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.

Stadium : Used car and underwear sales down #missdpopularitycontest

The man running Dunedin’s Forsyth Barr Stadium says the venue is still hunting for sell-out concerts, despite being overlooked by a string of top international acts.

### ODT Online Tue, 27 Dec 2016
Concert quest ongoing despite setbacks
By Chris Morris
After a bumper period last year in which Rod Stewart, Fleetwood Mac and Neil Diamond all performed at the stadium, the venue’s international concerts have dried up, the last being Black Sabbath’s show in April. Hopes more big acts would stop in Dunedin this summer were dashed when performers such as British rockers Coldplay and pop superstar Adele opted for shows in Auckland instead…. Dunedin Venues Management Ltd chief executive Terry Davies [said] this summer’s “dry” period for concerts in Dunedin would continue for the first half of 2017.
Read more

****

Listen:
### radionz.co.nz Fri, 12 Dec 2008
Radio NZ National : Nine to Noon with Kathryn Ryan
Carisbrook Stadium in trouble (Link)
09:30 Malcolm Farry, Chairman Carisbrook Stadium Trust; and Jeff Dickie, property investor and outspoken critic of the stadium.
Audio | Download: Ogg  MP3 (13′15″)

—

The instant the CST and the council started believing in their own hype and spin about Dalai Lama visits, world swimming championships and Royal tours was the moment that this city’s ratepayers were doomed to have to meet all of the “private funding”.
–Russell Garbutt ODT 13.4.12

Garrick Tremain – 13 May 2012

At various times, it was imagined that it might host international soccer, rugby league and even swimming; that penguins would frolic in a (converted) adjoining quarry, and not just that the biggest names in rock music would visit, but, perhaps, the Dalai Lama and British royalty.
–Steve Kilgallon Stuff 3.6.12

Then….

### channel39.co.nz Tue, 17 July 2012
█ Dalai Lama’s proposed visit puts smile on face
The Dalai Lama’s proposed visit to Dunedin has put a wry smile on the face of the man behind Forsyth Barr Stadium.
Video

Garrick Tremain – 17 Jan 14

Garrick Tremain – 1 Oct 2014

****

Full article:

[before we knew the GOBs were completely buggering Dunedin and Central Otago’s electricity network]

### Stuff.co.nz Last updated 05:00 03/06/2012
House of Blame
By Steve Kilgallon – Sunday Star Times
AMBITIOUS: The Forsyth Barr Stadium has left a city divided and its ratepayers facing vast debts.
….In June 2008, two major concert promoters had told the D-Scene newspaper what should have been self-evident: Dunedin was too small, remote and student-oriented to provide the sales base to attract big-name acts. In February this year, council-owned stadium management company Dunedin Venues Management Limited’s (DVML) chief executive David Davies said concert bookings for the stadium would be “thin” in 2012. “What’s thinner than one?” asks Garbutt. Cull says the council has to leverage the advantage of having a roof, guaranteeing events won’t be rained off. Farry, who wanted to run the stadium for its first two years, is disappointed the council hasn’t attracted more concerts.
Read more

*The same article, retitled, appears at Stuff Sport: Stadium builds under fire

****

### Stuff.co.nz Last updated 12:38 14/09/2012
Councils should stay away from business
By Chalkie – Tim Hunter
There are people who believe local councils should own businesses because they generate returns and ease the burden on ratepayers. Chalkie is not one of them. Your humble correspondent thinks councils should stick to their knitting. The reasons are many and varied. Taking a couple of examples at random:
a) Councils can start to think they are there to make money instead of, say, distribute water; and
b) Councils are not commercially savvy shareholders.
Poppycock, you say. Show me a single case of a council’s emptyheaded pursuit of unprofitable goals. In response, Chalkie invites you to consider Dunedin. In that southern city the council is the proud owner of Dunedin City Holdings, whose job, according to its report, is “to manage the commercial investments of the Dunedin City Council to maximise returns”. The businesses under DCH’s umbrella include electricity network company Aurora, forestry company City Forests, the Taieri Gorge Railway Company and an engineering business called Delta Utility Services. DCH’s 2012 numbers are not yet available, but last year it trumpeted an improvement in revenue and profit and a total cash return to the council of $23.2 million. If you thought that was a good result, you’d be wrong. When you look at several years of DCH numbers a disturbing pattern emerges of ever-increasing millions being borrowed and pumped into underperforming assets. The cashflow statements tell the story.
Read more

—

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

This post is offered in the public interest.

DCC confidential report on Industrial Land (March 2004)

Received today.

This leak in regards to DCC’s establishment of a new industrial zone bordered by Dukes Road (Industrial Variation 9B)…. is an unsubtle reminder of the number of Council-issued claims over the years about the extent (or lack of) industrially zoned land at Dunedin, particularly for argument in evidence (or was it lies and hearsay) at very significant plan change hearings.

Interpretations please!

[click each page to enlarge]

█ Download: DCC Confidential Report – Industrial Land 29 March 2004
(PDF, 1 MB)

—

Related ODT stories:

### ODT Online Mon, 12 Oct 2015
Property sales loss $1.07m
By Chris Morris
The Dunedin City Council has spent $5.6 million buying up houses, and even a farm, to smooth the path for industrial development on the Taieri. The purchases were detailed in documents released to the Otago Daily Times, which also showed the council has lost $1.07 million after on selling many of the properties for significantly smaller sums.
Read more

### ODT Online Mon, 12 Oct 2015
Council’s treatment of couple criticised
By Chris Morris
A retired couple forced to fight for five years to sell their farm to the Dunedin City Council were left with “a noose around their necks”, Cr Kate Wilson says. William and Fiona Smeaton owned the 15 ha farm sold to the council for $1.725 million in December last year.
Read more

ODT got led down the garden path by this couple, it appears. It’s out that they don’t have to meet the rates increase while they’re farming – only on conversion to industrial use would the land owner pay $10,000 pa, you say? The poor things had to work more jobs to meet the rates demand, yeah right – TUI.

A quick look at DCC Webmaps for 91 Dukes Road shows (linked to the rates account) the land use as “12 Rural Industry : Stock Finishing”, Total Annual Rates $4,596.60…. tsk tsk.

More at this thread: DCC considers sale of “149 properties”

—

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

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

DCC / Carisbrook Stadium Trust document scramble #LGOIMA

Received from Bev Butler
Fri, 19 June 2015 at 9:13 a.m.

—

From: Bev Butler
To: Lee Vandervis, Dave Cull, David Benson-Pope, Hilary Calvert, John Bezett, Doug Hall, Aaron Hawkins, Mike Lord, Jinty MacTavish, Andrew Noone, Neville Peat, Chris Staynes, Richard Thomson, Andrew Whiley, Kate Wilson
Subject: Mayor and Councillors/Security of DCC/CST stadium documents
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 2015 08:50:20 +1200

Friday 19 June 2015
 
Dear Mayor Cull and Councillors
 
During my recent DCC Annual Plan submission I requested a full forensic audit of the Carisbrook Stadium Trust (CST). You will recall that preliminary informal investigations found that documentation has been withheld. The CST and the previous CEO of the DCC both attempted via undisclosed legal opinions to ensure that this documentation remained hidden from any investigation or even LGOIMA requests and it is now more than clear that the CST, as an agent of the DCC, have no right to retain ANY documentation that relates to the entire period which the CST were in any way acting as an agent of the DCC. The CST appears to have no other function than continuing to receive donations from private persons as part of the private sector funding so, given that, I do not believe ANY documentation should be withheld from the DCC.
 
Since my public call for a full forensic investigation I have been greatly concerned about the security of the DCC/CST documents all of which were financed with ratepayer money.
 
It has now been revealed that the Chair of CST, Mr Malcolm Farry has removed most of the documents from the stadium and dumped them in a container. By doing so I believe that he has demonstrated a desire to thwart any investigation into any inappropriate spending of ratepayers money which could be revealed by a forensic audit, but he has also on the face of it, essentially misappropriated the documentation which has been, and remains, the property of the DCC.
 
On Monday 15 June 2015 I also contacted the Office of the Ombudsman expressing my concern over the security of the documents.
A representative of the Ombudsman Office then rang the DCC Governance Manager on Monday afternoon.
 
As elected representatives I believe you should be made aware of the situation.
 
Below is an urgent LGOIMA request I submitted on Tuesday 16 June 2015 followed by an acknowledgement of the request.
Further down the page is the earlier correspondence I had with the DCC CEO requesting the documents be secured.
 
Kind Regards
Bev Butler

—
 
From: Bev Butler
To: Grace Ockwell [DCC], Sandy Graham [DCC]
CC: Sue Bidrose [DCC]
Subject: URGENT LGOIMA Request: Security of DCC/CST stadium documents
Date: Tue, 16 Jun 2015 09:17:33 +1200

Tuesday 16 June 2015
 
Dear Sandy and Grace
 
Given the following:
1. Changes to LGOIMA recently came into force on 26 March 2015.
In light of these changes, and especially the changes to s2(6) which unequivocally states that a local authority will be deemed to hold any information held by an independent contractor in its capacity as contractor.
2. Under section 3 of Schedule 5 of the Service Level Agreement (SLA) between the CST and DCC it states:
“All files, records and other information held by CST and DVML will be held at the offices of DVML and made available to CST and DVML Board members and staff as required.”
3. DCC Governance staff were told by the Chair of CST, Mr Malcolm Farry, that ALL the DCC/CST stadium documents were in a locked room at DVML offices as per the SLA and only Malcolm Farry and his secretary had keys to the locked room. 
4. Recently it has transpired that MOST of the documents are not in the DVML offices.
5. Most of the documents are now in a container.
 
Therefore, given the LGOIMA legislation, the contract between DCC and CST and other information above, I request the following:
1. On what date were the DCC/CST documents removed from the DVML offices?
2. Apart from Malcolm Farry, who else was involved in the removal of the documents?
3. Which other CST trustees were aware of the removal of the documents?
4. Where exactly is the container located?
5. How are the documents stored in this container? Are they in cardboard boxes, supermarket bags, filing cabinets or thrown in piles or some other storage method?
6. Will the DCC report this removal of local government documents to the Police given this was done without DCC permission?
7. Will the DCC now seize these documents as is their legal right under the SLA?
8. The name of the law firm and lawyer who has been providing legal advice to the DCC over the security of the DCC/CST stadium documents?
 
Given the seriousness of this situation, I am requesting that this request be treated with urgency.
 
Kind Regards
Bev

—
 
From: Sandy Graham
To: Bev Butler
CC: Sue Bidrose, Grace Ockwell
Subject: RE: URGENT LGOIMA Request: Security of DCC/CST stadium documents
Date: Tue, 16 Jun 2015 02:00:11 +0000

Dear Bev
 
Thank you for your request below. I note that you have requested urgency and we will consider this request. If we decide that we will not progress the request urgently, you will receive a response as soon as practicable or within twenty working days.
 
I do wish to formally advise that I have sighted the CST files and after conversations with the CST have no concerns about their security. I note your reference to the provisions of the Deed between the CST and the DCC and will work to give effect to that with the CST over coming days.
 
Regards
Sandy

—

From: Bev Butler
To: Sandy Graham
CC: Sue Bidrose, Grace Ockwell
Subject: RE: URGENT LGOIMA Request: Security of DCC/CST stadium documents
Date: Tue, 16 Jun 2015 14:30:55 +1200

Dear Sandy
 
Thank you for your email.
Do the CST still have access to these documents?
 
Kind Regards
Bev

—

From: Bev Butler
Sent: Tuesday, 16 June 2015 3:47:51 p.m.
To: Sandy Graham
Cc: Sue Bidrose, Grace Ockwell

Dear Sandy
 
Further to your email below where you state:
“I note your reference to the provisions of the Deed between the CST and the DCC and will work to give effect to that with the CST over coming days.”
Can I assume that the DCC will be taking control of the documents by the end of the week as per SLA?
 
Kind Regards
Bev

—
  
From: Bev Butler
Sent: 24 May 2015 4:16 p.m.
To: Sue Bidrose
Subject: Security of stadium documents
Importance: High
 
Sunday 24 May 2015
 
Dear Dr Bidrose
 
I wish to formally request that the DCC secure the CST stadium documents.
Some time ago, I was made aware of a threat by Mr Malcolm Farry, Chair of CST, to remove the documents from the locked stadium room.
I think it is essential to ensure the security of these documents.
 
Given Mr Farry’s ongoing refusal to release information even with the recent change in legislation to LGOIMA and given the false statements and the malicious attack on me which he made on the front page of the ODT on Friday 22 May 2015 I believe it may be necessary to: 
(a) change the locks as I understand Mr Farry has the only key;
(b) secure any external window(s) from possible break-in or access to damage the documents.
(c) ensure Mr Farry is escorted by a security guard at all times whilst in the document room if he does now decide to co-operate.
 
Yours sincerely
Bev Butler
 
PS I think it fair to inform you I will be making this request public in a few days time.

—
 
From: Sue Bidrose
To: Bev Butler
Subject: RE: Security of stadium documents
Date: Fri, 5 Jun 2015 03:38:28 +0000

Hi Bev
 
Thanks for the conversation. To just put it in writing, I have had discussions with the CST representative and we are working together to ensure DCC has full access to CST documents pertaining to the stadium build. Most of the documents are not at the stadium and therefore ‘locking the door’ would not only be likely to provoke legal retaliation, it would be counterproductive in our working together to ensure DCC has the documents that we are legally required to have.
 
Kind regards
 
Sue

—
 
From: Bev Butler
To: Sue Bidrose
Subject: RE: Security of stadium documents
Date: Fri, 5 Jun 2015 17:22:51 +1200

Hi Sue
 
Thanks for the email.
fyi
On reading the Service Level Agreement today on page 20 it states under Schedule 5 – Resources/Administration
3. All files, records and other information held by CST and DVML will be held at the offices of DVML and made available to CST and DVML Board members and staff as required.
 
