Received from Douglas Field
Fri, 2 Oct 2015 at 8:57 p.m.
![DCC appointees to district plan [Douglas Field]](https://dunedinstadium.files.wordpress.com/2015/10/dcc-appointees-to-district-plan-douglas-field.jpg)
Related Posts and Comments:
2.10.15 DCC Draft 2GP hearings panel lacks FULL INDEPENDENCE
1.10.15 Dunedin mayoralty —tiny debate, no quality prospects as yet
30.9.15 DCC liability? South Dunedin Flood (June 2015) #LGOIMA
30.9.15 DCC 2GP molasses and the dreadful shooflies (You)
28.9.15 Message to DCC: The People can’t deal with your 2GP documentation…
26.9.15 DCC: Proposed 2GP to line pockets of cowboy developers…
1.7.15 DCC: 2GP – Notification Pre-Approval #secondgenerationdistrictplan
█ Proposed Second Generation District Plan (2GP)
https://2gp.dunedin.govt.nz/2gp/index.html
—
Posted by Elizabeth Kerr
What if? Dunedin... 
Received from Lee Vandervis
Fri, 2 October 2015 at 7:09 a.m.
█ Message: For anyone interested in my full view of the 2GP panel selection, my email to Morris is as below.
Cheers, Lee
—
From: Lee Vandervis
Date: Thu, 01 Oct 2015 17:27:04 +1200
To: Chris Morris [ODT]
Conversation: 2GP
Subject: 2GP
Hi Chris
The Mayor has been quoted as saying that “The decisions on the 2GP will be made by the Hearings Panel that was established at the last Council meeting.“
‘Established’ might as well have read ‘ticked off’ or ‘preordained’.
2GP panel members have an enormous say on what makes it in to our legally binding city plan for the future, and unfortunately this panel selection seems to have happened behind closed doors without using long experienced Councillors such as myself. At least Mayor Cull has been consistent with his statement “I have given you nothing”. What a shame when I have so much to offer.
With so many compliant Councillors it was not worth trying to fight the inexperienced 2GP panel selection tick-off vote.
Mayor’s favourites have again been chosen ignoring business experience.
In addition to the reasons given for the 2GP panel membership ‘RMA hearing and RMA Chair experience’, which I have, I also have infrastructure and property development as well as heritage restoration experience. All this is important in the 2GP.
Choosing compliant Councillors over experience has again been a re-run of the important Audit and Risk subcommittee to which I was not just not invited, but was initially told incorrectly that I was not even allowed to attend as a non-voting Councillor. Audit and Risk have missed the vital experience of both myself and Cr Hall who have more DCC contracting experience between us than the rest of Council put together, but who were excluded at the pre-appointment stage.
It is a shame that our new 2GP plan will be decided by newish Councillors with good green credentials but little property, property development, infrastructure or business experience, which Councillors like Hall and myself would provide, given the opportunity.
Cheers, Lee
—
My stunned response.
From: Elizabeth Kerr
Sent: Friday, 2 October 2015 11:41 a.m.
To: Lee Vandervis
Cc: Elizabeth Kerr
Subject: Re: FW: 2GP
Thanks Lee. About to do a post on full lack of independence with 2GP hearings and decision making based on fact DCC has decided to use councillor commissioners !!! No Freaking Way !!!
This must be legally challenged, immediately.
What a naïve and bloody stupid Council.
Cheers, Elizabeth
Sent from my smartphone network
WAKE UP CALL
Councillors not serving your wider constituents at the pointy end of voting ~!!!
ALL on political spectrum at DCC caught by the short and curlies.
—
### ODT Online Sat, 3 Oct 2015
Cull denies bias in panel choices
By Chris Morris
Claims of undue influence over a panel to shape Dunedin’s future have been levelled against Dunedin Mayor Dave Cull. However, the allegations by Crs Hilary Calvert and Lee Vandervis have been denied by Mr Cull, who hit back by accusing them of a “lamentable lack of understanding” of council processes.
Read more
Hark.
ODT 3.10.15 (page 5)
█ 2GP Hearings Panel – Expressions of Interest Sought (03 Oct 2015)
The DCC has established the Proposed Dunedin City District Plan Hearings Panel to hear submissions on the proposed 2GP
Would the illustrious ‘two’ also try to stack the panel from public ranks. Why yes, but they already have the voting majority on panel. Either way they’re covered.
Such a nice green hue to the notice……..
Hark indeed! The 2GP Panel has been cut and dried by ‘he who has to be obeyed’ so this is just a token exercise to once again fool the populace into thinking they will have an input. Why would you bother, and why would you think anything good can possibly come out of it? The whole thing is a ‘meddle’ by the Planning dept. which will last just as long as all the previous ‘Choices’, ‘Towards Forever’, ‘The Spatial Plan’ (I’m sure I’ve forgotten some), now the ‘2GP’. This will last until City Planning have another ‘rush of blood to the head’ and come out with another wonder which will of course, supersede 2GP with the ink hardly dry. Meanwhile City Planning will have employed a few more town and city planning graduates.
