Minutes:
The Sub-committee
received an investigation report into a complaint made by Mrs C Commons which
alleged bullying and harassment by Cllr K Tippins towards Mrs C Commons and behaviour
in contravention of the Shaftesbury Town Council Code of Conduct. The complaint alleged that Cllr K Tippins had
breached parts 2.1a, 2.1b, 2.2b, 2.2c and 2.2g of the Code of Conduct.
The Investigating
Officer, Anna Lake introduced herself to the meeting and highlighted the main
points of her report to the Sub-committee.
Anna Lake confirmed that she had no previous involvement with
Shaftesbury Town Council or anyone from the town council prior to the Code of
Conduct Investigation. Anna Lake
explained that she had approached a selection of potential witnesses, including
those who were at relevant meetings, who might be more supportive of Cllr K
Tippins or of Mrs Clare Commons. The
witnesses who had given statements were those that were specifically involved
with the complaint and all witnesses had signed to confirm that the statements
were accurate. Cllr K Tippins had
declined to meet with the Investigating Officer.
Anna Lake reiterated
that she had approached the investigation with no prior knowledge of
Shaftesbury Town Council, its councillors or officers so there was no bias in
the investigation. As a result of
conducting the investigation into the complaint made by Clare Commons,
Shaftesbury Town Clerk into Cllr K Tippins, the Investigation Officer concluded
that there had been breaches of the Code of Conduct.
The Chairman
invited Cllr K Tippins to ask questions of the Investigating Officer. Cllr K Tippins stated that she hadn’t refused
to meet with Mrs Lake, as she had asked Mrs Lake and Jonathan Mair (Monitoring
Officer) to tell her what she had done wrong.
Cllr Tippins asked why did Mrs Lake not provide her with the evidence
that she had requested? She had asked
for confirmation of what she had said that was deemed to be bullying
behaviour. Cllr K Tippins stated that
she had not received an answer to her questions and she had not been provided
with a transcript of the meetings. Cllr
Tippins stated that she had taken legal advice and should be have been told
exactly what she had done wrong. Cllr
Tippins stated that she had protected rights as a councillor and was able to
ask the town clerk questions in public.
The Deputy
Monitoring Officer, Grace Evans confirmed that it was a legal requirement to
conduct a fair hearing and Cllr K Tippins was entitled to see the allegations
made against her. The Deputy Monitoring
Officer confirmed that Cllr K Tippins had been sent a copy of the complaint
made against her.
Cllr K Tippins
confirmed that she had been sent a copy of the complaint. She had taken legal
advice and was advised that she needed to have the precise allegations and transcripts
of the meetings referred to in the complaint.
The Deputy Monitoring Officer advised the Sub-committee that the
Monitoring Officer was satisfied that the details of the complaint had been
provided to Cllr K Tippins and the legal duty had therefore been complied with.
Cllr K Tippins
stated the Investigating Officer had a copy of all the meetings so there should
have been a transcript of exactly what she had done wrong, Cllr Tippins
expressed her concern that the Investigating Officer was going to interview her
based on perceptions and not fact. Cllr
Tippins also stated that there were many inaccurate statements in the report
that went as far back as 2014 that included members of her family. In response the Deputy Monitoring Officer
advised that there was no legal requirement to provide Cllr K Tippins with a
transcript of the meetings and that Cllr K Tippins had had the opportunity to
respond to the allegations via the
Investigation Officer and had the opportunity today to make at the Code of
Conduct Hearing. The Investigating Officer confirmed that she had provided Cllr
K Tippins with a number of dates and times to meet but she had not responded.
Cllr K Tippins
repeated that she had the right to hear what she had done wrong and asked why
the report had included so many defamatory statements that went back to 2014
and included a time when she was not a councillor. Cllr K Tippins felt that she had been treated
unfairly and prejudicially and that as a result she had complained to the Chief
Executive Matt Prosser and the Monitoring Officer, Jonathan Mair. The Investigating Officer confirmed that her
report did not include reference to any incidents when Cllr K Tippins was not a
town councillor.
In response to a
question from the Chairman Cllr K Tippins confirmed that correspondence from
her solicitor had been sent to the Monitoring Officer, the Investigating
Officer and the Town Clerk. Cllr K
Tippins added that she had lost her mother at the end of March and that the
Town Council, the Investigating Officer, Jacqui Andrews and Jonathan Mair were
all contacting her about her alleged unacceptable behaviour a time when she was
grieving for her mother.