Kind regards
Bev

—

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

Please Mayor Daaave, to pasture NOW

Better that than the knackers yard —we have some notion of human rights! But let’s get rid to back paddock. Some natural justice.

Daaave’s opinion piece in today’s ODT is crippling, rustling with financial ineptitudes, and no clothes.

Sadly, his gratuitous fiction is simply No Match for the lavish, colourfully illustrated ODT love fest with Councillor Lee Vandervis, shown up in the Mix magazine spread on Saturday.

The small town of Dunedin was last murderously accosted by Malcolm Farry and Thugby. Here is yet another short man taking the Citizenry OUT: Mr Death Cull.

No-one seriously believes Daaave’s askew bleats given the state of DCC finances. The debt graph following the council’s recent Long Term Plan decisions should be quickly redrawn by independent honest people, and widely publicised.

Oh dear. Oh dear. Soon there will be no-one left capable of paying the rates, or shrinking council debt. Autumn has passed, along with the last fig leaf.

OPINION
Investing in our city necessary to attract the people we require
Dunedin must invest or wither, writes Mayor Daaave Cull. Dunedin’s aspiration is to be one of the world’s great small cities.
http://www.odt.co.nz/opinion/opinion/344498/investing-our-city-necessary-attract-people-we-require

photonz at ODT gives a very fair summation. The tight echo from all round.

—

Before final LTP decisions in May 2015

—

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

Tomorrow’s newspaper —Cull on CST

via 39 Dunedin News

Murray Kirkness says tomorrow’s ODT looks at Mayor Cull’s concerns about Carisbrook Stadium Trust.

****

[distraction][bodies, dance moves if bad prevails, how….]

“Just think while you’ve been getting down and out about the liars and the dirty, dirty cheats of the world, You could’ve been getting down to this sick beat.”

TaylorSwiftVEVO Published on Aug 18, 2014
Taylor Swift – Shake It Off
Video: Taylor Swift performing Shake It Off. (C) 2014 Big Machine Records, LLC. “Shake It Off” features on Taylor’s album 1989.
Music: “Shake It Off” by Taylor Swift (Google Play • iTunes)

[seriously, crime fighting]

Published on May 17, 2015 TaylorSwiftVEVO
Taylor Swift – Bad Blood ft. Kendrick Lamar
Video: Taylor Swift performing Bad Blood. (C) 2015 Big Machine Records, LLC. “Bad Blood” from Taylor’s multi-platinum release 1989.

Taylor Swift as Catastrophe – Selena Gomez as Arsyn
Karlie Kloss as Knockout – Kendrick Lamar as Welvin Da Great
Martha Hunt as HomeSlice – Jessica Alba as Domino
Serayah as Dilemma – Lena Dunham as Lucky Fiori
Hailee Steinfeld as The Trinity – Ellie Goulding as Destructa X
GiGi Hadid as Slay-Z – Hayley Williams as The Crimson Curse
Zendaya as Cut-Throat – Lily Aldridge as Frostbyte
Ellen Pompeo as Luna – Mariska Hargitay as Justice
Cara Delevingne as Mother Chucker – Cindy Crawford as Headmistress

—

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

*Blue/Yellow Pompoms ft. in Shake It Off provided by Dunedin City Council.

Snaky Stedman —not answering basic questions Dunedin ratepayers must ask

R. J. Sim of Mosgiel is asking the RIGHT QUESTIONS

Note the acute resemblance Mr Stedman has to Malcolm Farry when trying to sell the Stadium project. When backed into a corner on spurious claims, turns nasty and defensive. Boardroom games and hissy fits. Can’t wait until “Pool Guy” trots out the Hi-Vis vest, little black pants and a white hard hat, just like Malc! Assuming DCC and the GOBs duckshove the project through.

ODT 12.3.15 (page 14)

██ Two of the speeches made at the Stop The Stadium public meeting, Dunedin Town Hall, on 29 March 2009:
● Michael Stedman
● Dave Cull

—

Related Posts and Comments:
● 11.3.15 Mosgiel pool trust PLAINLY hasn’t got ‘$7.5M community support’
● 6.3.15 Propaganda from trust for Taieri pool project #Mosgiel
● 2.3.15 DCC: Mosgiel Pool private workshop Tuesday (tomorrow) [renders]
● 20.2.15 Taieri Aquatic Centre: 2nd try for SECRET meeting —hosted by Mayor
● 13.2.15 ‘Taieri Aquatic Centre’, email from M. Stedman via B. Feather
● 10.2.15 Dunedin City Councillors invited to Secret Meeting #Mosgiel
11.10.14 New Mosgiel Pool trust declared —(ready to r**t)
23.7.14 Mosgiel Pool: Taieri Times, ODT…. mmm #mates
16.7.14 Stadium: Exploiting CST model for new Mosgiel Pool #GOBs
● 4.2.14 DCC: Mosgiel Pool, closed-door parallels with stadium project…
30.1.14 DCC broke → More PPPs to line private pockets and stuff ratepayers
20.1.14 DCC Draft Annual Plan 2014/15 [see this comment & ff]
16.11.13 Community board (Mosgiel-Taieri) clandestine meetings
25.1.12 Waipori Fund – inane thinkings from a councillor
19.5.10 DScene – Public libraries, Hillside Workshops, stadium, pools
12.4.10 High-performance training pool at stadium?

—

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

Malcolm Farry, revisited at Nine to Noon (December 2008)

WARM FUZZIES

### radionz.co.nz Friday, 12 Dec 2008
Radio NZ National
Nine to Noon with Kathryn Ryan

Carisbrook Stadium in trouble (Link)
09:30 Malcolm Farry, Chairman Carisbrook Stadium Trust; and Jeff Dickie, property investor and outspoken critic of the stadium.
Audio | Download: Ogg  MP3 ( 13′ 15″ )

—

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

*Image: Malcolm Farry tweaked by whatifdunedin

Whaleoil on “dodgy ratbag local body politicians” —just like ours at DCC

### whaleoil.co.nz Fri, 31 Oct 2014 at 5:20pm
Why is there no law to rein in dodgy ratbag local body politicians?
By Cameron Slater
Former ARC Councillor Bill Burrill is not the first dodgy ratbag Councillor to trough from abuses of power to his own pecuniary advantage in recent years. A few years back in 2009 Council Watch was calling for a number of Councillors from the Canterbury Regional Council to be prosecuted and sacked from their positions after an investigation by the Auditor General Lyn Provost found that four individuals had broken the law by acting in conflict with their official role. Back then those Canterbury Councillors failed to declare a conflict on interest that [led] to a financial benefit for themselves by participating in discussion and voting on proposals before Council. Under investigation the Auditor General’s office chose not to prosecute stating that whilst the Councillors should have withdrawn as a matter of principle – they had each received and shared legal advice that they could participate. And here in lies the problem. The Auditor General and Office of the Ombudsmen publish clear guidelines for Councillors and council staff but the reality is that the law is erroneously filled with holes that are exploited and there is precious little oversight of Local Government leading to the Auditor General loathing to bother and the Courts uninterested.
Read more

