Stallholders plea to Fremantle Council (again)

Colin Wright speaking at the rally in Jan 2010.

2 years ago, many stallholders attended the Special Meeting of the Fremantle Council to hear the decision on the Market Lease. It would affect many of our lives and we were all interested in the outcome. Stallholders were divided on who should run the markets, as was the council, and this was reflected in the 7-6 vote to return the lease to the Murdoch family.

During this period many promises, guarantees and commitments were made but one outstanding quote by Jamie Murdoch sums up the duplicity of what has been allowed to happen since that evening.

In response to this question from Cr. Bill Massie

“So the current stallholders are guaranteed security?"

Jamie answered: quote
“We don't want to lose any stallholders, we want all the stallholders we have to come along. We have 200 stallholders who are all fantastic people, who we want to continue. We don't want to preclude any stallholders from anything. We want to give them the opportunity to come along for the next 10-20 years.”

He also went on to tell councillors, on many occasions throughout his presentation, that the Fremantle Markets would remain:
Firstly: a secure low cost trading environment and that they would put policies in place to do this.

And Secondly: as part of their Fremantle Markets Business Plan they would offer stallholders security of tenure with new 5 year agreements and 5 year options .

So as you can imagine, to the councillors listening to his presentation, the stallholders were going to be looked after, and I believe that that was important to most of them.

So what changed once the lease was signed?

What’s happened inside these walls and at Council that continually keeps the Markets dispute in the papers and causes a stallholder like Ed Seah to organize this rally.

Simple…the guarantees weren’t honoured and now about 40 of those stallholders… “the ones who Jamie said were all fantastic people” were, either priced out, relocated, downsized, or simply no longer wanted at the markets i.e. evicted.

The problem then for council was that they had also had made guarantees, in a public meeting, to all the stallholders and six of the councillors, that our businesses would be safe, under the new lease…Mark Scott even asked the question twice … he wanted to be sure. The ex-mayor also endorsed this point of view…

So what ever happened to those guarantees …We’ve asked Council, many times, but they have never answered those questions. We’re asking again today, for Ed and all the others who have lost their businesses:

…why have you failed to honour your guarantees?

Let’s also look at another of the Murdoch commitments,that of a:

“Low Cost Trading Environment”. This was a crucial component for stallholders and also a cornerstone of their presentation to Council. Markets need low rents in order to remain competitive. What has been allowed to happen, with the exorbitant rent hikes, now sees our rents higher than most in the Freo CBD and up with the most expensive market rents in the country. These unsustainable increases coincided with the Global Financial crisis, a weakening retail environment and greater insecurity surrounding small business. The timing couldn’t have been worse.

With these rent hikes we’ve lost our competitive advantage, prices have to go up or you go broke; and that’s what is happening. A market by definition must offer value for money, otherwise it becomes another shopping centre minus the trimmings; no air conditioning, no free parking and no terrazzo floors. How can stallholders possibly maintain market prices on their goods when they are being slugged like this? The high rents and overheads are driving established businesses out, while at the same time, new stallholders are apparently given the incentive of subsidized rents - to fill the empty stalls which are starting to appear.

Empty stalls are a new phenomena - it’s unheard of over the last 30 years.

Remember in all this, Council only passed on a modest 12% rent increase with the new lease to the Murdoch’s. Stallholders on the other hand have been slugged between 50% –100% and in some case considerably higher. They say it’s “Fair Market Rent” and the independent valuation proves it. We say it’s no longer the low cost environment you promised and the exodus of stallholders shows this.

If 40 businesses disappeared from along South Terrace, Market or High Street, Council and the Chamber of Commerce would swing into action as a matter of urgency. When it happens inside these walls everybody, including the new mayor, duck for cover. They hope it will eventually go away but it won’t, not before, before more lives are shattered through the decisions and unwillingness to act by the council. These are small family businesses and in Ed’s case, he supports three children as a single parent and a sick and aging father who started this souvenir business 30 years ago.

It’s ironic that the Murdoch’s, who threatened to run the markets into the ground if they didn’t win the lease cited their family’s long and successful connection with the market as a major reason why they should retain it.

It’s typical then of this management, that Ed and the other long term family businesses, which have been forced out, could not argue their long term connection with the markets entitled them to have their lease renewed as well. (photo of Eds dad who also ran the stall for many years)
What’s also maddening is that these very stallholders, who have lost their livelihoods, are now publicly criticized by Jamie Murdoch for generating bad press and ruining the trade for those who remain. Nothing could be further from the truth! However, we should not be manipulated into silence through guilt, when the real reason for poor trading and loss of regular customers can be levelled at management decisions, rather than ex stallholders telling their story to the papers.

On a Wednesday night, 12 months ago, 100 stallholders filled the Council Chamber and told their stories of how they were being affected. Emails flooded the CEO’s in box, the message was clear and unequivocal: Our businesses are under threat, we cannot sustain the rents, people will leave - what are you going to do? Fremantle Markets is an icon - the time to act is now.

One possible conclusion to draw from this is that the Fremantle City Council condones the action of the Markets management and their treatment of stallholders.

Brad Petitt told the Herald that “Council is bound by the head lease and are not responsible for the day to day running of the Markets.” That’s not completely true because through the “Fremantle Markets Operating Strategy”, a key component of the head lease: Council has the flexibility to alter the lease, hold management accountable and to govern the direction the market takes. Changes can be made through the Markets Working Group but they haven’t chosen to take this course of action.

Maybe they are comfortable with this mayhem?"

I don’t believe they are; and for the councilors, both those who supported or opposed the lease, there is a growing sense of injustice and wrong in the way this is being handled. The councillors, who voted for this lucrative lease, and the officers who recommended it, should acknowledge that what was promoted and sold to them by the Murdoch’s, to support the Markets remaining in their hands, is not what has been delivered.

The awarding of the Fremantle Markets lease, without an open tender process, was always going to be clouded in controversy and what has happened since reinforces that view:

1. “Why hasn’t the Council enforced the Business Plan”?

2. Were misrepresentations made to council which contravenes the Trade Practices Act?

3. Would the council seriously investigate this for fear of uncovering incompetence within their own walls?

In the meantime, the Ed’s and other small business operators who believed the Council were looking after their interests now find themselves without their business - their livelihoods - their goodwill - their income or their superannuation.

To Brad Petitt, the Fremantle Council and the new councillors: This fiasco continues to degenerate; it’s an ongoing public disgrace. Six more stallholders have left this month; more are lining up to go.

Don’t keep sweeping it under the table, act to defend what is right and just here…show leadership on this issue.

For latest post click
http://sonyagreen.blogspot.com

Fremantle Market rally pictures

Hundreds of Fremantle locals came to the Jan 31st rally to protest and show support for the Fremantle Markets. This is only a small glimpse but a poignant one, as once again, the same councillors who fought in the beginning are the same ones who showed up to let us know they are still listening. Donna Haney, John Dowson, Georgie Adeane, Bill Massie and the always present Les Lauder's energy.
Adele Carles; a politician who gets things done with intelligence, honesty and heart. (Watch this space for greater things to come)
Colin Wright's speech had me in tears and the people cheering and ringing bells.
Georgie Adeane: A councillor who still remembers why she joined council. When the soul of the city is respected and valued by it's leaders - it shows.
Ed's shop - closing down. Ed organised the rally and the sadness of this eviction was heartfelt throughout the port city.
sonyagreen.blogspot.com

Murdochs evict spokesman and force out long term tenants

New councillor Andrew Sullivan’s comments in last weeks Herald should make the new mayor sit up and pay attention. Andrew is impressive on two counts:
His refusal to be censored (gagged) and the balls to speak his truth.
He seems to grasp the importance of looking at new ideas or better options to help the disenfranchised stallholders. He simply states that the stallholders don’t need to be told to get on with it when they are obviously working through grief and suffering.

To me, the mark of a great leader is the rare combination of intelligence AND heart. This is a guy to watch.

Mayor Brad Pettitt’s rather beige comment about the eviction of Colin Wright was not much more than a political exhalation. “Colin and the Murdoch’s are clearly not able to work together any more. It’s best for everyone if they go their separate ways. I can’t see any way forward.” So what’s that – a personality conflict?

Has Brad completely missed the point? Colin Wright was elected by the stallholders to represent and speak on their behalf. Elected and supported because he had the ethics, intelligence, tenacity and most of all the courage to risk his own successful business to protect the vulnerable. Through Colin Wright the council was alerted to very major problems more than a year ago and his predictions and warnings have all now come to this final conclusion.

Removing Colin Wright is not the end of the plight of the stallholders or the predictable conflict to come. The markets are very close to collapsing and when Colin Wright is out of the picture the power of play will be between the Murdoch’s and a council who has so far been happy to deflect their responsibility in the whole sorry saga.

With council planning to spend in excess of 4 million dollars on the markets my suggestion would be to work out first of all if there will be a market by the time the debt is repaid. At a very rough estimate the Murdoch’s will be making squillions but the council will be lucky to break even after ten years.

It would do council and the Murdoch’s well to firstly define what a market is.

Exorbitant rents, lack of savvy traders, loss of customers, inappropriate stall positioning and unviable businesses are what this year turned up – where to now?

http://sonyagreen.blogspot.com/

Fremantle market - evictions and heartbreak

When Richard Murphy and Colin Wright took on the role as spokesmen for the Fremantle Market stallholders they had no idea of the grief and personal loss to come. This was a voluntary, unpaid position and they were both elected by the stallholders as ideal candidates. Both had operated successful businesses within the market for more than twenty years; they are intelligent, rational, objective, astute and fair negotiators.

Originally, and probably now with hindsight - naively, they expected their role to be representative of the stallholders point of view in matters concerning the smooth operation of the markets. It was never meant to be adversarial, in fact quite the opposite, they could sort out most minor issues on the ground and save management being involved or speak for the collective and negotiate with management. To a very large degree they acted as mentors and advisors to the stallholders.

They never wanted to act as critics or antagonists by any means. Ideally they would work with management and local council as part of a team to maintain or improve a highly successful retail business, tourism icon, heritage building and real estate asset.

The council needed to work on behalf of the ratepayers and care for the heritage aspect and physical structure of the building; its tourism status and commercial viability. It should have positioned itself as the main body or major stakeholder in the three part enterprise. The Murdoch management held the main lease on the Market which made their role primarily landlord and administrators. The stallholders input should have been in regard to customer requirements and satisfaction and the smooth running of the retail and service side of things.

The stallholders pushed hard to be part of a working group so that the three parties could get together on a regular basis and exchange ideas. When the new lease was signed off the stallholders found they had not been included as a voice in the new working group.

For reasons unknown and incomprehensible to anyone, including a number of commercial lawyers, the new lease appears to give the Murdoch’s full power and the council very little if any recourse. Although the lease was drawn up after much discussion, many promises and grand ideas nothing was committed to paper.

There were approximately 150 independent businesses operating under the Market roof. Most had paid tens of thousands of dollars for their businesses and many have been there for more than 10 years. These are the people who have created and nurtured repeat custom and are the real reason the markets evolved into such a phenomenal success. They understand customer relations, pricing, marketing, promotion, display, atmosphere, product and service supply, demand and competition.

Overall the markets have never and will never be a matter of bricks and mortar or administration. The markets exist only to the service of the customer.

