Cats —or, Infrastructure spending, Council debt, and Disenfranchisement of Ratepayers

Council cat squad checking rego fees [supplied]

After the great floods, the common affliction amongst leaders, “water on the brain”.

█ The ‘thinking’ – DCC cat control remit for LGNZ AGM

****

At Twitter:

Warming: The "cat rangers" are coming – if Local Govt NZ President & Dunedin Mayor Dave Cull has his way (Video) https://t.co/VHyv1Ns2sy

— Dave Goosselink (@davedunedin) July 26, 2017

****

“There may be issues with cats but they also serve a useful purpose in controlling pests. The cat population doubled to two at my place last year, and we have more tui and bellbirds around than ever, as well as visits by kereru and eastern rosellas and fantails and waxeyes. The cats occasionally catch a bird but most often it is a sparrow or a thrush. But it looks like the Dunedin council and some others are keen on requiring the herding of cats. They kept as quiet as they could on cats during the local body elections, and now mid term they try to foist it on the public. Devious.” –Pete George at YourNZ

****

Councils will now lobby the government to finish its National Cat Management strategy.

### radionz.co.nz 6:05 pm on 25 July 2017
RNZ News
Councils seek greater powers to control cats
By Michael Cropp – Wellington Local Government Reporter
The country’s councils are calling on the government to give them extra powers to protect wildlife from cats including microchipping, de-sexing and registration. Local bodies have the power to control dogs and their behaviour, but they only have jurisdiction over cats when they become a health risk. While the remit presented by Dunedin City Council at the meeting acknowledged the companion role of animals, it noted cats are a danger to wildlife. […] The controversial remit scraped through with just 51 percent of the vote at the Local Government New Zealand annual general meeting.
….Auckland mayor Phil Goff said his council abstained from the vote because it was not sure what it would mean for the 500,000 cats in the country’s largest city. “We are in favour of practical measures to protect native birdlife …. We’re not in favour of bureaucratic measures that might involve millions of dollars of council time and energy but doesn’t achieve the objectives that we set out to achieve,” Mr Goff said.
Read more

****

More about ‘LGNZ The Blight’:

Local Government New Zealand – Media Release
Local government to debate four remits and elect new President at AGM
News type: National news | Published: 21 July 2017
The local government sector will voted on four issues when it gathers for its annual AGM in Auckland on Tuesday 25 July. There is a focus on litter legislation, local government funding, cat management and health in this year’s remits. The AGM follows this year’s LGNZ Conference, when over 600 delegates from local government and its stakeholders, industry and community will gather in Auckland for the two day event [23-25 July]. The theme of this year’s conference is Creating pathways to 2050: Liveable spaces and loveable places. Remits are voted on in a secret ballot and if passed will become official policy and be actioned by Local Government New Zealand. Local government will also be voting for a new LGNZ President to replace Lawrence Yule, who steps down after nine years in the role.
….National legislation to manage cats
The third remit was proposed by Dunedin City Council and asks that LGNZ lobby the Government to take legislative action as a matter of urgency to develop national legislation includes provision for cost recovery for cat management.
Throughout New Zealand councils are tasked with trying to promote responsible cat ownership and reduce their environmental impact on wildlife, including native birds and geckos.  Yet, territorial authority’s powers for cats are for minimising the impact on people’s health and wellbeing, and regional councils’ powers are restricted to destruction of feral cats as pests.  The remit seeks the protection of our wildlife and native species by seeking regulatory powers for cat control, including cat identification, cat de-sexing and responsible cat ownership.
….The LGNZ AGM is open to members only. Following the meeting, LGNZ will advise of the outcomes of all votes.
Read more

****

Cat rangers and collars with bells on are some of the ideas Dunedin City Council wants to lobby Government for.

### Stuff.co.nz Last updated at 14:28, July 10 2017
Cat control: many Kiwi councils ready to lobby for national rules
By Libby Wilson
Councils around the country are looking to band together to rein in roaming moggies. Dunedin City Council has suggested its colleagues help it push the Government for national rules that could include cat rangers and shutting cats in overnight. Seven other councils around the country have given the idea, and its environmental focus, their backing ahead of a July vote at the Local Government New Zealand annual meeting.
Read more

****

‘Vacuum of cat management policy and services in Dunedin’, local submission says.

### nzherald.co.nz 29 Jun, 2017 7:02am
Dunedin council proposes registration of cats in New Zealand
A Dunedin proposal that could result in the registration of cats in New Zealand will be discussed nationally. The proposal from the Dunedin City Council, in consultation with seven other councils, will next month go to a Local Government New Zealand (LGNZ) vote. If it is successful, LGNZ would make it a policy, and begin lobbying the Government to have it made law. The proposal could see the Government called upon to develop legislation for cats similar to the Dog Control Act. It already has the support of the Otago Regional Council, one of 78 councils which will vote on the idea.
Read more

****

### ODT Online Wed, 17 May 2017
DCC seeks support for cat control
The Dunedin City Council will seek support from other New Zealand councils to gain greater control of cat management. If additional support from councils was gained, a remit would ask Local Government New Zealand to call upon the Government to give councils statutory power to control cats. The DCC was researching a Wellington City Council bylaw on microchipping cats. However, the current bylaw could not be enforced by non-compliance fees. Cat management would focus on the control of wild cats.
Link

****

S T O P ● P R E S S

At Facebook:

—

Related Posts and Comments:
26.7.17 RNZ Morning Report : Guyon Espiner sticks claws in Cat Cull & Curfews
25.7.17 To borrow from Stevie Smith : ‘the truth is I think he was already stuck’
22.7.17 Regional state of emergency lifted in Otago (incl Dunedin & Waitaki)
21.7.17 Rainy Day reading —The Spinoff : Ministry of Transport fraud case
21.7.17 DCC ORC : Heavy rain warnings preparations #PublicNotice
1.7.17 LGNZ, don’t wish ‘his lordship’ on New Zealand #VoteRachelReese
3.6.17 ODT updates mayoral vehicle serious injury crash information
24.4.17 LGOIMA vehicle (DCC) : Hyundai Santa Fe (2016) written off Jan 2017
10.12.16 Oh christ ! [LGNZ bureaucratic dopefest]
21.7.15 Dunedin to host LGNZ 2016 conference —FFS TIME TO TAKE IT OUT
21.5.15 DCC and LGNZ, total losers
2.2.15 LGNZ run by Mad Rooster Yule, end of story
10.10.14 Cull consorts with losers at LGNZ
26.6.14 LGNZ #blaggardliars

—

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

This post is offered in the public interest.

Regional council builds Palace, refuses help to dredge Otago boat harbour

The ironies are Most Apparent.

The Otago Regional Council contributed $30m to the stadium roof (an activity beyond its local authority mandate), yet the council has no intention of helping the Otago Yacht Club to maintain the city’s marina, the Otago Boat Harbour.

[click to enlarge]
DCC Webmaps – Otago Boat Harbour at Mouth of Leith JanFeb 2013

Otago Yacht Club’s origin dates back to 1892, making it one of the oldest yacht clubs in Otago. The club caters for a range of sailing interests from keelboats to trailer yachts and centreboarders. The club also operates keeler haul-out facilities and welcomes visiting boats. The club manages a full events programme during summer, including harbour, coastal and ocean races. On Sunday mornings in the season the club runs ‘learn to sail’ and ‘learn to race’ programmes which cater for all ages. The clubhouse is a popular venue for private functions and for local organisations to hold meetings and events. Within walking distance of the city centre, the clubhouse offers showers, laundry facilities, email connections etc. The resident caretaker-manager will usually manage to accommodate requests for berthage for boats up to 50 feet. The alongside mooring facilities consist of several large punts inside a walled boat harbour. Due to silting, access to the boat harbour has only been tenable approximately two hours either side of high tide for boats with 2m draft. The Otago boat harbour was last dredged in 1995.
Source: otagoyachtclub.org.nz

****

### ODT Online Thu, 20 Apr 2017
Club gets go-ahead to dredge boat harbour
By David Loughrey
The Otago Boat Harbour is about to get its first dredging in more than 20 years, after the facility reached such a state rescue vessels could not leave the harbour at low tide. The work, expected to start soon, has been described as a major achievement by the Otago Yacht Club, which leases the boat harbour. Club vice-commodore Blair McNab said the cost of the project – more than $300,000 – was being paid for from grants and club membership fees. […] The club recently received resource consent from the Dunedin City Council for the work. The consent allowed the club to deposit dredged sediment and soil on land in Magnet St, behind the club, for drying. Mr McNab said once the dredged material had been dried, which took about two weeks, it would be taken to the nearby Logan Point quarry. The consent said once the work was completed, about 100cu m would remain on the grass area at Magnet St to form a barrier around its perimeter, and provide better drainage. The consent decision said the boat harbour was in such a state that at low tide, craft used for harbour rescues could not get out. […] The club had hoped the Otago Regional Council might help with the cost of the dredging, as alterations to the Water of Leith meant more spoil was coming from the nearby mouth of the stream. Mr McNab said it appeared the council was not going to help.
Read more

The Star April 2014 via Otago Yacht Club. Also at ODT Online 22.4.14

****

The Otago Regional Council’s “special consultation” over its Dunedin headquarters is flawed, writes former councillor Gerrard Eckhoff.

### ODT Online Tue, 18 Apr 2017
Review needed in lieu of proper consultation
By Gerrard Eckhoff
The Otago Regional Council’s annual plan is now open for public consultation. Implicit in the word consultation is the opening of a meaningful dialogue with the public. It would be entirely disingenuous for any local authority to enter into discussion on their annual plan by merely informing the public of council intent without showing a willingness to accept “the wisdom of crowds”.
….This year’s ORC annual plan contains four lines on “Dunedin building review” in its feedback document which could easily be missed at first reading. To its credit, the council has finally accepted its statutory obligation for “special consultation” on this $30million major project.
….The last time the council ventured forth on a new building project without any prior special consultation, it cost the ratepayers upwards of $3million for the concept design and drawings alone. The cost of that proposal was well over $30million and it was never built. It is, therefore, hard to reconcile how the new building/s is going to be around the projected $20million mark, unless building costs have halved in Dunedin from eight years or so ago. The potential cost of a new car park building must also be factored in, so the ratepayers could soon be the lucky owners of two new buildings, as well as a difficult-to-sell ORC headquarters building in Stafford St.
Read more

DCC Webmap – Dowling St carpark JanFeb 2013, ORC office site starred

Related Posts and Comments:
9.1.17 ORC $wimming in it —SHOULD afford more Otago environmental…
15.8.16 ORC : Official complaints show integrity
22.6.16 ORC New HQ : Reminder, fiduciary duty and core responsibilities
● 9.6.16 ORC empire building again : Consultants give questionable options…
11.8.12 ODT editorial (spot on!) — ORC temporary headquarters
26.6.09 ORC headquarters [incl news items to present day]

—

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

This post is offered in the public interest.