—

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

Emerson’s Brewery #Dunedin

Founder Richard Emerson (via stoppress.co.nz)

█ Premium Craft Beer | Emerson’s Brewery Dunedin http://www.emersons.co.nz/

—

### NZ Herald Online 11:08 AM Wednesday Apr 10, 2013
Lion paid $8m for Emerson’s brewery
By Christopher Adams
Brewing giant Lion paid $8 million for Dunedin craft beer maker Emerson’s last year, according to documents filed with the Companies Office. At the time of the November takeover the Auckland-based company did not disclose the multi-million dollar price tag it paid for the South Island firm, which was founded in 1992, making it one of the most established and well-known craft brands in the country. But Lion is required to file its financial statements with the Companies Office due to its foreign ownership by Japanese brewer Kirin.
Read more

****

Emerson’s Brewery On The Move
Monday, 20 October 2014, 3:22 pm
Press Release: Emerson’s

Dunedin, New Zealand – Emerson’s, with support from Lion, has today purchased a new site in Anzac Ave, Dunedin where they plan to build a brand new spiritual home for this iconic New Zealand craft brewery. The new site will allow Emerson’s to meet increasing demand for its high quality beers whilst continuing to bring new and interesting beers to beer lovers. This is the fourth move in the Emerson’s journey and Founder Richard Emerson says the new site will be a vast improvement on the place they currently call home.
“Moving brewhouses and tanks is not new to us but this time, we want to create a place where people can touch, smell, taste and experience more about Emerson’s and its story,” says Emerson.
Emerson’s, supported by Beca who will be project managing the development locally, are progressing well with the plans for the site which will house a new brewery, warehousing, retail store and bar area where visitors can enjoy a beer matched with good food. Improved staff facilities are also a key consideration for the new development.
Lion’s Managing Director, Rory Glass says today marks the start of another exciting chapter in Emerson’s history and Lion is delighted to be able to help them reach their full potential.
“We stand by our commitment of allowing Emerson’s to continue doing what they do well – experimenting and brewing great beer and we are genuinely excited about helping Emerson’s to build a new home in which they can realise their growth aspirations now and in the future” says Glass.
Work is expected to get under way on the site in December 2014 with a target completion date for the new Emerson’s Brewery in early 2016. Final plans for the site will be shared more widely in due course but Emerson’s have extended their current lease at Wickliffe Street to cover them until the new site is fully operational.
For now however, it is business as usual for Emerson’s and the team remain focused on creating great beers for Emerson’s fans to enjoy.
Link to Scoop

****

DCC Webmap [click to enlarge]

Cr Hall had been in dispute with the council over access to his land for three years, after realignment of State Highway 88 during Forsyth Barr Stadium’s construction.

### ODT Online Tue, 21 Oct 2014
Brewery’s big plans revealed
By Vaughan Elder
An expanding Emerson’s Brewery is set to become a ”world-class” tourist destination now an agreement has been reached to buy a new site. The development – expected to cost in the millions – will be open for tours and house a new brewery, warehousing, retail store plus a bar and restaurant. The 22-year-old Dunedin brewery’s purchase of two adjacent pieces of land in Anzac Ave, belonging to the Dunedin City Council and Cr Doug Hall, also resolves a long-running access dispute over the land.
Read more

****

The global environment in which we operate has always meant swings and roundabouts for New Zealand goods and services.

### ODT Online Mon, 27 Oct 2014
Editorial: Swings and roundabouts
It has been a tale of two fortunes for city businesses this month. […] And as one door closes [Donaghys], another opens. Dunedin’s Emerson’s Brewery last week announced it had bought land on Anzac Ave, and would move from its nearby Wickliffe St site to build a multimillion-dollar expanded operation with a new brewery, warehousing, retail store, bar and restaurant. The company envisaged it would become a “world-class” tourist destination and the expansion would create jobs.
Read more

Image via 3news.co.nz

—

Related Posts and Comments:
2.9.13 SH88 realignment: decision to Environment Court?
3.8.13 SH88 notice of requirement [more maps]
30.4.13 DCC governance = management ?
20.11.12 DCC vs Anzide Properties decision: The road “has no legal basis”
27.5.12 SH88 realignment – information
25.5.12 SH88 realignment costs (injunction)
27.2.12 Bringing DCC, related entities and individuals to account…
23.8.11 Stadium project tangles
4.11.10 SH88 realignment for stadium disrupts traffic
21.7.10 SH88 realignment – update
7.7.10 Goodbye to great store buildings in Parry St
21.4.10 SH88 realignment – update
31.3.10 SH88 realignment
24.2.10 SH88 realignment: Are ratepayers buying the land twice?
20.11.09 Interesting. SH88 realignment.
2.9.09 SH88 realignment past stadium

—

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

Harland to scale

[zoom text with Ctrl + and Ctrl -]

█ Ten years ago. Whoever typed THAT ?

—

Related Post and Comments:
8.9.14 Jim Harland and the stadium MESS
27.6.14 Stadium costs $23.4144 million per annum
2.6.14 Stadium costs ballpark at $21.337 million pa, Butler & Oaten
23.5.14 Stadium | DCC Draft Annual Plan 2014/15 ● Benson-Pope asserts…
9.5.14 DCC Draft Annual Plan 2014/15 Submission by Bev Butler
10.4.14 Stadium: Edgar’s $1m donation (private sector fundraising)

For more, enter the terms *harland*, *farry*, *malcolm*, *athol*, *stadium*, *dcc*, *cst*, *dchl*, *dvml*, *orfu* or *rugby* in the search box at right.

—

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

*Image: Jim Harland and Sukhi Turner (via ODT 2.6.04) – supplied by Calvin Oaten

Jim Harland and the stadium MESS

Meanwhile, as Mayor Dave Cull’s council keeps up with massive spending on low priorities and unnecessaries, this comes to light:—

### ODT Online Mon, 8 Sep 2014
Stadium budget help was declined
By Chris Morris
The Dunedin City Council declined an offer of specialist help to keep its Forsyth Barr Stadium budget on track, years before the cost jumped by millions of dollars, it has been confirmed. The decision, revealed in an Audit New Zealand report from 2010, has been criticised by Mayor Dave Cull, who said it was “a function of the attitude of the management and the executive at the time”. Former council chief executive Jim Harland defends the decision, saying the council’s oversight was felt at the time to be “appropriate”. The offer was detailed in the Audit NZ annual report to the council, dated December 2010, which covered the 12-month period to June 30 that year.
Read more

—

The decision to build a debt-funded stadium – of which Jim Harland, Malcolm Farry, Athol Stephens, DCC stadium councillors, ORC stadium councillors, and professional rugby cronies are GUILTY – was ALWAYS the decision to bankrupt the Dunedin City Council but more especially, and insidiously, the ratepayers and residents of ‘greater’ Dunedin and Otago.¹

The Audit NZ offer was INANE and in any case a complete waste of time.
Audit NZ is what it is, a basket case. Of sheer incompetence and hypocrisy, nationwide.

Time for a full independent forensic audit of the Carisbrook Stadium Charitable Trust, fondly known as CST, headed by Malcolm Farry. This will also entail an intimate look at the way Dunedin City Council treated CST invoices, the Council’s spending delegations, and its chief signatories.

Let’s hope somebody goes to clink before the accounting games are over.
___________________________
¹Only now are Otago power users waking up to the fact of high line charges being levied by Aurora Energy Ltd to fund subvention payments to ‘the stadium’ (see recent letters to the editor in the Otago Daily Times).
Did the killer consolidated DCC think the people of Otago wouldn’t notice?

—

Related Post and Comments:
27.6.14 Stadium costs $23.4144 million per annum
2.6.14 Stadium costs ballpark at $21.337 million pa, Butler & Oaten
23.5.14 Stadium | DCC Draft Annual Plan 2014/15 ● Benson-Pope asserts…
9.5.14 DCC Draft Annual Plan 2014/15 Submission by Bev Butler
10.4.14 Stadium: Edgar’s $1m donation (private sector fundraising)

For more, enter the terms *harland*, *farry*, *malcolm*, *athol*, *stadium*, *dcc*, *cst*, *dchl*, *dvml*, *orfu* or *rugby* in the search box at right.

—

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

*Image: odt.co.nz (re-imaged by whatifdunedin) – Jim Harland

DCC: Forensics for kids

Fairfax Media has obtained Audit NZ letters of management to the DCC from 2005 to 2012, released under the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act. The letters show that in the years 2007-2010 auditors consistently urged the DCC to tighten up its risk-management policies and processes.

Audit NZ expressed concern over what it indicated could be inadequate controls over several internal processes, including verifying signatures of those authorised to sign invoices and purchase orders, independent review of creditor files, and controls of sensitive areas such as sale of council assets to staff. (Fairfax)

### stuff.co.nz Last updated 08:17 26/08/2014
Dunedin council officers ‘not kids’
By Wilma McCorkindale
The Dunedin City Council (DCC) appears to have ignored calls by Audit New Zealand to improve its risk and fraud processes, saying its officers were “supposedly people with integrity … not kids”.

The DCC revealed in June it was investigating a suspected major fraud within its Citifleet unit. The fraud was suspected to have been carried out over a decade. Citifleet team leader Brent Bachop died suddenly in May. His death has been referred to the coroner. Council chief executive Dr Sue Bidrose said the alleged fraud of $1.5 million included alleged illegal transactions resulting in the loss of profits from the sale of 123 council fleet vehicles. The findings have been passed to the Dunedin police for further investigation.

Fairfax Media has obtained Audit NZ letters of management to the DCC from 2005 to 2012, released under the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act. The letters show that in the years 2007-2010 auditors consistently urged the DCC to tighten up its risk-management policies and processes. It appears Audit NZ was compelled to repeat similar advice over the period and noted the DCC met only minimum requirements.

Council managers’ response to the Audit NZ findings in 2010 was to say the council had considered creating an audit and risk committee but concluded its finance and strategy committee adequately performed the role. In December 2010 Audit NZ raised the issue of reviews of areas “susceptible to fraud”, but management commented that specific audits in the “most sensitive areas” had found “no transactions of concern or deficiencies in controls”.
Read more

Five council staff were involved in “employment processes”, with some facing the prospect of losing their jobs, the ODT understands.

[Irony] Local Government New Zealand president Lawrence Yule yesterday told the ODT the “mind-boggling” alleged fraud was the biggest involving a local authority he could recall.

### ODT Online Tue, 26 Aug 2014
Council overlooked audit advice
By Chris Morris
Dunedin Mayor Dave Cull concedes a chance to detect the alleged $1.5 million Citifleet fraud may have been missed, after the council twice overlooked advice from Audit New Zealand. The revelation came in Audit New Zealand’s annual reports to the council, obtained by the Otago Daily Times, which highlighted gaps in council processes dating back to 2003. […] The findings have triggered finger-pointing between past and present council staff, councillors and Audit NZ, but council chief executive Dr Sue Bidrose said responsibility for failing to detect the alleged fraud rested with the council.
Read more

—

Related Posts and Comments:
23.8.14 DCC public finance forum 12.8.14 (ten slides)
6.8.14 DCC tightens policy + Auditor-General’s facetious comments
3.7.14 Stuff: Alleged vehicle fraud at DCC
1.7.14 DCC: Far-reaching fraud investigation Citifleet
3.6.14 DCC unit under investigation
2.5.14 DCC $tar-ship enterprise
28.4.14 DCC loses City Property manager in restructuring
7.2.12 DCC ‘money go round’ embedded

—

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

*Images (tweaked by whatifdunedin): tmba.tv – Tim McGarvey: 3D forensic animation (TMBA Inc. Animation Studio, New York City); scottthornbury.wordpress.com – F is for forensics (illustration by Quentin Blake, from Broughton, G. (1968) Success With English. Harmondsworth: Penguin)

DCC public finance forum 12.8.14 (ten slides)

The ten powerslides presented by DCC group chief financial officer Grant McKenzie, as discussed at the public finance forum held earlier this month are available for download (see PDF below).

Figures might be, but the forum was advertised….

Public notices advertising the forum and the warm invitation extended by Cr Richard Thomson, chair of the Finance Committee, were unfortunately met with low attendance on the night. Few of the well-known vocal commentators on DCC’s financial position, or indeed, leaders of the Otago Chamber of Commerce, bothered to show. Those individuals lose a measure of credibility. Where were all the beleaguered ratepayers and residents? The local ‘interested’ accountants, economists, board directors, investors, and successful business people? Their apologies? Has everybody drowned with rising sea levels or been knocked from their bikes on the one-way? Blame Dave Cull.

Rob Hamlin and ‘JimmyJones’ did make the effort to be there, solidly plying their observations and questions in debate. Other members of the public also engaged. We didn’t hear the names of people who forwarded questions prior to the meeting, or what their questions were. Notwithstanding, the slides are the Council’s attempt to respond to issues commonly raised, in summary.

The first public finance forum was held on 27 November 2013. The second on 12 August was an opportunity to hear Grant McKenzie who arrived at the Council in January. He proves to be approachable, mild-humoured and self-effacing. Grant explores the expanded GCFO role ably supported by senior finance staff; his already onerous duties include the overlay of current fraud investigations, new systems for accountability and risk management, as well as the stadium review (due in September).

—

[click slides to enlarge – scanned from forum handout]

1.
2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

█ DCC Finance Forum (powerslides 1-10) (PDF, 18.6 MB)

For more information on DCC, enter the terms *finance*, *dcc*, *dchl*, *delta*, *cst* *dvml* or *stadium* in the search box at right.

****

Other Reading – link supplied by Calvin Oaten
Sat, 23 Aug 2014 at 12:08 p.m.

An interconnected world was meant to reduce inequality – but that doesn’t seem to be happening.

### blogs.telegraph.co.uk August 22, 2014 13:18
Finance
Nobel gurus fear globalisation is going horribly wrong (technical)
By Ambrose Evans-Pritchard
David Ricardo’s Theory of Comparative Advantage has broken down after 200 years, or so I learned at the Lindau forum of Nobel laureates in Bavaria. The theory published in 1817 has been a guiding principle of free trade, taken as a given by every student of economics in the modern era. It has served us well, but just as Newton’s theories ran into limits and were overtaken by Einstein’s relativity, comparative advantage no longer explains the world. Under Ricardo’s model, inequality was supposed to narrow within countries as globalisation accelerated exponentially in the Nineties. Instead it is getting wider. The Gini coefficient measuring the spread between rich and poor is narrowing between countries, but is widening almost everywhere within countries, leading to a corrosive concentration….
Read more

● Ambrose Evans-Pritchard has covered world politics and economics for 30 years, based in Europe, the US, and Latin America. He joined the Telegraph in 1991, serving as Washington correspondent and later Europe correspondent in Brussels. He is now International Business Editor in London.

—

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

*Images: (from the top) Facebook – yahoofinance (advert); goodcars.co.nz – Finance your next car (advert); nzvf.co.nz – New Zealand Vehicle Finance (advert)

DCC tightens policy + Auditor-general’s facetious comments

The city council’s Whistleblower policy, originally written by Athol Stephens (!!), has recently been updated.

The proposed change came as independent financial consultant Deloitte continued its investigation into an alleged $1 million fraud within the Dunedin City Council’s Citifleet department. (ODT)

### ODT Online Wed, 6 Aug 2014
Council aims to tighten policies
By Chris Morris
The Dunedin City Council is moving to make it easier for whistle-blowers to speak out, but still has “a fair bit of work to do” to tighten other internal policies, senior managers say. The proposed change came as the council’s audit and risk subcommittee, meeting yesterday for just the second time, considered a schedule of 12 internal council policies it was now responsible for overseeing. The policies, ranging from risk management to staff travel and fraud prevention, were designed to promote good governance while protecting the organisation and its staff.
Read more

****

Universally detested (except by a charming coterie of Wellington’s public servants, all living high off the pig’s back), Lyn Provost represents a fat salary-dollar value only. Fully complicit or was that comfortably incompetent, in not getting MULTIMILLION-DOLLAR RORTS and FRAUD stopped across the local authorities of New Zealand. She and her well-paid ‘academic’ staff ask: “Whatever is Crime?” —OHH! “New Zealand’s public sector boasted $240 billion worth of assets and managing them required continuous attention, she said.” (via ODT) …..What attention, steamed up spectacles??!!

Bugger off, Lyn [Photo: liberation.typepad.com]

****

### ODT Online Wed, 6 Aug 2014
Praise for DCC’s new internal controls
By Chris Morris
The Dunedin City Council’s move to tighten internal controls has been praised by the Office of the Auditor-general, even as the investigation into an alleged $1 million Citifleet fraud continues. The words of encouragement came from Auditor-general Lyn Provost as she addressed a meeting of the council’s new audit and risk subcommittee during a visit to Dunedin yesterday. But, despite the headlines and unanswered questions about why the alleged fraud was not detected, including by auditors, the word “Citifleet” was not uttered yesterday.
Read more

—

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

Stadium: Who is being protected?

Received from Russell Garbutt
15 July 2014 at 4:30 PM

What is an advertisement, and what content of an advertisement needs to be able to be verified?

Readers of the Otago Daily Times, and followers of the on-going stadium debate which shows no signs of lessening in its intensity may be intrigued to know just where the sensitivities of the ODT lie.

Let us look at some simple facts which cannot be in dispute.

The Carisbrook Stadium Trust which was acting as an agent of the Dunedin City Council, decided to publish a full page advertisement in the 31 May 2008 issue of the ODT. The advertisement was headed up “The Facts about the New Stadium”.

In this advertisement it was claimed that “The funding target establishes a debt free stadium. On this basis the business plan for the stadium shows that it makes a profit. Unlike nearly all other Council owned facilities it will not need annual funding support. This assessment has been confirmed by two of New Zealand’s leading accountancy firms”.

This is published and accessible and the wording of the advertisement cannot be interpreted in any other way as the heading refers to all that followed as “facts”.

The advertisement also claimed that the Trustees of the CST were “committed to delivering this stadium, under budget, on time and to achieve its financial, social and economic goals”.

Now of course some advertisements for wrinkle cream use all sorts of phrases like “clinical tests prove etc etc”. Many people are ready to pounce on claims that are unable to be substantiated, or are untruthful, or are misleading, or cannot be proven. In other words, the makers of the wrinkle cream need to be able to show that there were indeed “clinical tests”. The fact that the clinic may have been part of the company making the cream is sometimes understood, and in any case, the makers of the cream hardly ever claim that “totally independent clinical trials using double blind processes found what we are claiming is true”.

But this is not some pot of wrinkle cream.

The CST claimed a number of facts in their advertisement that they said were verified by two of New Zealand’s leading accountancy firms.

So, I submitted a very brief letter to the Editor of the ODT that simply asked this:

Dear Sir

In light of the continuing operating losses of the Awatea Street Rugby Stadium, and the on-going debt costs from its construction, it would be interesting to be informed of just who the two leading NZ accountancy firms were that confirmed the Carisbrook Stadium Trust’s claims published in the ODT in 2008 that the stadium would be built debt free and would return an annual operating profit. Maybe these two companies could now tell us how the reality differs so much from the published claims.

Yours sincerely

The ODT has informed me that my letter was noted but not selected for publication. This is newspaper speak for it’s been binned.

Why should this be?

Should the ODT not be interested in ensuring that an advertisement of a major size on a subject that had divided the City was not at all misleading in the same way that claims were made that may not be able to be substantiated, or could be shown to be unfactual?

Is the ODT particularly sensitive to the views of those that decided to publish this advertisement?

Had the ODT entered into any understanding or arrangement that the paper would support the stadium project which may have led to less than stringent standards of advertising being followed in this case?

But perhaps more telling is that to my knowledge, the ODT has not followed up on the obvious story of just who these two leading NZ accounting firms were that supported the claims of a debt free stadium and an annual operating profit. My point is that time and distance show us that these claims were so at odds with the claims made and published, that serious questions remain unanswered on just how the CST and these two companies got it so wrong.

Maybe another newspaper sees the story that the ODT doesn’t?

[ends]

█ Legible copy: CST Advertisement, ODT 31 May 2008 (PDF, 200 KB)

—

Related Posts and Comments:
9.7.14 John Ward, no mention of stadium or CST trusteeship
23.5.14 Stadium | DCC Draft Annual Plan 2014/15 ● Benson-Pope…
9.5.14 DCC Draft Annual Plan 2014/15 Submission by Bev Butler
12.3.14 Carisbrook Stadium Trust: Financial statements year ended 30.6.13
8.3.14 Carisbrook Stadium Trust subject to LGOIMA
24.2.14 Carisbrook Stadium Trust: ‘Facts about the new Stadium’ (31.5.08)
22.2.14 Carisbrook Stadium Trust costs
24.1.14 Stadium: It came to pass… [stadium review]

—

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

Stadium costs $23.4144 million per annum

Received from Bev Butler
Thu, 26 Jun 2014 21:43:05 +1200

Cover note:
According to the latest DVL/DVML six monthly reports the debt is growing not reducing – that is a concern. The $146.6 million debt was passed over to DVL, many millions were poured into servicing the interest and capital repayments for this debt but even with that happening the combined short term/long term debt of DVML/DVL now stands at $157.6 million – $11 million more! The long term debt of $146.6 million has been reduced to $138.8 million but short term debt stands at $18.8 million. It is a major concern that the combined debt is growing not reducing – and this is during the stadium’s honeymoon period.

———

From: Bev Butler
To: Sue Bidrose; Sandy Graham; Kate Wilson; Richard Thomsom; Chris Staynes; John Bezett; Lee Vandervis; Hilary Calvert; Doug Hall; Andrew Whiley; Mike Lord; David Benson-Pope; Neville Peat; Andrew Noone; Jinty MacTavish; Dave Cull; Aaron Hawkins
CC: Calvin Oaten; Grant McKenzie
Subject: Stadium $23.4144 million per annum
Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2014 21:43:05 +1200

Dear Mayor Cull and Councillors

As a result of further discussions and more information obtained through further searching Council documents Calvin Oaten and I have updated the annual stadium costs which now stand at $23.4144 million. (See attached word document). No changes have been made to the spreadsheet I sent earlier which I prepared.
There are some costs which have not been included due to the difficulty in quantifying them to the accuracy of which I would be comfortable.

This $23.4144 million figure does not include any payments which may have not been fully transparent through the Council books.
By this I mean that I understand there were approaches by Darren Burden, former CEO of DVML, to obtain payments for bills which DVML were unable to pay but which another Council Department had shown some willingness to transfer their surplus unspent funds from that Department to DVML. In that particular case, I understand the transfer did not happen. However, I have no access to information as to whether this had occurred on previous occasions through other departments.

█ Also attached are Terry Wilson’s calculations coming from a different angle but which come to $23.1 million per annum. (See attached spreadsheet prepared by Terry Wilson).

Yours sincerely
Bev Butler

Downloads:
● FB Stadium=Annual Ratepayer Costs=V2 (PDF, 9.47 KB)
● Stadium Costs $23.4144 million per annum (DOC, 30.5 KB)

—

Related Posts and Comments:
2.6.14 Stadium costs ballpark at $21.337 million pa, Butler & Oaten
23.5.14 Stadium | DCC DAP 2014/15 ● Benson-Pope asserts himself
9.5.14 DCC Draft Annual Plan 2014/15 Submission by Bev Butler

—

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

Stadium costs ballpark at $21.337 million pa, Butler & Oaten

Received from Bev Butler
Monday, 2 June 2014 4:10 p.m.

Message: During the presentation of my submission on the draft annual plan I was asked by Council to produce the figures to back up my claim that the stadium was costing approximately $20 million per annum. David Benson-Pope made a general statement questioning whether the claims in my submission were correct – though he didn’t elaborate when I asked him. I have followed up the Council’s request and the final figure is $21.337 million.

Please note there is a huge disparity between what the DCC has published in the Draft Annual Plan 2014/15 and what can be shown by the DCC’s own figures that are very difficult to find and interpret. The ratepayers should not continue to be kept in the dark – the real costs are more than double what is being published.

This has now been sent to the Mayor and Councillors.

Regards
Bev

————————————

From: Bev Butler
To: Sue Bidrose; Sandy Graham; Kate Wilson; Richard Thomson; Chris Staynes; John Bezett; Lee Vandervis; Hilary Calvert; Doug Hall; Andrew Whiley; Mike Lord; David Benson-Pope; Neville Peat; Andrew Noone; Jinty MacTavish; Dave Cull; Aaron Hawkins
Cc: Calvin Oaten
Subject: Stadium Cost $21.337 million per annum
Date: Fri, 30 May 2014 22:49:43 +1200

Friday 30 May 2014

Dear Mayor Cull and Councillors

Attached is a Word document prepared by Calvin Oaten outlining the annual stadium costs. The final figure of $21.337 million is based on figures sourced from and cross-referenced with DCC/DVML/DVL/DCHL documents.
Also attached is a spreadsheet, containing four spreadsheets, prepared by Bev Butler, showing the treatment of the $146.6 million portion of the stadium debt.

Yours sincerely
Bev Butler

Explanatory Note for Calvin Oaten’s Word document:
I have expressly not mentioned nor quantified costs of what I would term ‘collateral’ effects of the Stadium Project. These of course are very real additional financial burdens to the citizens. These are: the realignment of SH88, the forgiving of considerable debt owed the city by the Otago Rugby Football Union, the costs of the purchase and sale of Carisbrook including the holding of same in the interim period. And of course, the ongoing operational losses of DVML’s operations. These particularly are proving to be a continual drag on the financial conscience of the ratepayer. It seems that if council cannot, or will not bite the bullet and raise the “pay to use” level to at least a break even figure then professional rugby is destined to have the last laugh at our expense. It is simply not fair.
I remain, without prejudice
Calvin Oaten

Explanatory Notes for Bev Butler’s spreadsheets:
1. Sheets 1 & 2 titled “$117.541m” and “$29.059m” respectively outline the calculations for the two tranches of stadium debt outlined in the DVL six-monthly report, dated 31 December 2013. This report states that the $146.6m stadium debt has been divided into two tranches of $117.541m and $29.059m. The $117.541m is for a term of 17 years and the $29.059m is for a term of ten years with a weighted average of 6.05%pa. In the calculations I have assumed monthly compounding periods and assumed the first payment(s) were made between 30 June 2013 and 31 December 2013. If the compounding period is shorter then there would be a small reduction in the payments.
Note that in the DVL six-monthly report it states that a mortgage has been issued to pay for the two tranches. This is the first time this has been mentioned in the DVL reports so it is assumed that the mortgage was issued sometime between the last DVL Annual Report (YE 30 June 2013) and the DVL six-monthly report (31 December 2013). There is also mention of a GSA having been signed. I assume this is a General Security Agreement to secure the payment of the debt in the event of the stadium folding or the rental payments not being met. I acknowledge that I am unsure about this as I have no further information. Perhaps the Council staff could clarify this aspect.

2. Sheets 3 & 4 titled “$146.6m monthly” and “$146.6m weekly” respectively outline the calculations for the stadium debt had [regular repayments been made] from the time the stadium opened. It appears from the calculations and the DVL Annual Reports that this was not happening. If it was then the debt would have reduced to approximately $134 million. The DVL long term debt as of 31 December 2013 stands at $141.090m. So up until the mortgage was secured, it appears the debt repayments were for interest only on the bonds (and an average annual capital injection of $2m) which were issued to pay for the stadium land and other stadium debt.

[ends]

Downloads:
● Stadium Costs $21.337 million per annum (DOC, 30.2 KB)
● Stadium debt calculations FINAL (XLS, 59.3 KB)

—

Related Posts and Comments:
9.5.14 DCC Draft Annual Plan 2014/15 Submission by Bev Butler
23.5.14 Stadium | DCC DAP 2014/15 ● Benson-Pope asserts himself

—

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

Carisbrook Stadium Trust: Financial statements for the year ended 30.6.13

Received via Bev Butler
Wednesday, 12 March 2014 1:48 p.m.

The CST’s latest financial accounts – link to full financial statements and a copy of the summary below [click to enlarge].

Source:
[enter in your browser] *Carisbrook Stadium CT 30.6.13 signed Accounts.pdf*

Download: Carisbrook Stadium CT 30.6.13 signed Accounts (PDF, 255 KB)

For more, enter the terms *cst*, *csct*, *carisbrook*, *charitable*, *trust*, or *farry* in the search box at right.

—

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

Carisbrook Stadium Trust subject to LGOIMA

Received from Bev Butler
Thursday, 6 March 2014 5:27 p.m.

MESSAGE TO MEDIA WATCHING THIS BLOGSITE

Malcolm Farry has been misinforming media about the CST being subject to the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act (LGOIMA).
Farry is incorrect when he states that the Carisbrook Stadium Charitable Trust (CST) is not subject to LGOIMA.
Attached are two legal opinions which both state that the CST is subject to the provisions of LGOIMA.
These were released to me by Paul Orders, former CEO of the Dunedin City Council (DCC), after I made a complaint to the Ombudsman.

In July 2008 I was making requests under LGOIMA about the stadium and was informed by the then CEO, Jim Harland, that the CST was not subject to LGOIMA. What Harland failed to tell me was that he had sought two legal opinions both of which state that the CST is subject to LGOIMA.

When I produced Harland’s email to the Ombudsman, the Ombudsman recommended that the Council release these opinions to me. Hence the attached legal opinions. It is not often that legal opinions are released because of legal priviledge but I guess in this case I had proved I was misled. It was part of the deceipt of withholding vital information from the public so that they could push the project through against the will of the community.

They lied from start to finish with this project and filled their pockets along the way –that’s why myself and others will continue to expose what happened. The whole process was so bloody cynical.

Returning to Farry, CST and LGOIMA, it is also clear under the Public Records Act 2005 that the Council is required to maintain full records etc as outlined below:

PUBLIC RECORDS ACT 2005
Requirement to create and maintain records

(1) Every public office and local authority must create and maintain full and accurate records of its affairs, in accordance with normal, prudent business practice, including the records of any matter that is contracted out to an independent contractor.

(2) Every public office must maintain in an accessible form, so as to be able to be used for subsequent reference, all public records that are in its control, until their disposal is authorised by or under this Act or required by or under another Act.

(3) Every local authority must maintain in an accessible form, so as to be able to be used for subsequent reference, all protected records that are in its control, until their disposal is authorised by or under this Act.

————————————————

From: Sandy Graham [DCC]
To: Bev Butler
CC: Letitia Parry @ombudsmen.parliament.nz
Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2012 16:04:50 +1300
Subject: Bev Butler re legal opinions – 14 Feb 2012.pdf – Adobe Acrobat Professional

Dear Bev

Please find attached the information regarding the LGOIMA peer reviews.

Regards
Sandy

—

Full download: Bev Butler re legal opinions – 14 Feb 2012 (PDF, 949 KB)
• Cover letter from Paul Orders 14.2.12 (1 page)
• Letter from Anderson Lloyd 18.9.08 (3 pages)
• Letter from Simpson Grierson 25.9.08 (5 pages)

[ends]

For more, enter the terms *cst*, *csct*, *carisbrook*, *stadium*, *farry*, or *harland* in the search box at right.

—

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

Stadium: Fairfax business editor pokes DCC’s Fubar

### stuff.co.nz Last updated 05:00 05/03/2014
Business
Empty seats, empty pockets
By Chalkie
[…] Chalkie is concerned by a $48 million scheme to build a stadium in Petone for the benefit of the Phoenix A-League football team and its fans. From what we know of the proposal, the Hutt City Council – which means ratepayers – will be asked to contribute $25m towards building a “boutique” 10,000 to 12,000 seat arena at the southern end of the Petone Recreation Ground. […] The good burghers of the Hutt will be best placed to judge the practicalities of the scheme when further details are available, but the financial side has worrying similarities to the set-up of Forsyth Barr Stadium in Dunedin. Arm’s length charitable trust controlling the budget? Check. Private sector funding promised? Check. Troubled sports franchise as anchor tenant? Check.

[…] In Dunedin, those involved in developing the city’s shiny new covered stadium are far from universally popular after ratepayers ended up with huge debts and an ongoing headache from running the thing. The original idea, itself controversial, was for ratepayers to contribute $129m – split between $91.4m from the city council and $37.5m from the regional council – towards the $188m cost of the stadium, with private sector funding contributing $45.5m. The balance was coming from local trusts and a government grant. In the end, the stadium cost $224m and the ratepayers were hit up for $200m of that. The private sector funding was virtually zero.

You could write a book on the series of failures that left a relatively small number of people – Dunedin has a population of about 126,000 – exposed to such high costs. But even in the short version written by PricewaterhouseCoopers it seems councillors were not well informed about the project and financial controls were inadequate. The controversy still simmers. Local campaigner Bev Butler, a determined and resourceful opponent of the stadium scheme, continues to unearth aspects of the process that do not reflect well on its management. One of the latest involves the relationship between Carisbrook Stadium Charitable Trust, which runs the project, and the council.

The problem in this instance is the lack of transparency around public spending, even when there was obviously concern at the outset to keep a firm grip on it. More than that, Dunedin got in over its head and allowed itself to be the schmuck landed with everyone’s bill at the end.

Money from the council was supposed to be transferred to the trust only to pay for third-party invoices billed to the trust. An exception to this rule provided for the trust’s administration costs to be covered by a general monthly payment from the council. These “trust costs” invoices were for between $40,000 and $90,000 a month, running from July 2007 to January 2010. According to Butler’s information, which tallies with the council schedule, the payments totalled $2.2m over the period. An Official Information Act response from the council to Butler said the money was paid “to cover staff and administration costs” of the trust “to facilitate ease of administration”.

Chalkie can see that it would be easier to pay for the trust’s incidentals in this way. However, it opened a big hole in accountability for spending because the staff and administration costs detailed in the trust’s annual reports for the period total $1,068,796, more than $1m less than the sums invoiced. It is not clear from the accounts how the other $1.1m was spent because no combination of other costs – marketing, PR, fundraising or project administration – seems to come close to the right figure. Chairman of trustees Malcolm Farry told Chalkie he could provide documents to clarify the details last week, but unfortunately they were not yet available as we went to press.

There are several lessons for the Hutt City Council, including to beware of using a charitable trust as the development vehicle, to ensure private sector money is paid up front with a buffer for contingencies, and to ensure there is no ambiguity about costs.
Read full article

● Chalkie is written by Fairfax business bureau’s Tim Hunter.

—

Related Posts and Comments:
24.2.14 Carisbrook Stadium Trust: ‘Facts about the new Stadium’ (31.5.08)
22.2.14 Carisbrook Stadium Trust costs

—

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr