Fairfax Media: Police release Citifleet investigation report

Updated post
Wed, 12 Aug 2015 at 4:50 p.m.

██ CITIFLEET POLICE REPORT (PDF, 4.41 MB) —via Fairfax Media

—

The detective, who has since left the police force, also noted the council did not supply Bachop’s credit card or fuel card statements as requested.

### Stuff.co.nz Last updated 13:08, August 12 2015
Police raised possibility of others involved in Dunedin City Council Citifleet fraud
By Hamish McNeilly
It had been billed as the work of a sole suspect, but a police file into the investigation of the theft of 152 cars from the Dunedin City Council fingers the “highly suspicious” activity of another unnamed person. Police have released to Fairfax Media their investigation report into the Citifleet fraud.
Read more

Previous articles:
18.12.14 Stuff: Car fraud pinned on dead man
3.6.14 Stuff: Dunedin council unit under scrutiny

—

[screenshot – click to enlarge]

█ For more, enter the terms *citifleet*, *conduct* and *vandervis* in the search box at right.

—

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

DCC Citifleet, [a] Deloitte report leaked

WHY WASN’T THE SERIOUS FRAUD OFFICE CALLED IN RIGHT FROM THE VERY START WHEN CR LEE VANDERVIS ALERTED FORMER DCC CHIEF EXECUTIVE PAUL ORDERS TO CAR FRAUD ???

Then too, think of all the people who had access to the Deloitte reports (plural) – more specifically those without access to the digitised data report. That ‘narrows’ the field of leaks to Deloitte itself, NZ Police, private investigators, counsel, privileged council staff, privileged mayor and (some) councillors, those council staff whose lawyers worked on their ‘resignations’ / exit packages….
Who else? A veritable feast.

No-one named in the ODT today hasn’t been mentioned at What if? posts and comments previously – this includes the names of the car companies.

—

### ODT Online Sat, 4 Jul 2015
Questions still unanswered
By Chris Morris
[…] even after reading Deloitte’s full “Project Lewis” investigation report – the Otago Daily Times was leaked a copy – there are still many unanswered questions … [The report] named members of three Dunedin families who, together, bought dozens of council-owned cars … Those names included Wayne McFadyen, Destry Duff and Shayne Perkins and members of their extended families, who between them bought 42 vehicles, Deloitte found.
Read more

****

Anngow Motors was sold in 2007 to Armstrong Mazda, which was, in turn, sold to Dunedin City Motors in 2009.

### ODT Online Sat, 4 Jul 2015
Long list of car deals
By Chris Morris
Council cars bought and sold within days, and handfuls of cash that disappeared without trace are detailed in Deloitte’s full report into the $1.5 million Citifleet fraud. The report outlines a long list of transactions between former Citifleet team leader Brent Bachop, private buyers and Dunedin car dealers dating back more than a decade.
Read more

****

“Mr Bachop or Mr McFadyen kept a significant proportion of the sale proceeds for these vehicles,” the [Deloitte] report said.

### ODT Online Sat, 4 Jul 2015
Nothing to hide, says car buyer
By Chris Morris
Wayne “Tubby” McFadyen says he has nothing to hide. Instead, the man identified as one of the main buyers of Citifleet vehicles says the Dunedin City Council should be looking “in the mirror” if it wants to point the finger. “If there’s anyone to blame, it all falls on their heads too. They can blame everyone else for buying vehicles and whatever they want to do, but at the end of the day the buck stops with them.”
Read more

█ For more, enter the terms *citifleet*, *conduct* and *vandervis* in the search box at right.

—

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

Code of Conduct show trial

Updated post
Fri, 27 Nov 2015 at 11:17 p.m.

—

Recently, Daaave Cull – he who cannot keep a true and proper Council minute record (as the Ch39 videos demonstrate) – ran an evil-illegal ultra vires punitive Code of Conduct campaign against Cr Lee Vandervis.

Mad Hatter 30.6.15 [click to enlarge]

—

Douglas Field Republished Aug 17, 2016
Mad Hatter’s ‘Show Trial’ of Lee Vandervis revised 10 7 15

—

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

Today at DCC in pictures

Updated post Wed, 29 Apr 2015 at 12:07 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

█ Download: Conduct Committee Resolution 28 April 2015

AFTER ALLOWING COUNCIL TO SPEND ONE AND A HALF HOURS DEBATING TWO ROCKS AT WARRINGTON THAT MUST BE REMOVED – OTHERWISE THE COUNCIL WILL BE ACTING UNLAWFULLY….