The Chairman asked
if she had made the officers aware of her personal circumstances at the time
and Cllr K Tippins confirmed that she had and that she considered the contact
to be harassment. The Investigating
Officer confirmed that in none of her communications with Cllr K Tippins had
she said that her behaviour was unacceptable and that at no point had Cllr K
Tippins mentioned the death of her mother.
Cllr K Tippins
stated that her complaint sent to the Chief Executive, Matt Prosser should have
been looked into and that officers had been talking about her during
pre-election purdah period, she therefore felt that the Monitoring Officer
already has a prejudicial view of her.
Cllr K Tippins thought that the Town Clerk had been writing a dossier
about her and that it was not until the 17th April when she found
out that the Town Clerk had an issue with her.
Cllr K Tippins stated that contents of the dossier had been leaked and
that she had been subjected to abuse on social media abuse and reports in the national
press.
In response to a
question from Cllr Susan Cocking the Investigating Officer confirmed that she
had received 2 emails from Cllr K Tippins’ solicitor in August and September
2020 and that she had replied direct to the solicitor, which included a
response about the impact statement and the ACAS definition of bullying but had
not heard anything further from the solicitor.
Cllr K Tippins stated that her solicitor had asked the Investigating
Officer for the details of the allegations and that the Investigating Officer
had not responded.
In response to the
allegations made Cllr K Tippins stated that her role as a town councillor was
to scrutinise and that she was answerable to the electorate on how decisions
were made and how money was spent by the Town Council. Cllr K Tippins stated when she was elected
all of the committee seats had been filled before the election and that she had
received a threat from another councillor that she had to vote in line with
everyone else otherwise it would be very difficult for her and that she would
not fit in and the councillors voted so that she was not able to sit on any of
the standing committees of the council.
Cllr K Tippins stated that she wanted to know the breakdown for all the
staff salaries as the cost represented over 55% of the precept. Cllr K Tippins felt that Investigating
Officer’s report referred to her as a bully for asking for information on the
payroll. Cllr K Tippins stated that
information on salaries should be made available for transparency for the
electorate and that people felt that the payroll costs were too high. Cllr K Tippins stated that she was not being
a bully, but she was trying to find out the information and challenging the
fact that she wasn’t on any of the committees.
Cllr K Tippins told the Sub-committee that she had received 986 votes in
the election, more votes than many other councillors on the council and that
the public liked her because she was independent and that she challenged, but
that was not the same as being a bully, it was scrutinising. The Town Clerk had put forward a resolution
to enable decisions to be made by standing committees and not by Full Council
and a requirement for 3 councillors to request items on an agenda. This meant that all decisions were taken by
standing committees and herself and Cllr Yeo were not allowed to speak at the
committee meetings, thereby excluding them from meetings and taking key
decisions. Cllr K Tippins stated that
her only way to improve governance was by going to the external auditor, but
again this was not bullying as she was looking after the public purse and it
was her right to ask questions and to submit FOI requests. Cllr K Tippins stated that by not serving on
a committee she could not represent the people in her ward and she referred to
decisions being made regarding S106 money that she could not participate
in. Cllr K Tippins also made reference
to a Town Council meeting when the Police had been called to remove her for a
breach of the peace and she explained that she had just been sat at a
table. Cllr Tippins also stated that she
had been the subject of a vote of no confidence in order to get her to resign
and that she had been muted when speaking at meetings.
At that point in
the meeting Cllr K Tippins concluded her representation and the Chairman
invited questions to be put to Cllr K Tippins.
The Investigating
Officer asked why Cllr K Tippins chose not to meet with her prior to the Code
of Conduct Hearing. In response Cllr K
Tippins stated that the Investigating Officer had not verified anything and
that she was attending the hearing in order to defend herself. Cllr K Tippins asked why she had not received
the report when it had been finished in July 2020. The Investigating Officer stated the report
had been completed in April 2021 and Cllr K Tippins had been provided with a
copy of the report.
Cllr B Trite
addressed Cllr K Tippins and asked, with reference to the accusations made
against her and her reports of corruption of contract awards, was he correct in
thinking that she considered herself to being victimised by the Town Clerk and
councillors and what was the cause of this long standing vendetta? In response Cllr K Tippins stated that it was
because she had spoken out about a planning application when she last served on
the town council. The planning
application was to build houses outside of the settlement boundary and her view
was that the application was deceitful.