*Images: Otago Yacht Club except where stated otherwise.

Gerrard Eckhoff does us All a favour

Updated post
Wed, 27 Jul 2016 at 10:07 p.m.

The Dunedin City Council’s decision to develop a rates remission policy to take into account the special relationship Maori have with the land is interesting, writes Gerrard Eckhoff.

### ODT Online Wed, 27 Jul 2016
DCC rates policy may be unfair to Pakeha landowners
OPINION All Dunedin City Council ratepayers will, I’m sure, be sympathetic yet intrigued to understand the principle the council has employed that allows for rates remission for Maori freehold land and not producing revenue (ODT, 19.7.16). It is a policy that will be embraced by most, if not all, ratepayers, as it sets a wonderful precedent. Cr Hilary Calvert sensibly noted DCC staff should develop policy which included non-Maori land as well for consideration.
Read more

● Gerrard Eckhoff, of Central Otago, is an Otago regional councillor.

—

DCC Rates history
The table and graph [go to the webpage] show the comparison between inflation and Dunedin City Council rate increases over the past couple of decades. For the first two years, the changes which followed local body amalgamation in 1989 mean it has not been possible to accurately calculate the DCC rates increase figure. Major upgrades in the areas of water and wastewater, and significant building projects, have had a big effect on DCC rates rises over the period.
█ http://www.dunedin.govt.nz/services/rates-information/rates-history

—

Received from Mike

This graph is a cumulative graph of DCC rates rises after inflation has been removed, graphed over the same range that the DCC graph is, with this year’s data added (and a couple of mistakes in the DCC’s inflation rate touched up to.match the Reserve Bank’s, they are minor, and mostly cancel out).

—

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

Election Year. This post is offered in the public interest.

ORC New HQ : Reminder, fiduciary duty and core responsibilities

Land ● Water ● Air ● Coast ● Built Environment ● Biota ● Natural Hazards ● Energy ● Wastes and Hazardous Substances

The core business of the Otago Regional Council is environmental protection, not real estate investment. –Eckhoff

### ODT Online Tue, 21 Jun 2016
Environmental cost to building
By Gerrard Eckhoff
OPINION The decision the Otago Regional Council will have to make on a new administration block sometimes means deciding on the lesser evil. Whatever the decision, councils don’t get much thanks for avoiding one bad choice in favour of another. The option of leasing space in an existing building, thereby leaving a large amount of capital free for the ORC’s primary environmental functions, has been summarily dismissed by the chairman of the ORC. This is despite matters of “significant investment” (such as a new building) requiring special consultation with our ratepayers, who will in turn expect that their or any suggestion will not be so easily dismissed. […] The ORC’s failure to understand that environmental inaction simply transfers cost from this generation to the next and with a multiplier effect is inexcusable. What price must environmental imperatives pay for a new building? That is the real question the ORC must ask of itself.
Read more

● Gerrard Eckhoff, of Central Otago, is an Otago regional councillor.

—

Otago Regional Council meeting
█ [today] Wednesday, 22 June 2016 at 9:00 a.m.
Council Chamber, 70 Stafford Street, Dunedin
Members of the public are welcome to attend.

Download: Agenda includes minutes and reports (PDF, 2402 KB)

Go to Part C Item 7 (pages 68-70)
Report: ORC Head Office Accommodation Update. DCS, 16/6/16
The report provides an update on the Council and staff workshops held to help inform the next stage of the project.

[extract]

Related Posts and Comments:
● 9.6.16 ORC empire building again : Consultants give questionable options…
11.8.12 ODT editorial (spot on!) — ORC temporary headquarters
26.6.09 ORC headquarters [incl news items to present day]

—

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

Election year. This post is offered in the public interest.

ORC empire building again : Consultants give questionable options for new office solutions

█ Should ORC be made to stay at its current Stafford St site for greater efficiency and cost saving ?

whatifdunedin says:
● Is new officing needed for ORC ? —Not clear.
● Is officing for ORC a worthy use of the prime site to Queens Gardens ? —NO, definitely not.
● Has there been full diligence around the building and site options available at Dunedin ? —Instant laughter. Look at the options listed at ODT, really ? That list has been utterly contrived for ONE set outcome, no more and no less.
● This “ORC Quest” (paraded as diligence for All councillors’ consideration) is empire building by a small rough set bunch of local body bureaucrats and their nest-feathering consultant-buddies with construction industry connections to particular councillors who should know better than not to declare their strong conflicts of interest, right now.

—

In the Otago Daily Times, developer and heritage building owner Russell Lund writes: “Public scrutiny is required to ensure the most efficient solution is found for the ORC’s new Dunedin building”. He goes on to detail that the regional council “does not have a good track record of project control in relation to its previous attempt to build”.

Wed, 8 June 2016
ODT: Where to now for ORC and its desire for new headquarters?
By Russell Lund
OPINION The Otago Regional Council wants a new facility, in all likelihood a new building, that it owns. When the ORC last attempted to build a new headquarters in 2008, the cost was about $38million … the most expensive office buildings ever constructed in New Zealand to cater for 105 staff … The 2008 building had a floor area of 5600sq m. This equates to 53sq m a staff member, when the recently completed ECan HQ building in Christchurch has just 17sq m a staff member. Cr Kempton, who has been on the new building working party since 2011, will be aware of the cost and size of the ECan building as his company, Naylor Love, built it.
Read more

*whatifdunedin notes: Trevor Kempton is also a Director for Boards of the Dunedin City Council-owned companies Delta Utility Services Ltd and Aurora Energy Ltd.

****

Thu, 9 Jun 2016
ODT: ORC considers Dowling St HQ
After a decade of controversy and delays, an Otago Regional Council committee yesterday recommended a car park in Dowling St, Dunedin, as the preferred site for the council’s new head office. […] The ORC wants a 3000sq m building, either new or redeveloped, with at least 60 car parks, and including a 240sq m council chamber. Its preferred option is now to build a two-storey building on the Dunedin City Council-owned Dowling St car park. It is understood a considerable part of the car park, at 15 Dowling St, would not be required for the proposed development, and could remain as parking.
Read more

[click to enlarge]
DCC Webmap – Dowling St car park JanFeb2013 (ORC preferred site)

Dunedin Street View [Google] – Dowling St car park following the line of the Harcourts building, off lower High St parking area, Queens Gardens

—

Related Posts and Comments:
11.8.12 ODT editorial (spot on!) — ORC temporary headquarters
26.6.09 ORC headquarters [incl news items to present day]

Expensive. ORC harbourside proposal, Mason & Wales Architects (2009)

—

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

Election Year. This post is offered in the public interest.

City council “justifiably proud of its fiscal discipline” —Cull The Delusional

ODT 30.11.15 (page 8)

—

Comments received at other threads:

photonz
Submitted on 2015/11/30 at 9:34 am
Several more blocked drains seen later on Friday and also more on Saturday, including some so bad they were flooding right across the road.

And today in the ODT we have the Mayor slapping ratepayers across the face again with the laughable claim that rate rises are due to rises in the cost of bitumen and pipes.

Considering how much is spent on bitumen and pipes, compared to wages and interest, that sounds [like as] big a lie as “the drains are properly maintained”.

The ODT should call Mayor Cull on this – because blaming year after year of rate rises on the costs of bitumen and pipes sounds like a big fat lie.

[Published in abridged form at ODT Online: Your Say:
DCC not responsible for flooding? Yeah right]

photonz
Submitted on 2015/11/27 at 9:26 am
Just posted to the ODT website –

“Taking the kids to school this morning, the drain at the end of our road is blocked and water is flowing across the street. So I started counting blocked drains on my short journey to Queens and Tahuna schools. Grand total – 14 blocked drains, including three bad enough for large amounts of water to be flowing right across the street.

Similarly a relative’s business in town has been flooded several times, every time because of blocked drains. Often they are left with the choice of going out in the rain to unblock it themselves, or hiring a private contractor to suction-pump it.

Because even though the DCC know it’s a problem, they still don’t maintain it.

Do the DCC not realise that all they do is make themselves look like either incompetent fools or liars, when they make the laughable claim that the drains are well maintained and do not contribute to flooding?”

photonz
Submitted on 2015/11/27 at 11:36 am
Several more blocked drains seen on the way into town, including two so bad the water is flowing right across the road. And it wasn’t even raining very hard at that stage.

At least three of those flood across the road very time it rains hard – ie 10-20 times a year.

—

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

Lively dialogue with DVML’s Terry Davies —Not ! #LGOIMA #Stadium

Received from Calvin Oaten
Sat, 28 Nov 2015 at 5:35 p.m.

—

—–Original Message—–
From: Calvin Oaten
Sent: Sunday, 1 November 2015 10:10 a.m.
To: Sandy Graham
Cc: Dave Cull; Sue Bidrose
Subject: [LGOIMA] Request

Hello Sandy,
I have been reading the annual reports of Dunedin Venues Management Ltd (DVML) and am somewhat uncertain as to the true position regarding the matter of charges/fees for the use of the Stadium. We were given a detailed report in the 2014/15 Annual Plan wherein it [was] disclosed that the DCC/ratepayers would be making a one off lump sum of $2.271m to DVML by way of calling up unpaid capital. Then there is to be $715k per annum paid also by way of calling up unpaid capital. An event attraction fund of $400k per annum, source ratepayers? These two annual sums are I believe revenue to DVML. We won’t talk about the later decision to fund $2m per annum as a rent subsidy to DVL, due to DVML’s inability to meet the $4m rent required towards DVL’s debt reduction.
There is no mention of the Stadium in the 2015/16 Annual Plan with any reference to funding shortfalls even though both DVML and DVL continue to run deficits.

Zeroing in on sports events held in the Stadium (because that is its primary purpose) I see that in 2013 there was (sic) 44 events attracting 205,511 attendees.
In 2014 there were 39 with 206,123 there and in 2015 for 33 events 174,575 turned out in support.

