TITLE: First Local Housing Strategy REPORT
Dear City of Joondalup,
Please receive and accept, this request submitted under FOI Act - to include the criteria below which provides the scope of the enquiry :
To include ALL instructions that the consultant was given before and during the preparation of the report:-
- initial task definition or brief to consultant.
- clarifications or further instructions on the task definition or brief given to the consultant.
- changes made to the task definition or brief.
- non public briefings to Mayor and Councillors on the report before, during and after its submission to the Administration.
- changes to the report that were requested or ordered by the administration.
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.
Good Morning Nick
To enable us to process your Freedom of Information request could you please complete the attached application form and pay the application fee.
Thank you
Rosemary Welsh
Acting FOI Coordinator
Records Services
City of Joondalup
Tel: +61 08 9400 4586
Fax: +61 8 9300 1383
Email: [email address]
Follow:
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.
HOA Group left an annotation ()
Not sure why the person above is posting this incorrect information.
The fee was paid and the City of Joondalup did provide some FOI information.
Locutus Sum left an annotation ()
Why would I say that the application was refused?
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 ()
I've set the status of this request to "Gone Postal" as we don't have the information from the Authority.
Locutus Sum left an annotation ()
Refused. Applicant did not pay the required application fee.