Censured Cr Milne in hot water

SUPPORTERS are rallying to help Katie Milne to pay large legal costs she incurred taking Rally Australia to the federal court.

Poll

Should Katie Milne have been censured?

This poll ended on 17 April 2010.

Yes

43%

No

56%

Undecided

0%

This is not a scientific poll. The results reflect only the opinions of those who chose to participate.

OUTSPOKEN Greens Party Councillor, Katie Milne, faces the sack or suspension from Tweed Shire Council if she again breaches the code-of-conduct rules after being formally censured by other councillors for mishandling a money donation.

And allegations that she has again breached the rules could come sooner rather than later, with some of her colleagues furious she stayed in Tuesday’s council meeting to argue against her censure and hinting they have new issues to complain about.

According to the council’s corporate services director Troy Green, once a councillor is censured twice for breaching a council’s Code of Conduct the matter is referred to the NSW Department of Local Government which can then either sack or suspend the councillor.

During a heated debate, Cr Milne was accused of making the council “look like a circus”.

At one stage she warned her colleagues if they are to strictly enforce rules about receiving gifts:

“You better watch out when the Easter bunny comes, you are not allowed to receive Easter eggs.”

Her fellow councillors attacked her for receiving a donation through a council post office box towards her court costs from fighting against last year’s world championship Repco Rally Australia event, and continuing to oppose the rally after the council voted to support it.

She was also attacked for attending a fundraiser to help pay her court costs.

An independent conduct review committee of three outside experts investigated a complaint lodged by Kingscliff-based council watcher Barbara Fitzgibbon.

The review committee found she breached three sections of the code of conduct: by takingpart in fundraising for her court costs she fell foul of a rule against seeking gifts or benefits; by receiving a donation she violated a regulation against accepting “an offer of money” and in forwarding it to the fundraisers, the No Rally Group, she failed to disclose it and surrender the gift to the council.