DVML showed revenue of $6.085m in 2012 and $8.205m in 2013. These were of the Stadium only, thereafter it includes the Edgar Centre, the DCC Convention Centre plus the Ice Stadium management. This brought about an increase in revenue to $9.127m for 2014 and $9.960m in 2015. Similar pattern for the operating expenses over those same years.

In order to enable one to get an assessment of where these obviously inadequate revenues come from I would request under the [LGOIMA] the following points;

1. The main events being rugby, which of the ORFU, the Highlander Franchise or the NZRFU staged what events over those years? What was the rental received by DVML from those respective bodies per event and do they figure in the revenue statements?

2. What was the amount of revenue received from the other lesser codes which used the same facilities?

With respect to the Operating Expenses outlined in the reports, 2012 as $3.862m, 2013 $3.589m, 2014 $4.361m and 2015 $5.407m.

1. Of those expenses I would request under the [LGOIMA] the amounts of those expenses which could be described as paid inducements or subsidies to perform in the Stadium, albeit sports and concerts?

I trust that this information could be made available within the statutory twenty-one days and thank you in anticipation.

Cheers,
Calvin Oaten

—

Terry Davies, DVML Chief Executive [via whatifdunedin]

From: Terry Davies
Subject: FW: [LGOIMA] Request
Date: 27 November 2015 3:53:09 pm NZDT
To: Calvin Oaten

Dear Mr Oaten

I refer to your email dated 1 November which has been referred to DVML to respond. I have responded directly to your questions below:

1. The main events being rugby, which of the ORFU, the Highlander Franchise or the [NZRU] staged what events over those years? What was the rental received by DVML from those respective bodies per event and do they figure in the revenue statements?
The rental received for these events is withheld under section 7(2)(h) and (i) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 to allow DVML to carry out commercial activities without prejudice or disadvantage.

2. What was the amount of revenue received from the other lesser codes which used the same facilities?
The revenue received for these events is withheld under section 7(2)(h) and (i) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 to allow DVML to carry out commercial activities without prejudice or disadvantage.

With respect to the Operating Expenses outlined in the reports, 2012 as $3.862m, 2013 $3.589m, 2014 $4.361m and 2015 $5.407m.

1. Of those expenses I would request under the [LGOIMA] the amounts of those expenses which could be described as paid inducements or subsidies to perform in the Stadium, albeit sports and concerts?
The expenses incurred and event attraction funding for these events is withheld under section 7(2)(h) and (i) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 to allow DVML to carry out commercial activities without prejudice or disadvantage.

DVML’s audited annual accounts are published which shows revenue and operating costs and this is available on line at http://www.dunedin.govt.nz/__data/assets/pdf_file/0006/519711/Dunedin-Venues-Management-Limited-2015-Annual-Report.pdf

You are entitled to have this decision reviewed by the Ombudsman.

Yours sincerely
Terry Davies

———————————————

From: Calvin Oaten
Subject: Fwd: [LGOIMA] Request
Date: 28 November 2015 12:08:46 am NZDT
To: Sue Bidrose

Hello Sue,
You will have been aware of my queries expressed recently via the [LGOIMA], re the DVML revenue [breakdown].
Well I would have to say that the reply as received is totally underwhelming. This would have to be the most condescending, snivelling, performance by a highly positioned manager one could expect. Hiding behind a clause in a flawed piece of legislation to deny a citizen stakeholder information which ought to be available, on the grounds that it would compromise the company in carrying out its business without prejudice or disadvantage is nothing but
a complete ‘cop-out’ by a less than forthright person. Unless there is detail showing activities detrimental to achieving maximum returns to the company, then I find it a disingenuous and rude dismissal of an honest request.

Sue, I am dissatisfied with his response but if you think it is the way it should lie, then I would be deeply disappointed. I would appreciate your comments as I treat this as a serious affront.

Cheers,
Calvin

[ends]

—

█ In other developments, ICC felt the need to secure games for its stadium. What have Terry Davies, (“make it work”) Dave Cull and Sue Bidrose been up to in behind ?

### ODT Online Fri, 27 Nov 2015
Rugby: Highlanders private investors revealed (+ video)
A group of South Island private investors has been granted a five-year licence to run the Highlanders. The group, headed by Ticket Direct boss Matthew Davey, has taken a 77% stake in the Dunedin-based Super Rugby franchise, with Otago, Southland and North Otago Provincial Unions having a 13% stake. New Zealand Rugby (NZR) retains a 10% share for the first two years.
Read more

Otago Daily Times Published on Nov 26, 2015
Highlanders private investors revealed

29.11.15 ODT: Rugby: New operators for Highlanders
The Invercargill City Council has underwritten the venture to the tune of up to $500,000 in return for one guaranteed game at Rugby Park each year for the next five years.

29.11.15 ODT: Canadian finds his ticket to success
Matthew Davey says the Highlanders helped make him – now he is ready to help return the favour. The Dunedin businessman says he started the company he founded, Ticket Direct, at Carisbrook in 1999, and it has since grown into a multinational entity based in Dunedin.

—

Related Posts and Comments:
6.10.15 DCC v Tauranga CC + costly stadium cycle/walkway :[
18.9.15 Tsunami stadium #DUD
● 29.7.15 Otago power consumers pay stadium debt, SO SORRY
● 24.7.15 Stadiums: Auckland works to limits —Dunedin, never
30.6.15 DCC low lifes #RugbyDebtStadium
● 18.5.15 DCC laundering – wring out Regent Theatre Trust, pump DVML
● 11.4.15 Stadium Tides = Subsidies (new English)
● 20.3.15 Stadium costs +$20M per annum, against one Fleetwood Mac…
10.3.15 *Surprise!* Farry’s f.u.b.a.r. Stadium not attracting first year Efts
1.3.15 DCC: DCHL/DVL/DVML limited half year result | Term borrowings…
28.2.15 Blonde ‘lawyer’ takes over DVML —expect no change
2.1.15 Stadium: Online petition to pressure $1M donation
14.12.14 ‘Stadium liability’, from the ODT unprintable letters file
1.12.14 Stadium Editorial Support strategy —ODT
1.12.14 Stadium Review: LGOIMA request and 2009 Town Hall speeches
22.11.14 ODT puffery for stadium rousing ?
● 21.11.14 Stadium Review: Mayor Cull exposed
● 19.11.14 Forsyth Barr Stadium Review
15.11.14 Stadium #TotalFail
12.11.14 DVML: Two directors gone before release of stadium review
● 8.10.14 Stadium: Liability Cull warns ratepayers could pay more to DVML
● 6.10.14 Stadium misses —like it would ever happen, Terry
4.10.14 DCHL & DVML: Call for directors
30.9.14 DCHL financial result
● 25.9.14 DVML on Otago Rugby and Rod
13.9.14 DVML and ORFU refuse to disclose 2012 Otago Rugby deal
10.9.14 Stadium: Behaviours at Suite 29 (intrepid tales)
1.8.14 DVML and the “Otago Rugby” deal (sponsorship and payments)
22.7.14 DVML catering and commercial kitchens….
21.7.14 DVML: No harassment policy or complaints procedure II
16.7.14 Stadium: Out of the mouths of uni babes…. #DVML
● 15.7.14 Rugby stadiums not filling #SkyTV
1.7.14 Southern Region, serving itself —or professional rugby (and Sky TV)
27.6.15 Stadium costs $23.4144 million per annum
24.6.14 Stadium: DVML, mothballing, and ‘those TVs’ #LGOIMA
23.6.14 DCC Annual Plan 2014/15 + Rugby and Rates
● 18.6.14 Crowe Horwath Report (May 2014) – Review of DVML Expenses
9.6.14 DVML: Crowe Horwath audit report (Hedderwick)
2.6.14 Stadium costs ballpark at $21.337 million pa, Butler & Oaten
● 20.5.14 Tim Hunter on Ward, McLauchlan, Hayne #Highlanders
7.5.14 Stadium: Jeff Dickie on costs
17.4.14 Aussie wine – NO parallels at DCC/DCHL/DVML/DVL/Delta/ORFU
3.4.14 DVML: Lost in transaction II (flatscreen TVs)
3.4.14 DVML: Lost in transaction (flatscreen TVs)
22.3.14 DVML, ‘Money for jam…..fig jam’
11.2.14 Stadium: ‘Business case for DVML temporary seating purchase’
● 11.12.13 Highlanders “Buy Us” entertainment: Obnoxious, noxious PROFESSIONAL RUGBY —stay away DCC !!!

—

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

Mangawhai ratepayers let down by ruling #BadOmenDCC

Link received from John Evans

█ Message: Why you should be extremely concerned about DCC financial stupidity.

[Are Dave, Sue and Grant rubbing their hands ? -Eds]

—

### radionz.co.nz Thu, 12 Nov 2015 at 8:22 pm NZT
RNZ News
Court ruling dismays Mangawhai ratepayers
By Lois Williams, RNZ Northland Reporter
Mangawhai people challenging rates set by the Kaipara District Council are dismayed by their latest defeat in court.

The Whangarei District Court has thrown out the arguments of Mangawhai Ratepayers’ Association president Bruce Rogan that his rates and many others set since 2006 were invalid because of multiple errors in the rating assessments. He said the council did not dispute the errors but the court had essentially said they did not matter.

“Things like setting the rates inclusive of GST, there’s absolutely no power in the act to do that,” Mr Rogan said. “It’s not a matter of them (the council) saying they didn’t do these things; they actually said they did them and said so in court.” Councils should not be able to use the law to gouge ratepayers when they did not comply with it themselves, he said. “It’s the end of civil society as we know it if this is allowed to stand. That may sound over-dramatic but if we don’t have a legal system that interprets the law as it is written then we’re all doomed.”

The association was still waiting for a Court of Appeal decision after it challenged the council in the High Court over its right to bill ratepayers for council debts they were not told about. The High Court found the Kaipara District Court’s borrowing to expand the Mangawhai Ecocare wastewater system was unlawful, because ratepayer had not been consulted about it. However, it could not rule on the rates levied to pay for the bank loans because Parliament had passed a special bill to validate them.

Mr Rogan owes the council $22,000 in rate arrears and has offered to pay the portion he believed was lawfully levied, minus penalties.
RNZ Link

—

Related Posts and Comments:
3.11.15 Kaipara Concerns —ADOTROL* disease [Dunedin mention, again!]
13.2.15 Associate Minister of Local Government: Return democracy to Kaipara
2.2.15 LGNZ run by Mad Rooster Yule, end of story
27.11.14 Auditor-general Lyn Provost #Resign
31.10.14 Whaleoil on “dodgy ratbag local body politicians” —just like ours at DCC
9.9.14 Mangawhai, Kaipara: Latest news + Winston Peter’s speech
19.7.14 Whaleoil / Cameron Slater on ratepayers’ lament
29.5.14 Mangawhai Ratepayers and Residents Assn wins at High Court
31.3.14 Audit services to (paying) local bodies #FAIL ● AuditNZ ● OAG…
29.1.14 Mangawhai, Kaipara —we hear ya!
3.12.13 LGNZ: OAG report on Kaipara
12.11.13 Northland council amalgamation
29.6.13 Audit NZ and OAG clean bill of health —Suspicious!
21.4.13 Councils “in stchook” —finance & policy analyst Larry.N.Mitchell
19.3.12 Local government reform
21.2.12 Kaipara this time

—

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

Screening tonight: Paradigm Episode 2! Local Government Corruption in NZ #Sky #YouTube

Updated post
Tue, 15 Sep 2015 at 1:25 a.m.

███ A “MUST” WATCH
Vincent Eastwood Published on Sep 14, 2015
Local Governance & Corruption, Paradigm Episode 2 Vinny Eastwood
Episode 2 of PARADIGM broadcasted on Face TV Sky Channel 083 on September 14th 2015 at 9pm NZT

TOPIC: Local Governance & Corruption
GUESTS: Bruce Rogan from the Mangawhai Residents and Ratepayers Association with activist and Mayoral candidate Penny Bright.
● How privatisation and secretive powerful roundtable groups (comprised mostly of large companies) have led to the rise of unelected, unaccountable officials.
● The utter refusal of EVERY SINGLE AUTHORITY in New Zealand to investigate corruption.
The police, the judiciary, the ombudsman, the minister for local government, the auditor general, political parties, the list goes on, every authority whose job is to investigate, prevent or punish corruption actually supports it!
● Why local citizens have no rights and why local government has no rules.

FACE FACT KIWIS
Believing NZ is corruption free was the very mechanism by which criminals took control of our country. The only reason NZ is #2 on Transparency International’s “perceived” least corrupt countries in the world list, is we’re the 2nd best in the world at concealing our corruption.

—

Vincent Eastwood Published on Sep 12, 2015
Paradigm Episode 2 coming soon! Local Government Corruption
PLEASE SHARE THIS!
Help me get as many people as possible to watch the show tomorrow night!
9pm NZT

—

Received. [names deleted]
Mon, 14 Sep 2015 at 4:00 p.m.

Re: DOCO ON CORRUPTION, AND MEMBERSHIP RENEWAL.

Tonight (14 September, 9:00pm) on Sky channel 83 there will be an episode of Paradigm which will feature the Kaipara Scam. Paradigm is a program that is the brainchild of a guy called Vinny Eastwood, and it is not an exaggeration to say that Vinny has picked up the ball that John Campbell (or rather Channel 3) dropped. Promo for the programme is at https://www.facebook.com/vincenteastwood/videos/10153220793607879/
Vinny has a deceptively casual and disarming manner that belies a very serious commitment to exposing corruption and fraud (he calls it scumbaggery).
As an MRRA member you will already be aware of the degree of scumbaggery besetting Kaipara, but it is highly unlikely that your friends and relations will grasp the scale of what is happening in New Zealand. Please do yourself a favour and send this email to everyone in your circle, especially your adult children, who are going to be wealth-stripped by the corporates that are taking over. Add your personal plea that they take a few minutes away from Coronation Street and watch something that might actually affect their lives.
Our financial year ends on 31 October. We want everyone to renew their membership please and we want new members from all over the country (world!) as we mount the final campaign to get justice for the country’s ratepayers. Please renew – don’t just leave it to the other guys to carry all the water. What other association can you think of that supplies over forty free informative newsletters per year?!, and has an executive team that is prepared to go to jail to defend your rights! (informative might be stretching it, but beauty is always in the eye of the beholder, going to jail is still a real possibility!).
The annual sub is still only $15.00 per family, or $10.00 single, and we have put no limit on donations, because we do not want to discourage that philanthropic person out there with $100,000 they have no further use for.
The account number is 38 9012 0318164 00 or cheques to MRRA at Box 225 Mangawhai 0540. Make sure please to include your membership number […], and if you are a new member please provide a name and phone number so we can call you and get all the details.

Kind regards,
MRRA Executive Committee.
[Mangawhai Residents and Ratepayers Association]

—

█ More at Kaipara Concerns (online news):

LOCAL GOVERNMENT CORRUPTION SCAM 14.09.2015
Tonight, Monday night (14 September 2015), 9pm on Face (access) TV. Sky network channel 83.

NZ’s MASSIVE Local Government Corruption Scam, Paradigm Episode 2

Bruce Rogan (Mangawhai Ratepayers) and Penny Bright interviewed by Vinny Eastwood on council corruption in New Zealand.

See the promo video here. #Facebook

See Bruce Rogan’s rates revolt speech here. #YouTube

—

Related Posts and Comments:
28.8.15 Joel Cayford: ‘Mangawhai Ratepayers at Court of Appeal’
2.2.15 LGNZ run by Mad Rooster Yule, end of story
27.11.14 Auditor-general Lyn Provost #Resign
31.10.14 Whaleoil on “dodgy ratbag local body politicians” —just like ours at DCC
9.9.14 Mangawhai, Kaipara: Latest news + Winston Peter’s speech
19.7.14 Whaleoil / Cameron Slater on ratepayers’ lament
12.6.14 Fairfax Media [not ODT] initiative on Local Bodies
29.5.14 Mangawhai Ratepayers and Residents Assn wins at High Court
11.4.14 Councils: Unaccountable, ready to tax? #DCC #ORC
31.3.14 Audit services to (paying) local bodies #FAIL ● AuditNZ ● OAG…
29.1.14 Mangawhai, Kaipara —we hear ya!
3.12.13 LGNZ: OAG report on Kaipara
12.11.13 Northland council amalgamation
29.6.13 Audit NZ and OAG clean bill of health —Suspicious!
21.4.13 Councils “in stchook” —finance & policy analyst Larry.N.Mitchell
19.3.12 Local government reform
21.2.12 Kaipara this time

—

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

Joel Cayford: ‘Mangawhai Ratepayers at Court of Appeal’

Link received. [Hooray!]
Fri, 28 Aug 2015 at 10:50 a.m.

—

### joelcayford.blogspot.co.nz Thu, 27 August 2015
Mangawhai Ratepayers at Court of Appeal

Joel Cayford [‘Reflections on Auckland Planning’] updates the Court of Appeal hearing (25-26 August) – Mangawhai Ratepayers and Residents Association v Kaipara District Council – in front of Justice Rhys Harrison, Justice Mark Cooper, and Justice Forrest Miller.

Mangawhai Ratepayers and Residents Association (MRRA) is represented by Matthew Palmer QC and barrister Kitt Littlejohn. David Goddard QC represents the council.

Cayford summarises the “causes of action for this hearing – which followed the judicial review heard by Justice Heath (posts here and here)”:

“that the Kaipara District Council (KDC) does not have the power to rate for unlawful purposes. That KDC acted unlawfully in deciding to enter into and expand the Ecocare Wastewater Scheme, and that it could not then enforce rates on ratepayers.

“that the Validation Act did not retrospectively validate ALL matters stemming from those unlawful decisions. It only validated various historic rating defects. Significant matters – including the additional $30,000,000 loan were not dealt with or validated by the Validation Act.

“that the KDC acted inconsistently with the Bill of Rights Act by initiating Validation Legislation which had an effect of undermining MRRA judicial review proceedings – to which they had a right.”

Of critical interest, Cayford says Matthew Palmer, in his closing, “told the Justices, to the effect: “a consequence of adopting the arguments of my learned friend would mean that any Council in New Zealand can breech Local Government Act provisions with impunity, leave ratepayers with the bill, and mean that Long Term Plans all become window-dressing, ratepayer submissions become meaningless. That cannot have been what Parliament intended.””

█ Read Cayford’s excellent post and reader comments here.

LinkedIn: Joel Cayford

Although the Court of Appeal ruling is some way off, fallout might very well illuminate effects of the Dunedin stadium rort, council debt loading and issues of general competency.

—

Related Posts and Comments:
2.2.15 LGNZ run by Mad Rooster Yule, end of story
27.11.14 Auditor-general Lyn Provost #Resign
31.10.14 Whaleoil on “dodgy ratbag local body politicians” —just like ours at DCC
9.9.14 Mangawhai, Kaipara: Latest news + Winston Peter’s speech
19.7.14 Whaleoil / Cameron Slater on ratepayers’ lament
12.6.14 Fairfax Media [not ODT] initiative on Local Bodies
29.5.14 Mangawhai Ratepayers and Residents Assn wins at High Court
11.4.14 Councils: Unaccountable, ready to tax? #DCC #ORC
31.3.14 Audit services to (paying) local bodies #FAIL ● AuditNZ ● OAG…
29.1.14 Mangawhai, Kaipara —we hear ya!
3.12.13 LGNZ: OAG report on Kaipara
12.11.13 Northland council amalgamation
29.6.13 Audit NZ and OAG clean bill of health —Suspicious!
21.4.13 Councils “in stchook” —finance & policy analyst Larry.N.Mitchell
19.3.12 Local government reform
21.2.12 Kaipara this time

—

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

DCC: DCHL on Waipori Fund

Dunedin City Council – Media Release
Positive Result for Waipori Fund

This item was published on 22 Jul 2015

The Waipori Fund performed strongly in the past financial year while meeting key targets. The fund’s capital base for 2014/15 is above its inflation adjusted target for the first time since 2008.

The fund is managed by Dunedin City Treasury Limited, a company owned by Dunedin City Holdings Limited (DCHL). DCHL is in turn is owned by the Dunedin City Council.

DCHL Chair Graham Crombie says this is an important measure because it shows the fund’s capital base is not being eroded. “As well as a good overall return for the year, it’s very pleasing to see the fund achieve this threshold.”

The fact the fund reached the target in the past financial year was mainly due to strong equity in the bond markets and a weakening New Zealand dollar.

The market value of the investment portfolio was $81.6 million at 30 June 2015. This was a 13.1% return for the year. This return also met the income objective of exceeding the official cash rate plus the consumer price index.

The graph below shows the progress of the fund since its establishment. The fund was created from the sale of the Waipori electricity generation scheme. It provides a source of revenue for the Council which can be offset against rates.

Waipori Fund

Contact Group Chief Financial Officer on 477 4000.
DCC Link

****

The distribution to council was budgeted to increase slightly over the period of the council’s 10-year plan.

### ODT Online Fri, 24 Jul 2015
DCC has no plans to spend surplus in Waipori Fund
By Chris Morris
The Dunedin City Council is celebrating a better-than-expected 13.1% jump in the value of its Waipori Fund, but has no plans to spend the bonus. […] Council group chief financial officer Grant McKenzie said the “solid” result reflected strong equity in bond markets and a weakening New Zealand dollar. […] “It’s just a funding stream for council.”
Read more

—

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

Dunedin to host LGNZ 2016 conference —FFS TIME TO TAKE IT OUT

Dunedin City Council – Media Release
Dunedin to Host 2016 LGNZ Conference

This item was published on 21 Jul 2015

Dunedin is all set to host the Local Government New Zealand (LGNZ) Conference for 2016 as this year’s conference wraps up in Rotorua today. LGNZ announced Dunedin as the host city for next year’s conference this week. The conference will bring up to 600 delegates to the city from 24-26 July 2016. Delegates will include mayors, chairs, chief executives, councillors and senior management from New Zealand’s councils as well as senior government ministers and stakeholders from the private sector, businesses, central government and non-government agencies.

[PROFLIGATE SPENDER ALERT] Mayor of Dunedin, Dave Cull says, “This is great opportunity for us to showcase Dunedin as a conference destination to the rest of the local government family. We don’t often get the chance to welcome people to Dunedin from every part of New Zealand at once. Delegates will get to experience New Zealand’s only UNESCO City of Literature, Gigatown winner and the country’s wildlife capital firsthand. It will also be an opportunity for all kind of councils to look at the challenges they have in common and discuss solutions.”

[DEBT-SPENDING PROPONENT ALERT] LGNZ President, Lawrence Yule says he is delighted the conference is returning to the deep south. “We have had a number of conferences in Dunedin over the past 20 years and the southern hospitality is always great,” he says. “The city has completed a significant upgrade of the hosting facilities at the Dunedin Centre and Town Hall and you put forward a very strong bid.”

The conference bid was made by Dunedin Venues and Enterprise Dunedin at the start of the year. They presented the Dunedin Centre and Town Hall facilities for the event and used Dunedin’s reputation for innovation, creativity and wildlife as a drawcard.

Contact Dave Cull, Mayor of Dunedin on 477 4000. DCC Link

—

Related Posts and Comments:
21.5.15 DCC and LGNZ, total losers
2.2.15 LGNZ run by Mad Rooster Yule, end of story
14.1.15 DCC Draft Long Term Plan: more inanity from Cull’s crew pending
13.1.15 Government’s council tax freeze
27.11.14 Auditor-general Lyn Provost #Resign
3.11.14 DCC: What happened to $20 million cash on hand? #LGOIMA
10.10.14 Cull consorts with losers at LGNZ
8.10.14 Stadium: Liability Cull warns ratepayers could pay more to DVML
18.9.14 DCC considers sale of “149 properties”
5.8.14 DCC staff-led CBD projects that impact ratepayers….
30.7.14 Dunedin City Council | Consolidated council debt
5.7.14 DCC’s debt level — who do you believe?
26.6.14 LGNZ #blaggardliars
23.6.14 DCC Annual Plan 2014/15 + Rugby and Rates
12.6.14 Fairfax Media [not ODT] initiative on Local Bodies
11.4.14 Councils: Unaccountable, ready to tax? #DCC #ORC
31.3.14 Audit services to (paying) local bodies #FAIL ● AuditNZ….
29.1.14 Mangawhai, Kaipara —we hear ya!
3.12.13 LGNZ: OAG report on Kaipara
7.10.13 DCC councillors, no idea annual cost of owning, operating FB Stadium
29.9.13 Alert: Dunedin voters —Mayors gain more powers
29.6.13 Audit NZ and OAG clean bill of health —Suspicious!
26.9.13 DCC: Council consolidated debt $623 million
21.4.13 Councils “in schtook” —finance & policy analyst Larry Mitchell
29.10.12 DCC consolidated debt substantially more than $616m to June 30, 2012
30.5.12 Larry Mitchell: 2012 Local Govt League Table Summary
4.7.11 Local government finances

█ For more, enter the terms *dcc*, *dchl*, *annual plan*, *long term plan*, *stadium* or *dvml* in the search box at right.

—

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

Stadium Tides = Subsidies (new English)

ON TOP OF TICKET PRICES
RATEPAYERS PAY TO GET ACTS TO F.U.B.A.R. STADIUM

An insider said DVML paid $350,000 to get Rod Stewart here.
No doubt it was more.

The stadium is costing ratepayers +$20M pa to stay open.
ODT mentions FLOOD, in a SEA OF COUNCIL DEBT.

—

The rising value of New Zealand’s dollar against the Australian had closed the profit gap for promoters considering whether to cross the Tasman or add another Sydney show.

### ODT Online Sat, 11 Apr 2015
Sellout gets promoters’ full attention
By Chris Morris
Australasia’s biggest promoters are promising more big acts as Dunedin’s concert drought threatens to become a flood. Michael Gudinski once vowed never to return to Dunedin. But, more than three years after the accomplished Australian music promoter slammed the “completely unprofessional” managers at Forsyth Barr Stadium, he is back. Mr Gudinski is the man behind Frontier Touring, the company bringing Rod Stewart to Dunedin for tonight’s stadium concert.
Read more

****

IS NICK SMITH PAYING THE PROMOTERS TO BE HERE

### ODT Online Sat, 11 Apr 2015
City in line for more top acts
By Chris Morris
Promoters for some of the world’s top musical performers say Dunedin is now firmly on the radar as a destination for a steady stream of headline acts. The glowing endorsement comes as Forsyth Barr Stadium prepares to host 25,000 fans at tonight’s Rod Stewart show. The concert, being brought to Dunedin by Frontier Touring, has also attracted three of Australasia’s top music promoters to Dunedin, eager to evaluate the event and the venue.
Read more

*ODT understands Stewart is staying at the Scenic Hotel Southern Cross in High St, and that he arrived on Thursday night.

—

Related Posts and Comments:
20.3.15 Stadium costs +$20M per annum, against one Fleetwood Mac concert….
1.3.15 DCC: DCHL/DVL/DVML … half year result | Term borrowings $586.5M
28.2.15 Blonde ‘lawyer’ takes over DVML —expect no change
21.11.14 Stadium Review: Mayor Cull exposed
19.11.14 Forsyth Barr Stadium Review
15.11.14 Stadium #TotalFail
12.11.14 DVML: Two directors gone before release of stadium review
8.10.14 Stadium: Liability Cull warns ratepayers could pay more to DVML
6.10.14 Stadium misses —like it would ever happen, Terry
25.9.14 DVML on Otago Rugby and Rod
13.9.14 DVML and ORFU refuse to disclose 2012 Otago Rugby deal
10.9.14 Stadium: Behaviours at Suite 29 (intrepid tales)
1.8.14 DVML and the “Otago Rugby” deal (sponsorship and payments)

For more, enter the terms *dvml*, *terry davies*, *orfu*, *nzru*, *stadium* or *flood* in the search box at right.

—

In which DVML’s Terry Davies buys a house in Dunedin, moves his family here and lives happily ever after.

—

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

*Images: (top) cagle.com – Dave Granlund 129564_600; blogs.swa-jkt.com – Hands-Drowning-Sea

LGNZ run by Mad Rooster Yule, end of story

Worse, Our Daaave is dumb enough to listen to Lawrence, cronies….

### whaleoil.co.nz February 2, 2015 at 4:30pm
Lawrence Yule wants more of your money
By Cameron Slater
There is a storm coming for local councillors, and for some, the clouds are only going to get darker, particularly as they start eyeing up next year’s local government elections. Local Government New Zealand today released a discussion paper about how they can get hold of more of your money. This is all being spun on the basis that more funding is required to meet the increased demand for services and infrastructure. Quick out of the blocks was the Taxpayers Union who pumped out a release ‘LGNZ Push For Local Income Taxes, Fuel Taxes and Regional GST’.
Read more

—

TAX PAYERS’ UNION – MEDIA RELEASE
LGNZ PUSH FOR LOCAL INCOME TAXES, FUEL TAXES AND REGIONAL GST

2 February 2015
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

The Taxpayers’ Union is furious that council lobby group, Local Government New Zealand, is spending ratepayer money on a campaign promoting local income taxes, regional fuel taxes and regional GST-style regimes to increase the tax burden of local councils. LGNZ launched a review document on various options for new taxes this morning.

Taxpayers’ Union Executive Director, Jordan Williams, says:
“New Zealand’s average rates bill has doubled in the last 20 years, tracking at twice the rate of inflation. Instead of focusing on the quality of councils’ spending decisions, this campaign is using ratepayer money on propaganda promoting new taxes.”

“LGNZ is a taxpayer funded lobby group representing the interests of councils. Nowhere in the discussion paper do we see a disciplined analysis of why local government spending is out of control.”

“This campaign is so blatant that LGNZ spin doctors are sending Mayors draft opinion pieces so local politicians can ‘leverage local media’ and promote these new taxes. The Taxpayers’ Union has been forwarded some of the emails by elected officials who are concerned LGNZ is overstepping the mark.”
Read more

—

Related Posts and Comments:
14.1.15 DCC Draft Long Term Plan: more inanity from Cull’s crew pending
13.1.15 Government’s council tax freeze
27.11.14 Auditor-general Lyn Provost #Resign
3.11.14 DCC: What happened to $20 million cash on hand? #LGOIMA
10.10.14 Cull consorts with losers at LGNZ
8.10.14 Stadium: Liability Cull warns ratepayers could pay more to DVML
18.9.14 DCC considers sale of “149 properties”
5.8.14 DCC staff-led CBD projects that impact ratepayers….
30.7.14 Dunedin City Council | Consolidated council debt
5.7.14 DCC’s debt level — who do you believe?
26.6.14 LGNZ #blaggardliars
23.6.14 DCC Annual Plan 2014/15 + Rugby and Rates
12.6.14 Fairfax Media [not ODT] initiative on Local Bodies
11.4.14 Councils: Unaccountable, ready to tax? #DCC #ORC
31.3.14 Audit services to (paying) local bodies #FAIL ● AuditNZ….
29.1.14 Mangawhai, Kaipara —we hear ya!
3.12.13 LGNZ: OAG report on Kaipara
7.10.13 DCC councillors, no idea annual cost of owning, operating FB Stadium
29.9.13 Alert: Dunedin voters —Mayors gain more powers
29.6.13 Audit NZ and OAG clean bill of health —Suspicious!
26.9.13 DCC: Council consolidated debt $623 million
21.4.13 Councils “in schtook” —finance & policy analyst Larry Mitchell
29.10.12 DCC consolidated debt substantially more than $616m to June 30, 2012
30.5.12 Larry Mitchell: 2012 Local Govt League Table Summary
4.7.11 Local government finances

█ For more, enter the terms *dcc*, *dchl*, *annual plan*, *long term plan*, *stadium* or *dvml* in the search box at right.

