From ‘City’ colleague with an eye for the law, Wikipedia definition
Fri, 1 May 2015 at 11:00 a.m.
—
### ODT Online Fri, 1 May 2015
Apology lacking; voting rights go
By Chris Morris
Dunedin city councillor Lee Vandervis has been stripped of his voting rights after failing to apologise before a 24-hour deadline. […] In a statement last night, council group chief financial officer Grant McKenzie said Cr Vandervis was suspended from all council committees from today until July 1.
Read more
****
[Cr Hilary Calvert] questioned the council’s right to delegate to council staff any final judgement on whether Cr Vandervis’ apology was appropriate, arguing that was a call for councillors to make.
“The process was open and fair, and, as far as I’m concerned, completely in accordance with proper meeting procedure. I question the motivation in quibbling about it now.” –Mayor Dave Cull
### ODT Online Fri, 1 May 2015
Mayor dismisses legality questions
By Chris Morris
Mayor Dave Cull has a one-word response to questions about the legality of stripping Cr Lee Vandervis of voting rights: “Whatever.” Mr Cull’s abrupt response came in an email to Cr Hilary Calvert yesterday, as she questioned whether the council had followed proper process when considering its punishment of Cr Vandervis.
Read more
█ For more, enter the terms *vandervis*, *cull*, *bidrose*, *citifleet* or *deloitte* in the search box at right.
—
Posted by Elizabeth Kerr
*Image: Cover-up image by whatifdunedin with acknowledgement to Wikipedia
What if? Dunedin... 
Cr Calvert claimed the process “calls into question how [Dr Bidrose] could possibly perform this function without fear of being thought to be biased”. (ODT)
Cr Hilary Calvert is coming into her own. Great work.
May 3 is World Press Freedom Day
Every year, 3 May is a date which celebrates the fundamental principles of press freedom; to evaluate press freedom around the world, to defend the media from attacks on their independence and to pay tribute to journalists who have lost their lives in the exercise of their profession.
Dave Cull is looking more like former Haitian dictator, Papa Doc Duvalier, every day. Impromptu rules and resolutions to suit him and his cronies. Who can also not forget the image of Duvalier being chauffered around his impoverished minions throwing money out the window to maintain fidelity to his rule?
Nay Peter lad, he’s just a gutless wee manny who’s got himself into quicksand and hasn’t yet kenn’t the more he thrashes round the deeper he sinks.
Somebody might rescue the mayoral chain, it’s worth a bawbie at Everitts.
Whatever…
Hype O’Thermia
Yes he is just that – a gutless little man thrashing around. On the front page under Dunedin ‘preferred’ site for big employer saying absolutely nothing – a desperate attempt to look important, “he declined to reveal the name of the company or what sector it was in, saying only that the jobs, if they eventuated, would be of mid-level pay”.
He is just full of …****… Such a little person.
New meaning for the letters DCC. Dunedin City Corruption.
### dunedintv.co.nz May 1, 2015 – 6:25pm
Lee Vandervis seeks legal advice over two-month suspension
Dunedin city councillor Lee Vandervis is seeking legal advice about his two-month suspension from committee duties. Vandervis told 39 Dunedin News he’s not sure if he’ll take legal action, but he’s consulting lawyers.
He’s suspended from all council committees until July. He can attend meetings and participate in debate, but can’t vote, although he’s still able to fully participate in council meetings and the long term plan hearings and deliberations.
His suspension relates to breaches of the council’s code of conduct. Vandervis has acknowledged the breaches, but his last-minute apology did not meet requirements set out by the council. He was invited to resubmit an apology, and chose not to.
Ch39Link [no video available]
Reading through the Code of Conduct compliance provisions, it seems quite clear that the Conduct Committee has investigatory powers only and can therefore make only a report. (You can’t make a ‘recommendation’ without deciding what to recommend). The Code of Conduct clearly says that this report will be brought to the full council in open session for them to make the final decision. This is in accord with the fair and reasonable legal concept of a person being judged by their peers.
