29/01/25 the complainant wrote to the current CEO following the CCC decision to refer the bulk of the complaint to TRC to investigate.
05/03/25 the CEO responded stating the following:
‘I have assessed your letter against the investigations already undertaken and the responses provided to you previously. I do not intend to provide a further response on allegations which have been fully addressed. Further, given that your concerns have been fully investigated and our Complaints Management Policy and process have been exhausted, TRC will not enter into further correspondence with you in relation to these allegations. Should you continue to repeat the allegations previously raised, TRC will undertake an assessment of your behaviour in accordance with our Unreasonable Customer Conduct Policy and may determine to you to be an unreasonable customer.’
The above statement contains assertions that are verifiably false. This conduct amounts to attempting to threaten a complainant using false claims and unfounded statements as justification to make the threat. I view this as a very serious matter indeed.
TRC has at no stage investigated the CCC complaint referral. They refused to do so, falsely advising the CCC they had investigated the allegations previously. This was done during the current CEO’s tenure as most senior council officer.
TRC’s responded to formal complaints dated 21st and 29th July. The second response was belatedly written 19th August. Given that both responses contained false and misleading information, the complainant did not respond further, instead referring the matter to the CCC.
The complaint referred to council by the CCC raised allegations of false claims made in councils 19/08/24 response, and included allegations in relation to conduct that occurred after that date. This includes conduct pertaining to the Sept 2024 council meeting, where the decision was made to demolish the pavilion.
The CEO’s claim that council had ‘fully investigated’ and ‘fully addressed’ matters in July that occurred post that date are literally impossible, and are of course completely false.
The CEO’s position being that in July or early August 2024, TRC had fully addressed allegations contained within the Crime and Corruption Commission referral that:
1. Related to TRC’s 19/08/24 complaint response;
2. Pertained to issues that occurred post July 2024;
3. Allegations raised previously that council had never addressed;
4. Allegations that had not been previously raised with council;
4. Allegations that Council had responded to in July/August by willfully providing false information and then seeking to use that false information as a mechanism to deny providing a further response.
The position is clearly untenable. When taking into consideration the underlying threat, the implications of these actions is elevated significantly.
It gets worse!
19/03/25 CEO made a statement in the Express Newspaper seeking to portray the complainant as simply unhappy the Pavilion was going to be demolished
‘individuals and groups will be disappointed when they do not get their desired outcome as has occurred in this instance.’
No mention whatsoever of any of the very serious allegations that had had not been addressed. No accountability. No transparency. Just spin, avoidance and deflection.
21/03/25 The complainant formally responded to the CEO with a third formal complaint to council. Within that 20 page document, 26 individually numbered key allegations and questions were detailed plus additional sub questions. This complaint specifically concerning allegations that TRC has never addressed nor responded to.
26/03/25 CEO responded with a barely two paragraph response totalling approx.100 words.
In relation to six questions – including if the recommendations of independent engineers had been similarly ignored in relation to other buildings, the response was to lodge RTI requests. (To lodge such a broad scale RTI as to cover all TRC buildings would be cost prohibitive potentially costing tens of thousands of dollars). In all, just a single allegation was responded to – seeking specific information. Of note this allegation did not relate to the serious allegations of false information supplied by council, nor the cover up attempts.
29/03/25 The complainant wrote to the CEO, supplying the requested information. Within the response an additional 27th formal question was added:
Do you as CEO, guarantee that all assets managed by TRC are currently safe to use, having been: Regularly inspected by independent engineers (as per regulatory requirements), and that any structural defects identified as posing potential risks to safety, have been rectified within the timeframes and manner specified in engineering reports?
07/04/25 CEO responds. All other questions in the complaint are avoided completely including the above. In relation to the single allegation that was responded to – council officer bias – the response was fascicle.
Instead of seeking to:
· Correct the public record on false statements;
· Provide answers to questions in the public interest including relating to the safety of other buildings;
· Investigate and respond to serious allegations of misconduct that TRC has never addressed;
The CEO elected instead, to use the vast majority of the two page response to further threaten the complainant.
Yet again, false claims were made to attempt to justify the threat, Including repeating the false claim the complaint ‘has been fully investigated and addressed’ by council.
In June 2025, documents were obtained under RTI that changed everything.
As detailed in the https://savethemalandapavilion.com/misconduct-exposedpoints 4-6, this included incontrovertible evidence proving TRC supplied false information in documentation to the Crime and Corruption Commission.
