35 responses to “Old ‘n fruity, blow off some dust —noooo, really ??!!

  1. I don’t know, but improvements do not take up much of the paddock which could be used for stock and water must be supplied and power to the building (s)? Some recognition must be given to someone who used to or does work for the council? But does that include not paying any rates on this one property? Maybe the property owners have more than one property and are considered to be paying more than their share? Maybe the property is owned by the DCC or ORC? I don’t know an answer Elizabeth, but I will take my tongue out of my cheek now.

  2. Anonymous

    Easy. OIA question: How many properties in Dunedin City are zero-rated for 2016 rates?

  3. Tom

    isn’t this the lady that is the acting chair for the Mosgiel Pool Trust, that expects the ratepayers (those of us that actually pay rates) to front up with about $10 million.

  4. Elizabeth

    Hmm, yeah. Done.

  5. Elizabeth

    DCC has replied very quickly to my LGOIMA information request(s) above. Appreciated.

    From: Sandy Graham
    Sent: Thursday, 17 September 2015 4:48 p.m.
    To: Elizabeth Kerr
    Cc: Grace Ockwell; Sue Bidrose; Kristy Rusher
    Subject: RE: Official Information Request re Zero-rated properties – further information request

    Dear Elizabeth

    Please find attached a spreadsheet of the non-rateable properties as requested.

    You have asked specifically about non-rateable properties owned by DCC staff or former staff. We do not hold that information. I have attached however, information relating to a property at 295 Wairongoa Rd, Nth Taieri which I noted was of interest to you on Whatif.

    The property at 295 Wairongoa Road is subject to a QE11 Covenant. Properties subject to this covenant are non- rateable in accordance with the Local Government Rating Act 2002. While most covenants only cover a part of a property, in this case the covenant covers the entire property as shown in the attached document. As no services are available in the area (kerbside recycling, water, drainage etc) the property is fully non-rateable.

    I hope this provides the information you were seeking.


    NonRateable (Xlsx, 51.1 KB)
    Open space covenant (PDF, 470 KB)


    • Anonymous

      Oh and the covenant arrangement set up by outgoing id fashion chairperson. How convenient.

      Dunedin: minxerit in singulis aliis loculos

    • John P.Evans

      I’ve got two beefs with Sue Bidrose’s reply.

      1. Kerbside recycling is a charge? The council sells the recycled material, by all tenets of business the council should pay for the recycled items.

      I am happy for the council to pick up my rubbish and pay for that privilege, but not to provide an unpaid recycling service.

      2. The other supposedly rateable services, I and many others do not have is town water, I collect or buy that, drainage or sewage or stormwater pickup.

      Why do I therefore have to pay rates for these supposed services not provided?

      And on my way home today I see the council congratulating itself on the wider roads at Harington Point!

      All of the roads have been widened merely to accommodate cycle lanes. The roads are not any wider for those vehicle users from our end.

      All of the bike riders have come from the city end.

      Let them pay for the overhyped and underused cycle lanes.

      {Group Manager Corporate Services Sandy Graham replied to the official request, not Sue Bidrose. -Eds}

      • Cinimod

        Oh get your hand off it, If you don’t receive DCC reticulated sewerage or water, you are not charged for those services. Take a look at your rate bill and if (as you say) you do not receive reticulated water or sewerage services, you will find no ‘line item’ that represents either a water or sewerage charge. You do our argument no service with unsubstantiated claims.

        Your comments will be automatically sent to moderation. You have been warned.
        Site Admin.

  6. Tom

    Well done Elizabeth for obtaining the above information.
    Here is an example of a person who is prepared to go to great lengths to preserve her property as an open space, by putting a QE 11 Covenant on it, and of course get the perk of being non-rateable.
    Not satisfied with that she is now a member of the Mosgiel pool trust that wants to destroy the open space of the Mosgiel Memorial Gardens, as the pool trusts preferred site.
    A long established gardens. Built on public donations for the pleasure of present and future generations. Something that would be Ideal for a QE11 Covenant.
    To top all this off she pays no rates, and now expects the ratepayers to fund millions of dollars towards her pet project. The new Mosgiel Pool. It would also appear that she may become the next chairwoman of iD Dunedin Fashion Committee. Another drain on the ratepayers’ pocket. Unlike the rest of us, she pays nothing towards the great white elephant, the stadium, by having the privilege of her property being non-rateable.

