[ad_1]
Lee Vandervis took his own advice about the consequences of a $ 12 parking ticket, and he lost.
The longtime Dunedin councilor was censured after a dispute with a customer service representative over the parking ticket on September 13, 2019.
“That relatively innocuous event was the catalyst for what followed,” Judge David Gendall said in his decision, after Vandervis petitioned the Superior Court for a judicial review of the council’s decision.
The battle has already cost the Dunedin City Council over $ 14,000.
READ MORE:
* Counselor’s $ 12 parking ticket battle costs council over $ 14,000
* Dunedin councilman bows after receiving order to apologize
* Dunedin councilor who yelled at colleague, alleges conspiracy
Gendall noted that the councilman was unhappy with the signage on the parking meter in question and the issuance of the ticket, despite having paid $ 4.20 for an hour of parking.
Vandervis claimed that a 30-minute parking restriction sign was not visible from the trail.
His dispute with the council staff member, who claimed it was “very unpleasant”, resulted in him saying, “see you in court.”
Later, Vandervis filed a formal complaint against the staff member, while one was also filed against the councilman himself.
The council erred in its code of conduct process and principles of natural justice, Vandervis said.
Hamish McNeilly / Stuff
Dunedin City Councilor Lee Vandervis walks to Dunedin Superior Court.
The board later appointed independent investigator David Benham, who found that the incident had left the employee “deeply upsetting”.
He described Vandervis as “loud, aggressive and intimidating.”
But Vandervis believed the whistleblower was politically motivated and that this was a continuation of negative information leaked about him by staff to discredit him, Benham said.
Vandervis’s attorney questioned the legitimacy of the Code of Conduct and aspects of Benham’s investigation.
Hamish McNeilly / Stuff
Vandervis claimed that a 30-minute parking restriction sign was not visible from the trail.
Gendall rejected those claims, noting that Vandervis had been informed by email in October 2018 of a list of investigators for matters related to the code of conduct, but apparently raised no objections.
It also found that former CEO Dr. Sue Bidrose handled the complaint correctly.
Gendall also found that Benham “generally took appropriate action and conducted its entire investigative process on a reasonable and objectively fair basis.”
Finally, even in situations where judicial review has merit, and I have found that is not the case here, ultimately, redress is always discretionary.
“In the present case, because this incident involves a disciplinary context for a member of what is inherently a body politic, in any event, relief, in my opinion, would probably not be appropriate.”
The appeal was dismissed.
Vandervis, who has been contacted for comment, wrote on his blog: “It is becoming useless to try to fight or complain to City Hall.”
You are considering an appeal.