Under the Crime and Corruption Act 2001 (section 218), A person must not give the commission a document containing information the person knows is false or misleading in a material particular. Maximum penalty— 85 penalty units or 1 year's imprisonment. This information was supplied to the CCC by other council officers, while the current CEO was freshly in the role.
18/06/25 A video was released https://youtu.be/IwyUlTHbxL0 dropping the bombshell information obtained under RTI that TRC had provided false information in the Corrupt Conduct Assessment Form. This form is a statutory requirement in accessing if a referral for potential corrupt conduct needed to be immediately referred to the CCC. Within the signed document TRC stated: Although the allegations if proven could amount to corrupt conduct, the decision-maker is in possession of information that indicates that the allegations are not accurate.' TRC used that false information to determine a self-referral was not required.
19/06/25 TRC issues a statement from the CEO in relation to the video claims.
It is apparent the CEO when making that statement, did not believe that the author of the video was in possession of the Corrupt Conduct Assessment Form. There is simply no other logical explanation as to why, when such serious documentation had been revealed, the CEO would elect to provide further false information, further lie and deceive the public.
To go through the CEO’s statements systematically:
CEO: Some members of our community have continued to allege that we provided factually inaccurate information to the community and other agencies regarding the condition of the pavilion prior to its closure. They even go as far as saying we risked the safety of people and organisations who used the facility. We vehemently reject these allegations.
FACT: The documents have been released that prove beyond any doubt that Tablelands Regional Council was warned of seven potential and an actual risk to public safety in an independent engineering report in June 2023 and did nothing. Further, a council officer directly warned superiors in March 2024 about serious concerns regarding public safety. Yet the entire time, TRC has claimed it had no prior warning of any risk to public safety prior to late May 2024 when it closed the Pavilion! The CEO can lie, deflect and ‘vehemently reject’ all she likes – the facts are indisputable.
CEO: We have provided the Crime and Corruption Commission (CCC) with our corrupt conduct assessment report regarding previous allegations, which were found not to be substantiated.
FACT: The Corrupt Conduct Assessment Form used by TRC to decide NOT TO self-refer corruption to the CCC. It was subsequently obtained and publicly released by the complainant and can be found here: https://acrobat.adobe.com/id/urn:aaid:sc:AP:48e0f97a-82ab-4b1f-964d-f0164fbc4535
The information TRC used to decide it did not need to refer the allegations was false – was a lie. TRC found the allegations to not be substantiated, using false evidence it had concocted, in a document TRC never thought would be publicly released. Now the CEO, elects to double down, apparently not believing the author of the video was in possession of this document.
CEO: The CCC acknowledged that TRC had exhausted its complaints management process and advised it would take no further action in relation to the matter.
FACT: The CCC did say this however it did so based on the assumption the following false information supplied by TRC under the current CEO’s tenure was factual:
1. That TRC had fully investigated and responded to complaints – including the contents of the CCC referral – A LIE!
2. False information, made up by TRC in a formal document that is a statutory requirement to determine if a corruption referral to the CCC is required.
3. Then submitting said false statement in documentation to the CCC, 18/02/25 despite the fact there could have been no reasonable doubt, based on evidence TRC held, that this specific ‘information’ council had made up then supplied was anything other than false.
CEO: We understand it can be hard to accept facts that may be contrary to a personal position or view members of the community may hold strongly, even in the face of incontrovertible evidence. It is a natural response for some.
FACT: This statement is designed to smear the good character of the complainant who revealed documentation exposing the serious wrongdoing of council. It is reprehensible, and conduct unbecoming the most senior council officer, that this woman would attempt to effectively portray the complainant as unhinged.
Further what the ‘incontrovertible evidence’ actually does is proves the CEO is STILL deceiving the public.
CEO: That said, these baseless allegations have no place in respectful discussion and serve only to harm and divide our community
FACT: The only thing ‘baseless’ is the statements made by the CEO in this media release AFTER information was publicly revealed proving that claims that TRC has been relying on for the last 14 months are false – are fabricated – are lies. The CEO apparently regards 'respectful discussion' as her own spin and electing to avoid completely addressing allegations or serous wrongdoing, or even answering direct questions! No 'respect' whatsoever afforded towards the complainant by the CEO refusing to converse and making false claims! The CEO could have entered the role as an ambassador for accountability, with a dedicated focus on transparency and exposing the truth. Instead we get this.
CEO: TRC arranges regular independent engineering inspections to monitor the condition of its facilities.
FACT: TRC does NOT conduct regular independent engineering inspections of all its facilities (more to be come on this soon!) In relation to the Pavilion specifically, TRC claimed inspections were annual. RTI documents proved this to be a lie. Further, when engineers advised follow up inspections were required to gain further access, TRC failed to act, instead leaving the building to rot – uninspected for a further five years!
CEO: While we were aware of some structural issues in the pavilion from previous condition reports the recommendations were to manage them as required’
FACT: As outlined elsewhere, successive engineering reports did not state ‘manage as required’ but rather outlined exactly what needed to be undertaken to rectify defects, including ‘take immediate action’ in regard to issues posing potential (and actual) risks to public safety. Instead, TRC did nothing.
CEO: In each instance, including with the 2023 report, we received written confirmation from the independent experts that the pavilion was not considered to be a risk that would prevent its use by the community.
1. FACT: TRC misrepresented an email exchange with TEG to give the impression an engineer was being asked to respond to its own report. RTI documentation revealed that TEG was in fact asked to comment on a different report, from a different engineering firm. TRC then misused and misrepresented that response in formal documentation as a mechanism to attempt to override the contents of the TEG report, to justify TRC’s inaction.
2. FACT: TRC’s attempted spin is that the Pavilion was safe to remain open on the date of inspection, but they choose to omit the second part - that in order to remain safe engineers advice needed to be followed. However, TRC elected to ignore all independent engineering recommendations, including advice to ‘take immediate action’ to address defects, placing the Pavilion in a position where it was not safe, recklessly endangering public safety. This is despite the fact the 2023 report correctly predicted the structural failure of the building within 12 months if action was not taken.
Of note: Dec 2023 brought the wettest cyclone in Australian history – likely placing the Pavilion under ultimate load – thus raising the damage risk on key structural components including the trusses that ultimately failed, from ‘potential’ to ‘actual’ risks to public safety. Yet TRC arranged no additional engineering inspections until May 2024, and left the Pavilion open the entire time.
CEO: There’s nothing more to the situation and we’re not withholding information — we need to move on.
FACT: TRC has wilfully, in a sustained manner, lied, and provided false and misleading information to the public. Indeed that was the basis for the decision made by the complainant to refer the matter to the CCC to begin with! Further, TRC has concocted evidence it used in internal documents it then relied upon to decide not to self-refer a complaint to the CCC. At every stage council has withheld key information in the deliberate attempt to conceal and cover up what has transpired. The only reason these documents have been made public, is as the direct result of an extensive 14 month investigation by the complainant, and very targeted RTI request being lodged at significant expense.
TRC withheld information from councillors and the public. TRC and the CEO, continues to withhold information from the public. How else can one explain her failure to respond to questions and allegations raised in the third formal complaint?!
The CEO would clearly like nothing more than to ‘move on’ from being forced to confront the truth of what has transpired. Unfortunately for the CEO and fortunately for those of us who value accountability and the truth, the legal processes to hold those responsible to account, will not go away, nor should it.
Shortly after making the media statement TRC turned off commenting on the post. Of note this occurred after the following comment was made on the post.
'Tablelands Regional Council you are about to be in a world of legal trouble. The CEO has now further lied in a media release. The coverup is beyond belief.'
Perhaps finally it had hit home to someone within the organisation that the CEO had now gone way too far, with significant litigation risks for council. That person or persons would be correct.
20/06/25 The following day after the media release, a second video was released responding to the CEO and dropping further bombshells. https://youtu.be/9mKGaQDOGP8?si=NxwKSVJGV1qJpXL7
Shortly thereafter the author began a process of publicly releasing documents including the Corrupt Conduct Assessment Form.
There has been a deafening silence from council ever since.
Meanwhile the CEO continues as the most senior council officer receiving annual remuneration estimated at $350,000.00. The CEO has failed to acknowledge any wrongdoing by council whatsoever in relation to this issue. Worse still, as outlined above the CEO has directly engaged in providing false and misleading information, attempting to deny what has occurred.
The CEO is a self-declared lawyer, and owner of a business that advises organisations on ‘professional ethics’, ‘governance’ and ‘cultural change'.
The mind boggles.
Copyright © 2024 Save The Malanda Pavilion - All Rights Reserved.AP:7f43c1b8-f85a