Cllr B Trite asked Cllr
K Tippins why she had not taken up her right of reply to the allegations that
had been made and why she did not take the opportunity to refute the
allegations. Cllr K Tippins stated that
she did not want to take part in an interview based on perceptions, she did not
feel comfortable or trust the process as it was not a legal process.
Cllr S Cocking
asked Cllr K Tippins why she had not reported a threat from another councillor
under the Code of Conduct. Cllr K
Tippins stated that she had already report that particular councillor under the
Code of Conduct and it had been dismissed.
Cllr S Cocking
asked Cllr K Tippins about the committees that she had been excluded from. Cllr K Tippins reported that she had a seat
on the planning committee but had been excluded from all committees when she
was elected, the most significant of those committees being the General
Management Committee which took decisions relating to S106 agreements.
In response to a
question from Cllr S Cocking Cllr K Tippins stated that all decisions were made
by the standing committee and the committees did not make recommendations to
Full Council.
Mr C Lousley,
Independent Person asked Cllr Tippins why she had not participated in the
investigation when he had suggested to her that she should take part. Cllr K Tippins replied that it was her right
to understand what the allegations were, that she was unable to deal with
perceptions and that the statements were defamatory and that the Investigating
Officer wanted to interview her before she had received a copy of the
report. Cllr K Tippins also stated that
she would co-operate in accordance with the Localism Act but she had not been
provided with the facts tor the transcripts of the meetings.
Mr C Lousley asked
Cllr K Tippins if she understood that she had a duty to the council officers
and faced with a complaint in which the Town Clerk was stating that she was upset
by Cllr K Tippins behaviour, wouldn’t she want to try and sort out the issues
directly with the Town Clerk. Cllr K
Tippins stated that she had only found out that the Town Clerk had issues with
her through social media, that she had been treated unfairly and prejudicially
and that the allegations were petty.
The Chairman
advised those in attendance that Cllr K Tippins has requested to call her
husband, Dr Tippins and Cllr Yeo as her witnesses, however she had been
informed that only witnesses who had provided a statement in the investigation report could be called as
witnesses at the hearing. The Deputy
Monitoring Officer advised the Sub-committee that Cllr K Tippins was entitled
to have the allegations put to her, to be part of the investigation process and
engage with that process. If she had
engaged with the process she could have asked for witnesses to be included as
part of the investigation process. Dorset Council was required to comply with
the legal requirements in its Code of Conduct complaint process. One requirement was for the hearing to be proportionate in all the circumstances of the
case. Dorset Council considered it
appropriate that witnesses could only be called at the hearing if their statements
had been included in the Investigation report as any information provided by
witnesses on the day could not be corroborated by other witnesses or taken into
account in the report. The Deputy
Monitoring Officer advised that the process was lawful and fair and that her
recommendation to the Sub-committee was not to accept the 2 additional
witnesses at this late stage in the process.
Members of the
Sub-committee agreed with the legal advice and did not accept the request to
hear the additional witnesses.
At that point the members of the Sub-committee, the Independent Person and the Democratic Services Officer retired in order for Sub-committee to make their decision.
After deliberations the Sub-committee returned to the meeting and the Chairman announced the following decision:
Having heard all of
the views today and having read all the papers and taken account of the view of
the independent person, the Committee has made a unanimous decision to agree
with the recommendations of the Investigation officer and find that there have
been multiple breaches of the Code, in particular 2.1(b), 2.2(b),(c), (g), and (h).
Where the investigating officer found that
there was no breach of the Code the Committee agreed with that finding. The Committee
is satisfied that a legally compliant process has been followed, which accords
with the rules of natural justice and the decision is made on the evidence
provided.
The Sub-committee
therefore requires
Cllr K Tippins to
attend a training course on interactions with other councillors and officers
within 3 months;
Shaftesbury Town
Council to identify a single point of contact for Cllr Tippins other than the
Town Clerk, to protect Cllr K Tippins and the Town Clerk from direct dealings
outside of formal council meetings;
The Town Council to
make arrangements, to apply until the date of the next town council election,
for any meeting between Cllr K Tippins and Town Council staff (outside of
formal council meetings) to be by appointment only so that staff can be
accompanied at the meetings.
In accordance with our
complaints process there is no right of appeal.