[image supplied]

Corner Stuart and Smith Streets, 6 September 2011

—

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

Wellington Towards 2040

Forming the “digital powerhouse”…

Wellington’s biggest assets are its compact form, its harbour setting and the quality of life. It also boasts a highly skilled population with the highest incomes in the country.

### idealog.co.nz 29 Sept 2011 @ 11:13 am
Wellington’s new 30-year vision
By Design Daily Team
Last night Wellington City Council unanimously agreed on a long term vision for the city, one that will have sustainability, digital saviness and innovation at its core. Wellington Mayor Celia Wade-Brown said the strategy, called Wellington Towards 2040: Smart Capital, would underpin and guide all Council strategies across economic, environmental, social, technology, transport and other key issues.

The four goals identified by the council are:

• People-centred city – the aim is to be healthy, vibrant, affordable, resilient, have a strong sense of identity, and strong and healthy communities.

• Connected city – this is connectedness in every sense: physical, virtual or social. Strategies like the Digital Strategy fall under this.

• Eco-city – this is a response to all the environmental challenges the city faces over the coming decades, and the Council is confident [it] can lead the country by example.

• Dynamic central city – this section largely deals with urban design aspects of the central city – making sure it’s still a great place to be where new ideas happen – and maintaining its role as the creative and innovative force to drive the regional economy.

Read more

WCC Report (15 September 2011)

—

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

Russell Garbutt met with Cr Bill Acklin

The following was received from Russell Garbutt this evening, he says:

—

Bloggers have been asking how the meeting went with Cr Bill Acklin and it is more than time that I responded.

The meeting was non-confrontational in my view and went over a number of issues. Cr Acklin was anxious to set out the process that was followed in relation to the black penis edifice in the Octagon and essentially outlined the process that was revealed a day later in the ODT. Why a committee has been set up that can outvote elected representatives is an unanswered question. I think it fair to say that the impression I have gained outside this meeting is that it’s clear that Ngai Tahu have had more than a significant amount of say into what the DCC contribution [might be] for what they see is a Ngai Tahu presence at the RWC. Ngai Tahu seems to have made it clear that there would be a downside if the DCC didn’t decide to contribute. None of this came from Cr Acklin, but then again this feeling was not able to be refuted. I sense that this is what the ODT were also saying in their piece. Something just doesn’t smell right with this deal.

The main issue I felt was that Cr Acklin believes that the “private funding” for the stadium has all gone to construction. He has said to me that he will check on my position that the money raised by the sale of product etc will be put into revenue and only after a real profit has been met will anything go into construction. Needless to say, I think it extraordinary that anyone involved in this process has not ensured that what has been presented by staff and the CST was not independently checked out. Cr Acklin’s position was in essence, that the DCC in total was in hock to about $700 million but only about $100 million was due to the stadium. Fair to say that there is a wide gap between what I think is the total stadium debt and what Cr Acklin believes it to be.

I think it fair to say that while I saw that there was huge financial risk if the Highlanders franchise was altered then the City would suffer because purchasers of product at the stadium would not choose to pick up instalments in arrears and hence revenue would be affected in a major way, that Cr Acklin didn’t see this as particularly worrying.

I asked if Cr Acklin would support an independent financial enquiry into the DCC along the lines of the Larsen report. I thought it intriguing that Cr Acklin believed that Larsen was working to a brief and that he was opposed to that. I’m not sure from our conversation whether Cr Acklin didn’t believe that the Board of DCHL had been compromised by conflicts or not, or whether he accepted the main findings of the Larsen report. I still don’t know if Cr Acklin would support an independent enquiry into the DCC finances and what is more concerning is why anyone wouldn’t support that initiative.

I think it also fair to say that some of the comments made on blogs were not surprising to either of us. It is accepted that a person that puts their name up for election does not have to meet any requirements of competence in governance and some that are elected are not qualified to meet the requirements of the job. It is also accepted that some Councillors have personal failings.

Overall, I was impressed that Cr Acklin offered to meet and spent 90 minutes in talking over a range of issues. However, I was not convinced at the end of the meeting that the processes followed and the reasoning followed by Cr Acklin in relation to the stadium could bear any stringent examination. It may be that Cr Acklin would have supported the stadium project no matter what the cost would be, and certainly I never gained the impression at any stage that he would have voted against the proposal.

Quite happy to hear from Cr Acklin of any corrections or other impressions from our meeting which I emphasise again was cordial, constructive and non-confrontational.

—

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

“Snippets” for blogs…

The information network is more subtle and more blatant than cafe eavesdropping, sorry.

### ODT Online Tue, 27 Sep 2011
Council staff warned: beware of cafe eavesdroppers
By Chris Morris
Dunedin City Council staff have been warned against spilling the beans while slurping their morning coffees. The latest edition of the council’s Staffzone internal newsletter included a short piece warning staff to be wary of who might be listening to their conversations in central-city cafes. A copy was sent anonymously to the Otago Daily Times.
Read more

Donations – the quest for clarification

The following correspondence was received from Bev Butler today.

ODT 28/2/07 front page as follows:

Man offers $1 million donation
By Allison Rudd
One person has offered a $1 million donation towards a multipurpose stadium to replace Carisbrook, the chairman of Carisbrook Stadium Trust, Malcolm Farry, says.
He told a public meeting, attended by about 120 people last night, he had received “very significant news today about one huge donation and two others in the wings” which could help meet the $188 million cost.
After the meeting, he said the $1 million donation was from a man whom he could not yet name.
The man had indicated he had associates who were also prepared to talk to the trust about making similar sized donation.
Mr Farry said he was “very excited” about the level of support being offered for the proposal, particularly yesterday’s development.
“Let’s say it made my day.”

—

Letter to editor (published 22/02/10 Otago Daily Times). The italicised parts were abridged.

Friday 29th January 2010

Dear Editor

It is now nearly three years since it was reported in the ODT (28/2/07) that Malcolm Farry, Chair of Carisbrook Stadium Trust, told a public meeting he had received “very significant news about one huge donation ($1 million) and two others (similar size) in the wings”. Mr Farry said the $1 million donation was from a man whom he could not name yet. Mr Farry said he was “very excited” and it had “made my day”.
Maybe it is now time for Mr Farry to reveal the identities of these alleged donors and let us know if the money has been banked.
Maybe Mr Farry could also give us an update on all donations received for the stadium.

Yours sincerely
Bev Butler

Macolm Farry’s response in today’s ODT:
“As at February 2010, Carisbrook Stadium Trust has secured private-sector funding in excess of $30 million in memberships and sponsorship. The trust does not publish the names of its members, sponors [sic] or donors without their agreement. Last year, we announced the head naming rights sponsor, Forsyth Barr, and we will announce further sponsors in future when they elect to do so.”

National Business Review (3/03/07) by Mark Peart
“Two individuals had pledged about $1 million each to the project since learning of the release of the trust’s feasibility report and “master plan” on February 19.
Several other potential donors had also expressed interest in making major, but unspecified, contributions to the project, should the trust’s preferred option be accepted, Mr Farry said.”

—

From: bev butler [mailto:bevkiwi@hotmail.com]
Sent: Monday, 22 February 2010 11:19 a.m.
To: mfarry@farrygroup.co.nz
Cc: murray kirkness; david loughrey; chris morris; craig page; michelle sutton; Mike Houlahan (DSC); david williams; robert smith; nbreditor; nbrnewseditor; emma lancaster; katrina bennett; pete hodgson; clare curran; john key; rodney hide; bill english; metiria turei; michael woodhouse; mark hotton; darren burden
Subject: Dunedin Stadium alleged donors: Serious Questions left unanswered (Note change in Mr Farry’s email address)
Importance: High

{private address and phone number deleted -Eds}

Monday 22nd February 2010

Dear Mr Farry

Your response, after three weeks, to my ‘letter to the editor’ (copied below) is completely inadequate.
Firstly, you have avoided responding to the reasonable request for an update of donations. It was revealed in October 2008 (Sunday Star Times) that the donations total was $30. That was the last update we received – upon inquiry.

You have also avoided responding to my query as to whether the several $1 million alleged donations have been banked.
Remember we are not talking about ‘products or sponsors’, but ‘donors’. That is what my query was about and that is what you avoided responding to.

I believe the public have a right to know if the donors actually existed to begin with and if so, do their promised donations, which you so excitedly announced in March 2007 (ODT and NBR), still stand? And if so, why haven’t the donors been happy for their names to be made public now that the stadium is being built? Surely their excitement would be as great as yours and they would proudly want their names out there supporting the project and thereby assist the marketing programme for the stadium.

If these alleged donors have withdrawn their promised donations, why have the public not been informed?

I note in the DCC’s recent media release (19/02/10) the Carisbrook Stadium Charitable Trust’s (CSCT) responsibility is quite clear, namely:
“CSCT will continue to operate as a charitable trust to solicit and receive donations and distribute them in accordance with the purposes of its trust deed.”

Also would you please confirm or deny that these alleged donations were used to help secure the $15 million ‘gift’ from Central Government for the shortfall in private funding?

Yours sincerely
Bev Butler
Former President
Stop The Stadium Inc

—

From: mfarry@farrygroup.co.nz
To: bevkiwi@hotmail.com
Subject: RE: Dunedin Stadium alleged donors: Serious Questions left unanswered [Note change in Mr Farry’s email address]
Date: Mon, 1 Mar 2010 16:33:44 +1300

Good Afternoon Ms. Butler,

While you have a series of questions we have not, however, conducted the fundraising in the manner that your enquiries would suggest.

There is no difference between donations, sponsorships, sale of product and funds raised. All have a donations component included. Your wish to distinguish between donors, sponsors and purchasers of product indicates a misunderstanding on your part as to the manner of our fundraising

There are several amounts in excess of $1M. As stated in earlier communications, acknowledgements of the individuals and organisations will be made public on the agreement of the parties to so do.

Parties involved have been very supportive of and excited about the project and to have gathered in excess of $30M under the circumstances and in the time involved is quite remarkable. I am sure this has never been equalled in our region and perhaps not even in New Zealand.

It seems unfortunate that you consider it necessary to continue your onslaught against the project when, surely, it would be in the interests of Dunedin and Otago if you put your energies into ensuring the project is a success.

Yours sincerely,

Malcolm Farry
Chair,
CST.

NB The report of $30 being received was in error.
The claims that the Stadium would be paid for from private funds is incorrect and mischievous.

—

From: bev butler [mailto:bevkiwi@hotmail.com]
Sent: Friday, 5 March 2010 9:56 a.m.
To: malcolm farry
Subject: RE: Dunedin Stadium alleged donors: Serious Questions left unanswered

Friday 5th March 2010

Dear Mr Farry

You have stated in your reply the following:

“There is no difference between donations, sponsorships, sale of product and funds raised. All have a donations component included. Your wish to distinguish between donors, sponsors and purchasers of product indicates a misunderstanding on your part as to the manner of our fundraising.
There are several amounts in excess of $1M.”

I agree with you, Mr Farry, I do not understand the manner of your fundraising as outlined above. Would you please be so kind as to clarify what is the percentage of the donation component which you claim your products and sponsorships contain? A good definition of donation is as follows: A payment is a “donation” if the payer receives no direct benefit in return.

I would also appreciate a direct answer to my original questions as to whether the several amounts of $1m are in fact ‘donations’ and have these ‘donations’ been banked? This shouldn’t be difficult to answer directly. Quite simply: Are the several amounts of $1m actual ‘donations’? Yes or No. Have these donations been banked? Yes or No.

I also note that you have not responded to this question either: “Also would you please confirm or deny that these alleged (ie $1m) donations were used to help secure the $15 million ‘gift’ from Central Government for the shortfall in private funding?”

My continuing interest in the project is purely to keep everything as transparent as possible. Surely you have no objection to this? Surely this could not be perceived as ‘mischievous’ – a word you have used more than once when faced by close questioning by people of the CST/DCC’s affairs.

As for the $30 donation you now say is in error, Mr Hedderwick did confirm to me back in 2008 in an email that the $30 was not a mistake. Mr Hedderwick, Commercial Manager of CST, and Mr Ewan Soper, former CEO of CST, both acknowledged the $30 donation and it was reported in both the Sunday Star Times and then the ODT. The CST have also reported it to the Charities Commission in their Financial Statements.

Yours sincerely
Bev Butler

—

From: mfarry@farrygroup.co.nz
To: bevkiwi@hotmail.com
Subject: RE: Dunedin Stadium alleged donors: Serious Questions left unanswered
Date: Tue, 16 Mar 2010 18:04:28 +1300

Good Afternoon Ms Butler,

I have provided you with the answers to your questions Any further elaboration would be unproductive.

Monies announced publicly are secured by legal contracts and payment protocols are a part of those agreements.

We have publicly documented the quantum of funds. They are in excess of $30 million at this stage These amounts have been verified. I fail to understand how we can be more transparent than that. Attempts to do that in the past have resulted in misunderstandings such as the thirty dollars you mention. I am sure that nobody could possibly believe that we have only raised this amount

For the record and as I have stated previously there are amounts contracted where the quantum is for $1M and greater

Yours sincerely,

Malcolm Farry

—

From: bevkiwi@hotmail.com
To: mfarry@farrygroup.co.nz
Subject: RE: Dunedin Stadium alleged donors: Serious Questions left unanswered
Date: Sat, 20 Mar 2010 20:19:54 +1300

Dear Mr Farry

You have not answered my questions about the $1m donations you personally announced, very excitedly, through the media three years ago.
Your persistent avoidance in confirming whether the $1m donations exist is unproductive and can only lead me to one obvious conclusion that the donations do not exist and they probably never did.

Your description of the original $1m ‘donations’ has transformed to ‘amounts’ then to ‘quantums’.
I find this latest description quite apt considering that in Quantum Physics a “quantum is the minimum unit of any physical entity involved in an interaction” (Wikipedia) ie virtually non-existent in the physical world. Note that donations are physical gifts involving the transfer of actual money from one or several sources to another.

Now that you have confirmed that the several $1m donations are not donations, you must realise you are now in a moral quandary.

Your plea below for me to put my “energies into ensuring the project is a success” is curious. You have always asserted that the stadium will be an unqualified success.
I take it that even you now have doubts.

Yours sincerely
Bev Butler

—

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

Private sector funding (donations) to stadium construction

One thing is certain, Malcolm Farry is confused.

### ODT Online Mon, 26 Sep 2011
$2.75 million donated to stadium: manager
By David Loughrey
The vexed issue of the level of donations the Forsyth Barr Stadium has attracted may have to stay vexed, the matter complicated by various interpretations of the definition of “donation”. The matter has been controversial since early on in the project, when, in 2008, Dunedin Venues Management Ltd commercial manager Guy Hedderwick suggested just $30 had been received. The matter was raised again at a recent Dunedin City Council finance, strategy and development meeting, and he then raised a figure of $330,000. Asked recently to clear up the issue, he said that related to just one donation. Instead, the total of donations stood at $2.75 million.

[Carisbrook Stadium Trust (CST) chairman Malcolm Farry] noted DVML has taken the total of private sector funding raised through the sale of seating packages and sponsorship towards $50 million.

Mr Hedderwick said donations had already been included in the private sector funding total for the stadium, which stood at $42.8 million in August.
Read more

—

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

U.S. Department of Energy Solar Decathlon 2011

### inhabitat.com 09/24/11
Team New Zealand’s Solar Decathlon House Puts an Innovative Twist on the Basics
By Amanda Coen
This year’s Solar Decathlon home design competition saw many fresh takes on the solar-powered prefab home, but Team New Zealand stood out from the pack with its elegant, light-filled, wood clad home. Built by students from the Victoria University of Wellington, the beach house inspired First Light home has a breezy, open feel with the invigorating smell of freshly cut cedar planks emanating throughout. This seemingly basic but surprisingly innovative house is currently on display at the 2011 Solar Decathlon competition on the National Mall in Washington DC.

Photograph © Jill Fehrenbacher for Inhabitat

Several unique features set the house apart from the rest. Inspired by the traditional New Zealand holiday home, the “Kiwi bach”, socialising and a relationship with nature were of prime importance in the design process. The front and back bi-folding doors allow for plenty of natural light to enter. An overhanging roof provides ample shade on hot days while also adding protection when the doors are open, creating a seamless unification of the interior and exterior environments.
Read more + Slideshow (27 images)

—

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

Idealog: Paul Callaghan’s business plan for New Zealand

### idealog.co.nz 22 Sept 2011 @ 4:13 pm
‘Never fear knowledge’ – Paul Callaghan talks sci-tech and entrepreneurial genius
By Esther Goh
Professor Sir Paul Callaghan has written a business plan for New Zealand – and it doesn’t include winning the World Cup.

“Never fear knowledge,” he told an audience of 1500 at the Wellington Town Hall last Wednesday. “If you have a business plan like the one I’m talking about you are not interested in digging up our national parks and resources at the expense of all we hold dear.”

The Victoria University Professor and New Zealander of the Year spoke at the Inaugural Chancellor’s Lecture about creating a more prosperous country through science and technology. Callaghan said New Zealand currently has one of the lowest rates of investment in research and development in the OECD, crippling our ability to achieve prosperity.
Read more + Video (1:15:19)

[related comment]

—

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

UIA2011 TOKYO: 24th World Congress of Architecture

25 September – 1 October 2011

The World Congress of Architecture, a triennial event hosted by the UIA, is taking place for the first time in Japan. The self-proclaimed ‘olympics of architecture’ will be focusing on ‘design 2050: beyond disasters, through solidarity, towards sustainability’.

Built from a mixed program of lectures, competitions, exhibitions and workshops, this year’s initiative seeks to create a vision for architecture and communities of the future. Questioning the role and responsibilities of architects, engineers, and designers, the poignant topic aims to investigate the creation of sustainable societies, attractive cities and the protection of human lifestyles.

10,000 international architects/engineers/designers are gathering for Design2050.

http://www.uia2011tokyo.com/en/

—

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

Kevin McCloud interview

Interesting comments on contextual housing, and more…

### radio.co.nzSat 24 Sep 2011 at 11:05
Saturday Morning with Kim Hill
Kevin McCloud: grand designs
Architectural historian and designer Kevin McCloud is best known for the television series Grand Designs, and has also made series about Europe, the slums of Mumbai, and urban blight and regeneration. He writes about architecture and people, most recently in the book Kevin McCloud’s 43 Principles of Home: Enjoying Life in the 21st Century (Collins, ISBN: 978-0-00-726548-0), and runs HAB (Happiness Architecture Beauty), building sustainable and contextual housing schemes. He is a Fellow of the Royal Society of Arts, an Honorary Fellow of the Royal Institute of British Architects, and a Fellow of the Institute of Chartered Foresters. Kevin McCloud visits New Zealand for the first time for One Night Only, an evening of design and anecdotes, on 26 October at Auckland’s Civic Theatre. (35′28″)
Download: Ogg Vorbis MP3 | Embed

—

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

John Montgomery: The Economy, Culture and Design of Cities

Dunedin City Council hosted a public lecture by Dr John Montgomery at the Dunedin Public Art Gallery last Friday (16 September).

Dr Montgomery provided a presentation [PDF, 5.94 MB] on the economy, culture and design of cities, building on his work in the UK and Australia. His views are particularly relevant for the development of Dunedin’s Central City Plan and Economic Development strategies.

John Montgomery is an urban planner, economist, author and managing director of Urban Cultures Ltd.

Urban Cultures consults in urban economics, city planning, urban design, arts-led urban revitalisation and managing the night-time city.

More on John Montgomery at Idealog.

—

Your City Our Future (YCOF) – Update

Dunedin City Council undertook a city-wide consultation in June 2011 to identify priorities for future expenditure. The results from the consultation survey are available here: YCOF survey report July 2011

The information and feedback received from the consultation, along with the feedback from the YCOF leadership teams has been used in the development of the Council’s draft spatial plan, “Dunedin Towards 2050”, draft Central City Plan, and draft Economic Development Strategy.

Formal consultation on these documents is planned for October/November 2011.

Find additional information on the development of the Council’s Central City Plan here: www.dunedin.govt.nz/centralcityplan

—

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

Can it be true? Nahhh #peepshow

Initially, did Ngai Tahu (Kai Tahu) get turned down for Dunedin City Council project funding towards the Haka Peep Show (‘black penis’), now resplendent in the Octagon?

Did Ngai Tahu then come back to DCC saying, more or less, that if DCC didn’t front up with the $50,000 then Council wouldn’t get any co-operation from the tribe with resource consents, etc?

No! This didn’t happen. In any case, the minutes of the Art in Public Places subcommittee (if released), or those of the Community Development Committee (which turned down the APP’s $100,000 funding request) wouldn’t be so specific as to the politics, surely?

No. No. No. A vile rumour, completely fictitious.
Not the way we do things in Dunedin!

****

### ODT Online Tue, 20 Sep 2011
Councillors join Ngai Tahu working party
By David Loughrey
Dunedin city councillors Fliss Butcher and Jinty MacTavish have joined a working party that will find “opportunities and mechanisms” for Ngai Tahu to contribute to the city’s decision making.
Read more

—

ODT columnist Dave Cannan has been asking questions about the artwork. In today’s ‘The Wash’ (ODT, 21.9.11) he says, “The cost of Rachael Rakena’s much-discussed installation is “in the vicinity of $115,000″, although some accounts are still being finalised.”

—

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

Is there a conflict of interest?

### ODT Online Wed, 21 Sep 2011
Conflict of interest claim denied
By David Loughrey
Anti-stadium campaigner Bev Butler has again taken aim at the people who worked to build the Forsyth Barr Stadium, but this time she has got no backing from a former ally, now mayor, Dave Cull. Ms Butler’s latest target is Dunedin City Holdings Ltd (DCHL) director Mike Coburn, who has also worked on the project delivery team that made sure the stadium was built. She claimed there was a conflict of interest in the role, and that two invoices she unearthed to Mr Coburn’s company Ruboc Holdings for “casual corporate suite rental” last year for the All Blacks v Wales game, showed about $6000 that should not have been paid for by ratepayers.
Read more

****

This morning, Bev Butler emailed the following notes and information to What if? Dunedin…

She says:
• Attached are 23 Ruboc Holdings invoices.
• Below is the covering note with [Mike] Coburn’s explanation.
• My overall comment: “The public will be shocked at the pure unadulterated greed.”
• My comment on the covering note by Coburn is “Pathetic”.

Notes:
DCHL director Mike Coburn’s company, Ruboc Holdings Ltd, invoiced the Carisbrook Stadium Trust (CST), then paid for by DCC, for casual lease of a corporate box for the All Blacks vs Wales test game last year.

The invoice was for $4,429.69 (incl GST). This was approved by Malcolm Farry, CST chairman. Note also the invoice is dated 12 May 2010 and payment made a month in advance of the rugby All Blacks test.

Another invoice was for Additional Test tickets $2,409.69. From the invoices this was a day out for the Project Delivery Team and ……..

Total of all Ruboc invoices: $83,370.04 (incl GST)

Coburn started claiming fees from 9 March 2009. This is before the Hawkins contract was signed on 27 April 2009. He was right in there from the start.

Some invoices claim expenses for meals, taxis, phone, parking and accommodation. Not sure where the accommodation would fit in as Coburn lives in Dunedin and there are no claims for travel elsewhere.

Mike Coburn is the sole director and sole shareholder of Ruboc Holdings Ltd. He is the company.

Mike Coburn was being paid $1000 per day as Project Delivery Team member to push the stadium construction further while failing in his duty as a director of DCHL to inform DCC that DCHL was unable to supply dividends to pay off the stadium debt.

Mike Coburn invoiced the CST $4,429.69 for the one day casual hire of his corporate box so that the Project Delivery Team could watch the All Blacks vs Wales test match.

This invoice was approved by Malcolm Farry then sent to DCC for payment under the guise of construction cost.

Mike Coburn also invoiced CST $2,409.69 for extra Test tickets for the same All Blacks vs Wales game.

[Malcolm] Farry then claimed this as a construction cost of the stadium.

Did Coburn also claim $1000 payment for attending the test match day as well because he was ‘working’?

Who were the other tickets bought for?
Who are the members of the Project Delivery Team?
Are these members all being paid $1000 per day and did they all get paid $1000 to attend the rugby as well as their tickets paid for?
Do any of these other members also have conflicts of interest?

—

Covering note from DCC:
Dear Bev
As previously indicated, here is the covering note for the release of Ruboc invoice information.