Can’t these people at the DCC read?
The Code of Conduct rules are on the DCC website as part of the council’s Standing Orders. Page 47.
(Sometimes, I also have my doubts about how carefully Standing Orders are read. Standing Orders, by the way, for those not familiar with council-speak, are the Council’s own rules for the conduct of its meetings.)
Daaave’s earworm for the weekend…..
[warning: some illegibility of the score]
OasisVEVO Published on Jan 17, 2014
Oasis – Whatever
Official music video for Whatever
Directed by: Mark Szaszy
Release Date: 18 December 1994
Music: “Whatever” by Oasis (Google Play • eMusic • iTunes)
—
Oasis “Whatever” Lyrics
I’m free to be whatever I
Whatever I choose
And I’ll sing the blues if I want
I’m free to say whatever I
Whatever I like
If it’s wrong or right it’s alright
Always seems to me
You only see what people want you to see
How long’s it gonna be
Before we get on the bus
And cause no fuss
Get a grip on yourself
It don’t cost much
Free to be whatever you
Whatever you say
If it comes my way it’s alright
You’re free to be wherever you
Wherever you please
You can shoot the breeze if you want
It always seems to me
You only see what people want you to see
How long’s it gonna be
Before we get on the bus
And cause no fuss
Get a grip on yourself
It don’t cost much
I’m free to be whatever I
Whatever I choose
And I’ll sing the blues if I want
Here in my mind
You know you might find
Something that you
You thought you once knew
But now it’s all gone
And you know it’s no fun
Yeah I know it’s no fun
Oh I know it’s no fun
I’m free to be whatever I
Whatever I choose
And I’ll sing the blues if I want
I’m free to be whatever I
Whatever I choose
And I’ll sing the blues if I want
Whatever you do
Whatever you say
Yeah I know it’s alright
Whatever you do
Whatever you say
Yeah I know it’s alright
Mayor Whatever
The ODT tonight have stopped all new comments about Lee Vandervis and Dave Cull’s efforts to silence him. Except for one (which doesn’t work) you have to go back to 25 Feb 2015 to find a related story with comments enabled. It is here [ http://www.odt.co.nz/news/dunedin/334301/threat-boycott-hearing-conduct ] but don’t expect it to remain or expect comments to be accepted. Dave and his friends at Allied Press want to silence us as well. I don’t feel like being silent.
JimmyJones, I’ve at least taken screenshots for these articles with comments:
http://www.odt.co.nz/news/dunedin/340734/apology-lacking-voting-rights-go
http://www.odt.co.nz/news/dunedin/340743/mayor-dismisses-legality-questions
http://www.odt.co.nz/news/dunedin/334301/threat-boycott-hearing-conduct
Today ODT has been quite liberal.
Screenshots for this too:
http://www.odt.co.nz/news/dunedin/340743/mayor-dismisses-legality-questions
There is an explicit reason for removal. All will become clear.
Image received Fri, 1 May 2015 at 9:24 a.m.
Friday, 1 May 2015 [via Stuff.co.nz]: Dilbert is offending his co-workers.
Scott Adams. Last updated 01:33 – 28/02/2012
http://www.odt.co.nz/news/dunedin/340890/council-priorities-frustrate
Because Chris Morris didn’t produce it.
Cr Lord. “I didn’t dispute the fact that he was guilty.”
Can Cr Lord back up this statement with some hard evidence, or is he just having a bob each way.?
Simon
I think that the penny has just dropped for Cr Lord. He realises that he has been ‘owned’ by the Green ‘taliban’ and wants to get back to the real world. Didn’t dispute the ‘FACT’? What freakin fact was that? Too late for Cr good Lord. He will have a bit ‘splainin’ to do out there in the farmland -unfortunately. Maybe Maurice P has already had a word.
Could it mean that in the absence of evidence of guilt (assertion without proof isn’t enough) his opinion was along the lines of “not proven”? “Fact” is a word used too loosely, it’s scattered around alternative health and climate change discussions like cheap confetti. Seldom should it be written without quote marks: “fact”, unless it’s one of the rare ones still clinging to life in unmodified environments.
Ah, Cr Lord’s emphasis may be on the verb: don’t dispute. This is not actually the same thing as saying he believes Cr Vandervis was guilty. But there are two completely separate issues here – whether Cr Vandervis’ behaviour was reasonably proven to be contrary to the Code of Conduct and whether the Code of Conduct compliance procedures were correctly followed. My careful following of the whole thing leads me to answer No to both questions. The first is a bit of a grey area and matter of opinion and degree (but really sensitive souls should avoid politics!) – the second, the procedural side of it, is absolutely black and white: no, the correct process wasn’t followed by miles! I find it hard to understand why honest councillors who were not asleep and not blinded by hatred for Cr Vandervis did not speak up before. But very good to hear Crs Calvert and Lord now. To be fair to councillors, their rights to speak at meetings are very strictly controlled by Standing Orders as interpreted by the Chair, and if the Chair is a bad and unfair one, he or she can really force the councillors to remain silent or desist from speaking.
Guilty of what? Seems that Lee Vandervis has owned up to shouting for which he has apologised on more than one occassion. What he is not guilty of is bringing to the attention of the appropriate people evidence of a wider fraud than has been published. The fact that a wider inquiry obviously has been shut down and all evidence of further fraud that may or may not be in the Deloitte report has been supressed makes Lee guilty of what exactly? This is the typical response to whistleblowers – seen all too often in NZ.
But I do sense some shift in power play here. What is going on with the editorial position of the ODT? They suddenly seem to be publishing some stories that criticise Cull in one way or another.
Admins – can we discuss methods of protesting this injustice?
Dave Cull and his cronies should never have censured Cr Lee Vandervis from voting as they have denied my right to representation and political opinion. I am a rate-paying constituent who exercised my right to vote for this Cr Lee Vandervis to vote on my behalf. I consider the council’s action to be unjust and where his right to vote is denied, that voting should be invalid as it does not recognise the position of those constituents who voted for him.
This is a stitch-up, bordering on conspiracy and the removal of his vote at this time suggests they are up to some nefarious business.
—
{It’s fairly self-evident that What if? has a wide/widening remit so long as the Site Owner isn’t made subject to legal action. Discuss away. -Eds}
Well said Anon. A journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step. We must stand and fight; it’s a matter of someone to take a lead and galvanise the widespread disgust with these Banana Republic type procedural behaviours. As Charles Darwin once said “ignorance begets confidence more frequently than does talent”. We are witnessing Darwin’s theory being played out before our eyes. That is: stupid people (because they are stupid) do not have the wit to know that they engaging in a ridiculous/ignorant manner. Thus they never lose their confidence; while more talented folk (when they err) have the wit to know that they’ve cocked up and thus lose their confidence. That (opined Darwin) is why we have idiots in leadership roles and talented folk languishing in the shadows.
Case in point; a man who for many years improperly intercepted (and used) City water that he was not paying for should never be judged fit to lead a City with a rating catchment of 3600 sq kilometres. And equally a walrus type person who slept as he presided over a State funded institution, while a man with many times his talent had the wit to filch millions of dollars from under the nose of Chairman Walrus – simply ‘hustled’ the public institution over which Chairman Simpleton presided for millions of dollars. But back to ‘the rail roading’ of Cr Vandervis. The language that made up that bizarre resolution to censor Vandervis, didn’t come close to respecting the probity of the English language. Elements of that resolution represented (not only) an assault on everyone of us who voted to have Cr Vandervis represent us but (just to be consistently rabid) it was an assault on the Queen’s English. Much of the content of those resolutions were simply incomprehensible. It’s hard to know whether these bizarre decisions have a background in ignorance or are just plain evil. My view: First step is to consider a ‘givealittle’ test amongst your readers with a view to funding a charge of malfeasance. I think that would take them out at first base.
O me miserum
May 2, 2015 at 10:52 pm
You have expressed this situation so eloquently. We are indeed governed in Dunedin at present by stupid and ignorant people and led by an essentially dishonest thief whose hubris knows no bounds. I too am appalled by the way in which this clumsily contrived and bizarre attack on this elected representative has been played out but I don’t think it is difficult to determine the motive of the background to that decision. As to your request to funding a charge of malfeasance, you have a resounding yes from me. Crowd sourcing a fund might demonstrate our anger and send a strong message. I resent being disenfranchised by such dishonest, incompetent and stupid people.
Why is the Chief Executive Officer of Dunedin City Council unable to speak for herself? Why is some ex-Allied Press accountant speaking on her behalf? That’s a bit of bloody conflict given the ODT’s recent stance. Sue Bidrose is paid a truck load of money and should have halted this crap ages ago. Her absence and this continued stupidity is a very bad look. She should have sent an email to everyone involved just saying “Stop it right now children. Get on with your jobs. Undo this silliness about censure – it’s probably illegal and making us look stupid. Lee, your apology is accepted but do it again and you’ll wish it was David giving you a floggin’ by the time I got finished with you.”
Anonymous
May 2, 2015 at 2:11 pm
Why is the Chief Executive Officer of Dunedin City Council unable to speak for herself?
Well you might ask this and the others questions you pose here.
I am seriously concerned about the competence of our executive branch of council while the utter stupidity of the elected portion I now take as a given. So when we see both governance and executive mal-functioning one has to look for alternatives. It is rather long to wait for the usual method of replacement and the other ones are not pretty. We have seen a few examples on the streets of some of the world’s major cities.
Actually Anonymous, if Dr Bidrose were here it would be kind of hard for her to endorse the complaint about speaking loudly (or “yelling” as was reported in a Radio NZ news bulletin a couple of days ago) and not apologising given her response to Lee Vandervis “way back when”.
There has been massive inflation in decibel-language. This may not be down to complainants deliberately misleading, it may be a false-memory effect where implicit incentives for heightened “memories” result in sincerely believed incorrect reports, eg the Civic Creche children’s accounts of secret tunnels and cages hanging from the ceiling – note that these absurd narratives were omitted by police from evidence presented at Peter Ellis’s trial because even with utmost eagerness to secure a conviction, these would have been counterproductive.
I’ve been discussing this matter with supporters of Cr Lee Vandervis, supporters of Mayor Dave Cull and subscribers of the Otago Daily Times, and so far all parties agree the removal of voting rights from an elected member of council is unusual and the perpetrators have gone too far in their personal crusade against him. The thinking is it can’t be legal because it removes the right to representation of the people who voted for him. Some have said it is likely they did not consider this as they were too focused on achieving what was clearly a predetermined outcome.
I think the Chief Executive Officer has a very narrow window of opportunity to fix this.
See new post.
Anonymous
May 2, 2015 at 8:11 pm
You say ‘I think the Chief Executive Officer has a very narrow window of opportunity to fix this.’
Yes
She had better step in and deal with this otherwise she might find that the people of this city might seek and find alternative remedies.
Surely the CEO has no part to play in this imbroglio? Lee Vandervis is an elected representative of the ratepayers and is therefore a member of the governance body of the City. It is up to the elected representatives (the Council) to administer any rules or guidelines for behaviour of that body and the CEO has no part to play whatsoever. By involving the CEO, Cull has politicised the entire structure – but maybe that was his intent at the outset.
I hope that the legal advice that Lee Vandervis is receiving is up to scratch, as I certainly can see no law that allows a legally elected representative of the people being prevented from voting at the meetings of the body to which they were elected. As many have pointed out, all this action taken by Cull and co has achieved is to remove the rights of the ratepayers for their views to be voted on. Disenfranchising in other words. Cull’s only other option is to force Vandervis to be dismissed and I’m damn sure that he would not like any form of community vote from an election that could result from that.
Hopefully a canny lawyer could force, by injunction or otherwise, an action leading to a declaration that the process against Vandervis was unlawful, and more importantly, that the information that has been buried by Cull regarding the wider fraud within the DCC can be exposed. For that is the single issue that lies behind all this smoke and nonsense. What is being hidden, by whom, and for what reasons? If what is widely suspected is forced to be revealed then all of a sudden Lee is revealed as being correct – and that is something that Cull and co really don’t want at all.
@russandbev
May 3, 2015 at 8:57 am
Surely the CEO has no part to play in this imbroglio? Lee Vandervis is an elected representative of the ratepayers and is therefore a member of the governance body of the City.
Agreed but the CEO can advise. She has the ability to advise the mayor and councillors about the legality, appropriateness and not least the consequences of the actions taken by the mayor in this affair. If this is not done then there will be consequences that are neither expected nor desirable for the good of the city.
@russandbev
May 3, 2015 at 8:57 am
I would go even further. It is incumbent upon the CEO to ensure that the council is made aware of the outcomes of its actions. A good CEO would have already done this behind the scenes. But this ‘resolution’ as pasted upon a screen that it seems nobody could read at much more than 2 paces, may not have been tempered with the benefit of such advice. Where does this leave the CEO?
“Where does this leave the CEO?”
Did someone say she’s currently overseas or did I imagine it?
Aha, ODT site search:
” … Tuesday’s council resolution, but that was to be decided by Dr Bidrose or her delegate. Dr Bidrose is overseas, but council group chief financial officer Grant McKenzie, acting …
Story – Chris Morris – 30/04/2015 – 05:31″
Hype O’Thermia
Aha yes -I like that – but she cannot hide that way – it is the office of the CEO that we are looking at. She/he – all the same – especially these days! But hey! – telephones and Skype. Then it comes back to the point I made earlier.
‘So when we see both governance and executive mal-functioning one has to look for alternatives. It is rather long to wait for the usual method of replacement and the other ones are not pretty’
The ‘cock up’ is spread over they whole bloody bunch.
Mick, at a guess once she appointed Grant McKenzie to act in her absence there’s a rule about leapfrogging him when an issue comes up that’s beyond his level of competent judgement.
One difficulty being, it’s not obvious that something is beyond a deputy’s competence until clunky ineptitude has occurred!
“By involving the CEO, Cull has politicised the entire structure – but maybe that was his intent at the outset.”
Spread the risk. Muddy the waters. Claim “It wasn’t me” and “Dolly (I mean Dr Bidrose) made me do it”?
King Cull and his Kangaroo Courtiers may be feeling the heat of a red-hot poker at close range, unless their delusional state is such that they are protected from public by a green fluffy cloud of Righteousness.
Has anyone so far noted any signs that they recognise widespread p’sst-offness among the peasantry?
@ Hype O’Thermia May 3 2015 at 11:51 a.m.
You ask. Has anyone so far noted any signs that they recognise widespread p’sst offness amoungt the peasantry?
If it is Cull you refer to – His is known to back himself at all odds – none so blind as those who cannot – will not see. So in short Mr. H. not bloody likely. Delusional is his middle name At for the rest – probably sh**ting themselves. If not, they should be.
If anyone cared to look at page 11 of ‘The Star’ they might see at the Montecillo War Veterans Home, a picture of a rather pensive looking Mayor ruminating (chewing of the cud) perhaps, of better times he might have been living in.
I noticed that picture too. With MP David Clark sitting next to the Mayor but David Clark taking the proceedings seriously, as you’d expect from a person of his background and (dare I say it?) integrity.