Complaints - Please scroll to the bottom of the page
Search
« This, is a Disgrace | Main | Allen v. Hammond »
Tuesday
Mar272012

Bowling Club Green Purchase - $400,000 + $200,000

On 28 November 2011, the Thames Community Board approved the purchase of the green directly opposite the Council for $400,000 for a carpark. This was kept secret for 'commercial' reasons. 

On 14 December 20 2011, Council confirmed the purchase, and staff proceeded according. The matter remained secret for 'commercial' reasons. 

on 27 March 2012 (yes folks - it is that long since our well paid Community Board has met - 4 months - they are supposed to meet every six weeks) the matter was again raised and staff (Matt Busch) were requested to provide a briefing because Cr Hoadley claimed that she for one had not been informed of the outcome. 

Matt Busch explained that the purchase had been completed on the instruction of the Council, and in addition, $200,000 had been allocated to complete sealing and carpark marking. The previous Council rejected the proposal when it was put up during its term. It would be very interesting to know who promoted the new proposal, and how - is it another election pay-off by any chance?

Both these actions are outside of Council policy and the necessary authorising motions would have to have been passed at the time, but what is of greater concern is that these action have been concealed from public gaze. There is no indication that appropriate valuations were carried out, nor how these two items totalling $600,000 are to be funded. Board Chair Strat Peters attended the Council meeting on 14 December, and unless otherwise engaged, must have been aware of what happened. 

The matter only came into the public arena today because BM Mark Bridgeman asked in open meeting  why the Resource Consent that he had approved under delegation did not appear in the minutes, or agenda. 

So now it is out there - our Community Board, and Council have purchased an area of land from from the Thames Bowling Club for $400,000, and aproved sealing etc. for $200,000 with no public input whatsoever, and until inadvertantly released in public today, it would probably have remained secret business.

I believe that this method of operation is contrary to the Act, and that it should be subjected to an investigation by the Office of the Auditor General, but it won't happen - that office gives the impression of being unwilling to upset the applecart. 

 

 

 

PrintView Printer Friendly Version

EmailEmail Article to Friend

Reader Comments (2)

well this is a turn up for the books.I personally know of a exCouncillor in the previous Council who took that very thought to the CEO of the time, Steve RURU and received a luke warm reception - and despite the Parks and Reserves Manager of the day comming up with a novel thought of buying the land for a future aquatic centre it failed to gain traction at full Council- despite it being suggested that Council buy the land and 'land bank' it for future developement..
So what has changed??
Council knows it lacks parking and any other private developement in the District has to provide one park for every 5 employees or 1 park for every additional 40 m2 of new building -or pay a car park levy -so is this a retrospective purchase of carparks for employees at Council [mind you if they keep leaving/ being fired at the current rate we won't need the additional parking]
It begs the question - where did this money come from - hopefully not from the Thames Urban account- for this is a District matter - methinks it is about time this current Council conducted its business in the public arena - NOT behimd closed doors as currently.
My ex Councillor contact has often commented that with no printed media reporting the meetings and only the spin Doctors at Council putting out their slanted views [ thank goodness for Bill's blogs!!] -this current Council is not being questioned or called to account and has a free reign to do what it likes - legally or otherwise- --so much for Hammonds proclamation that TCDC is in financial difficulties and staff cuts are needed!!!

March 27, 2012 | Unregistered CommenterThamesite

I would suspect the money came from long standing carparking developer contributions, which have to be used in a certain time period? But it would make a great aquatic centre site sometime in the future.

March 27, 2012 | Unregistered CommenterGunna

PostPost a New Comment

Enter your information below to add a new comment.

My response is on my own website »
Author Email (optional):
Author URL (optional):
Post:
 
Some HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>