“Please find attached the information requested regarding Ruboc Holdings Ltd invoices. All the invoices held by the Council have been released. The invoices, in the main, cover Ruboc Holding’s[sic] time in respect of the many meetings attended relevant to the delivery of the stadium project including those with the PDT, DCC committees, Council meetings, University, DVML and Hawkins.

“Two invoices relate to the rental of a suite at Carisbrook. The hosting of contractors at Carisbrook was an exercise by the PDT to strengthen the working relationship primarily between the main contractor Hawkins, subcontractors and Arrow International Ltd at a time when they were facing significant challenges to reduce costs to remain within budget. Initially there was only sufficient interest to fill part part the suite and Ruboc committed to the balance but as word got around, enthusiasm grew as did the numbers, and Ruboc had to forgo the balance, hence two invoices.

“I trust this answers your enquiry.”

Sandy [Graham]
[DCC governance manager]

—

The invoices:
Ruboc Holdings – 00000041 – $900
Ruboc Holdings – 00000047 – $2,025
Ruboc Holdings – 00000053 – $900
Ruboc Holdings – 00000065 – $1,800

Ruboc Holdings – 00000069 – $1,487.50
Ruboc Holdings – 00000075- $5,580
Ruboc Holdings – 00000112 – $2,180.50
Ruboc Holdings – 00000125 – $2,197.50

Ruboc Holdings – 00000130- $2,120
Ruboc Holdings – 00000133 – $3,937.50
Ruboc Holdings – 00000138 – $3,583.50
Ruboc Holdings – 00000148 – $2,141.95

Ruboc Holdings – 00000150 – $4,459.25
Ruboc Holdings – 00000167 – $3,240
Ruboc Holdings – 00000180 – $3,330
Ruboc Holdings – 00000190 – $4,680

Ruboc Holdings – 00000198 – $4,950
Ruboc Holdings – 00000213 – $4,275
Ruboc Holdings – 00000221 – $2,475
Ruboc Holdings – 00000234 – $4,725

Ruboc Holdings – 00000246 – $5,625
Ruboc Holdings – 00000253 – $2,700
Ruboc Holdings – 00000261 – $4,050

—

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

DScene: Cull & Co planning asset sales

We’ve heard or read comments about ‘considering’ the possibility of asset sales from Dave Cull, Kate Wilson, and Andrew Noone… anyone else?

Register to read D Scene online at
http://fairfaxmedia.newspaperdirect.com/

### D Scene 21-9-11 (page 3)
City Forests faces chop
By Wilma McCorkindale
City Forests may be the next ratepayer asset for the chop to pay for Dunedin City Council debt, sources say. A reliable informant said some councillors on the Dunedin City Council, including Mayor Dave Cull, had a secret agenda of asset sales. The source said the councillors were in favour of the sale of City Forests, a subsidiary of Dunedin City Holdings Ltd (DCHL).

City Forests chairman Ross Liddell said he did not want to see assets sold to pay for debt. “I would much prefer capital expenditure slow down within the council. You can sell assets once and you don’t get any income from them in the future . . . [Asset sales] That’s not something that’s coming to Dunedin City Holdings at the moment.”

{continues} #bookmark

—

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

The Auckland Plan

It’s the season for spatial plans!

### idealog.co.nz 20 Sep 2011 at 1:40pm
Auckland’s grand plan to build the ‘world’s most liveable city’
By Esther Goh
It’s a tall order, making Auckland’s the ‘world’s most liveable city’ by 2040, but we’ll never know if we don’t try. Mayor Len Brown today launched the draft Auckland Plan, accompanied by plans for the region’s economic development, the city centre and the waterfront, which outline initiatives for urban design and business growth to secure its future as a “globally competitive city”.

The proposals shape options for how JAFAs may live and work, and the transport services they will use. The report sets out five priorities:
• dramatically accelerating the prospects of children and young people
• committing to environmental action and green growth
• outstanding public transport within one network
• radically improving urban living and the built environment
• substantially lifting living standards for all Aucklanders

Click here to have your say on the plan.

Read more

****

ODT Online Tue, 20 Sep 2011
Grand vision for Auckland revealed
Auckland mayor Len Brown has today unveiled his vision to make it the world’s most liveable city by 2040. The 30-year plan looks to create a world-class city centre and waterfront with a city rail link, and to focus on improving education, health and housing. It also sets sets out how Auckland will absorb an additional one million people and build 400,000 houses to accommodate them in the next 30 years. APNZ
Read more

—

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

WE NOW HAVE A STADIUM DEBT PLAN ~ lovely! thanks DCC

See comment. See red. See riot.

—

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

NZIA members on Christchurch City Plan

Architects contribute ‘Early verdicts on the Christchurch draft Central City Plan’ in the latest issue of New Zealand Institute of Architects Cross Section magazine.

Christchurch’s draft Central City Plan, which the [Christchurch City] Council has been pressed to produce with some despatch, has met with a mixed response from local architects. Let’s start with the positive reactions. “The draft Central City Plan is a very good achievement in a short period of time and encapsulates a broad range of ideas and concepts that have been articulated to date,” says Warren and Mahoney’s Peter Marshall. “As a discussion document it will provide the necessary catalyst for a detailed evaluation needed in order to finalise the re-build framework for Christchurch.”

Various positives are expressed in reaction to Volume 1, followed by ‘criticalities’ and ‘explosions’ lobbed at the constraints of Volume 2.

A common critical theme is that the draft Plan is, in the words of Ian Athfield, “extremely prescriptive”, and that the regulatory regime revealed in Volume 2 would be inimical to the city’s recovery. “There are issues… that are going to need a more careful examination to ensure the urban design attributes do not compromise commercial realities,” says Peter Marshall. Peter’s remarks are a judicious expression of opinions that seem to be widely held by Christchurch architects.

“The more I look into Volume 2 the more concerned I get,” says Jasper van der Lingen (Sheppard & Rout Architects, and chair of the NZIA’s Canterbury branch). “Some examples: Volume 1 says you can get extra height for good urban design and a green building. Volume 2 translates this into mandating that a building owner must employ a green building council professional – bureaucracy and cost – and good urban design translates into a pitched roof between 30 and 60 degrees. Volume 1 talks about safety through passive surveillance. Volume 2 translates this into ridiculous rules about how much glazing you must have. Volume 1 talks about good scale of retail. Volume 2 translates this into a maximum size of retail of 250 square metres – no Ballantynes or Farmers. Volume 2 has some terrible stuff about blank façades that looks a lot worse than the old residential 20 metre rule, and it determines where neighbourhood centres should go without consultation with the local community – in dumb places, in my opinion.”

“There will be capital flight if this goes through unaltered,” Jasper says. “Volume 1 was a pass and appears to be written by designers. Volume 2 is a big fail and appears to be written by planners. It’s a huge worry for the future of Christchurch. The NZIA has a lot of work to do to fight this.”

It’s only a DRAFT. Read more

—

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

Architecture and Design: harnessing the collaborative energy

### places.designobserver.com Posted 16.09.11
The Art of Advocacy: The Museum as Design Laboratory
By Barry Bergdoll
Since 2007, when I ventured out of the academy to take the reins of the Department of Architecture and Design at the Museum of Modern Art, we have traversed an unexpected set of economic, social and environmental challenges in which the centrality of the design professions has become manifestly clear, even as larger forces — in which designers are too often complicit — act to marginalise the disciplines of architecture, landscape architecture, urban planning, design and the fine arts.

The neologism “starchitect” has lost much of its lustre…

Having worked side-by-side with diverse professionals, I am more than ever convinced that a cooperative, multidisciplinary approach is fundamental to the future vitality of the field — and essential if designers are to contribute to solving the enormous problems of our day. At MoMA we have been trying to discover meaningful positions and prospects even as practitioners have been jolted into discussion of just where the moral compass should be set.
Read more

—

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

Paul Orders starts Monday

### ODT Online Sat, 17 Sep 2011
New chief executive aims high
By Chris Morris
The Dunedin City Council’s new chief executive is yet to get his feet under the desk, but is already aiming high. Welshman Paul Orders and his family flew into Dunedin – via Auckland – last Saturday, and have spent the last week on a rapid-fire familiarisation tour of the city before his first day in the role on Monday. Speaking to the Otago Daily Times yesterday, he said there was a lot to be done over the next few weeks as he embarked on a “steep learning curve”.

“Dunedin has great potential. It could be one of the great small cities. What it also needs to have is a very high-performing city council.”

Read more

—

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

Larnach Tomb restoration

Updated post Sun, 8 Feb 2015 at 6:48 p.m.

The Northern Cemetery at Dunedin is registered by Heritage New Zealand as a Category I historic place.

### ODT Online Sat, 17 Sep 2011
An inspired restoration
By Charmian Smith
The most striking memorial in Dunedin’s Northern Cemetery once again soars proudly heavenwards after years of neglect, vandalism and desecration. After seven years in the planning and 18 months’ work, Larnach’s tomb in the Northern Cemetery is looking pristine with restored finials and crosses, new window tracery and stained glass, new doors and wooden floor – all replicas of the originals.

Stewart Harvey, chairman of the Historic Cemeteries Conservation Trust of New Zealand, instigated a conservation report in 2006. By early last year he had raised $345,000, initially with a grant from the Dunedin Heritage Fund. Other sources contributed: the Lottery Grants Board, Heritage and Community Trusts, Southern Trust and Macmillan Trust, and work was able to start.
Read more + Images

• (via ODT) William James Mudie Larnach, banker, businessman, politician, government minister, and builder of the grandiose house, The Camp, now known as Larnach Castle, on Otago Peninsula in the early 1870s, built the mausoleum in 1881 as a memorial to his first wife Eliza Jane Guise.

• Official opening
Dunedin Mayor Dave Cull will officially open the restored tomb today at 1pm.

—

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

DCHL and subsidiaries: shuffling, no real clean out?

