Charlie Johns – Con Man and Community Thief
Charlie Johns owes the community of the Southern Highlands $25,016.22. He’ll never have to pay it back, because years ago, he had his crooked political mates write off the debt.
Last year at council, the matter was once again raised in an open meeting. When the figure of nearly $24,016.22 was mentioned, Clr Peter Nelson was heard to say, “It’s more like $60,000.”
And Clr Nelson should know, he was the crooked Manager of Governance at the time. And if there was something corrupt going on, Nelson either knew about it, or he was a big part it.
Charlie Johns was the campaign manager for the four politicians who helped write off the $25,000 debt. The councillors voted in favour of expunging Johns’s debt for the WHOLE FOUR YEARS of their term. They kept voting in favour of Charlie at every opportunity. It wasn’t just the debt write off, the four councillors also voted on Charlie Johns’s development at Bowral Rd, Mittagong. They voted in favour of this development EVERY SINGLE TIME.
When it comes to local politicians declaring conflicts of interest, the campaign manager who helped the politicians win office – is obviously considered a major pecuniary interest. Councillors should NEVER debate and vote on motions concerning someone who was so pivotal in having them elected into office. It’s like – a HUGE conflict.
But the four councillors who had Johns as their campaign manager – simply declared their campaign manger a non-pecuniary interest. They then proceeded to vote in favour writing off a $25,000 debt – that was owed to the council by the very person who helped the four politicians get elected.
This is not misconduct, this is long-term systemic corruption
Here’s an example from April, 2008 where Clr Campbell-Jones declares the most minimal of conflicts when it came to his very good mate and close business associate, Charlie Johns.
Declarations of Interest –
Clr N N Campbell-Jones declared a non-pecuniary interest in Item c-QWN1 QWN 01/08 Write-off of Debt as it deals with a company whose director was his team’s campaign manager in the 2004 Local Government election campaign. He stated that he would remain in the chamber when this matter was discussed, take part in the debate and vote thereon.
Here’s another declaration of interest from Clr Malcolm Murray concerning the same conflict, while using exactly the same wording as his close political associate, Clr Campbell-Jones.
Clr M Murray declared a non-pecuniary interest in Item c-QWN1 QWN 01/08 Write-off of Debt as it deals with a company whose director was his team’s campaign manager in the 2004 Local Government election campaign. He stated that he would remain in the chamber when this matter was discussed, take part in the debate and vote thereon.
Here’s two more declarations of interest by the same councillors in March, 2008. Both Campbell-Jones and Murray declare pecuniary interests, and in doing so, they were forced to leave the chamber during the motions, and they were unable to debate and/or vote on the matters.
Clr M Murray declared a pecuniary interest in Item v-EP1 - Scottish Arms, Boardman Road, Bowral as his children’s grandparents own another hotel in Bowral. He stated he would leave the chamber when this matter was discussed, take no part in the debate and refrain from voting thereon.
Clr N N Campbell-Jones declared a pecuniary interest in Item v-EP1 - Scottish Arms, Boardman Road, Bowral as he owns a house in close proximity to this development. He stated he would leave the chamber when this matter was discussed, take no part in the debate and refrain from voting thereon.
But hold on. One of the councillors is willing to declare a major conflict of interest with regards to the grandparents of his children, but when it comes to his very good mate, Charlie Johns (the campaign manager who got him over the line on election day), Clr Murray nominates his relationship with Johns as one of the most minimal of conflicts. And he then proceeds to vote in favour of his friend for the NEXT FOUR YEARS.
The same can be said for the former mayor, Nick Campbell-Jones. Nick declares a major conflict of interest – simply by living near a hotel that’s up for consideration before council – and immediately disqualifies himself from voting on the matter, because there's potential that there may be a pecuniary interest involved. Nick’s house could possibly increase in value (or decrease) because of changes that occur at the Scottish Arms due to council regulations, and there's the conflict.
You err on the side of caution, that's how declarations of interest work.
But Nick Campbell-Jones and Co were playing by their own rules back in 2004-2008. They literally had carte blanch to do as they pleased (by authorities and police). Campbell-Jones didn’t see any problem calling his very dear friend, Charlie Johns, “a non-pecuniary interest”. It was the most minimal of conflicts, and he was rubbing the community's nose in it.
After all, he had been the mayor. And he still was running the town. He had the local cops on side, and most of his fellow councillors.
But he didn’t have all the councillors in his pocket.
And that’s why he needed his team of four elected officials to constantly vote in favour of their campaign manager, Charlie Johns (when motions came before council). They (as a team) wanted to save their good mate almost $25,000 (or $60,000 if we’re to believe current councillor, Peter Nelson).
So there you have it. Charlie Johns rips off the council (and community) for $25,000, and it can never be retrieved.
But when I confront Johns with evidence of his illicit conduct, he calls up his crooked mates at the Southern Highlands Police Division, and I’m suddenly charged with stalking and intimidation for exposing Charlie Johns as a criminal. WTF!
Anyway, this is the type of influence Charlie Johns has in this town. He can simply call upon the support of local police to have someone charged based on fabricated allegations and outright lies.
And he’ll get away with it. That’s because no one’s willing to talk about the mammoth elephant in the room. It’s a monster!
PS Please find in the comments (below), further evidence of the twenty-five thousand dollar swindle by Charlie and Co.
PPS And one other thing. I’ve got evidence of the four politicians signing off on a document that makes a significant claim that Charlie Johns DIDN’T donate any cash to their 2004 electoral campaign, and that’s why they were able to vote in favour of Charlie’s “matters” before council over the next four years.
The evidence will be in the comments below and in coming Facebook postings. Stay tuned …
- Charlie Johns – Con Man and Community Thief.jpg (331.8 KiB) Viewed 213 times