    • Anonymous

      237 Wairongoa Road – non-rateable
      adjoining 285 Wairongoa Road (non-rateable)
      adjoining 287 Wairongoa Road (non-rateable)
      adjoining 265 Wairongoa Road (Total charge 3,019.94)

      Presumably, 265 Wairongoa Road has services (kerbside recycling, sewage, drainage), that the others do not. How unfortunate.

      Or is the rates relief not more likely provided under this policy: https://www.dunedin.govt.nz/services/rates-information/protected-land
      in place due to the nature of Wairongoa Springs?

      • Cinimod

        OMG – spare me such ignorance. 265 Waironga Road is miles away from any DCC reticulated services (drainage, water, kerbside recycling etc). How could anybody seriously believe that such services might be provided in remote Nth Taieri. Take a look and get yourself informed. The rating charge against 265 Waironga Road is purely the general rate alone. The argument about non-rateable ‘covenanted land’ is not assisted by the introduction of absurd suggestions of reticulated services on rural zoned land.

  7. Anonymous

    Part (b) under “First Schedule” gets it right: preserving a load of horseshit.

  8. Elizabeth

    Received today re our society woman and ex DCC staff member.

    █ Message: Cherry Lucas DOES NOT pay DCC Rates – please note that she wants a 4% rate increase for the unwashed, while she pays nothing.

    Links to submissions to the DCC Draft Long Term Plan 2015/16 – 2024/25:

    Cherry Lucas (aka Cherry Henderson)
    [As a non Dunedin ratepayer, she has certainly got a big list that she expects the common ratepayer to pay, for her pleasures.]

    (husband/partner) Roly Henderson
    [Someone else that expects a lot from rates and contributes nothing through rates.]

  9. Peter

    Given that ID Fashion is supposed to reflect grace and style, what does the rugby stadium offer in this regard compared to the railway station?
    lt would be as foreign as a church service in a brothel.

  10. Simon

    Peter. The stadium offers similar services to a brothel. The only difference is at a brothel the user pays, in the case of the stadium the ratepayer gets shafted, and still has to pay.

  11. Calvin Oaten

    Just cut to the chase. Have the fashion show in a brothel, that way Cr Benson-Pope would happily represent the DCC. Win win all the way.

  12. Elizabeth

    Brothels are legal. Wikipedia: Prostitution in New Zealand

    [phew] The station would continue to be used because the “world’s longest catwalk” gave the show a point of difference.

    ### ODT Online Sun, 20 Sep 2015
    ‘Very positive’ about iD role
    By Shawn McAvinue
    The new iD Dunedin Fashion Committee chairwoman […] Cherry Lucas [aka Henderson], of Mosgiel, said the 10 member committee […] would investigate adding new events to the fashion week and the feasibility of using Forsyth Barr Stadium. The stadium would not feature next year but could be used at the 20th birthday celebration in 2019, she said.
    Read more

    • Carol

      She pays no rates. Heads two groups that rely on ratepayers’ dollars to survive. One that requires about $8 million of ratepayers’ dollars, and submits to the long term plan supporting a 4% rate increase. No doubt to make up for those who are non-rateable. Dunedin: She’s is alright here.

  13. Rob Hamlin

    Wow, I’ve only just picked up on this. It’s enough to make you laugh like an unconnected DCC drain. Now if you look at the aerial photo, this block appears to be a relatively flat block of land that is pretty much 100% under grass.

    So what have Cherry and co given up to get this idefinite excusement from paying their rates? The answer may lie in these passages of the covenant:

    “The owner may continue to use, maintain and replace existing structures on the grassland area required to facilitate use of the grassland for pastoral farming AND FURTHER the Owner may erect and maintain such new structures as are necessary for that purpose after obtaining prior consent from the Trust with such consent not to be unreasonably withheld.

    The Owner may erect one dwelling on Lot 1, DP 11728 in the position agreed between the Covenantor and the Trust at the date on which Deed was executed with usual associated amenity facilities including a driveway to the dwelling site PROVIDE THAT the dwelling shall be:

    (i) of a single storey;

    (ii) finished in natural colours,and

    iii) sited so as not to be seen silhouetted against any ridge line.”

    The answer as to what Cherry & co have exchanged for this excusement for an unremarkable flat grassland block zoned as it is appears to be pretty much bugger all – Unless there’s more to this than meets the aerial eye. The requirement (iii) for a Taieri property is particularly droll.

    There is however, one fly in the ointment:

    “2. It is expressly recorded that there shall be no subdivision of the land the subject of this deed.”

    But I bet if the rezoner comes along and there’s a sniff of capital gain by subdivision that there’ll be a way out of that one if you’re well connected – Don’t you?

  14. Calvin Oaten

    I wonder does the covenant allow for ‘pig farming’? Seems appropriate as the troughs will be there already and the incumbents demonstrate an ability to ‘bring home the bacon’. Where the authority within the Town Hall lies to make that sort of concession would be interesting. CEO Bidrose needs to explain, if she thinks it is reasonable for ratepayers to subsidise this inglorious ‘rort’ on the public purse.

  15. Elizabeth

    Information to inform significance of the property at 295 Wairongoa Road, North Taieri.

    Received from Anonymous
    Mon, 21 Sep 2015 at 3:23 p.m.

    Wairongoa Springs is a property on the north-eastern margin of the Taieri Plain near Dunedin. It was owned in the late 19th and early 20th centuries by the Thomson family, proprietors of Thomson & Co. cordial manufacturers. The Wairongoa Springs site provided much of the naturally carbonated spring water for their beverages, from springs that still flow today. Indeed, many of the business’s original buildings still stand on the property, within 100 m of the kauri. Mr A.C.B. Thomson, son of the proprietor, Alexander Thomson, lived on the property upon his return from the First World War as a somewhat reclusive and eccentric local character. He was a botanist and horticulturalist who established an extensive arboretum on the property, including around 110 juvenile kauri trees planted between 1955 and 1957 (Unknown [1964]). It is possible that the kauri stock originated from New Plymouth as Mr Thomson Jr was in contact with Duncan and Davies Ltd, seed merchants there (letter from V.C. Davies to A.C.B. Thomson, 11th February 1957); flourishing kauri plantations had already been established in New Plymouth by another botanist, Fred Cowling. Cowling had established the Brooklands Park and Fred Cowling Reserve kauri plantations in New Plymouth (~1935) (Herbert et al. [1996]). It is highly likely that the New Plymouth stock, and therefore the Wairongoa Springs stock, originated from Waipoua Forest (Steward [2011], Barton personal communication). At the time, the Waipoua nursery was the only commercial source of kauri seed, originally collected from 17 trees between 1951–54 (Morrison [1955]) and then rapidly expanded until, in 1972, 94 trees were being harvested (Morrison and Lloyd [1972]). At the time of initial sampling in the current study, approximately 60–70 of Thompson’s trees still thrived, constituting probably the largest kauri stand in the South Island. However, a number of trees were severely damaged in a strong north-westerly wind event shortly before the second sampling trip.


  16. Rob Hamlin

    Anonymous’ point is? Kauri, as far as I know, is no more native to this area than Sycamore or Pinus Contorta – Its natural range lies north of 38 degrees (Auckland). Its presence in an isolated stand within an already highly modified landscape over 1,000 kilometers south its natural range, and as an outcome of a historical and eccentric act of importation and gardening means that it has absolutely no restorative or ecological value.

    In the absence of that we have to consider amenity value, which as they are presumably small, virtually unknown and located on private land in a rural area, cannot be great.

    However, working on the presumption that they can be classified as an amenity, we already have established and widely applied rules for the preservation and protection of individual and small groups of amenity trees. If one has a significant amenity tree (or more) on one’s property in this City – and certain people get to know about it, one gets a ‘significant tree’ protection order put on it/them without any say so from one. Which status means one gets to put up with providing the amenity to the neighbourhood, free of charge and regardless of personal inconvenience.

    If one doesn’t like that, then one gets to pay a hefty fine if one cuts it down. Or one can go through a resource consent process – which amounts to pretty much the same thing, bar the legality and the risk of failure – If one is not well connected, then one runs a real risk of paying all the fees, having one’s wrist slapped in public, and then still being stuck with the tree(s).

    The public spirit of the owner is taken for granted by these rules – One does not get let off one’s rates, or receive any other kind of consideration for not cutting it down.

    However, I can see the point in the latter ‘carrot’ course of action for significant amenity trees. It would certainly help me! But it should be all one thing, or all the other – like so many things round here.

  17. Hype O'Thermia

    The “natural range” of any species can be accidental. Depending on how seed is spread, the formation of an impassible corridor can occur by fire, cultivation and earth movement – different time scales. Some species exist in places that are now separated but in the past were joined by land or by islands close enough for the birds that ate seeds to fly between.
    I don’t think an historic scheme to increase kauri by “artificial” propagation is insignificant. Or if it is, then so are breeding programs for bringing endangered species of birds and animals up to self-sustaining numbers. Increasing the environments in which vulnerable species can live is not a bad idea because if a disease or predation attacks one population group there will be backups instead of catastrophic losses.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s