Read: “Keeping Stuart”
Larsen recommended looking to the national pool of directors (steering away from the local boys) – the kind of writing on the wall we wanted. Alas, politics afoot in the run up to local body elections, huh Dave?

—

### ODT Online Fri, 16 Sep 2011
Cull hopes to effect directorship rule changes soon
By David Loughrey
Changes in the Dunedin City Council’s group of companies – expected to result in the end of the terms of at least some directors – should be imposed soon, despite the illness of a key figure causing a delay. The changes were expected at a Dunedin City Holdings Ltd (DCHL) annual meeting planned for October 31, following the release today of the companies’ annual reports.

The council appoints directors of DCHL, and is asked to approve DCHL’s recommendations for directors of the subsidiaries.

Read more

Related Posts:
13.8.11 Ridding DCHL of conflicts of interest . . . and other ghouls
9.8.11 CRITICAL Dunedin City Council meeting

—

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

DCC assistance possible for earthquake strengthening

### ODT Online Tue, 13 Sep 2011
Nod for funds to brace buildings
By David Loughrey
Dunedin heritage building owners may next year get financial help with earthquake strengthening, both through an increase in the [Dunedin Heritage Fund], and a targeted rate system. The decision followed sharp words among councillors at a recent meeting as they fought over funding for their areas of interest.

A report to the Finance, Strategy and Development Committee, from heritage policy planner Glen Hazelton, called for to provide information on a targeted rate to assist building owners to strengthen their buildings against earthquakes, suggested a variety of options.

Read more

Report – FSD – 05/09/2011 (PDF, 144.8 KB)
Targeted Rate for Earthquake Strengthening

—

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

Stadium: Private sector funding

UPDATED

The Carisbrook Stadium Charitable Trust (CST) states that sources of project funding for design and construction of Forsyth Barr Stadium include:

Private Sector Funding of $31 million (from a total of $45.5 million).

Last week, Guy Hedderwick, commercial manager at Dunedin Venues Management Ltd (DVML), in reply to a question from Cr Lee Vandervis confirmed that the donations total was still “around $330,000”.

Only $330,000 raised of the tens of millions required.

Meanwhile, Dunedin City Council has been forced to raise debt to meet the massive shortfall and is required to pay interest on this debt.

The Carisbrook Stadium Charitable Trust has serious work to do.

—

The Trust, at its Funders webpage, states the University of Otago will contribute $10.0 million of project funding for stadium design and construction.

Cr Lee Vandervis says “My clear understanding is that the University of Otago is not allowed to fund such things as the stadium, and that not one single dollar of university funding has built the stadium. They have merely built a university building on adjoining land next door.

“While I was on Council in 2007, Malcolm Farry, chairman of the Carisbrook Stadium Trust, said there would be $10m worth of ‘synergies’ between the University Plaza building and the stadium, but when I questioned harder these synergies turned out to be bull-dust.”

Cr Vandervis might care to check the construction and or architectural synergy between the stadium and the university building, and how the associated costs were met.

—

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

HELP, if the elected Council was bright

The Dunedin City Council faces a financial meltdown of unprecedented proportion; a squalid bankruptcy of governance the cause. No-one knows the true dollar scale of the problem and many of the accounts are closed to public scrutiny.

In the absence of a fully developed all-encompassing strategy to bring order to the books, the implication is the Council will leave it to generations of ratepayers to foot the bills. The cost will be to every citizen. In effect, that’s what the Forsyth Barr Stadium Debt Servicing Plan report to this week’s Finance Strategy and Development Committee says. The dangers of isolationist hands-off thinking.

—

Warren Larsen Report
Governance review of all companies in which Dunedin City Council and/or Dunedin City Holdings Limited has an equity interest of 50% or more.

From the time Larsen’s recommendations were adopted (Stuff 12.8.11), how long for the Council to ring changes? 6 months, a year? Longer, after the councillors are voted out or forcibly removed?

The lack of outward communication appears contrary to the imperative of Larsen’s report. By now, surely Council has an indicative critical path for release to the concerned public.

—

What are some ‘unearthing’ options for information?

Pin Mayor Dave Cull for the timeline to effect Larsen recommendations.
Forensic audit.
Statutory management.
Commissioner / Panel.
Legal action.
Independent senior business commentators to talk through details of logistical steps Council must take (in response to Larsen) to get its books in order – to avoid and retire cumulative debt, at the same time manage/streamline all Council business.

It’s all about a local authority corporate re-structure, involving large sums of borrowed money to clear. It includes identifying elements of usury, mis-spending, laundering, corporate fraud, deceit, ignorance, and incompetence; and, above all, hammering with all firepower what continues as Council’s unethical immoral avoidance of the fiduciary duty of care to Community.

A clear interpretation of what is now, what has been, and what lies ahead will be difficult if not impossible to achieve while obfuscation continues at DCC, DCHL, DVML, DVL, CST, and related entities.

It’s a chill air at Dunedin.

—

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

Statutory manager for DCC?

The Press 3-9-11 page A21 (PDF, 59KB)

—

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr