Cr Vandervis replies to local newspaper

Updated post Sun, 26 Apr 2015 at 2:44 p.m.

Meeting of the Dunedin City Council on Tuesday, 28 April 2015 at 1:00 PM, Council Chamber, Municipal Chambers

Agenda – Council – 28/04/2015 (PDF, 96.6 KB)

Report – Council – 28/04/2015 (PDF, 172.7 KB)
Conduct Committee Report to Council

Updated post Sat, 25 Apr 2015 at 3:00 a.m.

From: Lee Vandervis
Sent: ‎Friday‎, ‎24‎ ‎April‎ ‎2015 ‎9‎:‎02‎ ‎p.m.
To: Chris Morris [ODT], Nicholas George S Smith [ODT]
Cc: Elizabeth Kerr
Subject: Follow-up questions

Dear Mr Morris,

There are serious DCC issues underpinning the Code of Conduct process.

DCC Bureaucracy has run many months of self-investigations costing quarter of a million dollars, which this Councillor has not been allowed to see the results of.

Unbelievable claims that the acknowledged $1.6++ million worth of fraud was all perpetrated by one man only, now dead.

Months of Police investigation leading nowhere, with no prosecutions because they only looked at missing vehicles and anticipated that all receivers had to say was they thought the dead man had authority to sell in the way he did. And they all did. This despite many assurances from CEO Bidrose to me from the beginning that there would be a full and wide investigation.

My requests to the Serious Fraud Office [including discussion of 3 year plus investigation of Landfill frauds by local Police] to do the job local Police are seem not to be up to. CEO Bidrose claims SFO had been asked to investigate but SFO have no knowledge of this when I ask them to investigate.

Police investigation only claimed to be widened by Police management after my exposing of their very narrow investigation. Still no prosecutions, or Police interest to date in my offered evidence of Citifleet maintenance contract fraud, credit card fraud etc.

Mayor Cull and CEO Bidrose saying that no public comment allowed while investigations ongoing, but commenting themselves that it was all down to just one man and that the public can have confidence in the living remainder of the DCC organisation.

Mayor Cull accepting non-confirming [devoid of any evidence] Conduct complaints against me.
Crs. Thomson and Staynes add tampered evidence to one of their complaints but not the other – both immediately accepted again by Mayor Cull.

Mayor Cull falsely claims it is within his authority to choose the membership of the Code of Conduct committee against me. Is defeated.
Mayor Cull chooses again, this time with majority Councillor rubber stamp.

CEO Bidrose fails to ensure proper meeting and Code of Conduct processes over many weeks, fails to read my related email, finally culminating in hallway loudness. My full apology should have been printed and still should.

Audit and Risk committee fails to address major DCC problem of contract fraud, identifying 17 types of fraud but not including contract or tender fraud which I have been complaining of repeatedly.
Audit and Risk chair refuses ultra vires to allow any discussion or debate on 40 page pivotal financial report confirmed agenda item which I had previously indicated in the meeting I wanted to speak to.
Cr. Calvert also wished to speak to it but the Chair abused her authority and shut it down. This along with a history of other A&R suppression was the cause of this loudness and my final exit from this committee.

These are all real issues with stories you should be interested in Mr Morris, but instead you bypass the reasons “Whatever the reasons for your frustration…” miss the important issues and ask 5 inane questions about my behaviour.
These are the actions of a gossip columnist, not a reporter.

Cr. Vandervis

{Draft text deleted at Cr Vandervis’s request. -Eds}

On 24/04/15 4:11 PM, “Chris Morris” wrote:

Lee,

I’m following up on this morning’s story. I tried to include as much as I could of your comments, where they addressed the issues being raised in the conduct committee’s report, but I’d still far rather talk through it all point by point, in detail.

Failing that, can you respond to these specific questions about where to from here:

1. Whatever the reasons for your frustration, do you now accept that your behaviour (as reported by witnesses in the report) was bullying, aggressive and intimidating and included swearing (which you initially denied)?

2. If you do, what changes (if any) will you make to modify your behaviour, other than the previously mentioned plan to raise concerns with council staff only by email?

3. What is your reaction to the comments by Richard Thomson, who said your approach was counter-productive and your talents wasted?

4. What is your reaction to the comments by Cr Thomson and others suggesting a genuine apology might be the best way forward? Will you consider this, or do you plan to offer one at Tuesday’s meeting or at any other time, or do you maintain that you have already offered one?

5. Do you think your behaviour (as described in 1) is in any way appropriate for an elected public representative? If not, and given the limited sanctions available to the council, will you be considering your position, including whether or not you should resign?

Chris.

SICK QUOTES
—care of whatifdunedin

Richard Thomson Facebook - ODT 24.4.15 Cr Thomson on Cr Vandervis 1Mayor Cull on Cr Vandervis - ODT 24.4.15

ODT articles:
Penalty urged for Vandervis
Voting rights loss ‘punishing wrong people’

█ For more, enter the terms *vandervis*, *cull*, *bidrose*, *citifleet* or *deloitte* in the search box at right.

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

Advertisements

33 Comments

Filed under Business, Citifleet, DCC, Democracy, Economics, Media, Name, New Zealand, OAG, People, Police, Politics, Project management, Property, SFO

33 responses to “Cr Vandervis replies to local newspaper

  1. Cars

    Why is Chris Morris still hung up on the aggressive behavior minor issue affecting only Sandy Graham, Sue Bidrose and Lee Vandervis when he (Morris) should be investigating Vandervis’ allegations, the result of which affects all ratepayers?

    • Will.

      Chris Morris’s line of questioning to Lee Vandevis is to divert the serious questions of fraud to his own agenda and those whom he works with. He plays with fire…and he will get burnt.

      {Moderated. -Eds}

  2. Hype O'Thermia

    Cars, it couldn’t be because he supports, or has been instructed that policy says support must be given, one side rather than the other. Could it?

  3. Anonymous

    Maybe Mr Morris should move to Stuff. With questions like those, he would be embraced within their new tabloid philosophy – only a minor step to such journalistic brilliance as “…and it’s perfect” or “…but man is it worth it.” It seems you don’t even need to spell-check your work any longer, or worry about formatting, and can just copy and paste Tweets. No more buggering about hunting for news, fronting to interviews or making phone calls. And, thank the editorial god, no more hard yakka banging out questions by email. Perfect!

  4. Will

    It is not just a case of people you tend to associate with, but it happens a lot, for me, where the ODT comes up, in passing, by people you don’t know. They invariably comment with some unsolicited, withering comment about the paper. Sure, they like to publish the odd letter, like the one in today’s paper, which praises them for reasons not obvious to the media savvy. How they must grasp such letters with gratitude.
    The paper is leaking like a sieve about delicious stuff going on there. More to come.

  5. Calvin Oaten

    Cr Vandervis’ letter to Chris Morris – ODT reporter (I nearly said journalist) – covers a multitude of issues which are of paramount importance to the citizens of Dunedin. All Morris could do was ask a bunch of inane questions around the already well aired CoC Report, and then hinging on the comments of Cr Thomson when it is Thomson who should be interrogated.
    But all that rubbish aside, the points made by Cr Vandervis need further examination. For instance:
    [“DCC Bureaucracy has run many months of self-investigations costing quarter of a million dollars, which this Councillor has not been allowed to see the results of.
    Unbelievable claims that the acknowledged $1.6++ million worth of fraud was all perpetrated by one man only, now dead.”]
    This implies that there is something/s of embarrassing moment to the administration within that report hence the withholding. CEO Bidrose could be seen to be exceeding her authority here unless of course she has consulted Mayor Cull and received his instructions on that matter.

    Then there is this:
    [“My requests to the Serious Fraud Office [including discussion of 3 year plus investigation of Landfill frauds by local Police] to do the job local Police are seem not to be up to. CEO Bidrose claims SFO had been asked to investigate but SFO have no knowledge of this when I ask them to investigate.”]
    If CEO Bidrose claimed that she had asked SFO to investigate, why then would SFO tell Cr Vandervis that they had no knowledge of that request?

    [“Police investigation only claimed to be widened by Police management after my exposing of their very narrow investigation. Still no prosecutions, or Police interest to date in my offered evidence of Citifleet maintenance contract fraud, credit card fraud etc.”]
    Again, where are the CEO’s instructions here?

    [“Mayor Cull and CEO Bidrose saying that no public comment allowed while investigations ongoing, but commenting themselves that it was all down to just one man and that the public can have confidence in the living remainder of the DCC organisation.”]
    This suggests collusion between the Mayor Cull and CEO Bidrose in order to minimise fallout and contain the matter within tight parameters. It would seem by the outcome to date that this has been achieved.

    [“Mayor Cull accepting non-confirming [devoid of any evidence] Conduct complaints against me.
    Crs. Thomson and Staynes add tampered evidence to one of their complaints but not the other – both immediately accepted again by Mayor Cull.”]
    This action suggests that Mayor Cull has a predetermined outcome target to undermine Cr Vandervis’ standing.

    [“Mayor Cull falsely claims it is within his authority to choose the membership of the Code of Conduct committee against me. Is defeated.
    Mayor Cull chooses again, this time with majority Councillor rubber stamp.”]
    The establishment of a “Kangaroo Court” by coercion of a malleable lacklustre council.

    [“CEO Bidrose fails to ensure proper meeting and Code of Conduct processes over many weeks, fails to read my related email, finally culminating in hallway loudness. My full apology should have been printed and still should.”]
    Why was the full apology not printed and have the matter done? One can only suspect that it wasn’t wanted. Now we see where Cr Thomson is demanding that very action in his nasty public commentary.

    [“Audit and Risk committee fails to address major DCC problem of contract fraud, identifying 17 types of fraud but not including contract or tender fraud which I have been complaining of repeatedly.
    Audit and Risk chair refuses ultra vires to allow any discussion or debate on 40 page pivotal financial report confirmed agenda item which I had previously indicated in the meeting I wanted to speak to.
    Cr. Calvert also wished to speak to it but the Chair abused her authority and shut it down. This along with a history of other A&R suppression was the cause of this loudness and my final exit from this committee.”]

    So there we are, a journalist could/should have an absolute field day with all this and pose some very hard hitting questions to all the parties in these points of dispute. Then an objective analysis of the overall situation re the effectiveness of the Mayor, Council and Administration’s obligation to effectively protect the citizens’ treasure and to do no harm. It would then be up to an honest community newspaper to publish all material in the citizens’ interest. But I wouldn’t be holding my breath.

  6. Hype O'Thermia

    I didn’t vote for as many candidates as I could have because there weren’t all that many I considered worth voting for. Some had already proved themselves to be duds. Others from their candidate presentations didn’t look as if they would be any better. 

    So Lee Vandervis is important to me as one of the few representatives I chose – to represent ME. Considering the high number of votes he got there are a good many Dunedin people who chose him to represent them.

    And he is being denied the right to carry out his responsibility to us.

    That’s just wrong,

    Totally bloody-mindedly wrong.

    Cull et al – carry out your feud with Vandervis on your own time, not on mine. He’s paid as a councillor to represent ME (and all those other people) in particular, as well as do his duty by Dunedin as a whole.

    Cull, you’re not enough of a man to do a decent handbagging. Settle down and get on with council work in council time, like Vandervis does when he’s not being hamstrung by tim’rous wee beasties who tremble at the very thought that they might have to look a Fearful Fact in the eye without flinching.

    Grow a pair, you gutless wonders. And stop taking away my right to full and effective representation according to the law regarding electoral process.

    You wouldn’t dare this nonsense if Vandervis and I (and a fair number of those who voted for him) were Maori, or Chinese, or Jewish, and his efforts were strongly based on fairness for our culture. Well, get this: my culture, and where I feel Vandervis represents me superbly, is anti-rorting, anti-troughing. Such a shame it’s so unwelcome in council in 2015, and I do mean SHAME.

    • Calvin Oaten

      Further to the Vandervis Code of Conduct hearing, I have now read the full report of the CoC Panel with its recommendations. It in effect finds Cr Vandervis guilty on all counts with recommendations that he publicly apologise to the offended, plus be excluded from all committee meetings for two months. Although he can still attend full council meetings he will not be permitted to vote on any motions. That in itself is a disenfranchising of the voters who selected him to represent them. Can this be democracy?
      All that aside, if we look at the decisions relative to each point as outlined by Cr Vandervis in my previous posting we can see that there are serious points of difference and dismissal of much of the evidence accumulated by the respondent since 2011 in respect to the ‘Citifleet’ fraud case. It most definitely is based on selective evidence which would not stand up to any permitted defense or cross examination. In a word a one sided outcome along predetermined lines. As the respondent himself says, a “Kangaroo Court” designed for a specific outcome. Let’s hope that common sense and decency prevails around that council table to vote on the recommendations and that the required 75 percent margin is not achieved. A difficult assignment perhaps when one looks at the power of the Mayor and his ‘Greater Dunedin’ cabal. Tomorrow will be test of this council with far reaching ramifications if the Cr is found against.

      • Elizabeth

        Calvin, respondent is a better word. Cr Vandervis is not at court, and ‘quasi legal’ is the joke that is the loopy conduct committee.

  7. Elizabeth

    Updated comment Tue, 28 Apr 2015 at 11:08 a.m.

    From: Lee Vandervis
    Sent: ‎Monday‎, ‎27‎ ‎April‎ ‎2015 ‎5‎:‎53‎ ‎p.m.
    To: Chris Morris [ODT], Nicholas George Smith [ODT]
    Cc: Elizabeth Kerr
    Subject: Councillor pay.

    Dear Mr Morris,

    9% you say? When inflation has only been 1%?
    Sounds like I could soon be earning more than 10% of what our DELTA CEO gets!, although I am happy with my current rate of pay.
    If we get the chance to vote on the increase I will vote against as I do not think any general increase is justifiable with inflation so low.

    A significant increase could be justified if we halved the number of Councillors as ChCh did a few years back. This would make for a better quality of representative with much higher pay making it a real profession rather than a part-time self-employed job.

    I used to spend 40+ hours a week on Council and political business for many years when we were only paid 30 something thousand dollars a year.
    Now that the pay is nearer $50 thousand per year before tax, with no positions of responsibility I only spend about 20 hours a week directly on Council business.

    I have cced to the What If site in the belief that it will improve the accuracy of what you chose to quote.

    Cr. Vandervis

    ****

    The increases will lift Dunedin city councillors’ base salaries from $50,500 to $55,045.

    ### ODT Online Tue, 28 Apr 2015
    9% rise deserved, Cull says
    By Chris Morris
    Dunedin city councillors are set for a 9% pay rise – worth more than $4500 to each – and Mayor Dave Cull says more is needed. The Otago Daily Times yesterday confirmed the pay increase for Dunedin city councillors was expected to be finalised by the Remuneration Authority next month.
    Read more

    DCC – what they earn (via ODT)
    • Mayor Dave Cull $146,250
    • Deputy mayor Chris Staynes $65,650
    • Committee chairmen $60,600
    • Councillor $50,500
    • Community board chairmen (population based) $14,000-$17,400
    • Board members $7000-$8700

    • Mick

      And the Mayor inept as ever compares Dunedin with Tauranga – some comparison. Look at what Wikipedia has to say about it: –

      Tauranga is one of New Zealand’s main centres for business, international trade, culture, fashion and horticultural science. The Port of Tauranga is New Zealand’s largest port in terms of gross export tonnage and efficiency. Tauranga is one of New Zealand’s fastest growing cities, with a 14 percent increase in population between the 2001 census and the 2006 census, though that number has slowed to 11% between the 2006 Census and the 2013 Census. This sudden population growth has made Tauranga New Zealand’s 5th largest city.

      Dunedin is shrinking – it is losing business; it is a city of pensioners and students and rising debt. And the mayor says the councillors deserve more pay and compares it with of all places Tauranga? He should get a life – preferably somewhere else.

      • Hype O'Thermia

        “If they were paid more they wouldn’t make dumb decisions,” declared the White Queen, adding reflectively, “Sometimes I’ve believed as many as six impossible things before breakfast.”
        (Carroll & O’Thermia, 2015)

        • Mick

          Hype O Thermia
          You hush now. Daave and Minty might be listening in. They might be encouraged to try eight or ten.

      • Cars

        There is one vast difference between Dunedin and Tauranga.

        The fast growing centre has 50% less council employees than Dunedin.

        If only Dave Cull chose to make that comparative figure equitable , then I would approve his payrise.

        • Mick

          Cars
          April 28, 2015 at 3:45 pm
          You say ‘There is one vast difference between Dunedin and Tauranga.

          The fast growing centre has 50% less council employees than Dunedin.’

          You are right. I can add also less councillors (10) versus 14 here and no community boards versus 5 here with six members each!

          If clueless Cull wants to make comparisons he should do a little more homework.

    • Mike

      Lee is wrong here (but oh so right) inflation as announced last week is 0.1% not 1% – the councillors are getting a raise almost 100 times that of inflation.

      The real problem of course is that so long as they get pay rises higher than the rates rises they vote for they don’t feel the pain the rest of us who’s income increases average that 0.1% inflation rate.

      If they want pay increases they should make sure they can afford them while keeping to a budget that sets the rates rises to be the same as or lower than the inflation rate.

    • Mick

      April 28, 2015 · 8:40 PM
      You say Elizabeth:
      IN SUMMARY, CR VANDERVIS WAS SANCTIONED IN HIS ABSENCE AND WE WOULD SAY DAAAVE’S FUTURE AS MAYOR OF DUNEDIN IS DISSOLVED OR WAS IT CRASHED
      UNLESS DEAR OLD ODT CAN FIGURE SOME NEWS STORY TO SAVE HIM.

      Regarding Cull’s council’s performance throughout this whole affair and today the words of Cromwell in his speech dismissing the “Rump Parliament” (20 April 1653) seem apposite and I quote:

      You have sat too long for any good you have been doing lately… Depart, I say; and let us have done with you. In the name of God, go!

      • Elizabeth

        Mick, apt! Just waiting for more information to be sent through from today, including words of the Cull resolution.

        I will say that Diane Yeldon was a great success in her outright challenges to the Mayor this afternoon. Diane might prefer to describe what happened in her own words. Very brave and correct !!!!!

        This was NOT a straightforward council meeting in the least.

        • Mick

          Thanks Elizabeth. I will look forward to what Diane has to say. Things are truly in disarray with this council.

        • Calvin Oaten

          Elizabeth, you are saying that the hearing was a bit of a shambles with Cull simply ‘winging’ it in order to get what he wanted, am I right? The result is that not only was it Cr Vandervis’ opinion that the whole process was ‘ultra vires’ and left, but that council basically proceeded to break the law by proceeding and censuring Cr Vandervis in his absence. Could they be that stupid? Don’t answer that.

        • Elizabeth

          Yes, Calvin – SHAMBLES
          But still voted on via pretext of weekend calls between Councillors that lobbied here and there. Couldn’t possibly answer the last part! Not when views are shooting sky high tonight at the latest post / home page.

        • Diane Yeldon

          Thank you, Elizabeth. When the meeting reached Agenda Item 14, Mayor Cull opened the discussion by having a new proposed resolution which was not in the Agenda put on the overhead projector. Cr Vandervis said he couldn’t read it and asked for a printed copy. The mayor declined. So here was a councillor entitled to discuss and vote on a resolution (never mind the fact that it pertained to the proposed censure of that particular councillor) and the mayor was not permitting that councillor to actually read (and so understand) the proposed resolution!
          Cr Vandervis apparently sought and received legal advice on his phone, then told the mayor that the procedure was illegal and left the meeting. There was some confusion at this point and the meeting went into a kind of very brief unofficial recess. I got up from the public seating area and walked to the back of the meeting room looking for a governance officer to ask for a copy of the resolution for the members of the public present. But no governance officers were accessible. On the way back to my seat, I found myself asking the mayor if the members of the public present could please have a copy of the resolution. To my astonishment, Mayor Cull said No. I protested and said it was a public meeting, I couldn’t read the projector screen either, the resolution wasn’t in the agenda so how could the public understand what was going on? Mayor Cull said “You are not part of the meeting.” However, by this stage I believe senior staff were already preparing copies of the resolution for members of the public, I asked Mayor Cull if we could have time to read it, and once again, he said No! I protested and then he said “You can have the same time as the councillors…” And then said he was not going to discuss it any further so I said, “Thank you”, and sat down.

        • Mick

          @Diane Yeldon
          April 29, 2015 at 2:57 am
          Thanks Diane for your comment. The mayor’s responses to you are astonishing and show his truly vindictive and destructive nature. He continues to demonstrate that he is quite unfit for the job. It is appropriate to repeat my earlier comment to Elizabeth last night vis:-

          “the words of Cromwell in his speech dismissing the “Rump Parliament” (20 April 1653) seem apposite and I quote:-

          You have sat too long for any good you have been doing lately… Depart, I say; and let us have done with you. In the name of God, go!”

          I repeat again. In the name of God, go.

        • Brian Miller

          The copies of the resolution that the staff had printed were not enough for all the members of the public to get one. Several members of the public, myself included, are yet to receive one. We were told that more copies were being printed, but it appears that no date was given for when we might receive a copy.

        • Elizabeth

          Brian, I didn’t receive a copy either.

  8. Russell Garbutt

    If the Councilors cannot turn down their pay increase, then why not donate it to the people of Nepal?

  9. Peter

    There are some hoary old chestnuts here justifying a 9% pay rise.
    Better pay does not necessarily equate to better candidates or more diversity among councillors’ backgrounds. If better pay was the answer, we only have to look at case studies where excellent pay has not produced the results. Where private sector companies and public bodies of various descriptions have still performed badly in terms of ‘outcomes’ despite having well emunerated CEO’s and governance representatives.
    As for diversity of backgrounds (gender, ethnic, religious, sexual orientation, socio/economic) is concerned, this can happen when quotas are set, but this is artificial social and political engineering and can be counterproductive. You still don’t necessarily end up with quality candidates, only candidates which satisfy some preordained philosophy and who have managed to get in by preference rather than prior excellent work history elsewhere.
    There are various factors that don’t attract people to stand for council. It might be the tedious nature of a lot of the work. It might also be an unwillingness to be associated with such bodies and the people therein. The latest nonsense concerning the Lee Vandervis Code of Conduct complaints would hardly attract many decent people to serve. I would be embarrassed to be on the council as it is now constituted and for people to know I was a city councillor.
    Finally, I note some of the councillors big note themselves as to all the hard work they do, judged by hours spent on council work that is beyond the call of duty. This is their choice, and good on them but, once again, while time spent by them on council business may be onerous, the time may not necessarily be spent effectively or achieve any discernably positive results.

    • Mick

      Peter
      April 28, 2015 at 10:18 am
      You say “Finally, I note some of the councillors big note themselves as to all the hard work they do, judged by hours spent on council work that is beyond the call of duty. This is their choice, and good on them but, once again, while time spent by them on council business may be onerous, the time may not necessarily be spent effectively or achieve any discernably positive results.”

      Reminds me of this:-
      BUSY DOING NOTHING
      From the film “A Connecticut Yankee In King Arthur’s Court” (1949)
      (Jimmy Van Heusen / Johnny Burke)
      La-la-la-la-la-la
      La-la-la-la-la-la-la-la-la-la
      La-la-la-la-la-la
      La-la-la-la-la-la-la-la-la-la

      We’re busy doin’ nothin’
      Workin’ the whole day through
      Tryin’ to find lots of things not to do
      We’re busy goin’ nowhere
      Isn’t it just a crime
      We’d like to be unhappy, but
      We never do have the time

      I have to watch the river
      To see that it doesn’t stop
      And stick around the rosebuds
      So they’ll know when to pop
      And keep the crickets cheerful
      They’re really a solemn bunch
      Hustle, bustle
      And only an hour for lunch

      La-la-la-la-la-la

      And so on – I am sad to say that this seems to describe the DCC rather aptly.
      And as for Cull’s ‘9% rise deserved’ statement – well – all I can say is that in the context of Dunedin’s current debt situation it is risible.

  10. Lyndon Weggery

    I too am incensed at the Mayor’s response to the proposed pay increase with inflation running at 0.1%. Nobody else is getting this apart from SDHB and Otago Regional Council. Everytime this happens they hide behind the mantra that the Remuneration Authority sets the rate and it is beyond our control. If Mayor Cull was really serious to achieve badly needed savings in the Council finances then surely he would be leading the charge to change the RA’s rules for setting pay rates as PM John Key is hinting at with the MP increases. Mayor Cull’s comments will certainly come to haunt him in next year’s elections.

  11. Simon

    9% rise deserved. Plus free water. Yeah Right.

  12. Hype O'Thermia

    Cull-ture of entitlement?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s