I hope that Dave made personal guarantees - bankrupt him!!!

Looks like the new owners of Hendos Hole (Five Mile) in Queenstown want to fill it back in. Only about 350,000 cubic meters or about $1.5 million in cost

Gloucester Towers (down near Canterbury Museum) was squeezed thru a loophole in the town plan by Mainstay Properties in the 1980's (after a court battle -it is taller than the surrounding villas) . Hendo's lawyer was a director (I believe).

Well the due diligence gets more and more interesting. Property Ventures can't have the wherewithal to exercise the option, it is a shell, apparently:

http://www.stuff.co.nz/the-press/news/christchurch/3411492/Henderson-com...

Quote:

Henderson said the receivership of Property Ventures was a "quite pointless exercise".

"Property Ventures owns nothing right now with any value in it, and hasn't for some time. From my point of view, whilst I am a director, I don't own any shares in Property Ventures. I guess given Allied's position right now they do need to be seen to be doing something in regard to the loan book they inherited from Hanover."

Mark Hubbard says "every councillor who had a hand in it should be voted out"

Bearing in mind what has happened in previous council elections all existing councillors and the mayor will be voted back in. ChCh residents are extremely reluctant to oust sitting members.

The proposed rate increase this year is 4% compared to the current inflation rate of 2%.

I've got no idea whether they're borrowing or not, all I know is they're out of control.

We have two houses of almost identical value, one in Diamond Harbour (Chch), one in the Marlborough Sounds: our rates in the Sounds are under half what we pay in Chch.

(Although all councils are way beyond their mandate of basic services - and I don't even think they should be there for that. I caught some of Leighton Smith in the car yesterday, NewstalkZB, the topic council excesses. A case in Auckland was cited where a 'granny' had subdivided the back of her own section off, a single line on a map: the cost of all the council consents, etc, was $90,000. I still can't get over it. Some of the 'bits of paper' went through thirteen hands in the council office. Another case of a landowner who wanted to construct some type of roadway on his own property, and the council made him, as a requirement for the consent, take out a $1 million insurance policy, and pay them a bond of $50,000 in case he damaged his own property!

We're way, way past the time for a revolution against NZ's monolithic, moribund, parasitic bureaucracy that serves only to crush effort and endeavour.

Freudian slip - High Court, Hugh ! Excellent post; right on the money, as it were.

The CCC were recently reaffirmed with a Standard and Poors AA+ rating. Better than most banks and many Countries these days. CCC rates 50% of Auckland City. CCC debt levels almost non existent. Don't you just hate them!

Nick Stone - it helps of course that the Christchurch Council "customers" are forced to pay rates and other too often unjustifiable charges.

One only has to go to the Christchurch Council website to see the bloated corporate structures and staffing levels. Its about time Tony Marryatt actually started managing the place instead of simply administering it like a town clerk, where the indians are running the show to suit themselves.

After all Tony is pulling near $500,000 a year.

The guy is paid to perform as are most of them in there. They wouldnt get anywhere near these pay rates in the US or Canadian local government sectors - and they all know it. And most of them couldnt earn anywhere near this money in the private sector in New Zealand.

The sooner we start seeing sound and easily understood performance measures in the local government sector - the better. The good guys in this sector will appreciate this, as they will then know they are contributing constructively to their communities - and not just feeding off them.

The focus of this discussion though is the processes followed with the Property Ventures - Hendo / Christchurch Council exercise.

yes they are borrowing again this year, how else are they going to pay for the $115 million glass palace that is the new Council offices.

Oh yeah, forgot about that. And after spending all that money they still won't even own the building, plus they're going to pay something like $8 rent per annum. I think I'm remembering that right. I remember reading how the deals comprising this worked and there was a certain smell coming off it.

I've got a client who has a nice commercial building in Chch they could rent for $100,000 a year. In fact they could buy it for just $1 million. It would easily fit enough staff to run essential services. We don't need more than that, and think of the rates reduction we could have. The oldies could actually afford to retire in Chch and not have to live in the boondocks, something I suspect traveling in for the odd flower show doesn't really make up for..

