Media Statement

7 June 2007

What is Auckland City Council hiding?

The Ombudsman is being asked to investigate a decision by Auckland City Council to decline a request by the Property Council of New Zealand to release any information about its development contributions policy. Connal Townsend, Chief Executive of the Property Council, described Auckland City Council’s decision to withhold all information as undemocratic and secretive.

“The Property Council, on behalf of its members and thousands of aspiring property owners, is seeking to investigate the development contributions policy of Auckland City Council. We want to ensure that it is obeying the law. To do this we need access to information.

“If Auckland City Council adopts its draft Annual Plan without amendment, it could grab in excess of $700 million over 10 years in extra levies on the purchasers of new homes and other buildings. The Auckland City’s proposed development contributions policy bumps up the levy on apartments in the Central Business District (CBD), up from around $7,000 to over $40,000 - a five-fold increase.” Auckland City’s policy is coming in despite a recent High Court declaratory judgment that seriously undermines the legal basis for countless development contributions policies, which are being pursued by territorial authorities throughout the country.

“All we are doing is asking the City to be honest about the reasons behind their policy” Connal Townsend said. “The Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 is crystal clear. Information shall be made available unless there is good reason for withholding it. It is not on for Auckland City to withhold information simply because it might be embarrassing to make that information publicly available.

“The harder the City tries to hide things – the more convinced we are that its information should be publicly disclosed.”

On 15 May 2007 the Property Council requested the following information from Auckland City Council –

1. All memos, reports and correspondence (including draft and electronic documents) pertaining to advice developed in response to the High Court declaratory judgment regarding the North Shore City Council’s development contributions policy 2004;

2. All memos, reports and correspondence (including draft and electronic documents) pertaining to analysis of the Auckland City Council development contribution policy and how it compares to the findings of the Declaratory Judgment; and

3. All memos, reports and correspondence (including draft and electronic documents) pertaining to what steps, if any, have been taken by the Auckland City Council to ensure compliance with the principals outlined in the declaratory judgment. On 5 June 2007 David Rankin, Chief Executive of Auckland City Council, responded by declining all parts of the Property Council’s request.

“We simply cannot tolerate a territorial authority withholding such relevant and important information. Our initial request was clear, fair and concise. We believe we have a right to the information requested, and our appeal to the Ombudsman reflects this,” Connal Townsend said.

ENDS

© Scoop Media