We have no basis for endorsing these observations from personal experience. The February by-election in Waikanae was refreshingly free of personal acrimony; the candidates addressed issues and did not attack each other.
There should be courtesy, respect and honesty at all times and we can, accordingly, appreciate Dr Bolton’s feelings, as we ourselves witnessed extraordinary disrespect and untruths aimed at us in 2013 from a certain ill-tempered lawyer associate (not Michael Scott) of a local property developer.
11 Beachwater Gr
Waikanae Community Board
Not private, not confidential
Dear Mr Westbury
Based on today’s column in the Kapiti News you are presumably an individual of independent mind, as distinct from those on the boards and council who are self-serving opportunists. Consider a few matters re Waikanae board and the council:
1. Already since February, Michael Scott has shown himself to be, I suggest, among the most ill-mannered and arrogant of councillors, ill-mannered towards other councillors, namely Jackie Elliott and David Scott, and towards the public. From what myself and others have observed of him, some of his antics include bizarre finger gestures towards David Scott for no apparent reason and in no obvious context. When David Scott objected to this, rather than Michael Scott being reprimanded by Church, it was David who was reprimanded for objecting, because Michael is presumably part of what Cr Gurunathan has described as one of ‘the in crowd’. It is this type of situation which has resulted in Cr Gurunathan taking KCDC to court, which will be yet another council fiasco, like the Standens matter.
2. Michael Scott’s gratuitous quip to Jackie Elliott that she words what she
states in an inept manner, and his stated refusal to apologise when asked by Elliott. What a cad.
3. Michael Scott’s quip about a rep. from the Mens Shed after he had spoken and left.
4. After a ratepayer, Mr John Vickerman of Waikanae, a civil engineer, had taken time from work and waited for 6 hours to speak for 3 minutes on 3 subjects, Michael S. interrupted him to say that he wasn’t interested in hearing about 2 of those 3 subjects. Mr Vickerman proceeded after objections from David Scott that he has a right to speak on any subject at that time.
5. Michael Scott was one of a gaggle of the majority of councillors who claimed he witnessed me chase after Janet Holborow with a walking stick, and hence he was one of those who was subject to a Code of Conduct complaint for lying, filed by me. It was this matter to a significant extent that has recently resulted in the touted white ribbon status of the KCDC being revoked, although council is in some type of psychotic collective denial.
– While Michael Scott claims to have been a witness, to jump aboard a corrupt bandwagon with most of the others, he was in fact chatting at the time of the non-event with David Scott in the councillors’ lounge and could not have seen anything, even had it taken place. Others also saw him as the first to leave chambers, because it was his inaugural luncheon he was attending to.
– Despite what you might have been told or read, my code complaints were not heard on the evidence and overturned on that basis. Michael Scott presented a submission on the day that standing orders supersede the code at council meetings. Hence his colleagues jumped at the opportunity to simply nullify the code, and my complaints and those of Jackie Elliott, were voted out on that pretext. Minor problem: my complaints relate to alleged events that were supposed to have taken place during lunch recess. Because of Michael Scott’s ineptitude and /or dishonesty, this is one of the primary grounds for a complaint to the Ombudsman as a procedural matter.
6. My complaint to the Law Society on Michael Scott’s dishonesty is to be heard on 23 November. In his submission to the LS, Michael Scott contended not that he had been truthful, but that the complaint did not come within the LS jurisdiction. My complaint has already been accepted as within the jurisdiction. Pure hubris.
Mr Gregory, several months after the non-event with Holborow, like others, jumped on the bandwagon and stated he too witnessed something. I am not too sure what, as he did not reply to my request to be specific. He stated he saw me swinging my walking stick within chamber while I was walking, presumably as distinct from, say, dragging it limply along the floor, or trying to shove it into my trouser pocket(?). What does he think walking sticks are used for?
After the bogus code of conduct hearing, from which Crs David Scott and
Gurunathan withdrew on the basis that, as I contended also, it was a breach of common law on multiple levels, outside KCDC premises Eric Gregory quipped to me: ‘At least I have not been in jail for lying’. He was heard to say this by several people. What this means I cannot guess, and he would not explain despite my repeated requests. It brings into question whether one is dealing with someone possessed of the ‘full quid’?
This is not private, not confidential and I don’t give a God-damn who sees it. I am completely truthful, have no partisan political motives, and am open in what I state. You are free to discuss any of these matters with my wife and I, and (I think) indeed others, including Waikanae ratepayers who have witnessed these events.
I am merely writing to you in the hope that , having myself been confronted by the ineptitude, lack of civility, cowardice, lies and narcissism, to say the least (as have other ratepayers, such as the Standens, Salima Padamsey, Julie Snodgrass, John Vickerman, my wife Kathy, Dale Evans, Jenny Cronin, Max Task, and God knows who else) you will be cognisant of the type of people who now control council, and that those such as yourself will take a lead in opposing what amounts to, I suggest, from my knowledge of psychology, collective sociopathy.
K R Bolton