05/05/2026
Over the last month or so I have been contacted by numerous community groups and members concerned about a range of matters. I have therefore formally lodged the following questions that should be answered in the paper for the 21st May 2026 council meeting.
APPOINTMENT OF DALSKI Pty Ltd AND THE SWIMMING POOLS
------------------------------------------
Many in the community have asked me how it came to be that Council engaged Dalski Pty Ltd to renovate the pools in Bombala and Cooma, especially in light of information that was circulated to community groups and then published on the Monaro Zone.
In relation to the engagement of Dalski Pty Ltd for works at the Cooma and Bombala pools:
1. What role, if any, did NSW Public Works have in the preparation, assessment, or determination of the tender process?
2. Were any concerns raised regarding contractor suitability, financial capacity, or probity matters including by NSW Publics Works participants?
3. To what extent, if any, did council undertake background checks on the tenderers? Did this include public domain information and internet searches?
4. Did council discover, become aware or was made aware, including by participants from NSW Public Works, of matters investigated by ICAC related to Mr Vlad Stabculescu and Dalski in relation to its Operation Hector?
5. If concerns were raised, what risk assessment was undertaken and what mitigation measures were proposed or planned?
6. Of the mitigations proposed or planned, which were implemented and which were not?
7. What information was provided to the Governing Body regarding
7.a. any risks associated with Dalski Pty Ltd; and
7.b. any advice received from NSW Public Works or other agencies?
8. Under what delegation or authority was the decision made to engage Dalski Pty Ltd?
9. How did the then CEO ensure compliance with section 335(f) in providing councillors with sufficient information?
THE TILES USED IN THE BOMBALA AND COOMA POOLS
-----------------------------------------
There have been rumours circulating that the tiles used in the Bombala pool are the tiles specified in the tender and may in fact be ‘knock off’ tiles purchased on Alibaba or Temu.
In regards to the tender and contract of works from the Bombala and Cooma pools:
1. What did the tender specify in respect to the specific type/brand of tiles that were required to be used?
2. What did the tender specify in respect to the type/brand of any adhesive that were required to be used?
3. What did the tender specify in respect to how adhesive would be applied to the tiles and any methods for validating its use and effectiveness?
4. What did the tender specific in respect to the suppliers or tiles and/or adhesive?
5. What were the reasons for the specifications?
6. Were any variation to those specifications approved? If so, by whom and under what authority?
7. If variations to specifications made:
7.a. Were all tenderers given the opportunity to retender or amend their quoted price? If not, why not?
7.b. What were the reasons for the approving the variations?
7.c. What assessment was undertaken regarding performance, durability, and compliance with standards for any variation to the specifications.
8. What information regarding any variation was provided to the governing body?
9. How did the CEO at the time ensure councillors were properly informed under sections 223 and 232?
NON DISPARAGEMENT AGREEMENTS
------------------------------------------
I have been contacted by several persons from across the shire complianing that they have been asked to sign agreements that they won’t disparage council (if they want to do work). These individuals were working for council contractors not council directly. In my view all residents and ratepayers in our shire should be free to discuss council decisions, actions and performance in any forum, and encouraged to report any wrong doing or improvement opportunities.
In relation to council contracts or contracting practices:
1. Has Council requested, compelled or required any party or entity to enter into any form of agreement not to disparage Council?
2. Has Council potential or actual supplier to request, compel or require their staff, sub-contractors or suppliers to consider or enter into any form of agreement not to disparage Council?
3. In the event the answers to either or both questions 1 or 2 is Yes:
3.a. Why has Council sought to impose such requirements?
3.b. When did Council commence requiring such agreements?
3.c. Did the Council draft or fund the drafting of the relevant agreement or clause wording?
3.d. What does Council consider to be disparagement?
3.e. How does Council monitor compliance with the agreements and what does this cost?
3.f. Has Council taken action, or threatened action, against any entity or person, or encouraged or compelled any action against any entity or person for alleged disparagement?
3.g. Is there a policy of Council or a resolution passed by councillors to require non disparagement agreements on Council project works?
CARAVAN PARKS
---------------------
I asked the CEO (Ms Vu) in February 2026 whether a specific caravan park had the requisite approvals in place to allow residents to occupy sites long-term. This was due to concerns raised regarding two residents and their extended stay. An email response on 9 March 2026, indicated that the caravan park was only approved for short-term stays and that the “non-compliance matter for ‘long term’ residents is a risk”. I assumed that the CEO’s response relates to non-compliance with the Local Government (Manufactured Home Estates, Caravan Parks, Camping Grounds and Moveable Dwellings) Regulation 2021 (the Regulation) under the Local Government Act 1993 (NSW).
In the context outlined above I ask the following questions:
1. Has council identified any instances of non-compliance with the Regulation that are current, or that occurred/existed in the past three years in relation to council operated caravan parks?
2. Has council identified any instances of non-compliance with the Regulation that are current, or that occurred/existed in the past three years in relation to caravan parks other than those operated by Council?

3. In the event the answer to questions 1 or 2 is that non-compliance was identified:
3.a. What were the non-compliance matters identified?
3.b. Which caravan parks did these related to?
3.c. Are the parks now compliant?
4. If any council operated caravan parks was, or are, operating without fully complying with the Regulation
4.a. What compliance or enforcement action has been taken?
4.b. What information was provided to the governing body and when?
4.c. Has the Audit, Risk and Improvement Committee considered these matters and when?
4.d. How has the CEO ensured councillors were informed under s.335(f)?
RAIL TRAIL PROJECT AND GRANT
-----------------------------------------
It would be fair to say that the rail trail proposal, especially the very short trail being commencing in Bombala currently approved by Council, is being talked about by many.
In relation to the rail trail project:
Approvals
—————-
1. What approvals, and from what authority, has council obtained to access or undertake work in the Bombala station precinct and rail corridor?
2. When were these approvals provided and in what form were they provided?
3. Has council, or any supplier of services engaged by council, entered any area or undertaken any work without the required approvals having yet been granted?
Rail corridor lease
—————————
4. What length of rail corridor is council intending to lease or has a lease granted over?
5. Has council applied for a lease on the rail corridor? Please provide a copy of the application documents.
5. If council has applied for the lease, when and to what organisation or authority has that application been made?
6. If council has not applied for a lease:
6.a When will the application be made?
6.b What organisation or organisation is council discussing the potential lease with?
7. When is it expected that a lease will be granted?
Expenditure and Grant
————————————
8. What amount of grant funding has council been awarded?
9. What can this funding be used for?
10. Have grant funds been received by council or are they held by the grantor?
11.How much of the grant funding has been used and how much remains?
12. Please provide the details on what the funding has been used for.
13. What amount has council spent, if any, on the rail trail that has not been paid for or claime against with grant funds? Please include the value of staff time, and any expenses.
14. How many kilometres of rail trail can be constructed with the remaining grant funding?
15. Is there a date by which the funds must be used? Please provide a copy of the grant agreement.
Construction
———————
16. When will construction commence?
17. When will construction be completed?
Agricultural impact risk assessment
———————————————————-
18. What risk assessment has council undertaken in respect to potential impact on adjoining farm land and livestock?
19. What agencies or authorities has council consulted in respect to the assessment of risk?
20. What decontamination, biological controls or other mitigations will council be installing and servicing to mitigate risk to farming production and livestock?
21. What is the cost of insurance for the operation of the rail trail? How has this been determined?
22. What events are included in the insurance council will hold? Are there any exclusions? How has this been determined?
23. Should the rail trail, use of the trail or users of the rail trail be found to have contributed to the injury, death or disease of livestock, will these impacts be covered by the insurance?
24. Has council’s audit, risk and improvement committee been consulted or asked to consider the design or operation of the rail trail?
Operating and Maintenance Budget
———————————————————-
25. What is the expected operating and maintenance budget for FY26/27, FY 27/28 and FY 28/29?
26. What activities and materials are included in the operating and maintenance budgets for these years?
27. Is the operating and maintenance budget for the rail trail included in Integrated Planning and Reporting documents that have been on exhibition?
RETURN ON COUNCIL RENTED PROPERTIES
------------------------------------------
In the last week there has been substantial discussion in the community about council’s real estate portfolio and whether council is making an appropriate return on investment on its property that used for non-operational purposes.
In relation to houses or buildings owned by Council I ask the following questions. Please exclude community halls, sporting facilities and show ground facilities.
1. What houses, apartments, units, flats or buildings are currently owned by Council?
2. Which of these houses, apartments, units, flats or buildings are occupied or used for non‑Council operational purposes?
3. For each house, apartment, unit, flat or building used for non‑Council operational purposes, to whom (person, organisation or entity) is the property leased, licensed or otherwise made available?
4. For each house, apartment, unit, flat or building used for non‑Council operational purposes, what rent or fee does Council receive for its occupation or use, and how is that rent or fee determined (for example, market valuation, policy setting, subsidy or concession)?
5. Where Council receives rent or fees that are below market value, what is the reason for this?
6. On what basis (for example, policy decision, resolution of Council, legislative requirement or other approval) has below‑market rent or fee use been permitted?
7. Where a house, apartment, unit, flat or building is used by council employees to personal use, how has council treated any fringe benefits tax liabilities?