WHEN IT CAME TO CR VANDERVIS’ CONDUCT AND COUNCIL SANCTIONS, WELL….

DAAAVE PROMPTLY FORGOT DUE PROCESS AND LOST IT FOR DEMOCRACY IN A VERY OBVIOUS MANNER THEN WAS SEEN TO LOOK LIKE A STUNNED MULLET, SUDDENLY

[SHOW TRIAL] HOWEVER, DAAAVE DID MANAGE A RESOLUTION (AMBUSH DOCUMENT) TO SANCTION CR VANDERVIS, HE PUT IT TO THE VOTE WITH ONLY CRS CALVERT, HALL AND LORD AGAINST.

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.

—

Received from Lee Vandervis
Tue, 28 Apr 2015 at 8:06 p.m.

█ Message: Below is the statement I gave to [Chris] Morris as I left the meeting today. Be interesting to see what he does to it. —I also gave him a copy of my initial apology.

I completely reject the claim that I misled the Audit and Risk committee, and that I was not open and honest.

– What I did do was voice my concern that the investigation into DCC Citifleet fraud was narrowed down to a single category of fraud, and that the blame has been narrowed to a single deceased individual.

– Since then I have seen no hard evidence of the DCC fraud investigation being widened.

– Accusers should have had hard evidence of a widened investigation as was continually promised but not delivered, before even considered accusing me of acting in bad faith – never mind now considering sanctions against me.

– I am still hopeful that the DCC Citifleet fraud investigation that I began in 2011 will be actually widened, seek my offered evidence, and fully investigate the whole range of fraud, including Citifleet.

Regarding complaints of loudness, due process has not been followed to allow me to defend anonymous claims that go beyond loudness, so I’m not in a position to recognise them.

Cr. Lee Vandervis

From: Lee Vandervis
Date: Wed, 04 Feb 2015 21:22:32 +1300
To: Sue Bidrose, Sandy Graham, Andrew Noone, Andrew Whiley, Chris Staynes, Doug Hall, Hilary Calvert, John Bezett, Jinty MacTavish, Kate Wilson, Lee Vandervis, Mayor Cull, Mike Lord, Neville Peat, Richard Thomson, David Benson-Pope, Aaron Hawkins
Cc: Chris Morris [ODT], Debbie Porteous [ODT]
Conversation: Apology for hallway loudness
Subject: Apology for hallway loudness

Dear Sue, Sandy and Councillors.

If it was thought that my Council hallway questioning of CEO Bidrose yesterday was considered to be too loud or inappropriate, I unreservedly apologize to those who thought so, especially if that included Dr. Bidrose.

I recognise today that I had become increasingly frustrated with the lack of CEO response to my earlier emailed governance complaints, and that an unacceptable Council agenda item was imminent as a result.

Happily some time was subsequently allowed for possible resolution of the Governance issues I complained of.

To prevent a recurrence of overheard unpleasantness, I undertake to make any future complaints of staff or elected representatives in a recorded medium.

Kind regards,
Cr. Lee Vandervis

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

—

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

*Images (tweaked by whatifdunedin): (from top) ytimg.com – Ultra vires [maxresdefault]; tumbler.com – Justice, I can’t breathe [tumblr_ng1j9u4squ1qgiurvo1_1280]; acting-man.com – Approach

Before Council meeting tomorrow at 1:00 PM

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

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

—

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

*Image: gangasudhan.com – Kangaroo Court (tweaked by whatifdunedin)

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

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

DCC re Dr Bidrose’s time as most senior Citifleet Manager

From: Sandy Graham
Sent: ‎Friday‎, ‎24‎ ‎April‎ ‎2015 ‎4‎:‎16‎ ‎p.m.
To: Lee Vandervis
Cc: Sue Bidrose, Elizabeth Kerr
Subject: RE: Overestimation of Dr. Bidrose’s time as most senior Citifleet Manager

Dear Lee

Please find attached the information you have requested about the responsibilities of Dr Bidrose.
It took a few days to collate as I wanted to ensure accuracy.

The information will also be forwarded to all Councillors for their information.

Regards
Sandy

[click to enlarge]

█ Download: SUE BIDROSE RESPONSIBILITIES (PDF, 16 KB)

————

From: Sandy Graham
Sent: Friday, 17 April 2015 8:45 p.m.
To: Lee Vandervis
Cc: Sandy Graham; Sue Bidrose; Elizabeth Kerr
Subject: Re: Overestimation of Dr. Bidrose’s time as most senior Citifleet Manager

Dear Lee

I will get this information on my return to work on Monday.

Regards
Sandy

Group Manager Corporate Services
Dunedin City Council

————

On 17/04/2015, at 4:12 pm, Lee Vandervis wrote:

Dear Sandy and Sue,

Thank you for correcting my overestimation of the time Sue was senior manager of Citifleet prior to becoming DCC CEO.
I sincerely apologise for my inaccuracy.
To avoid future inaccuracy on my part, can you please clarify which departments Sue was in a managerial position over and for what periods in the years Sue was at the DCC prior to be coming our CEO.

Kind regards,
Lee

The overestimation was made in Cr Vandervis’s open letter found at the highlighted link below (15.4.15). -Eds

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

—

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

DCC severely FAILS councillor #naturaljustice #contempt

Updated post Sun, 26 Apr 2015 at 2:45 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

—

Received from Lee Vandervis
Thu, 23 Apr 2015 at 6:22 p.m.

█ Message: Your readers may be interested in this email exchange below.

—— Forwarded Message
From: Lee Vandervis
Date: Thu, 23 Apr 2015 15:58:40 +1300
To: Sandy Graham
Cc: Stuart Anderson [University of Otago], Andrew Noone, Andrew Whiley, Chris Staynes, Doug Hall, Hilary Calvert, John Bezett, Jinty MacTavish, Kate Wilson, Mayor Cull, Mike Lord, Neville Peat, Richard Thomson, David Benson-Pope, Aaron Hawkins, Sue Bidrose
Conversation: Code of Conduct public announcement
Subject: Re: Code of Conduct public announcement

This does not answer my governance question Ms Graham, as to why I was not advised that this was coming out.
There has been nothing standard about any of this Code of Conduct process.
Cr. Lee Vandervis

————

On 23/04/15 11:48 AM, “Sandy Graham” wrote:

Dear Councillor

The report formed part of the public agenda that was delivered to all Councillors last night in advance of Tuesday’s meeting.

The media receive a copy of the agenda at the same time as per our standard process.

Regards
Sandy

————

On 23/04/2015, at 10:34 am, Lee Vandervis wrote:

Code of Conduct public announcement
Dear [as in expensive] all,

I have been rung by media this morning wanting my comment on the outcome of the Code of Conduct claims against me.

Nobody has had the decency to inform me of what these outcomes might have been, despite the exceptionally long time the production of these outcomes has taken.

Can anyone advise me why the media seem to have this information well in advance of me, or is it just standard process for a show ‘trial’, in which I have not even been allowed to see 2/3 of the ‘evidence’.

Cr. Lee Vandervis

—— End of Forwarded Message

Received from Lee Vandervis
Thu‎, ‎23‎ ‎Apr‎ ‎2015 at ‎7:12‎ ‎p.m.

Re: Code of Conduct decision

I have sent my response to today’s Code of Conduct decision just sprung on me to you since I can not rely on ODT reporter Chris Morris to accurately present it.
Fortunately most interested parties read your blog anyway.

I am innocent of the Code of Conduct claim that I have misled the non-pubic Audit and Risk committee regarding the Citifleet fraud investigations.
The guilt lies with those DCC staff and some elected representatives who for years failed to act on my Citifleet fraud and other whistle-blowing allegations despite the DCC records evidence available to them. Some of this evidence has recently emerged in the Deloitte reports which I continue to seek.
If my allegations and evidence had been appropriately acted on, many matters of grave concern would have been dealt with when the record shows I raised them as early as 2011.
DCC staff refusal even now to let me see the full main unredacted Deloitte Citifleet Fraud report, or the Deloitte staff report, or the digitised relevant DCC records evidence, further increases my suspicion of a cover-up.
Questions regarding the role of new DCC CEO Bidrose as senior manager of Citifleet prior to becoming CEO, and of what she knew of my allegations in the years prior are some of the many questions yet to be answered.

What has been shown is that the Police investigation was certainly very narrowed up until my complaint of this narrowing to CEO Bidrose and the Police investigating officer, some six months after the Citifleet manager’s sudden death. Subsequent claims by Area Commander Jason Guthrie that the investigation has been widened have not been supported by Police following up on the evidence I tried to interest them in: the Citifleet maintenance contract fraud, DCC credit card use fraud, etc. or by any convictions, or other widened investigation action that has been visible to me.

The two loudness claims, evidence of which I have not been allowed to see and therefore defend, both come back to the shutting down of the wider DCC contract fraud debate, and the resulting multiple abuses of Code of Conduct process to try and shut me down.

The four prescribed penalties suggested in the Code of Conduct report are:

1 -Censure
– the Mayor has already done this on pubic and non-public occasions.

2 -Request Apology
– I already apologised for loudness at the time

3 -Suspension of voting right only in Committees, not Council
– abuse of my representative function, but a wet bus ticket given my continuing right to debate

4 -Dismissal from positions of Deputy Mayor, Chairperson or deputy chairperson of a committee
– Mayor Cull already did this at the beginning of the triennium.

The Mayor’s recommended members of the Code of Conduct Committee have run an expensive Kangaroo Court with only my loss of two months committee voting rights to be recommended. It will be interesting to see if enough Councillors will vote for that.
It will also be interesting to see what the voting public think – do they want wide investigation and full disclosure or do they just prefer good news stories from the DCC.

Kind regards,
Cr. Vandervis

Received from Lee Vandervis
Thu, 23 Apr 2015 at 7:17 p.m.

—— Forwarded Message
From: Lee Vandervis
Date: Thu, 23 Apr 2015 19:15:55 +1300
To: Chris Morris [ODT], Nicholas George S Smith [ODT]
Conversation: Code of conduct report
Subject: Re: Code of conduct report

Chris,

I have sent my response to the What If site, as I can not rely on you to accurately present it.

I was out last night, and the first I heard of the Code of Conduct decision today was radio media wanting comment.

Cheers,
Lee

————

On 23/04/15 3:34 PM, “Chris Morris” [ODT] wrote:

Lee,

I’ve sent you a text with a very basic outline of the key findings. Happy to hear from you at any time today or tonight for a detailed response once you’ve read the report in full. I understand it was hand-delivered to your house last night.

Cheers,

Chris.

—— End of Forwarded Message

—

Related Posts and Comments:
15.4.15 Cr Lee Vandervis: Open Letter to the DCC Code of Conduct Committee
18.3.15 Lee Vandervis releases emails #Citifleet investigation
17.3.15 DCC whistleblowing —what is open government ?
13.3.15 Cr Lee Vandervis: LGOIMA…. Citifleet Investigation – Deloitte Report
26.2.15 DCC and the day(s) of Madness
23.2.15 Lee Vandervis on DCC Code of Conduct process #emails #naturaljustice
15.2.15 DCC…. ‘CEO Bidrose confirms no Vandervis complaint with a hug’
6.2.15 Cr Lee Vandervis apology
5.1.15 DCC: Chairman denies true and correct Council record
19.12.14 Vandervis: Deloitte and Police Citifleet investigations
19.12.14 DCC Citifleet by email . . . . woops! (another timeline proof)
18.12.14 DCC: Deloitte report released on Citifleet #whitewash
24.10.14 DCC Citifleet, more revelations….
21.10.14 DCC Citifleet, undetectable….
1.9.14 DCC Fraud: Further official information in reply to Cr Vandervis
30.8.14 DCC Fraud: Cr Vandervis states urgent need for facts….

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

—

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

Lee Vandervis on DCC Code of Conduct process #emails #naturaljustice

Two emails this evening.

I

Received from Lee Vandervis
Mon, 23 Feb 2015 at 6:15 p.m.

█ Message: I am forwarding this email to you so that my view of the on-going Code of Conduct process can be made clear, something I can not hope for from the ODT.

—— Forwarded Message
From: Lee Vandervis
Date: Sun, 22 Feb 2015 11:36:37 +1300
To: Mayor Cull, Stuart Anderson [University of Otago], Andrew Noone, Andrew Whiley, Chris Staynes, Doug Hall, Hilary Calvert, John Bezett, Jinty MacTavish, Kate Wilson, Lee Vandervis, Mayor Cull, Mike Lord, Neville Peat, Richard Thomson, David Benson-Pope, Aaron Hawkins
Cc: Sue Bidrose, Sandy Graham, Pam Jordan
Conversation: Complaint to Mayor Cull and potential Code of Conduct Committee members
Subject: Complaint to Mayor Cull and potential Code of Conduct Committee members

Dear Mayor Cull,

By failing to respond to your required justifications under standing orders J1 Accountability [accountable for their actions] and Openness [be prepared to justify their actions] as well as the overarching principle of Natural Justice, you are prejudicing this Code of Conduct process.
If you will not justify your decisions to accept certain code of Conduct complaints with reasons, and your deputy will not justify or give his reasons for rejecting my initial conforming Code of Conduct complaint against you, my legal advice is that it leaves open the question that you can not justify your Code of Conduct decisions and that consequently there are no reasons available for an investigation on which to mount a defence.

The facts are that you have falsely claimed the authority to chose the membership of a Code of Conduct Committee against me, [and that you are again attempting the same under another guise] and you have decided to accept a Code of Conduct complaint that is agreed did not conform, and you now accept another non-conforming similar complaint ex Cr. Wilson and you refuse to give the required reasons for accepting specific claimed complaints.
All this contributes to a process so prejudiced by you that any consequential decision can not be valid.
Cr. Wilson’s second Code of Conduct complaint against me does again not conform under J4.1 for exactly the same reason you have recognised in the first Staynes/Thomson attempt – that it is devoid of any evidence, record, or taking down of words used as required under Standing Orders for a conforming complaint. As with the Staynes/Thomson complaint, it merely offers a damning tone judgement without providing any evidence. The documentary ‘evidence’ presented in only part of the Staynes/Thomson revisited complaint has been tampered with and the untampered evidence actually confirms my objected-to claim.

It is not clear as you claim that I was at any time happy for you to chose members of the Conduct Committee. The complete opposite should be clear to you especially when I wrote as below;
“at what date did you discover that you are not in fact empowered to appoint the Code of Conduct Committee, as detailed in Standing Orders and in the Structures and Delegations manual?
Having discovered this over-reach of your authority, what steps did you then take to remedy imposing your choice of members for the Code of Conduct Committee?”

I still await your answers to these process questions.

On the subject of Committee membership, I can not agree to be any part of any Code of Conduct process that includes Cr Benson-Pope as a Code of Conduct Committee member. Any conduct decision from Cr Benson-Pope would be tainted by his extraordinary long and public history of personal conduct issues [some of which I can list if required]. Any other Councillor of long experience would be preferable, and in Cr Benson-Pope’s case necessary. Never mind his personal antipathy toward me that almost rivals yours.

I also object to item 24 being Confidential and in the non-public part of the agenda. There is nothing in the report apart perhaps from the unnecessary naming of the position of Chair of Audit and Risk Committee that can warrant going against the default spelled out in J4.1 of Standing Orders that “Council will consider the [Code of Conduct] report in open meeting of the Council…” . Additionally, making it Confidential and non-public gives the false impression that as I am the publicly advertised target of the complaints I have something to hide.

In short, for item 24 proposed for Monday’s Council meeting to proceed;
1 – you should redact the unnecessary naming of the position of Chair of Audit and Risk and must move the report into the public part of the meeting.
2 – your recommendation of Cr. Benson-Pope for Code of Conduct Committee membership needs to change to a viable Council member. Preferably you should sit back from making any recommendations yourself.
3 – you need to give reasons for your acceptance of both Code of Conduct complaints for forwarding to the Code of Conduct Committee, and you need to recognise your past failures in appropriately assessing complaints.
4 – written ‘eye-witness account evidence’ that you infer as existing must accompany the original Code of Conduct complaints [as mine does in my complaint of you] and not come later in order for you to even consider it for forwarding for an investigation.

Until these appropriate process requirements are met, I can not recognise the item 24 process you propose for Monday’s non public agenda.

My legal advice is that if these matters are not rectified the purported hearing becomes a nonsense and any subsequent decision will certainly not be enforceable.

Currently my advice is also that if these matters are not rectified I should not attend any Code of Conduct hearing and I should ignore any consequential purported decisions.

Regards,
Cr. Lee Vandervis

On 18/02/15 11:01 PM, “Dave Cull” wrote:

Hi Lee,
I am running the process of Code of Conduct complaints as per Standing Orders but taking no other role. It appears that I initially mistated how the Conduct Committee would be appointed. The Council will now do that. However it is clear from your email below that you were happy for me to choose the members of the Conduct Committee.
I will not be responding further to your pseudo legal questions so as not to prejudice the process.

Dave

From: Lee Vandervis
Sent: Wednesday, February 18, 2015 10:09 PM
To: Dave Cull; Andrew Noone; Andrew Whiley; Chris Staynes; Doug Hall; Hilary Calvert; John Bezett; Jinty MacTavish; Kate Wilson; Lee Vandervis; Mayor Cull; Mike Lord; Neville Peat; Richard Thomson; David Benson-Pope; Aaron Hawkins; Sue Bidrose
Cc: Pam Jordan
Subject: Re: Code of Conduct complaints

Dear Mayor Cull,

Thank you for advising me that you are satisfied “that there are reasonable grounds for believing that a provision of the Code has been breached” as below.
My advice is that you are required to detail what these ‘reasonable grounds’ are under Standing Orders J1 Accountability [accountable for their actions] and Openness [be prepared to justify their actions] as well as the overarching principle of Natural Justice.
I am particularly interested in your reasons, given that you were also satisfied with the initial Staynes/Thomson complaint which is now accepted as being deficient and non-conforming under Standing Orders.

Regarding you verbal claim to me that you are personally authorised to choose the membership of the Code of Conduct Committee against me, and your written claim as below;

“From: Dave Cull
Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2015 03:54:35 +0000
To: Lee Vandervis
Cc: Sandy Graham
Subject: Code of conduct panel

Dear Cr Vandervis,

Following our correspondence re the appointment of a panel to hear the Code of Conduct complaint against you, I have appointed three people as per Standing Orders requirements.”

at what date did you discover that you are not in fact empowered to appoint the Code of Conduct Committee, as detailed in Standing Orders and in the Structures and Delegations manual?

Having discovered this over-reach of your authority, what steps did you then take to remedy imposing your choice of members for the Code of Conduct Committee?

Looking forward to your open clarifying responses.
Cr. Lee Vandervis

On 11/02/15 12:28 PM, “Dave Cull” wrote:

Dear Cr Vandervis,
I understand you have been informed that two Code of Conduct Complaints have been made against you by Crs Staynes and Thomson and Cr Wilson respectively. In both cases I am satisfied that there are reasonable grounds for believing that a provision of the Code has been breached. Accordingly I will refer both matters to the Conduct Committee for investigation. I will report the matter to the next ordinary meeting of Council on 23rd February and ask Council to appoint the Conduct Committee members.

Dave

Dave Cull
Mayor of Dunedin

—— End of Forwarded Message

[ends]

II

Received from Lee Vandervis
Mon, 23 Feb 2015 at 6:17 p.m.

—— Forwarded Message
From: Lee Vandervis
Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2015 18:00:05 +1300
To: Chris Morris [ODT]
Conversation: Mayoral statement – Conduct Committee
Subject: Re: Mayoral statement – Conduct Committee

Hi Chris,

Today Mayor Cull’s second attempt to stack a Code of Conduct Committee against me was successful after his first attempt was shown loudly to be an overreaching abuse of his authority. The acceptance of non-conforming complaints against me without reasons given by Mayor Cull on the back of the refusal, again without his reasons given, of the Deputy Mayor to accept my initial conforming complaint against the Mayor makes the current process a farce. The Mayor may want to try and justify his actions to you but has refused to give the required reasons to me.

Cheers,
Lee

On 23/02/15 5:16 PM, “Chris Morris” [ODT] wrote:

——– Original Message ——–
Subject: Mayoral statement – Conduct Committee
Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2015 04:05:04 +0000
From: Andrea Jones [DCC]
To: undisclosed-recipients:;

Hi everyone

Mayoral statement attached.

Regards

Andrea Jones
Communications Team Leader, Council Communications and Marketing
Dunedin City Council

—— End of Forwarded Message

[ends]

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

—

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr