DCC fails to meet LGOIMA request re ‘lost’ secure storage of CST files

The Dunedin City Council OWNS the Carisbrook Stadium Trust files, note.

Received from Bev Butler
Mon, 8 May 2017 at 1:40 p.m.

Subject: Complaint Dunedin City Council/storage of stadium documents

Message: Attached is the letter from the Ombudsman Office. I have sent a response to the Ombudsman letter.

[screenshot – click to enlarge]

● Download: 0_1-408161-3117439

—

Related Posts and Comments:
2.6.16 Official Information at Dunedin City : Bev Butler maintains pressure
10.7.15 Ombudsman complaint re DCC reply to LGOIMA requests #CSTfiles
9.7.15 DCC: Council-owned CST files whereabouts not declared
27.6.15 Ratepayer boxes #saga
20.6.15 DCC / CST document scramble #LGOIMA

—

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

This post is offered in the public interest.

Jeff Dickie: Edinburgh tough, Dunedin (DUD)

Further to the contents of an email from Jeff Dickie last month, who was writing from a hotel on Orchard Road at the time:

Supplied. ODT 13.7.15 (page 6)

****

INVOICE FRAUD AND MORE

TWO corrupt council officials and two businessmen who supplied them with cash and hospitality have been jailed with a warning they face “significant” sentences.

### HeraldScotland.com Wednesday 17 June 2015
Corrupt Edinburgh council officials face lengthy jail term
[…] Former local authority employees Charles Owenson and James Costello were treated to dances and drinks in lap dancing bars as valuable Edinburgh City Council contracts were secured through bribery. Ex-directors of Action Building Contracts Ltd (ABC Ltd) Kevin Balmer and Brendan Cantwell provided the rewards over the allocation of work for public buildings including schools, care homes and cemeteries.
Following their earlier guilty pleas a sheriff told them that he would continue their case until tomorrow for sentencing at Edinburgh Sheriff Court to consider the information he had been given. But Sheriff Michael O’Grady QC told the four men: “Having regard to the gravity of the offences, it is clear to me the sentences will require to be custodial and require to be significant.” He remanded all of them in jail ahead of sentencing.
Owenson and Costello were provided with hospitality, including corporate seats at Hibs and Hearts football grounds and meals out as well as cash, by Edinburgh-based construction firm ABC Ltd (Action Building Contracts). The contractors even submitted inflated invoices to the local authority for work carried out to cover the costs of the bribes they were paying council officials. Fiscal Keith O’Mahony earlier told the court: “In essence, the council was being charged for the cost of bribing its own officials.”
[…] Police began carrying out enquiries in 2010 as a result of complaints about the statutory notices system and were later informed that senior management had received “a whistleblower letter” alleging that Owenson was showing favouritism when allocating work to contractors. The Crown has raised proceedings to recover crime profits in the case.
Read more

█ 18.6.15 BBC News: Four jailed over Edinburgh City Council bribes

—

Shades of the ‘Screaming Orgasm cocktails’ saga following Dunedin City Council’s decision to build the stadium. That evening, the board members of Carisbrook Stadium Charitable Trust went out to celebrate, booking their drinks at Alibi Bar & Restaurant to the Ratepayers.
Of course, there have been masses of local big-ticket ‘corruptions’: the stadium land purchases (including for realignment of SH88); the Carisbrook ‘deal’ with Otago Rugby Football Union, and further ‘Otago Rugby’ deals with Dunedin Venues (DVML); the Delta subdivisions and service contracts (Jacks Point and Luggate, and more recently Noble Village); the unravelling Citifleet fraud and insurance scam (substantially greater than 152 fleet vehicles lost off the inventory, allied to ‘traffic’ in car parts, tyres, service contracts, and fluid cash); the Dunedin Town Hall Redevelopment Project (via City Property) yet to be fully detailed; and field lights for Otago Cricket Association…….. et al.

—

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

Ombudsman complaint re DCC reply to LGOIMA requests #CSTfiles

Received from Bev Butler
Fri, 10 Jul 2015 at 11:25 a.m.

—

From: Bev Butler
To: complaint @ ombudsmen.parliament.nz
Subject: Ombudsman complaint: Whereabouts of secure storage facility?
Date: Fri, 10 Jul 2015 11:19:53 +1200

{Address and phone number removed. -Eds}

Friday 10 July 2015

Dear Sir/Madam

I wish to make a complaint about the Dunedin City Council’s reply to a recent LGOIMA request (copied below) where I ask the whereabouts of the secure storage facility and the date the DCC/CST documents were placed in the facility.
Please also refer to my email to Ombudsman Office dated 15 June 2015 where I express concern as to the safety of the DCC/CST documents.

In the DCC response it states:

“The location of the secure storage facility is withheld pursuant to s7(2)(b)(ii) of LGOIMA to avoid prejudicing the commercial position of the person who is subject of the information.”
This is not a valid reason to refuse the request because s7(2)(b)(ii) only provides protection for “the person who supplied or who is the subject of the information”. This could be a valid reason to refuse to provide some of the documents, but not a valid reason to refuse to provide the location of the documents.

The other reason for refusing to provide the location was: “pursuant to s7(2)(f)(ii) of LGOIMA to enable the effective conduct of public affairs by protecting officers and persons from improper pressure or harassment.”
This is invalid because there are no public affairs being conducted that would be affected by revealing the location of the documents. More importantly, this only applies to “members or officers or employees of any local authority”. Revealing where the documents are, will not create any “improper pressure or harassment” on Council staff or Carisbrook Stadium Trust (CST) members.

The DCC in their response to the date the documents were stored in the secure storage facility state:
“The CST are unable to confirm when the documents were shifted to the storage facility. The person who can confirm this is now resident in Australia. Attempts were made to contact her but she is hospitalised, recovering from a serious illness and was unable to provide the information. Your request is therefore technically declined pursuant to s17(g) of LGOIMA as the information requested is not held.”
The DCC confirmed this morning that the documents were moved with permission of the CST. Therefore, if the documents were moved with the permission of the CST then section 2(6) of LGOIMA applies because the CST are subject to LGOIMA given their special agency agreement with the DCC.

I request the Ombudsman Office investigate the above.

Yours sincerely
Bev Butler

█ {See previous post for chain of correspondence up to and including Ms Graham’s reply at Thu, 9 Jul 2015 21:42:53 +0000, provided in full with Ms Butler’s complaint to the Ombudsman. -Eds}

—

Related Posts and Comments:
9.7.15 DCC: Council-owned CST files whereabouts not declared
27.6.15 Ratepayer boxes #saga
20.6.15 DCC / CST document scramble #LGOIMA

—

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

DCC: Council-owned CST files whereabouts not declared

Updated post Fri, 10 Jul 2015 at 1:22 p.m.

Received from Bev Butler
Thu, 9 Jul 2015 at 12:32 p.m.

—

From: Bev Butler
Sent: Wednesday, 1 July 2015 1:46 p.m.
To: Sandy Graham [DCC]; Grace Ockwell [DCC]
Subject: LGOIMA Request: Whereabouts of secure storage facility?

Wednesday 1 July 2015

Dear Sandy and Grace

It was recently stated in the media that the DCC/CST documents were stored in a “secure storage facility”.
Also on Monday 29 June 2015, the CST stated:
“The CST advise that there is no charge for the storage and as such, there is no invoice.”

I request the location where these documents were stored, the type of “secure storage facility” and on what date the documents were taken to the secure storage facility.

Thank you.
Kind Regards
Bev

—

From: Sandy Graham [DCC]
To: Bev Butler
CC: Grace Ockwell [DCC]
Subject: RE: LGOIMA Request: Whereabouts of secure storage facility?
Date: Wed, 8 Jul 2015 22:14:28 +0000

Dear Bev

I refer for your request for information about the CST secure storage facility where you asked the following questions:.
Where are the documents stored?
What type of secure storage facility it is?
What date were the documents taken to the facility?

I provide answers to these questions as follows:

The location of the secure storage facility is withheld pursuant to s7(2)(b)(ii) of LGOIMA to avoid prejudicing the commercial position of the person who is subject of the information and pursuant to s7(2)(f)(ii) of LGOIMA to enable the effective conduct of public affairs by protecting officers and persons from improper pressure or harassment.

The facility is a commercial storage facility. I have already advised that it is not EziStor. Any further details that may identify the facility are however withheld pursuant to s7(2)(b)(ii) of LGOIMA to avoid prejudicing the commercial position of the person who is subject of the information and pursuant to s7(2)(f)(ii) of LGOIMA to enable the effective conduct of public affairs by protecting officers and persons from improper pressure or harassment.

The CST are unable to confirm when the documents were shifted to the storage facility. The person who can confirm this is now resident in Australia. Attempts were made to contact her but she is hospitalised, recovering from a serious illness and was unable to provide the information. Your request is therefore technically declined pursuant to s17(g) of LGOIMA as the information requested is not held.

As we have withheld information you are entitled to a review of our decisions by the Office of the Ombudsman.

Regards
Sandy

—

From: Bev Butler
To: Sandy Graham [DCC]
CC: Grace Ockwell [DCC]
Subject: RE: LGOIMA Request: Whereabouts of secure storage facility?/Clarification
Date: Thu, 9 Jul 2015 14:15:33 +1200

Dear Sandy and Grace

Appreciate clarification before contacting Ombudsman.
In the response it states:
“The CST are unable to confirm when the documents were shifted to the storage facility. The person who can confirm this is now resident in Australia.”
Given the statement above which implies that there is only one person in the world who knows when the documents were moved, is it correct to assume the documents were moved by the “sick lady” without the permission of the CST?
Is it also correct to assume the documents were placed in the secure storage facility without the knowledge of the secure storage facility’s owner, given the “sick lady” in Australia is the only person who knows when the documents were stored there?

Kind Regards
Bev

—

From: Sandy Graham [DCC]
To: Bev Butler
CC: Grace Ockwell [DCC]
Subject: RE: LGOIMA Request: Whereabouts of secure storage facility?/Clarification
Date: Thu, 9 Jul 2015 21:42:53 +0000

Dear Bev

Your assumptions are incorrect.

Regards
Sandy

—

Related Posts and Comments:
27.6.15 Ratepayer boxes #saga
20.6.15 DCC / CST document scramble #LGOIMA

—

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

Ratepayer boxes #saga

Once upon a time, Rugby louts and owners of industrially-zoned land at Dunedin decided they deserved a new Rugby stadium and some personal spending CASH! (ie ratepayer money)

It wasn’t long before DCC was vigorously lobbied from within and without by slimy fatcats, to build a Hopeless Stadium.

The evil plan was to saddle ratepayers with outlandish debt for decades and decades.

It also transpired that the Chin Council thought only slightly about lines in the sand but agreed ‘it’s perfectly alright to rob the poor to support the well-off’ —the practice continues to this very day, Mayor Cull’s merry band of dimwits subsidise DVML and have recently transferred $30m of Hopeless Stadium debt back onto the DCC books.

Going back a treacle-filled step or two… the spendthrift Carisbrook Stadium Charitable Trust (CST), headed by Malcolm Farry, became agent to the Council via a Service Level Agreement (SLA), to see in the Hopeless Stadium construction project and associated fundraising.

[Aside, like it didn’t matter: Farry in his construction safety hat and dayglo vest failed miserably at raising public donations for the Hopeless Stadium.]

Long short… regular as well as ‘other’ payments were made by DCC to CST and co-greedy sods without much corroborating paperwork.

Despite non-accountability and lack of transparency, and the odd crucial missing document, there’s a stash of CST files kept “in storage” somewhere – files to drive a bulldozer through, lawfully the property of the Council, paid for by ratepayers.

Turns out two of DCC’s most senior executives, with Malcolm Farry, appear to have no interest whatsoever in surrendering the files for independent forensic audit. They’ll only retrieve file boxes in batches, while pedalling strongly backwards.

The files are not sealed, seized or safe. Where are they? DCC will not say. Farry won’t say. Fairytales are being told.

The files were long ago officially requested through the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act (LGOIMA) by Dunedin resident Bev Butler. They’re also subject to the Public Records Act.

The Ombudsmen’s Office is involved, due to deliberate lack of co-operation shown by CST and DCC to supply copy of the original files to Ms Butler in a timely manner.

Have the files been thrown into plastic shopping bags, shredded or dumped? We simply don’t know.

CST and DCC are equally culpable, they’re both prepared to lie and defer – What if? can only imagine the files might be as tidy as this.

If it takes a court order…..

—

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

*Image: clipart.org – Filing Cabinet Overload