Calvin
Quite frankly I wonder why we even bother to take much notice of them at all. You might remember Malcolm Lathan’s ‘Our Kind of City’ planning report in the early 1970s. What advances have been made in the thinking since then? I mean real advances. All these people are doing is producing gab fests which they themselves largely ignore. But what I do see is more and more interference in the day to day lives of the citizenry by people who believe that they know how other people should conduct their affairs. It seems to be a terminal affliction that these people have; more’s the pity because they inflict the effects of their malady upon the rest of us. God help us!
It’s all very well for whatiffers to waffle on about the high brow and apportion blame. All this tells me is most people are missing the point and completely failing to see the cumulative adverse effects of the proposed second generation district plan, which can not be mitigated.
Read the proposed plan and see the effects as the RMA would have it. Then look at what happens to the Dunedin you know as a large rural area with townships and a metropolitan area (the historic city if you will, with suburban centres), does it need to demolish? Do you want to lose the form and character of this unique and very attractive old city? Do you want builder special crap jammed up to your backdoor? Do you want the campus area firmly contained to reduce the amount of urban blight now being experienced in the City Rise? Do you want South Dunedin to prosper and remain, not be subject to climate change fanatics like MacTavish and the slavish Cull chasing her skirts who think this very old suburb can’t sustain (but really, the flood in June 2015 was because DCC failed to keep the screens of the stormwater pumping stations clear of debris; the sea wall which should easily have been fixed and mitigations to stem coastal erosion afforded). Et cetera.
People, you need to get a grip fast.
It must be a legal ‘protect what you own and what you value’ approach to citizenship and the 2GP – or frankly, you’re gone burger.
Yes, definitely worthwhile for a property owner to check what’s allowed and what’s not in the zone where their owner property is located. And then get one of the planners at the information centre to explain it to you to make sure you haven’t overlooked or misunderstood anything. And make a submission against anything you don’t like. This is an ‘everyone for himself and his own interests’ approach. Which I suspect is the actual rationale behind the plan, with the good old ‘stakeholders’, who got in first, looking after their own particular interests. Result? A kind of patchwork of rules benefiting most those with the most clout.
Plus the wind has just arrived.
One suggestion:
Councils should not be allowed to charge for permits and inspections UNLESS they stand by their Okaying.
The point of getting an independent authority – and it must be independent, no special rules for special mates – is that builders and property developers and architects and plumbers retire, migrate, “disappear” shonky companies only to reappear under a new name, and die.
The Consumer Guarantees Act is a good model.
We used to take our shoe, split after 2 wearings, back to the shop only to be told “you’ll have to send it to the manufacturer, there’s nothing we can do about it”. Now the shop has to sell merchantable quality goods and stand by them, then it’s up to them to take their grief to the manufacturer for recompense.
If the council cannot inspect so its OK is worth a damn it should eff off out, taking their delays and extra costs with them on the road to irrelevance.
Myself, I don’t want that to happen.
I don’t want to rely on builders etc whose “professional association” is meaningless, despite the advts saying don’t get just anyone with a tool belt and a hammer to do your building because he’s probably crap at it.
Friends of mine did all the right things, ended up with someone more expensive than any “just call me Bob” off a card in the dairy window, twice as incompetent, whose work failed every test including the “open eyes and look where ceiling doesn’t meet wall” check. Material payments had already used up their ready money, and with nothing but pulling down his work to show for it, the bank wasn’t lending now. Theirs was a small job, though in terms of their resources a huge loss.
Then it turned out that there is no fidelity fund (like lawyers have to pay into) to cover nogood builders. The clients are in an impossible position trying to extract recompense from their Real Professional Builder, last heard of having headed to the West Coast. I hope he’s possum trapping, or whitebaiting, or anything other than ripping Coasters off with his uselessness as a builder, mind you Coasters tend to deal with “issues” in traditional West Coast fashion so maybe he’d only make one more mistake…….
And the council (they said the council people were sympathetic and as helpful as they could be with advice) either didn’t inspect along the way (why not?) or took the builder’s word for what he had done and was doing… until it was too late. The thing is, councils have the power and the lawyers to chase up ratbag tradesmen and recover money. They can insure against their own failure of competence, which being spread over thousands of permits and inspections shouldn’t cost too much unless they are habitually incompetent, in which case the individuals who can’t do the job right should be replaced promptly. The guarantee being with a council rather than with an individual tradie or inspector will endure even if that individual dies, or goes off to retrain as a cow whisperer.