can be resolved through other methods. “If the matters which have led to the internal arbitration application can be resolved, the councillors making [the] application may elect to withdraw it,” he said.

First published in the Frankston Times – 14 June 2022

Share.
Leave A Reply

Currently you have JavaScript disabled. In order to post comments, please make sure JavaScript and Cookies are enabled, and reload the page. Click here for instructions on how to enable JavaScript in your browser.

Exit mobile version