Investigation into the conduct of three councillors of former Hurstville City Council now part of Georges River Council and others (Operation Galley)

Summary

Findings 4

Allegations are not findings. A commission's finding or opinion of corrupt conduct or misconduct is not a finding that a person is guilty of a criminal offence, and the commissions say so in their reports.

1. serious corrupt conduct

   Finding

   The Commission found that Mr Badalati engaged in serious corrupt conduct by:

   Report, page 10, Summary of investigation and outcomes

2. serious corrupt conduct

   Finding

   The Commission found that Mr Hindi engaged in serious corrupt conduct by:

   Report, page 11, Summary of investigation and outcomes

3. serious corrupt conduct

   Finding

   The Commission found that Mr Sansom engaged in serious corrupt conduct by:

   Report, page 12, Summary of investigation and outcomes

4. serious corrupt conduct

   Finding

   The Commission found that Mr Uy engaged in serious corrupt conduct by: • providing the following benefits to Mr Badalati and Mr and Mrs Hindi: (i) payment for accommodation for Mr Badalati and Mr and Mrs Hindi at the Beijing International Hotel on the nights of 10 and 13 April 2016 in the amount of about $150 per room per night (approximately $600 total) (ii) payment for the flights for Mr Badalati and Mr and Mrs Hindi from Shenzhen to Beijing on 10 April 2016 in the amount of about $363 per person (approximately $1,089 total) in circumstances where he intended the payments to be an inducement or reward to Mr Badalati and Mr Hindi to use their position as councillors of HCC to favour the interests of Mr Uy and the proponents of the Treacy Street and Landmark Square developments (chapter 5) • paying for Mr Sansom and his partner Wang Hui’s return flights for the trip to China departing 23 March 2014 and returning 6 April 2014 in circumstances where he knew such payment was intended to influence Mr Sansom in carrying out his official functions including in relation to the Treacy Street and Landmark Square developments (chapter 5) • paying the sum of $70,000 to Mr Badalati in 2015 in relation to the Treacy Street development and $100,000 in 2018 in relation to the Landmark Square development in each case as an inducement or reward to use, or for having used, his position as a councillor of HCC to favour the interests of Mr Uy and the proponents of the Treacy Street and Landmark Square developments (chapter 6) • paying the sum of approximately $70,000 to Mr Hindi in 2015 in relation to the Treacy Street development and $100,000 in 2018 in relation to the Landmark Square development in each case as an inducement or reward to use, or for having used, his position as a councillor of HCC to favour the interests of Mr Uy and the proponents of the Treacy Street and Landmark Square developments (chapter 6).

   Report, page 13, Summary of investigation and outcomes

Recommendations 11

1. Recommendation 1

   That the DPE issues guidelines under s 23A of the Local Government Act 1993 addressing: approval and reporting requirements for overseas travel by councillors in an official capacity governance and probity guidance about councillors travelling overseas in an official council capacity, including related funding arrangements.

   Georges River Council/Hurstville City Council – allegations concerning former Councillors and others (Operation Galley), Recommendations for corruption prevention

2. Recommendation 2

   That the Department amends the Model Code of Conduct to prohibit council officials, including councillors, from accepting gifts and benefits (including hospitality and contributions to travel) from property developers. An exemption should be considered for situations where the receipt of hospitality is in connection with a councillor’s attendance at industry briefing, educational, professional development and training events – such as workshops, conferences, seminars, symposiums – that are provided, organised or sponsored by a property developer.

   Report, page 14

3. Recommendation 3

   That the Department provides guidelines for councils stating that, when they propose to form an informal committee consisting of councillors, they should establish: (i) clear terms of reference and objectives for the group, including its role (ii) governance arrangements, accountability and transparency measures (including proper record-keeping requirements and ensuring the group cannot direct staff) (iii) an obligation to report in a timely manner on the deliberations of the group to other councillors (iv) that the group does not have a decision-making function normally carried out through other council processes or activities.

   Georges River Council/Hurstville City Council – allegations concerning former Councillors and others (Operation Galley), Recommendations for corruption prevention

4. Recommendation 4

   That the DPE also provides guidelines for councils in relation to when it is appropriate or inappropriate to establish informal working groups. For example, whether they should be convened to deal with statutory and administrative decisions including planning and other regulatory and procurement matters.

   Report, page 15

5. Recommendation 5

   That the DPE amends the Model Code of Meeting Practice for Local Councils in NSW to require a council’s governing body to provide reasons for approving or rejecting development applications, planning proposals and planning agreements where decisions depart from the recommendations of staff. These reasons should refer to the relevant merits criteria and explain why the decision is more meritorious than the recommended outcome.

   Report, page 15

6. Recommendation 6

   That the DPE seeks amendment of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Regulation 2021 to require councils and other planning authorities to demonstrate that the following have been considered before entering into a planning agreement: the fundamental principles (2.1) in the Planning Agreements Practice Note 2021 the acceptability test (2.5) in the Planning Agreements Practice Note 2021 the methodology or structure that was used to determine the reasonableness of the proposed contribution and its real value the public interest.

   Georges River Council/Hurstville City Council – allegations concerning former Councillors and others (Operation Galley), Recommendations for corruption prevention

7. Recommendation 7

   That the DPE produces guidelines and provides training to assist councillors regarding the proper exercise of their decision-making role in respect of planning agreements.

   Report, page 15

8. Recommendation 8

   That the DPE develops guidance on the essential information that must be submitted with an offer of a planning agreement to a council or other planning authority.

   Report, page 15

9. Recommendation 9

   That the DPE: conducts regular risk-based audits of planning agreements negotiated by councils establishes guidelines for conducting risk-based audits publishes audit outcomes uses the outcomes from audits to improve the processes and procedures governing negotiation and execution of planning agreements.

   Georges River Council/Hurstville City Council – allegations concerning former Councillors and others (Operation Galley), Recommendations for corruption prevention

10. Recommendation 10

    That the DPE seeks amendment of section 375A of the Local Government Act 1993 to include planning agreements in the definition of planning decisions that require a register of votes to be kept.

    Georges River Council/Hurstville City Council – allegations concerning former Councillors and others (Operation Galley), Recommendations for corruption prevention

11. Recommendation 11

    That the DPE issues advice to councils and other planning authorities about the need to consider any proposed instrument, including any draft local environmental plan (LEP), when determining a development application. The advice should address the: case law and principles established by the courts weight to attribute to a draft LEP, with particular regard to its imminence and certainty.

    Georges River Council/Hurstville City Council – allegations concerning former Councillors and others (Operation Galley), Recommendations for corruption prevention

Published responses 3

• 24 month progress report - Dept of Planning, Housing and Infrastructure (DPHI) (pdf)

  Progress report

• 12 month progress report - Dept of Planning, Housing and Infrastructure (DPHI) (pdf)

  Progress report

• Action plan - Department of Planning, Housing and Infrastructure (DPHI) (pdf)

  Action plan

Official documents 2

• Investigation into the conduct of three councillors of former Hurstville City Council now part of Georges River Council and others (Operation Galley)

  Report · 176 pages

  Document details

  Role

  Report

• Download the recommendations for prosecutions (pdf)

  Recommendations

  Document details

  Role

  Recommendations

Coverage

This publisher

• Reports on investigations made public before 2016 are not online: the ICAC keeps only a summary for each, and copies must be requested from the ICAC. Those records hold the ICAC's published summary; findings and recommendations are not extracted.
• The ICAC copyright statement reserves all rights (fair dealing aside). OPAX keeps short verbatim finding and recommendation passages with links to the original report.
• Findings are read from the summary chapter of each report PDF. Where a finding's particulars run past the cited page only the finding statement is kept, and reports whose layout could not be read confidently are marked not_extracted.
• Agency action plans and progress reports are listed as documents; their contents (implementation status for each recommendation) are not parsed.
• Report PDFs without a text layer (scanned images, for example Operation Scania) are not OCRed; their findings stay not_extracted.
• Many pre-2016 summaries give only the month a report was made public; those records carry no date and a note with the month, because the schema holds day-level dates only.