Wally - too true!

more than a bit of debt here----1.67 billion
The Group includes the Council and its trading operations.
The financial results, after all inter-company transactions have been
eliminated, reflect the financial strength and size of the organisation
as a whole.
$'000
Revenue from operations 949,486
Operating surplus (before tax) 120,556
Total assets 7,598,568
Total liabilities 1,067,685
Total equity 6,530,883
This result continues a positive trend in results for the Group, and the
increasing value of the assets held by the City.
Standard and Poor’s affirmed the Council’s and Christchurch City
Holdings Limited long-term rating of AA+ and short-term rating
of A-1+.
this is from the summary
http://www.ccc.govt.nz/thecouncil/policiesreportsstrategies/annualplan/a...

Owen McShane wrote the following a few years ago: I wish a local body political party would actually contest their elections on this platform:

Fourteen Tips for New Mayors
Monday, 15 October 2007 18:26

........and Councillors Too!”

You are a new Mayor, or a new Councillor. You want “to make a difference”.

You may however be wondering how strong your mandate is, given the low voter turnout. I suspect one reason for the low turnout is that many voters have realized the staff actually run everything and that councillors do not know how to bring them under control or even have any idea what is going on. So why bother voting?

However, it seems to me that the big “upsets” have taken place in those councils were the staff are most out of control and are aggressively promoting their own social agendas and especially “socialisation by stealth”.

Consequently, those of us who have voted for you are now looking to you to take firm control and act like real Governors, rather than sit back and enjoy the meeting fees and morning and afternoon teas.

So you do have a mandate – a mandate to bring the politically-correct bureaucrats to heel, and even to clean out the stables.

However, be warned. The bureaucrats have been preparing for your arrival. Mayors in New Zealand have few powers – some of your staff are determined to neutralise even these.

Here are a few tips to help you retain a few powers of your own, make a few friends, and be re-elected if you choose.

1. Delegated Authorities

As soon as your Council is properly established, the CEO will table a document that delegates a whole range of decisions to the staff.

Don’t vote on it!

Put it on hold, give councillors time to digest the contents, and to discuss just what the delegations actually mean. Then make any delegations provisional, and demand they be brought back for confirmation every three months.

2 Going to Court

Adopt a standing order that says Council will not take a ratepayer to court, or support another agency’s court action without the consent of full Council. Otherwise your staff will spend ratepayers’ money supporting cases brought by DoC, other Councils, the Forest and Bird Society, and other agents of socialisation – all claiming to represent the public interest while spending your ratepayers’ money.

3. Case Law

Insist that staff provide councillors with regular updates on significant RMA Case Law. Many staff have a policy “not to advise Councillors of Case Law”.

No wonder.

No “Strategic Planner” is likely to tell their councillors about the Dye (1) decision, in which the Court of Appeal pulled the rug out from under all those plans and decisions based on “hand waving” about “cumulative effects”. The Appeal Court rejected the notion that a present application should be declined by the possibility of “unknown actions, by unknowable people, in an unknowable future”. This decision caused a panic among the zealots.

However, they have now written such cumulative effects specifically into their plans and depend on the Courts to rule that plans “trump” the Act, because they are legitimized by consultation.

Believe me – these “strategic planners” never sleep.

4 Employ an Economist or Three

Section 32 of the RMA demands that all policies, methods and rules be subject to a proper cost and benefit analysis. It never happens. When I have challenged this deficiency during Hearings, the staff admit they don’t know how to do it.

So employ a few bona fide economists who do.

5 Get rid of the “Planners”

The RMA is not a planning act. It never mentions the word as a verb. The RMA rejected the planning philosophy of the old Town and Country Planning Act in favour of a focus on environmental effects. But the Planning Institute still exists. So the RMA is administered by a profession which is hostile to the central purpose of the Act.

So change the name of the Planning Department to “Resource Management Department” and take “planning” and “planner” out of all the job titles. The frustrated planners will go somewhere else – preferably to North Korea.

6 Seek Contestable Advice

Your Council will receive reports on applications and proposed policies which will make you uneasy because they seem contrary to your common sense. If you question these recommendations you will be told "The RMA made me do it" or “The LGA made me do it” and you will be given little choice but to nod your head.