—

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

Dunedin City Council to set rates WAY ABOVE….

Updated post Thu, 22 Jan 2015 at 1:10 p.m.

### ODT Online Wed, 21 Jan 2015
Editorial: Dunedin’s rating dilemmas
OPINION The council’s pre-draft long-term plan – which is yet to be refined or considered by the public – forecasts a rates rise of 3.7% for 2015-16, followed by 5.5% and then 4.2% in subsequent years. This is at a time when the inflation rate could well be about 1% and wage increases and benefit hikes about the same level. This also follows many years of rates rises above the increase in the cost of living.
Read more

—

Comment at ODT Online:

Council debt
Submitted by Barnaby on Wed, 21/01/2015 – 8:37pm.

Mayor Dave Cull says, Dunedin “is on a bit of a roll”. So was the Titanic! This comment shows how genuinely out of touch he is with Dunedin businesses and ratepayers alike, who are struggling to fund one lunatic project after another, let alone make a living. He confuses misappropriation of ratepayers’ funds with “investing in the city”. To highjack rates for more silly things is neither fair nor moral. The DCC is now so far from core council services it is ludicrous. Now more than ever, Dunedin desperately needs a leader with business experience and skills.

—

Related Posts and Comments:
15.1.15 Did the pool trust reply, Dr Hamlin?
14.1.15 DCC Draft Long Term Plan: more inanity from Cull’s crew pending

—

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

DCC explains Harbourside subdivision in reply to Vandervis

Received from Sandy Graham, DCC Group Manager Corporate Services
Friday, 16 January 2015 5:06 p.m.

—

From: Sue Bidrose
Sent: Wednesday, 14 January 2015 3:59 p.m.
To: Lee Vandervis
Cc: Council 2013-2016 (Elected Members); Sandy Graham
Subject: FW: Non-notified ORC subdivision?

Hi Lee

Here is the Planner’s discussion about the Chalmers subdivision in the paper today. They have given generic information about how such decisions are made (to be notified or non-notified) and then how those principles stacked up in this specific case. They have then also addressed each of your specific attributes for this particular subdivision (size, political interest, transparency etc.) and how much impact that each of these can/can’t have on their decision-making around making the application notified/non-notified. I know you know much of this background Lee, but as you cc’d all Councillors, I wanted a generic response for Councillors who are not Hearings Panel members, so forgive my ‘teaching Granny to suck eggs’ approach.

Attached is also a couple of sketches that the planner (Lianne) made for herself showing the subdivision at the start of the process, and then at the end, just for your information for those of you who are interested in knowing exactly which lots were affected.

Regards
Sue

Dr Sue Bidrose
Chief Executive Officer
Dunedin City Council

[click to enlarge or view PDF immediately below]

█ Download: Chalmers subdivision diagrams (PDF, 1.0 MB)

——————————

From: Jeremy Grey [DCC]
Sent: Wednesday, 14 January 2015 3:36 p.m.
To: Sue Bidrose [DCC]
Subject: FW: Non-notified ORC subdivision?

Hi Sue,

Please see below an email that Lianne has prepared in response to your query. I will also be sending some diagrams.

Please let me know if you need anything further.

Regards,
Jeremy

——————————

From: Lianne Darby [DCC]
Sent: Wednesday, 14 January 2015 2:03 p.m.
To: Jeremy Grey [DCC]
Subject: RE: Non-notified ORC subdivision?

Hi Jeremy

In response to Sue’s questions:

1. All subdivisions require resource consent. This is not a suggestion that there is a fault with subdivision, but is simply a matter whereby Council maintains control i.e. makes sure there is access, servicing, the land is geotechnically stable, etc.

The District Plan sets out the criteria for subdivision within the different zones, and where a subdivision meets the criteria, it is usually processed non-notified. In the case of the Port 2 and Industrial 1 zones, subdivisions are expected to comply with Rules 18.5.3 (access), 18.5.4 & 18.5.4 (requirements for esplanade strips or reserves), 18.5.6 (service connections), 18.5.9 ( a rule which has since been deleted and no long applies), 18.5.10 (lots in unserviced areas) and 18.5.12 (structure plans). Some/most of these rules will not be relevant to specific proposals. It should be noted that there is no minimum area or frontage requirements for lots in these zones. A subdivision meeting all these rules is a restricted discretionary proposal. It is worth noting the final paragraph of Rule 18.5.1 which states:

“… any application for subdivision consent involving a discretionary activity (restricted), the written approval of affected persons need not be obtained.”

… that is, a land owner may subdivide in accordance with the expectations of the District Plan for the zoning without needing to consider others as affected parties.

Subdivisions which do not meet the above rules (unrestricted discretionary and non-notified activities) are often processed non-notified as well if the proposal involves no change in land use, the non-compliance can be mitigated, or there are no consequences for neighbours, the general public or the District Plan integrity. For example, in the residential zones, new lots require frontage. Many lots do not have any frontage at all and the subdivision is a non-complying subdivision as a result. However, these lots will have rights of way providing them with legal and physical access, so the lack of frontage is not considered of any consequence. We do not notify these applications.

As a general rule, subdivisions are notified when there is a breach of density i.e. the new lots are undersized and will result in development at a greater density than the zoning would anticipate. This has the potential to change the wider amenity of an area or overload Council’s services, among other matters. However, if the land is already developed, then the subdivision of the land into lots smaller than anticipated is not usually considered a matter of concern as there will be no actual change occurring except on paper. For example, a lot with two houses could be subdivided into two undersized lots, each containing a house, without the subdivision being notified.

Large subdivisions are not notified simply because they are large. If the subdivision is in accordance with the District Plan expectations, i.e. meets the relevant rules, it will not be notified. For example, the large Mosgiel residential subdivisions currently underway have not been notified except for Heathfield which involved a lot of undersized lots.

Planning does not take into account political or commercial interests when processing resource consents.

2. The subdivision of Chalmers Properties was non-notified for several reasons.
a) It meets the necessary requirements for subdivision in the Port 2 and Industrial 1 zone. Any deficiencies there may be in servicing (e.g. the need for individual water connections) will be addressed as part of the consent conditions, as is typical.
b) There is no new development proposed. The subdivision is not for the purpose of creating vacant sites for new development. This does not mean that the new lots cannot be redeveloped, but this is not the purpose of the subdivision; nor is redevelopment dependent on the subdivision. The existing sites can be redeveloped at any time should the property owner desire.
c) The subdivision is not so much a large subdivision as a number of small subdivisions all being put on the same plan. We are starting with 15 existing titles and finishing with 34.
d) The new lots have, by my understanding, been selected mainly to coincide with existing leases. Council does not have access to lease information and does not know who the leaseholders are (barring door-knocking). Council does not normally consider lessees or property renters as affected parties as the tenancies are private agreements. The subdivision of the freehold parcels should not have implications for the terms of any leases or leasehold titles.
e) Many of the existing titles are comprised of multiple sections. The original subdivision created many small parcels, and these have been grouped into freehold titles to give the 15 subject sites. Section 226 of the RMA allows a property owner to separate these parcels onto separate freehold titles if certain conditions are met. This is not a subdivision, and Council does not have discretion to say ‘no’ if the conditions are satisfied. Many of the new lots follow existing parcel boundaries and could arguably have been dealt with using s226. Given the number of titles being dealt with and the fact that some buildings might actually, when checked by survey, be over boundaries, the applicant decided to deal with them all by a formal subdivision at once; a one step process whereby any breaches of buildings over existing parcel boundaries will not cause the project to stall.

3. As noted above:
a) Size. The size of the subdivision is not a deciding factor in notification if the subdivision rules are met. In this case, the subdivision is not so much a large subdivision as a number of small subdivisions dealt with together. There is no change in land use anticipated as a direct result of this subdivision as there are already established land uses for the new sites.
b) Political implications: Council does not take into account political implications when processing resource consents. Consents are assessed on their merits and not according to who the applicant is or where it is situated. The zone is the relevant factor, not the neighbourhood or the history of the area.
c) Planning implications: There are no planning implications associated with this subdivision. The subdivision meets the necessary rules as set out by Rule 18.5.1(iv) for the Port and Industrial zones. There is no minimum site size set for the zones, so there are no undersized lots. All lots are serviced and have access. They are already developed with lawfully established activities. Any existing encroachments of buildings over boundaries will be resolved by this subdivision. The subdivision is a restricted discretionary activity.
d) Public interest: It is difficult to see how public interest is relevant in this case. The subdivision does not challenge the integrity of the District Plan in any way, and this is the public planning document being applied. The terms of all existing leases should not be affected (and this is a matter between the property owner and tenants anyway, not Council). There is no change to the sites occurring as a direct result of the subdivision. While the new lots may be sold and/or redeveloped, the land is in private ownership and can already be sold and/or redeveloped. Council does not decide whether or not a property owner can sell their land. Redevelopment proposals will be assessed by Council if and when they arise.
e) Commercial interest: Council does not take into account commercial interests when processing resource consents. The RMA sections 74(3) and 95D(d) instructs a consent authority to disregard trade completion or the effects of trade competition.
f) Transparency: The applicant is a private land owner who is entitled by the District Plan to undertake certain activities on their land. While subdivision is not a permitted activity, Council does not decline subdivision applications where the proposal is in accordance with the relevant subdivision requirements and the land is stable (i.e. section 106 of the RMA is not triggered). This is not Council land, nor Council’s project. The resource consent application and decision are public documents available for anyone to view, and in this regard, there is transparency about the proposal. It was decided for the above reasons that the proposal did not need to be notified.

The consent decision makes evident that there are a large number of addresses involved. In a nutshell, the property owner has a large number of addresses which do not fully align with leases, which do not fully align with freehold titles, which do not fully align with buildings on-site. The subdivision seeks to tidy up, or rationalise, the landholdings for ease of the property owner’s administration, as noted in today’s Otago Daily Times paper.

Regards

Lianne

——————————

From: Jeremy Grey [DCC]
Sent: Wednesday, 14 January 2015 8:43 a.m.
To: Lianne Darby [DCC]
Subject: FW: Non-notified ORC subdivision?

FYI…

—

From: Sue Bidrose [DCC]
Sent: Wednesday, 14 January 2015 8:11 a.m.
To: Jeremy Grey [DCC]
Cc: Sandy Graham [DCC]
Subject: FW: Non-notified ORC subdivision?

Hi Jeremy
Please read the Councillor email below about why the subdivision in today’s paper was done on a non-notified basis. I need details on this – is it possible (please read the details below) to do this today?

I need the details about:
1. Generically: how a planner decides notified vs non-notified – the things you are legally allowed to take into consideration generically, not specifically this case – what are the RULES and steps for making that decision
2. Specifically: how those rules were applied and steps taken in this specific case

Given my response to the Councillors is quite likely be shared reasonably widely, it might be useful in answering that first dotpoint for you to imagine you are writing a sort of ‘guide to the notification decision-making process’.

Thirdly, it would be also useful if you could tell me specifically on how each of the following issues is allowed to have weight in that decision of notification:
Size (of subdivision/change)
Political implications
Planning implications
Public interest
Commercial interest
Transparency.

Jeremy, if you could cc Sandy in your response please, as we will disseminate the answer and all relevant emails the way we do with LGOIMAs – and I suspect we could well get LGOIMAs about this also.

Thanks
Sue

Dr Sue Bidrose
Chief Executive Officer
Dunedin City Council

—

From: [name redacted on forwarding to council staff]
Sent: Wednesday, 14 January 2015 7:53 a.m.
To: Sue Bidrose [DCC]; Sandy Graham [DCC]
Cc: (all councillors)
Subject: Non-notified ORC subdivision?

Dear Sue,
Why has the massive subdivision of 15 ORC properties into 34 lots [today’s ODT p4] been processed on a non-notified basis, given the size, political and planning implications, and public and commercial interest in this range of properties?
Notification is surely a necessary prerequisite for such a large range of subdivisions to be carried out in a transparent manner is it not?
Kind regards,
[name redacted]

[ends]

—

Related Posts and Comments:
9.1.15 DCC: Non-notified decision for harbourside subdivision
27.12.14 Port Otago Ltd + Chalmers Properties
17.11.14 Bradken keen to sell Tewsley Street premises
12.6.14 Dunedin’s industrial land
18.3.14 Dunedin Harbourside: English Heritage on portside development

—

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

Government’s council tax freeze

At least 30 Tory-led local authorities are planning to reject demands to freeze tax rates this year, a Telegraph survey finds.

### telegraph.co.uk 8:30AM GMT 11 Jan 2015
Council tax to rise in Tory shires despite freeze ordered by ministers
By Edward Malnick – The Telegraph
Dozens of councils are preparing to defy the Government’s council tax freeze, including many in Conservative heartlands. A survey by The Telegraph found that at least 30 Tory-led local authorities are planning to reject demands to freeze tax rates this year. They are among 60 across England who say they intend to increase bills from April — including almost half of the country’s 27 county councils.

The Government has said councils should help taxpayers with the cost of living and ministers will be particularly concerned in the run-up to the general election in May.

Eric Pickles, the Local Government Secretary, said residents should “demand an explanation” if councils refused the freeze. He accused some of being “democracy dodgers” for planning to push up rates by 1.99 per cent, shy of the 2 per cent threshold at which they would have to hold a referendum.
More than 80 councils said that their proposals would not be published until a later date, raising the prospect of more householders facing rises.
The Telegraph surveyed all 353 of England’s councils about their 2015-16 council tax bills, most of which will be finalised by March. Of the 262 that responded, only four said that they were preparing to reduce their levies, while 116 were planning to go along with the request to freeze rates.
Read more

—

█ Soundings at Whale Oil Beef Hooked:
Cameron Slater 13/1/15 “This would be a fantastic policy to have here, as it would stop the councils doing exceptionally stupid things because there is no way in hell voters would vote for a rates rise of greater than 2%. There are a few things needed for local government reform in New Zealand. The first is the power of recall and recall elections. The USA has them, Canada has them, and the UK is getting them. This would allow citizens to remove ratbag mayors and councillors instead of waiting 3 years.” More

Postscript: Cameron Slater 13/1/15 Lusty, loopy, lascivious and now SLIMY Len

—

Dunedin City Council, glory days. What can possibly happen to Cull.

█ You might want to sponsor the dropkick…. anything to fix the Citifleet profile eh, Daaave —[McKerracher goes mad with PR opps]

—

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

DCC: Non-notified decision for Harbourside subdivision

Updated post 13.1.15 at 1:25 a.m. Map added.

Notice:

20 Cresswell Street Dunedin, 32 Cresswell Street Dunedin, 36 Cresswell Street Dunedin, 8 Bombay Street Dunedin, 10 Bombay Street Dunedin, 14 Tewsley Street Dunedin, 47 Willis Street Dunedin, 59 Willis Street Dunedin, 34 Mason Street Dunedin, 44 Cresswell Street Dunedin, 47 Cresswell Street Dunedin, 56 Willis Street Dunedin (SUB-2014-149)

This consent was an application to/for subdivision at 20 Cresswell Street Dunedin, 32 Cresswell Street Dunedin, 36 Cresswell Street Dunedin, 8 Bombay Street Dunedin, 10 Bombay Street Dunedin, 14 Tewsley Street Dunedin, 47 Willis Street Dunedin, 59 Willis Street Dunedin, 34 Mason Street Dunedin, 44 Cresswell Street Dunedin, 47 Cresswell Street Dunedin, 56 Willis Street Dunedin.

This was considered by the Council’s Senior Planner (Consents) on 25 November 2014.

█ http://www.dunedin.govt.nz/services/planning/browse-non-notified-decisions?result_146838_result_page=3

Information obtained from City Planning 12.1.15

Harbourside subdivision (SUB-2014-149)
Applicant: Chalmers Properties Ltd

“The proposed subdivision is to be undertaken in one stage, and will not create any vacant sites intended for development. Nor is any redevelopment of the new lots anticipated.” (from the Decision) ??? Are we sure….

█ SUB-2014-149 Decision (DOCX, 1.62 MB)

█ SUB-2014-149 Application 2014-10-30 (PDF, 9.33 MB)

Decision (final page) – Copy of Plan: Not to Scale. [click to enlarge]

DCC Webmap – Dunedin Harbourside [click to enlarge]

Dunedin City District Plan – Harbourside zones (detail) via Map 35 and Map 49

Heritage New Zealand – Dunedin Harbourside Historic Area # List No. 7767

—

DCC Ratepayers:

● 20 Cresswell Street Dunedin – Anzide Properties Ltd
● 32 Cresswell Street Dunedin – Anzide Properties Ltd
● 36 Cresswell Street Dunedin – McCormick Carrying Properties Ltd
● 8 Bombay Street Dunedin – Ross D Matheson, Mary K O’Hara Matheson
● 10 Bombay Street Dunedin – Nicen Ltd
● 14 Tewsley Street Dunedin – Ewen W Heather, Leanne M Kent, Russell S Melville
● 47 Willis Street Dunedin – Steel and Tube Holdings Ltd, Pacific Oriental Holdings Ltd
● 59 Willis Street Dunedin – Christie Paper Ltd
● 34 Mason Street Dunedin – Otago Daily Times Ltd
● 44 Cresswell Street Dunedin* – Graeme M Crosbie, Gillian K Crosbie
● 47 Cresswell Street Dunedin – Hyde Park Industrial Developments Ltd
● 56 Willis Street Dunedin – Development Six Ltd

*Note: Conflicting DCC mapping information for 44 Cresswell Street, Dunedin. Property adjoins 14 Tewsley Street, does not include 14 Tewsley Street.

—

Related Posts and Comments:
16.1.14 DCC explains Harbourside subdivision in reply to Vandervis
27.12.14 Port Otago Ltd + Chalmers Properties
17.11.14 Bradken keen to sell Tewsley Street premises
12.6.14 Dunedin’s industrial land
18.3.14 Dunedin Harbourside: English Heritage on portside development

—

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

DVML on Otago Rugby and Rod

Received from Anonymous

Interesting, when DVML and ratepayers have propped up Otago Rugby for such a long time….

Nick Smith is being called on to help fund concert bids….

Really quite a sad situation. “DVML staff still bullied.”
“Board members spent a fair time in Suite 29 too.”

Where this will all end we don’t know….

Stadium Review due for public release this month(?) is unlikely to fix it.

—

Related Posts and Comments:
13.9.14 DVML and ORFU refuse to disclose 2012 Otago Rugby deal
10.9.14 Stadium: Behaviours at Suite 29 (intrepid tales)

For more, enter the terms *dvml*, *orfu*, *nzru* or *stadium* in the search box at right.

—

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

DVML and ORFU refuse to disclose 2012 Otago Rugby deal

Dunedin Venues chief executive Terry Davies was asked to release details of the “Otago Rugby deal” struck in 2012 as part of the Otago Rugby Football Union recovery package.

Surprise! Mr Davies and ORFU don’t want you to know how much DVML pays ORFU for each rugby game played at Forsyth Barr Stadium, and given DVML is struggling to meet the sponsorship commitment (see previous post). Worse, DVML keeps paying even though ORFU is now flush with funds.

Just how are these payments passing through Council-owned books? The money comes from your rates; piling on top of every other subsidy DCC is gifting to the stadium and professional rugby.

The 2012 deal involved David Davies, the previous DVML chief executive. Who else was involved at ORFU, NZRU and DCC? Was the Mayor of Dunedin Dave Cull a signatory? More to come.

—

Correspondence received from Bev Butler
Fri, 12 Sep 2014 at 2:38 p.m.

Message: They really don’t want any part of this agreement out.

From: Terry Davies [DVML]
To: Bev Butler
Subject: LGOIMA request: DVML/ORFU venue hire agreement
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2014 22:28:54 +0000

Dear Bev

Please find attached a response to your email request dated 27 August 2014 as per below. A copy has been posted to you today.

Yours faithfully
Terry Davies [DVML]

—

From: Bev Butler
Date: 27 August 2014 10:08:59 am NZST
To: Terry Davies [DVML]
Subject: RE: LGOIMA request: DVML/ORFU venue hire agreement

Thanks, Terry.
I would still appreciate a redacted copy of the agreement.
Thank you.
Regards
Bev

—

From: Terry Davies [DVML]
To: Bev Butler
Subject: FW: LGOIMA request: DVML/ORFU venue hire agreement
Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2014 04:19:21 +0000
Dear Bev

Thank you for your email below. Please find attached the response which has also been posted to you.

Yours faithfully

[Terry Davies, DVML]

—

From: Bev Butler
Sent: Monday, 28 July 2014 9:01 a.m.
To: Terry Davies [DVML]
Cc: Sandy Graham [DCC]
Subject: LGOIMA request: DVML/ORFU venue hire agreement

Dear Terry

In 2012 DVML signed a venue hire agreement with the ORFU. I request the following:

1. The date of this agreement;
2. The names of the signatories on the agreement;
3. A copy of this agreement.

Thank you.

Yours sincerely
Bev Butler

█ Download: Letter to Bev Butler 11.09.14 (PDF, 49.4 KB)

—

Related Posts and Comments:
8.9.14 Jim Harland and the stadium MESS
● 1.8.14 DVML and the “Otago Rugby” deal (sponsorship and payments)
15.7.14 Stadium: Who is being protected?
24.6.14 Stadium: DVML, mothballing, and ‘those TVs’ #LGOIMA
18.6.14 Crowe Horwath Report (May 2014) – Review of DVML Expenses
9.6.14 DVML: Crowe Horwath audit report (Hedderwick)
2.6.14 Stadium costs ballpark at $21.337 million pa, Butler & Oaten
23.5.14 Stadium | DCC Draft Annual Plan 2014/15 ● Benson-Pope…
11.5.14 Stadium: DCC proposes extra funds for stadium debt repayment
9.5.14 DCC Draft Annual Plan 2014/15 Submission by Bev Butler
10.4.14 Stadium: Edgar’s $1m donation (private sector fundraising)
3.4.14 DVML: Lost in transaction II (flatscreen TVs)
22.3.14 DVML, ‘Money for jam…..fig jam’
19.3.14 ORFU: Black-tie dinner, theft or fraud?
17.3.14 ORFU: Black-tie dinner on ratepayers
15.3.14 Mayoral DISGRACE: DCC won’t ask ORFU to repay $480K bailout
14.3.14 ORFU flush to pay creditors
4.3.14 Bev Butler: Guy Hedderwick’s departure package (LGOIMA)
7.9.13 Stadium: $266 million, more or less?
30.7.13 Stadium: Accountability, paper trail leads unavoidably to NEWS
4.7.13 Carisbrook: DCC losses
15.2.13 Carisbrook: Call for OAG investigation into DCC / ORFU deals

—

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

*Image: whatifdunedin – re-imaged screenshot from YouTube clip, Terry Davies press conference regarding streaker (ODT 15.6.14)

LGNZ #blaggardliars

Received from Anonymous
Thu, 26 Jun 2014 at 3:17 p.m.

Horowhenua Chronicle 25.6.14

[Anonymous] “Another report by another highly paid expert, strategically placed on the front page to calm the masses only weeks after Horowhenua District Council (HDC) announced rate hikes of 10%.”

[Evidence] No-one believes his crap. Slippery Lawrence Yule treated like yesterday’s scrumpled chip paper.

—

Our reading preference:

█ The Ratepayers’ Report is based on data collated by the Taxpayers’ Union, a lobby group, from councils’ annual reports. It also includes information collected independently from the Department of Internal Affairs and Statistics New Zealand. All of this has been checked and sent to the 67 councils involved for them to review. See local government league tables published by analyst Larry Mitchell since 2010.

Related Post and Comments:
12.6.14 Fairfax Media [not ODT] initiative on Local Bodies
21.4.13 Councils “in stchook” —finance & policy analyst Larry.N.Mitchell
30.5.12 Larry.N.Mitchell: 2012 Local Govt League Table Executive Summary

—

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

DCC Annual Plan 2014/15 + Rugby and Rates

The council owned companies DVML and DVL present their Statements of Intent to the Dunedin City Council today. The meeting commences at 2pm at the Council Chamber, Municipal Chambers.

### ODT Online Mon, 23 Jun 2014
Whistle to blow for stadium deals
By Chris Morris
The company which runs Dunedin’s Forsyth Barr Stadium faces an uncertain future as it eyes the expiration of deals with sponsors, members and even the Highlanders Super rugby franchise. It also continues to operate under a cloud while awaiting the outcome of a major review of the stadium operation, now expected by early August, that seeks to address the venue’s multimillion-dollar losses.
Read more

Report – Council – 23/06/2014 (PDF, 164.3 KB)
Statement of Intent for Dunedin Venues Limited

Report – Council – 23/06/2014 (PDF, 170.1 KB)
Statement of Intent for Dunedin Venues Management Limited

—

The meeting includes final approval and adoption of the Annual Plan 2014/15 and the setting of rates.

Agenda – Council – 23/06/2014 (PDF, 122.0 KB)

Report – Council – 23/06/2014 (PDF, 4.5 MB)
Dunedin City Council 2014/15 Annual Plan for Adoption on 23 June 2014

Report – Council – 23/06/2014 (PDF, 699.6 KB)
Adoption of the 2014/15 Annual Plan – Minutes of Hearings and Deliberations

Report – Council – 23/06/2014 (PDF, 114.3 KB)
Adoption of the 2014/15 Annual Plan

Report – Council – 23/06/2014 (PDF, 540.0 KB)
Setting of Rates for 2014/15 Financial Year

Report – Council – 23/06/2014 (PDF, 76.6 KB)
Assessment Timeframe for Dunedin Earthquake-Prone Buildings Policy

Report – Council – 23/06/2014 (PDF, 149.9 KB)
Marketing Dunedin Advisory Board and Transition Advisory Group

Report – Council – 23/06/2014 (PDF, 872.4 KB)
‘Toi Au – Our Creative Future’, Draft Ōtepoti Dunedin Arts and Culture Strategy

Report – Council – 23/06/2014 (PDF, 156.0 KB)
Elected Member Remuneration Rates for 2014/15

█ Statements of Intent for other council owned companies are here.

—

Related Posts and Comments:
18.6.14 Crowe Horwath Report (May 2014) – Review of DVML Expenses
14.6.14 NZRU ‘hustles’ towns and cities to build stadiums
12.6.14 Fairfax Media [not ODT] initiative on Local Bodies
9.6.14 DVML: Crowe Horwath audit report (Hedderwick)
3.6.14 DCC unit under investigation
2.6.14 Stadium costs ballpark at $21.337 million pa, Butler & Oaten

—

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

*Image – radionz.co.nz – DVML chief executive Terry Davies at the stadium

Fairfax Media [not ODT] initiative on Local Bodies

The Taxpayers’ Union in collaboration with Fairfax Media has launched the “Ratepayers’ Report”. (Link)

—

Comment received from Russell Garbutt
Submitted on 2014/06/11 at 10:04 am

The Fairfax initiative on Local Bodies is an excellent one.

It can be found at http://www.ratepayersreport.co.nz/

It seems that this whole thing has stemmed from the excellent work of Larry Mitchell, in trying to educate Local Bodies as to some financial nous, and also to alert ratepayers to what circumstances their local body has put them in.

I know from experience over many years of trying, that my recommendations to local Councillors to contact Larry Mitchell and learn from his experience as an independent consultant on Local Government fell on totally deaf ears. They seemed to know better. Yeah, right.

Now it is out there in a form that is very readable and comparisons can be easily seen.

What is totally amazing is the views of the DCC in this. Yes, the second highest debt per ratepayer, but the DCC says that it has the second highest value of assets. Crap. This is just rubbish and it can’t sell those assets. Every Council has water, roading etc which it must provide and can’t sell, but in the case of the DCC it has the stadium. Not an asset as we all know but a fearful liability, but it appears in the books as an asset. Well, sell the bloody thing. It isn’t needed.

I know that this story won’t be picked up by the ODT as it is a Fairfax story, but the other point in here of course is that the ability of Aucklanders (who have the highest debt levels) to pay. Dunedin doesn’t. Its population is well below that of Auckland when it comes to average income per household.

The other thing that the ODT won’t cover is the local comparisons. While the DCC has a debt level of $15,093 per ratepayer, the Central Otago District Council has only $327 per ratepayer, with virtually the same equity value per ratepayer. What’s the difference? As the CODC says of the area “A World of Difference”. I know which Council I admire the most.

[ends]

—

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

DCC pedalling to…… #hell

Received from Jeff Dickie
Sat, 7 Jun 2014 at 3:41 pm

You could be forgiven for thinking Cull, Bidrose, the Finance Committee, and the majority of compliant councillors don’t have a vision for Dunedin’s future. That to believe that, not hearing bad news, smiling and riding a bike, will make the financial mire we are now in go away. That to continue to spend huge amounts on yet more foolish projects will somehow fix things. That to embrace a culture of no accountability will magically preclude the idiots who have cocked up so many DCC things in the recent past, doing EXACTLY the same thing again.

Just look at how many of the idiots who have foisted this debt and the numerous foolish failed projects are still on council. These people do have a vision, and here it is!

Hopefully the cycle trail will lead there.

Jeff Dickie
Woodhaugh

****

An opinion piece from 28.9.12, written by Calvin Oaten, continues to have currency.

The End of The Golden Weather?
Are we coming to the end of the ‘Golden Weather’? I say this, not in the meteorological sense, but rather in the sense that perhaps our society and its economic construct might be on the verge of a catastrophic change. Why? Well it seems that many signposts are pointing to an approaching collapse of the present model of the economy as constructed. This requires constant growth in order to sustain an ever increasing social budget.
Read more

—

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

*Image supplied.

Mangawhai Ratepayers and Residents Association Inc wins at High Court

v Kaipara District Council

Brilliant ~!!!

Case webpage:
http://www.courtsofnz.govt.nz/cases/mangawhai-ratepayers-and-residents-association-inc-v-kaipara-district-council

The decision (date of judgment 28 May 2014):
http://www.courtsofnz.govt.nz/cases/mangawhai-ratepayers-and-residents-association-inc-v-kaipara-district-council/at_download/fileDecision
(PDF, 332 KB)

● Decision is not sealed.

—

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr