COMPLAINTS AGAINST GOLD COAST MAYOR TOM TATE
* At a November 2013 council meeting considering an application for a development called Waterglow, Mr Tate allegedly failed to fully disclose his "material personal interest" as a partner in the company seeking the application.
* Mr Tate participates in debates and resolution voting on the funding model for council's new cultural precinct first stage in meetings in May and July 2017. It's alleged he breached the Local Government Act by taking part in these proceedings due to his "material personal interest" in several properties affected by the funding model.
* At council meetings in May and July 2017, Cr Tate allegedly made statements he knew to be false and misleading in support of the proposed funding model for the cultural precinct for the "purposes of deriving a benefit for himself".
* Mr Tate allegedly engaged in a pattern of conduct concerning council decisions relating to matters where he has a material personal interest, and this conduct influenced council decision making for the "express purpose of providing a benefit to himself, and for his business associates".
* Mr Tate accused of misusing his authority by nominating himself, during a closed council meeting, to negotiate CEO Dale Dickson's new employment contract. This was despite being aware Mr Dickson had been delegated the sole responsibility for negotiating the sale of council-owned land to a business in which the mayor had a material personal interest.
* Mr Tate failed to update his register of interests within the statutory timeframe to properly disclose the receipt of hospitality benefits he received from the representative of a Chinese developer.