For those who have been tracking the
Masterton District Council's antics, here's today's update:
So Gordon Crawley, Masterton District Council's 'Team Leader Animal and Bylaw Services' thought - probably on ratepayer-funded legal advice - that he'd take the smart-assery to a whole new level.
Here's how it went for him . . . and for the Council at large (email trail displayed, of course, in reverse chronological order, but I saved the best for last . . . so read right to the bottom):
From: Jordan Kelly
Sent: Friday, 15 May 2026 1:07 pm
To: 'Animal Services'
Subject: RE: Witness details
I will relay your position to my witnesses, who may or may not wish to be further involved.
I will have my cleaner sign her existing statement at her next attendance here.
I note the following:
- This is highly unusual – and I strongly suspect, unprecedented – treatment of an already well-documented, well-evidenced, multiple-format-evidence-provided complaint;
- You persist in your refusal to attend the primary place of effect, which speaks for itself;
- Your own staff, contractors, actions/inactions and statements, combined with the provided existing multiple recordings – as documented in this published account:
Nuisance Barking & This Council's Selective Hearing for Selected Complainants - provide further evidence of a degree, and in multiple formats, that I do not believe you would have encountered before in this context. I would suggest that, taken together, these and the many components of my to-date-published account, underscore my case as regards your extraordinary treatment of myself and of this matter.
- I note your intentionally insulting use of the term "alleged" barking, which should actually, of course, be the "recorded" barking.
I request your provision of a detailed Masterton District Council precedent with regard to your treatment, and extraordinary ongoing and increasing evidentiary requirements, of this ongoing, long-term, well-evidenced complaint.
This complaint will remain in the public domain until it is ethically and properly addressed. I reserve the right to publish any and all further correspondence and to distribute it as part of my ongoing coverage relating to this matter.
Jordan Kelly
From: Animal Services
Sent: Friday, 15 May 2026 11:58 am
To: Jordan Kelly
Subject: RE: Witness details
Until the Council has had the opportunity to interview the witnesses ourselves I will not commit to a course of action. Once we have statements from the witnesses we will assess the information and then make a decision on next steps.
The account provided by your cleaner was received by the Council in an email sent by you to Animal Services. The account is unsigned by the maker, so until Animal and Bylaw Services Officers have the opportunity to interview your cleaner that information will be noted and no further action will be taken.
The information contained in the statement of Mr
(editor has redacted name for privacy purposes)
is limited in detail in terms of the alleged barking, so we would like to interview him ourselves.
Until you provide the information requested so the Council can interview these witnesses there is no further action that can be taken.
I am happy to revisit the witness information if you provide full contact details to the Council so they can be interviewed by an Animal and Bylaw Services Officer.
Warm regards,
Gordon Crawley
Team Leader Animal and Bylaw Services
@MastertonDC
www.mstn.govt.nz
(Editor's Note: Sits back smirking after masterminding his first-time insertion of his "Warm regards" punchline in his final "take that" missive.)
From: Jordan Kelly
Sent: Friday, 15 May 2026 10:58 am
To: Animal Services
Subject: RE: Witness details
Thank you for your response.
I note you have not answered my question regarding what specific action the council intends to take and on what time frame.
I will await that confirmation before approaching my witnesses.
Jordan Kelly
From: Animal Services
Sent: Friday, 15 May 2026 10:45 am
To: Jordan Kelly
Subject: RE: Witness details
Your witnesses are already involved Jordan. They became involved when you sent the brief accounts of what they witnessed to us. Until we have had the opportunity to speak with them I am not in a position to say what action will be taken.
Gordon Crawley
Team Leader Animal and Bylaw Services
@MastertonDC
www.mstn.govt.nz
From: Jordan Kelly
Sent: Friday, 15 May 2026 10:34 am
To: Animal Services
Subject: RE: Witness details
Thank you for your email acknowledging the witness statements, including the one that had remained unacknowledged since it was first provided (May 4).
Before I approach either witness (who may or may not want to become involved given the very obvious nature of the council's long-term evasion of this matter, and given that one of them has been my cleaner for the past six months and has an understanding of the vast amount of information and evidence already in council’s possession, and given the public attention the issue is now attracting and is set to do so increasingly from this point), I would ask that you first confirm what specific action the council intends to take following any such interviews, and on what time frame.
Given the history of this matter, I want to ensure that any further inconvenience to my witnesses is with good and specific cause, and will result in concrete action, rather than the conduct of yet another administrative exercise with disingenuous intent.
Jordan Kelly
From: Animal Services
Sent: Friday, 15 May 2026 9:10 am
To: Jordan Kelly
Subject: Witness details
Thank you for providing the witness accounts. We would appreciate it if you would provide contact details for those people so we might interview them ourselves. We would be interested in obtaining some more detail about the barking.
Gordon Crawley
Team Leader Animal and Bylaw Services
@MastertonDC
www.mstn.govt.nz
From: Jordan Kelly
Sent: Friday, 15 May 2026 1:40 pm
To: 'Ruth McEwen'
cc: 'Animal Services'
Subject: Official Information Act Request - Barking Complaint Precedent
Dear Ms McEwen
Pursuant to the Official Information Act 1982, I request the following information:
- All previous complaints received by Masterton District Council relating to nuisance barking from dogs, from January 1, 2015 to the date of this request, in which the council required the complainant to provide witness contact details and submit to witness interviews conducted by Animal and Bylaw Services Officers or other council representatives before any action was taken or considered – notwithstanding the prior provision of multiple audio recordings of the barking, the likes of receipts for barking deterrent devices purchased in direct response to the barking in question, signed witness statements, and additional items and instances of evidence as, or similar to, those documented at
https://www.doggiemamma.com/nuisance-barking-mdc-selective-hearing
, and as in all correspondence and attachments submitted to the council to date in relation to this pre-existing matter.
- For each such complaint identified in item 1: the reason/s for the requirement of this extensive amount of evidence and supporting material in prior complaints;
- The outcome of the council's investigation and any action taken or not taken following those witness interviews additional to evidence already provided in similar volume across multiple months;
- The current written policy or standard operating procedure governing the evidentiary requirements for nuisance barking complaints – specifically, but not limited to, whether witness interviews are a standard requirement before any action is taken, and if so, under what circumstances this requirement applies.
I request a response within 20 working days as required by the Act.
Sincerely
Jordan Kelly
