FORMER councillor Steve Kepert was found guilty on September 16 of seven criminal charges laid by the local government department over his time at the City of Melville.

Mr Kepert was a councillor between 2017-2021 who lost his seat and then received 36 charges related to failing to vote and benefiting from his position on May 19, 2023. 

Facing a maximum of $45,000 in fines, Mr Kepert received something of a slap on the wrist from magistrate Nicholas Lemmon, who recorded a spent conviction and fined him just $1550 while saying he found it hard to see how Mr Kepert had financially benefited.

He was fined $1000 for failing to vote and $550 over the conflicts of interest. 

Magistrate Lemmon said Mr Kepert had not intentionally set out to break the law, as the former councillor believed he had advice that cleared his actions, but the reality was that it was a breach of the Local Government Act.  

In relation to the five counts of failing to vote, Mr Kepert told the court he felt he was unable to vote on ethical grounds because the City’s administration had held back important information. He also believed he’d followed council processes in withholding his vote. 

But the Department of Local Government, Sports and Cultural Industries disagreed, and a bevy of officers attended the drawn-out trial, one audibly whispering “yes” to her two colleagues in court following the guilty verdict.

After the sentencing Mr Kepert said it was “very dangerous” being elected to council and that he “wouldn’t recommend it to anyone”. 

The drama harks back to 2018 when then-councillor Kepert criticised the tone of comments in a Facebook group. 

He was ordered to apologise to the group’s administrator as well as the community and undertake an effective councillor course. 

Mr Kepert swore under oath three times that he completed the course, but claimed he’d not been given a certificate of completion so had no evidence. 

Almost two years later, and following an unsuccessful appeal he lodged against the ruling, CEO Marten Tieleman was told by the local government department to take him to State Administrative Tribunal. 

This resulted in a heated dispute over Mr Kepert’s legal fees; in June 2019 the council agreed to fund his legal fees, but a month later a handful of his colleagues turned on him, successfully putting forward a rescission motion.

Mr Kepert took legal action and the court ordered the City to restate his payments, but it later moved to cut him off, which he Claims was part of a payback which included the current charges.

by CARLA LANE