Dear Editor,
A recent article in The Wombat Post criticised me and fellow councillors for walking out of the September 16 Council meeting, implying that our action was an “abrogation of responsibility.” I want to address these claims and clarify the principles behind my decision.
The matter in question was confidential, and respecting that confidentiality is essential. I can confirm that I left the meeting, and I want to be transparent about my decision to do so. This choice was made after careful consideration of the legal and ethical complexities involved, ensuring that I acted in a manner aligned with my responsibilities as a councillor.
Though contacted by The Wombat Post, I couldn’t respond promptly as I was seeking advice on the issue’s sensitivity.
Leaving the meeting was a decision made with the integrity of the process in mind, not an attempt to avoid my duties. Suggesting that this was a tactic to “prevent a vote” oversimplifies the situation and ignores the broader ethical considerations at play.
Earlier this month, I moved a motion to publicly make the Mayor’s diary retrospectively accessible to promote transparency and build community trust in Council decision-making. That vote was lost 3-4, with the Mayor using his casting vote. My actions at the September 16 meeting reflected my dedication to ensuring accountability and the community’s best interests.
In line with this commitment, I collaborated to establish the Chamber of Peoples—Hepburn (formerly Community Voice). The Chamber of Peoples is focused on improving local governance processes by involving Hepburn Shire residents in meaningful ways, ensuring their voices shape decisions that affect our shared future. It aims to connect democratic organisations and individuals within the shire and foster more effective participation.
The Wombat Post plays an important role in keeping the community informed. However, assumptions made without fully understanding the context can lead to misinterpretations that may undermine public trust. It’s crucial that we continue to seek deeper understanding, especially in complex matters involving Council decisions.
It is misguided to suggest that this action sets a “dangerous precedent.” Councillors must always act according to their best judgment, ensuring decisions are made with accountability and transparency in mind. Sometimes, that means making difficult choices, even when they are not fully understood by others.
As I stand for re-election to the Hepburn Shire Council, I remain committed to openness, fairness, and accountability. My actions at that meeting, while perhaps not popular with all, were made with these values in mind. Informed voters should consider these principles when casting their ballots rather than being swayed by incomplete narratives.
In closing, councillors are elected to make decisions in the community’s best interests. It is important to engage with the facts and complexities of each situation before making judgments, and I urge the community to take that approach.
Tim Drylie,
Creswick
