By BRIDGET COOK
THE future of Casey’s CEO will be decided following court proceedings, after he was charged with two alleged breaches of the Local Government Act.
Mike Tyler has been charged over allegedly failing to notify the mayor and the council of a conflict of interest in a matter for which he had authority.
It is further alleged that Mr Tyler then committed council resources and funds to a matter in which he had a personal interest, without notifying the mayor or council as required under the legislation.
The case involves a sexual harassment claim lodged against Mr Tyler by a former female staff member in 2010.
Mr Tyler has been summonsed to appear in the Dandenong Magistrates Court on Thursday, 18 April.
The maximum penalty for each offence is 120 penalty units, or about $16,900.
Mr Tyler and the council were the subject of a harassment claim made in July 2010.
A confidential settlement was reached at a VCAT mediation hearing in May 2011.
Casey councillors were not made aware of the matter until after the settlement was reached – including details of the allegations and legal and settlement costs.
After becoming aware of the complaint, Mr Tyler instructed the council’s director of corporate services to deal with it.
In July last year an independent investigation into the handling of the matter was prepared by Simon Bailey from solicitors DLA Piper.
It stated that because the director of corporate services reported directly to Mr Tyler, there was a risk that the director might be perceived as having a conflict of interest between the interests of the council and the interests of his immediate superior.
“Had the council been aware of the issue, it could have taken steps to manage this risk,” the report stated.
Last year, the council said Mr Tyler did not recognise that he had a conflict of interest and therefore did not report this to the first council meeting.
In an email on 28 July 2010, when Mr Tyler asked the director of corporate services to deal with the complaint, Mr Tyler said: “while the allegations relate to me, I believe that legally I do not have a conflict of interest under the LGA.”
But Mr Bailey said he believed that Mr Tyler did appear to have had a conflict of interest in respect of the complaint and the proceedings.
He said it appeared that written disclosure of Mr Tyler’s interest was not made to then mayor, Lorraine Wreford. However, Ms Wreford was aware of the matter from the outset.
Mr Tyler did not disclose the conflict of interest to the council until 17 May 2011, after councillors became aware of the complaint.
The independent report cleared the council in its handling of the matter, but councillors resolved to refer the findings to the Local Government Department Inspectorate for resolution.
With the inspectorate this month charging Mr Tyler, Casey Mayor Amanda Stapledon said the council would consider the outcomes of the court process before deciding on any future action.
“Council will not be funding Mr Tyler’s defence,” she said.
“Mr Tyler is entitled to due process, and until the matter concludes, it is inappropriate for council to make any further comment.
“Once the matter is finalised, council will advise residents of the outcome.”
The inspectorate said it would make no further comment on this matter before the courts, nor any other matters involving the Casey council.