So set up a special policy committee, with its own budget, which can be instructed by Council to seek contestable advice from outside council. My experience is that most “unreasonable” reports are actually unlawful – they are written by soviet-style planners, rather than by sound resource managers.

7 The Many Meanings of Section 5

Ask your RMA managers what is meant by Section 5 of the RMA and in particular that part which “enables people and communities to provide for their social, economic and cultural wellbeing ... ".

Let me know what they tell you.

8 Cars and Parking

Many of your staff and some of your councillors believe public transport promotes purity and virtue, and trains grant sainthood.

It’s their right, and it's a free country.

Just insist they give up their car-parks – especially the ones right outside Council's front door.

Why do so many planners hate cars? Because cars set people free, which means they can’t be planned.

9 Don't Amalgamate

Whatever problems your district has, unless you have fewer than 10,000 inhabitants, amalgamation will only make things worse.

That goes for Auckland too.

10 Consultation (1) – check the lists

The RMA and LGA require that Councils consult with the people and the communities of the District during the preparation of annual plans, changes to plans – and indeed virtually everything.

Your staff will go out and consult with the “appropriate” groups.

Check the lists.

You will find groups like Forest and Bird Society, the Environmental this-and-that, the so-and-so protection societies, and the BANANAS (build absolutely nothing anywhere near anything) are all on the list. But for some reason the Chamber of Commerce, the Real Estate Institute, the Institute of Valuers, the Property Institute, Federated Farmers, and anyone who actually wants to get out of bed and do something, will be strangely absent.

And who consults with the newcomers – the migrants waiting in the wings?

Set it right.

11 Consultation (2) – we don’t have to consult with anyone

Councils have to consult with people and communities, including Maori, while preparing plans. But applicants for consents don't have to consult with anyone – unless they choose to so as to avoid notification.

Your staff may tell you otherwise.

They're wrong.

12 Compensation for Significant Natural Areas etc.

Your staff will tell you that compensation is not payable under the RMA. Tell them to read Part VIII of the Act and write out one hundred times the contents of sections 189 and 198 especially 198(5).

13 Have only two plans in place at any one time.
Bureaucrats thrive on discretion and multiple plans provide infinite discretion and totally disempower landowners. Hence insist that your Council has no more than its operative plan, and one proposed plan, before the public at any time. This will provide an incentive to get the proposed plan operative.

Be ready for a fight.

14 “May the Force be with You”.

I could go on.

But if you take only a few of these steps you will put your staff in their proper place and show that you mean to be in control. After all, you were elected – they weren’t.

But if they make the people furious, they keep their jobs, while you lose yours.

Good luck.

(1) Russel Dye vs Auckland Regional Council and Rodney District Council, Court of Appeal, CA86/01, 11 September 2001.

I suppose one of the reason council fees are so expensive is fighting developers on behalf of their citizens. If developers had to pay for the sunshine they usurp onto their apartment block and other adverse affects people might not be so allergic.

Interesting bit of info from the prudent bear

Brazil’s Bovespa has gained 84.2% in 12 months, Mexico’s Bolsa 86.8%, and Argentina’s Merval 140.8%. In Asia, China’s Shanghai Composite gained 36.5%, Hong Kong’s Hang Seng 70.2%, Taiwan’s Taiex 65.3%, South Korea’s Kospi 54.4%, Australia’s S&P/ASX 200 49.5%, the Thai index 73.6%, the Jakarta Composite 100.2%, and the Ho Chi Minh index 108.1%. In Europe, the Prague stock index has gained 80.8%, Budapest 131.3%, and Russia’s RTS index 170.1%. Emerging Market debt spreads (EMBI) were above 730 a year earlier yet closed this week below 300 bps. Mexican bond yields traded to a record low today (4.80%). Over the past year, the South African rand has gained 43%, the Australian dollar 42%, the New Zealand dollar 39.5%, the South Korean won 37.5%, the Brazilian real 34.5%, the Swedish krona 30.8%, and the Canadian dollar 25.6%. The price of crude oil has almost doubled in 12 months, and the CRB Commodities index has gained 35%.