All correspondence related to the change of use of the toilet block at Beldon Park Gradient Way 2014
Dear City of Joondalup,
I respectfully request that access to all the documents pertaining to the change of use of the toilet block at Beldon Park Gradient Way during 2012 -2015 be provided in a timely manner.
This specific request is for copy of the ground/floor plans of the toilet block to include any pre and post structural changes to the toilet block which is located on the local park. The COJ document stamp dated 2014 by the City of Joondalup has been already been seen in another government department and am advised to seek access from you under the Freedom of Information legislation.
Inclusion of all correspondence between the Mayor, the City of Joondalup and any other government departments, (in support or otherwise) but in particular the Department of Racing Gaming and Licensing regarding all applications by this club for a restricted license, enabling the sale of alcohol from within a local park by Joondalup United Football Club, is also requested.
By submitting a request for information it should in now way be perceived by anyone that this request is anything other than a request exercising my right to know and this is why I write the request.
Yours faithfully,
Nick
Thank you for your e-mail to the City of Joondalup. Your e-mail will be
forwarded directly to the relevant officer who will deal with the matter.
If your e-mail indicates that it requires a response, you will receive a
reply within 7 working days of receipt.
Should you have any queries, please do not hesitate to contact the City on
9400 4000.
Dear Nick
Thank you for your Freedom of Information request received via email on 11
October 2017 seeking access to:
o All documents pertaining to the change of use of the toilet block at
Beldon Park Gradient Way Beldon during 2012-2015. This specific
request is for copy of the ground/floor plans of the toilet block to
include any pre and post structural changes to the toilet block which
is located on the local park.
o All correspondence between the Mayor, the City of Joondalup and any
other government departments, (in support or otherwise) but in
particular the Department of Racing Gaming and Licensing regarding all
applications by this club for a restricted license, enabling the sale
of alcohol from within a local park by Joondalup United Football Club
This type of request is for non-personal information, as it relates to a
property not personal details as such.
Seeking access to non-personal information under the Freedom of
Information Act 1992 requires a $30.00 application fee to be paid when the
application is lodged. Once the City has received such a fee, processing
of your application will commence. If you wish, you are able to contact me
to pay the required fee by credit card.
If you have any concerns regarding my request, or decide not to proceed
with your application please do not hesitate to contact me on 9400 4586 or
email [1][City of Joondalup request email]. See enclosed a brochure on guidelines
for using Freedom of Information in Western Australia.
Kind Regards,
Jenita Perera
FOI Coordinator
City of Joondalup
Tel: +61 08 9400 4586
Fax: +61 8 9300 1383
Email: [City of Joondalup request email]
Follow:
[2]Facebook [3]Twitter Bird Logo [4]You Tube [5]LinkedIn
[6]kscope17_email-sig
The information contained in this communication may be confidential or
commercially sensitive. If you are not the intended recipient you must
not copy this communication, disclose its contents to any other party, or
take any action in reliance on it. Please delete and destroy all copies
and immediately notify the sender on 9400 4586 , or by reply message.
References
Visible links
1. mailto:[City of Joondalup request email]
2. https://www.facebook.com/cityofjoondalup
3. https://twitter.com/city_joondalup
4. http://www.youtube.com/cityofjoondalup
5. https://www.linkedin.com/company/city-of...
Locutus Sum left an annotation ()
First, I would like to agree with Nick that it is best when the information recorded on Right to Know is accurate. Second let me say that it was most likely I who is responsible for saying that the request was refused. How can these things be compatible?
For almost 64 weeks, the status of this request was recorded as "Long overdue". Apparently this was incorrect because in truth the fee was paid, and the request was answered, but Right to Know did not know this. Sometime recently, I was playing the request categorisation game (see, "Can I help out ..." https://www.righttoknow.org.au/help/cred... ). I was given this request to classify. As I have said in many other places, 'Mostly I classify a response like this one to say "clarification requested" because the agency has told the applicant that some more information (or money!) is needed before the request will be processed. This time, I have put the response in the category of "refused" because it is more than 1 year since the agency responded and the applicant has apparently not made a follow-up.' I now know, from the comments by Nick, that the request was not refused, that the fee was paid, and that the request was answered but of course, I could not know this. The choices were to leave the request status to say, "Long overdue", or to change it.
The history shows that it is always best when the applicant herself, or himself, updates the status of the request. When an applicant has not done this, Right to Know always sends a reminder to the applicant, but eventually the reminders stop and a volunteer makes a guess about the true status of the request.
Because I now know that the request was actually answered, I have asked an administrator to update the status to "All the information was sent". The very unfortunate view to this classification is that only the applicant has the information; normally when a request is marked to say "All the information was sent", then everyone in the world can see that this is true and also read the documents that were provided by the agency.
Ben Fairless left an annotation ()
Hi Nick,
If you have any issues with a request, there is a "Report this request" link on the right hand side of the request.
I've updated the status of this one to "Gone Postal" as we don't have the information on Right to Know.
If you see anything that doesn't look right or if you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact us.
Kind Regards,
Ben
Nick left an annotation ()
I do not know what the meaning is of the entry "refused" submitted by an unknown person not connected with the issue as far as i am aware.
The City of Joondalup was particularly helpful and the fee was paid.
It is important that only factual information is published here because it is an important resource for the community.
If there is a moderator perhaps information should be checked before publishing it.