The very obvious and most destructive element at the moment is the Murdoch’s delusional grandeur and posturing as The Boss of the Minions. The attitude that the stallholders are disposable ‘workers’ makes us wonder if they actually believe that they run a third world sweat shop. Even in their presentation they said they had never ‘sacked’ a stallholder. Was that a Freudian slip or an insight into their opinion of themselves? Well, let’s be clear about this: landlords don’t sack anyone; stallholders are not unpaid employees. They might argue that they meant to say that they hadn’t EVICTED anyone - but then that would be a lie.

When Richard Murphy (a previous surveyor) disputed the Murdoch’s estimate of his stall measurement and questioned the insecurity of the new lease proposal he sought legal advice. As president of the stallholder association he had every right to challenge and define the legal implications of what appeared to be a rather dodgy document.

He was evicted.

And the Murdoch’s might give all kinds of reasons now for that eviction but at the time he was evicted without explanation. I doubt that anyone else would argue that he wasn’t victimised and persecuted for one reason only: he was too effective as the stallholders’ champion.

In a democratic system, in a land of free speech and social justice this is diabolical. This is akin to sacking a Union leader. In mainstream workplaces this would be illegal and Unions throughout the country would have closed down shop. But once again the new lease proved that everyone is vulnerable and no one is protected.

When Colin Wright stepped into Richard’s position he was well aware that he risked the same treatment. Ethically, he could not back down. Very few people would be aware of the hours he worked; the thousands of phone calls, the meetings, reports, the out of pocket expenses, the research and overall stress and heartache he endured.

Colin Wrights shop was probably one of the most popular and most profitable shops in the markets. He could afford the higher rents and he could have kept quiet and continued a successful business. Richard Murphy and Mark Scott were also running successful businesses. It was never about self-interest but the integrity of the markets and the fair treatment of everyone.

Communication with the Murdoch’s became impossible. The only course of action was to address the council and hold them accountable for signing off on the lease. They had dug themselves into a hole and by the time they sat up and took notice most of them were astounded at the repercussions unfolding and the indifferent and belligerent response by the Murdoch’s.

Initially, half the councillors were fiercely opposed to re-signing the lease with the Murdoch’s. Others were not convinced but reached a stalemate and reluctantly swayed under legal advice. Ex mayor Tagliaferri seemed very pro Murdoch for reasons unknown but highly speculated about. When the Shit hit the fan Tagliaferri retreated. He ended up losing his campaign in the by-elections and gained himself immense negative media attention. Outside of council offices you would be hard pressed to find anyone who wouldn’t say they screwed up big time.

Throughout it all the biggest problem was that the council would have had to deem themselves responsible and accountable and in effect the council lawyers were being asked to find themselves at fault. Legally this could have exploded, so understandably, it was never in their interest to find fault with the lease, and without doing that, the lease became ironclad. Long term, the council is stuck with the Murdoch’s for near on twenty more years and pretty powerless in a volatile partnership.

Anyway, that’s their problem now. Although, from the sideline, I might just point out that truck loads of money have been spent by the Murdoch’s and the Council and although they have treated the stallholders as the enemy they really should be grateful for the education they have both received this early in the game. Ironically, if the council had been more open to constructive criticism and the research done by the stallholders they probably should have paid them for this work. If they had not been so defensive and had listened to their predictions they would have saved themselves a lot of money, a lot of heartache and public embarrassment.

As for the Murdoch’s, I imagine that their ineffective market research and legal costs would be so substantial that had they have been more honest and ethical right from the beginning they could have paid out the few stalls that they wanted to remove and not only would that have given them smooth access but would have saved them the expose of their reputation as well as their almighty $’s.

Much of this has been said before, but I wanted to recap because this month the saga has hit an all time low. The vindictive actions of these nasty little creatures have stunned the Port City with the news that Colin Wright has now also been evicted.

It seems very obvious to me and others that the timing has been very well calculated for maximum impact. Knowing full well that pre-Christmas is the most profitable time of year for the stallholders, to evict someone on the 30th of November just shows how spiteful these people are. In normal circumstances retailers would invest as much money as they could afford to buy in their Christmas stock.

As disgusting as this is, it was also predictable so no, Colin was not caught out. But many others were hit up with notice to sign on or move out and this week-end at least six people have been forced to walk away. Unbelievably, they have been offered, or actually been manipulated into signing, what is nothing more than a month to month tenancy.

Let’s be very clear about one fact: Colin Wright has been evicted for speaking up for and on behalf of the majority of vulnerable and intimidated stallholders. He has never acted out of self interest and his words have always been the words of the collective. Getting rid of Colin or getting rid of the association does NOT get rid of the anger, resentment or the complaints to come.

It is also very obvious that the other people being forced out this week, and previously, have been those who have supported the stallholders association. Mark Scott has been a much loved market character who has mentored most of the fruit and vegetable traders over a span of more than twenty years. He has worked as the unofficial ‘go to guy’ and has done much to promote and improve the markets. Last year the Murdoch’s didn’t mind taking a photo opportunity with Mark to bask in his success and award for trader of the year. Ann Meyers didn’t mind calling on Scotty when she needed support or advice when she first started out either. Both she and the Murdoch’s have now shafted him -they have refused to offer him the 5 year agreement that they promised.

There are so many stories that I would love to write about to allow people to really see what has taken place, but as many are identifiable, I can not break their confidence at this point. Many people have been forced to walk away and have lost their investment, have been left with unsold stock and without an income. Some don’t have the luxury of leaving with nothing. These people have families and mortgages and unpaid bank loans. To walk away would mean certain bankruptcy and their only option is to sign onto another lease, pray they can manage the high rents, hope they might break even or sell out and try to make enough to walk away someday - managing their loses.

When you hear the Murdoch’s make statements like most of the stallholders have happily accepted the rent rises or some people have chosen to leave, I just want to slap them.

I would challenge anyone to ask the 30, yes that is 30, stallholders who have ‘chosen to leave’ WHY? You might also ask the 6 leaving this week why they would choose to leave a month before Christmas after investing in additional Christmas stock.

I also take offense at Ann Meyer's in this week’s newsletter when she expresses her cheerio and good wishes to Gloria; stating that Gloria has sold her business and moved on. Actually, there has been a few references to people having sold their business but never once has it been mentioned as to how much less than value it has been sold for; how much each of those people have lost. Gloria had no choice – she wasn’t offered a new agreement.

Nothing is said about the people who have paid for a business, which has now been relocated into a smaller space, in a lower traffic area, and has lost the right to on-sell their lease or goodwill. Robbed of a business but compromised into a shadow of hope. These are ‘the happy’ ones.

One lawyer stated he had been contacted by eight stallholders in one week; three had been terminated without negotiation or notice.

Jamie Murdoch claimed that 15 of the 20 stallholder who had left this year had sold their licenses for an average of $40,000. Again it is 30 stallholders that have left, a good number are there on monthly tenancies and planning to pull out or are probably going to be forced out. This outrageous statement can be easily disputed by asking the X-stallholders for the correct figures and if anyone did sell for $40,000 then it is also worth asking how much they lost. I don’t think selling out for forty grand is much to sing about if the seller paid seventy grand to buy it.

Let’s also talk about the accuracy of Jamie’s statement that the Wednesday’s growers market was “A successful trial”. Let’s ask those stallholders who invested in the plans, promises and propaganda of that venture if they were aware they were investing in a trial. Successful? It lasted about 6 weeks and it was an abysmal failure.

Or the claim that closing down Friday night trade was based on ‘research’ and had also has been a trial.

We have it in black and white that the markets would not trade on Thursday and yet here it is again dressed up as a Christmas trial. Then there were the opening and closing hours on trial; the sheer stupidity of closing Friday nights but opening early on Sunday mornings. The only person who would have had any customers would have been the girl selling coffee to the other stallholders who sat around in the cold waiting for customers to arrive at the usual time. Did I mention that Ann’s daughter owns that coffee shop? (A prime location fortuned to her after only a few months trading when normally it would take years. – I would love to know how much rent She pays?)

I guess if your market research consists of asking the new coffee seller if it was worth opening earlier in the morning and closing Friday nights she would probably agree. My guess is that not too many people are looking for caffeine late in the day but probably business is very good for a captive early morning crowd of stallholders.

No one I spoke to recalls being asked if they thought they should close down Friday night. In fact, I hear there was disbelief and outrage from the stallholders and the customers.

Anne claims she discussed closing with stallholders and was surprised that those same people objected when she followed through. They tell me that she didn’t say she was planning on closing, she asked how business was and many said it was slow. They thought it was casual chit-chat and they meant slow compared to other years. She never stated that she was researching the viability of being open and she later acted like they had deliberately misled her.

This week she issued a newsletter entitled Bollocks and sarcastically claimed that some stallholders were speaking disrespectfully of the Murdoch management. Jamie has also made public statements which lamented that the stallholders were casting aspersions on their reputation. Ha! They are wiping the floor with people, destroying lives and have bought heartaches and devastation into the city and yet they blame the publicity. No, they blame the stallholders for the publicity. Poor babies, they feel they are being bullied – Boo Hoo.

NOTE: You have been exposed and put under a spotlight and we see who you are. That IS your reputation. No one is doing anything to you - we are all just observing. Everything that I have said, the press has said, the stallholders have said - is all on record and can all be checked and double checked. Your reputation is directly related to your actions and your word.

I am pleading with people to seek legal advice before signing any agreement with these people. It is always good business practice to understand the fine print in a lease and it’s essential with this one.

Although the Murdoch’s have made grand statements about the new restoration work and renovations, I am amazed that more people have not asked how business will be trading whilst that work is being carried out. What does a lease mean if you are entombed in scaffolding? Will customers be wearing hard hats? It seems clear to me that it will be impossible for anyone to trade for some months while this work is being done. It’s obvious that there is not space for relocation and I can’t see that it can happen without stalls being put out of business for a matter of months. Has anyone even seen the plans? If people are setting up and equipping businesses now will they be dismantled soon? Will those fittings and fixtures work in the new version or are stallholders expected to refit all over again if they make it back.

The council estimated over $4million dollars worth of works a few years back but since then there has been mention that it might be much greater than that. Sounds like very substantial work to me. I won’t even go into how or why the council or really the ratepayers ended up footing the bill for this, when clearly, it is primarily to the advantage of the Murdoch’s. Why? Has anyone even done the sums? I can see that while the Murdoch’s will be making huge profits the ratepayers will be waiting at least a decade before they see a cent of rent from the Murdoch’s. That is, if the markets are still operating in ten years; could be a very expensive white elephant.

It still remains perplexing that the city didn’t take control from the beginning and then re-lease it after the work was complete. If the council had taken control then, all of the profit could have gone towards the restoration and been paid for in a fraction of the time.

Do the ratepayers even know that more than 4+ million of their dollars are going into the markets and that the council has very little power to ensure that the markets are well run or even viable as a long term business?

Well, it’s worth thinking about if anyone cares, but right now, I can see that the people who have cared and did try to do something are the ones who will be under the guillotine this week-end.

To Richard Murphy, Colin Wright, Mark Scott and the stallholders who can’t be named yet - we thank you.

To Les Lauder, Donna Haney, John Dowson, Georgie Adeane, Shirley Mackay, Alice King and Bill Massie we thank you. Also a special thanks to the other councillors who jumped on board a little late but at least you stood up.

To the Fremantle Herald, especially Jenny Danger - we thank you.

Adele Carles, Annie St James, Paul Masten, Rod Hagar, and the people of Fremantle – we thank you.

To John and Jamie Murdoch, Ann Meyer, Phil Dawson, Robert Fittock, Freo Council legal team and Peter Tagliaferri – shame on you all.

To Mayor Brad Pettitt – Good luck.

http://sonyagreen.blogspot.com/

John and Jamie Murdoch - spiteful revenge

The Fremantle Markets farce
By Beatrice Thomas, Local Government Reporter

Copy of West Australian Newspaper article Nov 25th 09


The deteriorating state of affairs at the Fremantle Markets is nothing short of farcical.

What started as a dispute over the awarding of a new lease to the Murdoch family, and later rent increases of up to 300 per cent, has now escalated into a vicious stoush where long-time, reputable stallholders are leaving or having leases terminated with little warning and it seems with even less prospect of any recourse.

When a new 18-year head lease was awarded to John and Jamie Murdoch, whose father operated the 112-year-old markets for more than 30 years, the City of Fremantle, which owns the building, said it would guarantee a security of tenure for permanent stallholders.

"From the very start of the new lease process the Stallholders Association wanted their security of tenure (to) be protected," the City's corporate services director Glen Dougall said in November last year.

"The City ensured this by allowing stallholders access to sub-lease or licence agreements of at least five years unless otherwise negotiated by the stallholder."

Not only was this supposed to protect the long-term stallholders who rely on business from the three-day operation for their livelihoods but the addition of the Retail Tenancies Act in the new agreement was supposed to ensure "fair commercial principles" were enforced.

What has emerged over the past year suggests anything but that has transpired with monthly leases, reduced space and little communication all complaints from long-term traders.

And the City's statistics that only 70 per cent of stallholders have signed new lease agreements is proof of the unrest.

The parties are even in dispute over the number of stallholders leaving with the Stallholders Association saying up to 35 traders have left, while Jamie Murdoch says the number is at most 20.

Earlier this year, the Murdochs, trading as Fremantle Markets Pty Ltd, began issuing stallholders with notices outlining rent increases of up to 300 per cent.

At the time they said the head lease with the council demanded "a fair market rent" be established, meaning a big correction because rents had been artificially low.

However, acting on the growing number of complaints from stallholders who said the increases were unjust, the City in April found Fremantle Markets had failed to negotiate with stallholders over rent increases and as a result had breached its lease.

Rejecting legal action, the City opted for "an urgent dispute resolution".

Not only has this failed dismally but the City is now faced with the embarrassing prospect of stallholders setting up a rival market across the road at the South Fremantle Football Club, of all places.

The stallholders can take up the issue with the State Administrative Tribunal and Supreme Court, but as lawyer Rod Hager pointed out they could at most seek damages and at the end of the costly process there are still no guarantees that they get their stall back.

To date the Murdoch brothers have maintained that they have followed the requirements of the head lease and have effectively dismissed most of the criticism as coming from a bunch of disgruntled troublemakers unhappy with having to pay what their stall is worth.

Irrespective of whether this is completely true, the people leaving the markets are more often than not long-time tenants whose quirky, colourful and popular stalls have helped shape the character of the century-old operation.

They may be disposable for the Murdochs, who are more than too happy to point out that they can be replaced, but their loss should be a wake-up call for a council that promised to look after them but has failed to do so.

* My comments.
* Those disgruntled trouble makers would be the ELECTED stallholders association that speaks out ON BEHALF of the others. Needless to say that the spokespeople for the association have been evicted and others who have spoken out have been forced to leave by having shop sizes greatly reduced, rents increased and inappropriate relocations. Most at best, were promised a month to month lease agreement which makes it impossible to trade or sell out. John Murdoch said publicly that some stallholders have chosen to leave!


* The proof of the lack of replacement stalls is now obvious with vacant stalls and rent subsidies being offered to new and casual tenants.

John and Jamie Murdoch - Retail 101

“The Fremantle Market is one of the key elements to the growth of Fremantle and an integral part of the local community providing various social and economic benefits.”

The above quote is just another example of the delusional statements made by the Murdoch management. Their ‘key elements to the growth of Fremantle’ should be compared to the growth of a melanoma. Regular visitors and long term stall holders have complained bitterly all year about the decline of the markets; the loss of soul, loss of customers, loss of livelihood, loss of businesses and traders and loss of goodwill.

Fremantle council meetings were filled beyond capacity as angry stall holders’ and their supporters pleaded with the mayor to undo or redo the lease with the Murdoch’s. A public rally was also held outside town hall to encourage council to ‘evict the Murdoch’s’

Is that what they meant by ‘an integral part of the community’?

Many speakers told stories of intimidation, desperation, loss of livelihood, insecure tenure and the sadness and shock of seeing their much loved and respected Richard Murphy being evicted. Richard had been their spokesperson, articulating professionally and calmly THEIR voices.

Most spoke of being crippled by high rents and as many as thirty businesses had to walk away as it was no longer financially viable to continue. Many of these people had paid many thousands of dollars for specific stall spaces, but were unable to sell out due to their inability to secure a long-term secure lease.

Would that be the social and economic benefits referred to in the above quote? No, economic benefit is a one way street and that street runs a truck load of money to the doors of the Murdoch kingdom.

Many of the stall holders have had their stalls downsized or relocated to inferior or inappropriate positions. New traders have been bought in and are in direct competition with others. Apart from massive rent hikes, many new administrative charges and costs have been introduced as well as some stalls having to re-equip or re-fit their shops.

Their grand vision and media hype about the ‘New Wednesday Growers Market’ contradicted their previous promises about trading hours. They grossly exaggerated its viability and it badly impacted on the rest of the markets. They talked it up with statements like ‘food from heaven’.

It ended up being a complete embarrassment and a total flop. It was a small, dark, dingy collection of trestle tables, selling nothing more than common grocery items. AS PREDICTED. The gourmet cheese and wine tastings were pathetic and the celebrity chef cooking school was akin to watching a bloke cooking a barby in any local picnic area.

Sadly, the twenty or so vendors who believed in the Murdoch propaganda have lost whatever costs they incurred and have become the new collateral damage at the Fremantle Markets. True to form, the Murdoch’s statement about the closure of the Wednesday market completely dismisses the abysmal failure and they were recently quoted as saying that it was “A successful trial”.

“Mr Murdoch, did you ever tell the press, the community or the vendors that the Wednesday growers market was a TRIAL?

Would you please define successful?

Your trial lasted about 6 weeks. Each week saw less customers and less stalls and finally it simply snuffed out. The traders have done their dough and you are in denial. I am not the first to say “I told you so,” nor will I be alone in saying Ha ha!

And now for your further edification, let me address your preposterous claims about local artists and craftspeople:

So far, you have lost most of the great crafts-people you already had. As they have pointed out, they can’t afford those rents. Also, most of the work they do is done from home in workshops. They might retail on the weekend but they work and create throughout the week. Your vision of having potters, ironworkers and artist working on site is simply another example of ignorance. Why not do the unthinkable and actually ASK those people what they require?

Let me give you just one example:

A potter works with wet clay. The wet clay takes days to dry and can not be moved or relocated – it is very fragile. The pieces then need to be baked in a big oven called a kiln. Do you expect a casual potter to bring down their wheel, tools and kiln each week or will they need to pay for a massive space and set up a permanent stall? My estimate is that such a potter would need to turn over a couple of thousand dollars a week just to cover the costs. How do they sell the pottery with their arms up to the elbow in mud?

Why not speak with a welder before you encourage ironwork on site. Ask a glassblower about trestle tables and Fremantle winds. Ask a dressmaker how she will fit, draft and sew a frock while serving her customers. I notice on one of the newsletters a suggestion to demonstrate sheep shearing. Now that’s probably worth serious consideration…

I know you will take offense at what I am saying. You will probably run this by the legal team. You seem to interpret constructive criticism as possible defamation, but wait and think…

You have forked out a bomb on market research, legal advice, advertising, additional office staff, security, evaluations, PR and loss of time in disputes and conflict. Your reputation is sullied and your working environment is toxic, hostile and stressful. Do the unthinkable – just listen and put the ego back in its cage for a minute.

I am not trying to attack you, I am simply pushing you to step up and be a leader. The Stall Holders are not employees; they are savvy, experienced business men and woman. Many have been trading successfully there for more than ten years. This in itself is evidence that they know their demographic and are catering to it.

Richard Murphy and Colin Wright have not been your enemies and have never tried to be adversarial or counter-productive. Both were elected to speak on behalf of the Stall Holders in view of fair treatment, market improvement and ongoing success. Both these men have been supported and endorsed by the collective. You have victimized and persecuted them!

Richard Murphy had one of the nicest and most patronised stalls in the market. Colin and Marilyn Wright's shop is arguably the best stall there; bringing regular repeat custom and they have over twenty years experience.

Mark Scott, Richard Murphy and Colin Wright have mentored so many and have acted freely and generously in holding a large section together; acting as spokes-people, settling disputes, supporting new traders and bringing competitors together to compliment each other.

These three men have sat and consoled crying and distressed stallholders, arbitrated and resolved conflicts, advised, supported, mentored, encouraged and advocated of their own accord; for no reasons other than decency and caring. Not one of them has been paid to do these things, but God only knows how much time, money and grief they have saved you in taking on this position. Most of this went unmentioned and certainly unrewarded.

These guys are worth a thousand Annie Meyers’ who seems to live in her ‘happy place’ and quotes facts and figures like little tom-thumb crackers. Is she there to feed you or is she just an apron to hide behind? We’ve all heard what she says, but what has she actually done?

I mention these three men specifically, but I also call your attention to the many that believed in you, supported you and championed your bid on the new lease. Without naming names, I remind you that you wiped the floor with them and continue to ruin them. Why?

There is a wealth of knowledge there from the front line and the common interest is to maintain and improve what works. The hay days of the market were the result of minimal interference from management. Every stall has a vested interest in doing well and to be successful; they need to know their business, their product and their customers. Why do you disregard knowledge and experience in favour of external market research or Annie’s magic wand and fairy bread or Tagliaferri’s self-interests?

Your need for control and structure is interfering with the natural ecology of the market. It has always been the eclectic mix that worked. Departmentalising the markets takes away the free flow and the leisurely browsing which encourages impulse buying. The markets are an exhibition or an entertainment - not a snatch and grab venue. Vendors used to compliment each other and feed off each other, but now you are creating competition and aggravation.

You need to encourage people to wander the full circuit, not direct them in and out in the shortest possible time. This is not a hardware store. This is also why the markets work as a week-end business and why other retail functions mid-week. You can’t have it both ways – stick with what works.

One of the best things about the way things were is that the blend of aromas and sounds created atmosphere. The smell of coffee beans led gently through to fresh bread and then incense or mangoes. Now with all the food being compressed you have garlic, sausage, fruit, ice-cream etc and everything fusing into an obnoxious stench.

The spaced music of the cd shop, the bar, buskers, meditation and other genres worked very well, but now there is an irritating din creating a stressful noise. Most of the excellent buskers are now outside the market and in the mall – no longer at Freo Markets.

You are pushing to exclude merchandise made in China or other such countries but your understanding on this is quite ignorant. China, India, Taiwan and other such countries are the manufacturing Mecca’s of the world. Most of your so called designer label products are imported from these countries. In recent years, most western manufacturing has gone offshore and it will continue to do so. Get real, be discerning and get yourself educated. Again, talk with the guys on the ground – you must.

Obviously the markets can do without tacky junk but you fail to understand that there is a huge demand for bargains; cheap T-shirts, sunglasses and $2 bits and pieces are as valid as anything else. No one goes the market to buy Vuitton or Prada. Do you have any idea about your demographic?

Closing down half the market on Friday evening is ludicrous. It’s one of the busiest trading times of the week. You don’t seem to fathom how embarrassing and insane that was. Chasing customers out of an establishment has never been written into the retail act, simply because, no retailer other than you, would have ever considered such a thing.

Retail 101 – Don’t yell at customers to F…Off.

Seriously, you have been pathetic, cruel and vindictive. Unless you get back into the drivers seat and work with the people who matter you will destroy the markets and be shamed out of town. No one wants you to fail and perhaps you don’t like the teacher, but at least be smart enough to learn the lesson.


http://sonyagreen.blogspot.com/

Cr Robert Fittock curious about my sex

It’s been a crazy week, ending up with a somewhat severe looking photograph of me on the front page of the Fremantle Herald. I never imagined that my fifteen minutes of fame would involve a Fremantle councillors curiosity or fascination about my genitals.

The huge headline “Fittock under fire for ‘sleazy’ email” was undoubtedly an embarrassment to Fremantle council. The email in question was and continues to be an embarrassment to me. Although I am offended and angry I am also quite willing to bring it out into the public arena.

Apart from the obvious intention to belittle or insult me, the sexual undertones suggest a bullying implication. If he had said it or even emailed it to his like-minded colleagues it might have been viewed as schoolboy smut or immaturity. Sending to all councillors was disrespectful and as one person mentioned it had a subtle sense of intimidation; a covert suggestion that this is what happens when you cross him.

Initially I wrote a somewhat provocative and critical letter to all councillors in reference to the decline of the Fremantle markets. The exact copy is on this blog under the title of back yard piss up. Yes, I acknowledge that this is a little crass but deliberately so for effect.

Only three councillors replied. Cr’s Lauder and Dowson wrote to express understanding of my concerns and frustration. Cr Fittock wrote nothing more than a sarcastic quip about my blog and it was something along the line of the internet being the dunny wall of the world. (Dunny is Australian slang for toilet)

He then shot of his email to the mayor, CEO and all councillors:
“Don’t ya just love her…if in fact she has a womb…hermaphrodite maybe…or just someone with a teensy weensy weenie.”

I am not so precious that I get offended by dirty jokes and I really don’t care if people blow off steam in-house. It is my opinion that a joke must be clever or funny and this is clearly neither.

This says nothing about me but it does say an awful lot about cr Fittock. Sigmund Freud, Carl Jung or indeed any psychiatrist or psychologist would have their work cut out in analysing this subconscious.

Cr Fittock is an elected member and is expected to represent the people. When he was asked by the Herald to comment he said he had never spoken to me personally and his ‘flowery’ wording was his way of asking whether the blogger was a woman. He followed this stupid statement with “If I need to apologise I will but I wont do it until I get advice.

He then complained that he should be able to email colleagues without fearing his comments will leak. He said he would lodge an official complaint with the CEO.
(Interesting priority – good luck with that. Must be reassuring to the public that you put yourself first and appear oblivious to the trouble you’re in and the trouble you have created.)

The incident happened over a week ago. He has had time to prepare a reasonable statement and if this is the best he can do then we can only wonder about the mans intelligence or right to represent his constituents. I have not had an apology from him and after that comment, why would I accept one now? I will mention that Cr’s Lauder, Haney, Adeane and deputy mayor Dowson have all contacted me and apologised on behalf of council.

Adele Carles called me as soon as she read the article to see how I was and offered assistance and support. No wonder she blitzed mayor Tagliaferri at the last bi-election. His only comment to me was something along the lines of what email are you referring to?

The Herald quoted him as saying that the comments and their public disclosure would both undergo ‘due process’ but he too was concerned councillors might feel hesitant about open expression if they couldn’t trust that internal emails would remain private. He foolishly continued with “There have been emails in the past that were seriously on the edge but they haven’t gone outside.

When I commented that cr’s Dowson and Lauder has expressed their embarrassment and put forward their apology other councillors turned on them in a witch-hunt manner and accused them of leaking the email to me. In-house the biggest debate was about the leak not the offense!

The Herald did get comment from the councillors who were still focused on the main issue and not playing into the diversionary tactics of the others:
“Sleazy, almost a sexual put down,” Cr Georgie Adeane said.

“It's belittling for everyone on council…It’s horrible” said Shirley Mackay, a mayoral aspirant. “I can understand someone calling for his resignation.”

Cr Donna Haney was “Disturbed” such comments could be “made by an elected member about someone in our community.”

Cr Les Lauder was “utterly disgusted” adding “I don’t believe that such a person should be on council.”

Although this is a very ‘unsexy’ cause, I will push on and allow my face to expose this type of nastiness. It seems to me that Fremantle council is divided in many ways and it is apparent to me that one team works so hard and ethically and the other works defensively, neutrally or politically. I don’t want to be involved with politics but it appears to me that it is always the same people who step up and show themselves.

Fremantle is about to elect a new mayor and of the in-house aspirants Shirley Mackay was the only one to comment on this issue and didn’t run for cover.

Pettitt, a good mate of Fittock was silent, overall they all did the old Tafliaferri shoe shuffle or played under the radar. Perhaps it would be wise to bring in someone from outside the clique. I fear a Tagliaferri protégé will allow this old boys club to continue.

I still haven’t had any real answer to my original email about the markets but Colin Wright challenged Brad Pettitt to put his ideas to the public in plain black and white. Brad wrote to the editor of the Herald and this is what he said:

‘As Colin Wright’s letter (Pettitt’s too little too late, Sept 5, 2009) attests the recent angst over the markets lease made it very difficult for a useful dialogue to occur between all parties.

Now the head lease and rental issues have been resolved I hope council can work in a more productive fashion to revitalise the markets (the Growers Market is an exciting first step) while addressing stallholders concerns over the transition.

Is that the best you can do Brad? All parties exclude the stallholders completely and the Growers Market looks like a school fete.

Fremantle to elect new mayor

Politically, the Fremantle Markets is a big issue. It played a big part in Adele Carles triumphant win in the election earlier this year and not only influenced Mayor Tagliaferri’s embarrassing loss but more importantly forced him into the limelight.

Under such close scrutiny he was forced to show who he really was and what he was really made of. The general consensus is evident by the result.

Now, with the upcoming election for a new mayor the pressure is on again. A few of the present councilors are vying for the job and a lot of soft shoe shuffling is going on. Obviously, aspirants would like to look like they are capable of fixing the market issues. Some have, up until now, shown no interest or indeed opposed intervention and opted for a wait until it goes away approach.

A few outsiders are running for position and might be worthy of consideration. Someone fresh; without Tagliaferri’s influence, personality bias or emotional baggage might be the better option. Michael Martin is looking good at the moment and I would be very interested to hear more of what he has to say.

So far all that has been offered are platitudes and vague definitions. No-one can even get clear about definitions such as;
Security of tenure
Low cost environment
Fair market rent

Let’s just lock in straight forward plans and then work out from there. Follow through, modify, disagree or deny them but stop all the smoke and mirrors and stop pretending to look into it. A real leader must have a strategy and put it into action. If it can’t be done or won’t be done then step up and say so.

A number of points keep being raised but never addressed; let’s start here:

An effective working group; council, management and stallholders working together until decisions are made and carried through. So far meetings appear to be casual chit-chats, stallholders have been excluded, attendance seems optional and nothing constructive has ever happened. There must be quarterly meetings with everyone attending.

Tenancy agreements offer no real security of tenure. What has happened to the 5 year+5 year option? At the moment some stallholders can not sell businesses as FMPL will only offer prospective purchasers a 6 month trial. No one in their right mind would pay out tens of thousands of dollars for a stall with only a 6 month trial period.

Instead of paying out phenomenal fees to lawyers why not compensate businesses which are being forced out? Not only a cheaper and cleaner option but a fairer, faster and easier solution.

Offer and then support a transition period to allow people to modify, sell or reinvent their businesses.

Define what a market is. Much of the redevelopment plans sound like imitating Harrods or David Jones; then it’s a growers market and food emporium; next it’s an arts exhibition - what is it? Previously it has been a bazaar style shopping experience with an emphasis on value for money, eclectic and unique merchandise, vibrant and casual entertainment, artistic and handmade products, busking, exotic smells and heaps of personality and community spirit. It has always been, and successfully so, a leisurely weekend outing. Does the council or the community want to change the nature of the markets?

Fremantle Markets stall holders association

Fremantle Stallholders Association address to Fremantle Council March 25th 2009
(Colin Wright)

1 year ago many of us met here to listen to your decision on the Market Lease. We heard all the promises, had been given all the guarantees and that evening you were told by the Murdoch’s that: quote

“We don't want to lose any stallholders, we want all the stallholders we have to come along. We have 200 stallholders who are all fantastic people who we want to continue. We don't want to preclude any stallholders from anything.”

They also made a commitment in their pre-meeting presentation to council to continue to provide a:
a secure low cost trading environment despite capital expenditures and trading initiatives.
They also said “We subsidise rents to retain a low cost trading environment”.

Fast forward 12 months and I’d like to introduce to you my friends in the gallery …the sitting duck tenants.
….. Retail tenants at the end of their lease period.

We all want new 5 year agreements and the security of tenure we were promised but not with their conditions or ridiculously high rents attached. We have been left at the negotiating table with landlords who aren’t prepared to negotiate. They hold all the cards…They’re in a superior bargaining position and they are taking advantage of that.

They used stallholders to get support for their 18 year lease and now they turned their back on us.

Their idea of negotiation is……………. “ take it or leave it”
In some cases they take half your shop, that’s half you business.. with no compensation….. Or they relocate you into a shop considerably smaller than your current shop, charge higher rent and try to convince you it’s a good thing.

Can anybody please tell stallholders what ever happened to the Murdoch commitment of a “low cost environment” or how the Council intended to hold them to it.
Their rent goes up 12%. Ours goes up 50 – 100%.

Small businesses like ours have less capacity to pay high occupancy costs and our risk of failure is considerably greater….

Jamie told the Herald last week “we were happy to pay the higher rents”……just look around at all the smiling faces!

We are now asking you “ what can we do about this”.

If we followed Council’s previous advice … all we had to do, was to head off to the SAT and challenge it …incorrect… false information given to stallholders and councilors.
We have no negotiating powers through SAT at the commencement of a lease.

We are totally at the mercy of the landlord….and even though both you Peter and Glen guaranteed all stallholders would get an agreement you cannot follow through on this…they know it and you know it…..

We saw it coming!!!! The Association told you in our Business Plan submission. We made a recommendation for a “Transition Period” between leases to avoid this.

You had 2 1/2 years still to run on the old lease but you surrendered it early. During this time it would have been a good opportunity.…to fine tune the Working Group, plan for change, enact your conservation plan and prepare stallholders for the future. Now we have planning through stealth or forced attrition.

Our businesses are under threat and people will leave…

They are leaving…Bob, Mary, Steve, Alison, Subhi and Annupo, Chris, Nathan, Kung and Sue….and there will be more.

It’s up to the council now to have the will and desire to do something about it.

Or,………… we could take John Murdoch’s advice….
“You’ve had it too good for too long…if you don’t like it get out”

Most recent post http://sonyagreen.blogspot.com/