Proposed billboard and signage by-laws illustrates Auckland City at its worst

By Connal Townsend, Chief Executive, Property Council of New Zealand

What triggers a requirement for a local authority to consult with its ratepayers?

Do by-laws that will cost property owners $120 million in equity and lost revenue justify consultation? Do by-laws that effectively eliminate an entire industry and destroy 400 jobs justify consultation?

Does the implementation of a set of rules that breach the New Zealand Bill of Rights and the constitutional right to advertise justify consultation?

Apparently some people in Auckland City Council think not. Last week the Property Council, like countless other affected parties, lodged a detailed submission in response to Auckland City Council ’s proposed billboard and signage by-laws. The impact of the proposed by-law has been widely canvassed in the media. But what has not been well publicised is the debacle that occurred in the run-up to the full Council vote on the issue.

As the Property Council has pointed out in its submission, the proposed by-laws on billboards and signage have a direct and material impact on private property owners in Auckland City ’s Central Business District, the majority of who are members of the Property Council.

Neither the Property Council nor any of our significant property-owning members were contacted, let alone consulted, during the quite significant preparatory period leading up to the full Council vote on the first draft by-laws.

We were completely ignored. But we weren ’t the only ones. Auckland City Council gave the business community just two days ’ notice of the draft by-law.

Regrettably, Auckland City Council, for reasons known only to it, decided to pass over an opportunity to work constructively with affected signage and industry leaders, retailers and business owners, choosing instead to create a stand-off with the very stakeholders who are forced to pick up a very large part of the City ’s annual rate bill.

On hearing that draft by-laws were being prepared, the Property Council requested, in November 2006, that the matter be placed on the agenda of the City ’s CBD Board for that month ’s meeting. Eventually the CBD Board received a first briefing on the draft by-laws the day after the full Council had voted on them for the first time.

At that Board meeting it became apparent that any economic impact of the proposed billboard by-law, in terms of the loss of income for building owners, had barely been considered by Auckland City Council.

In January 2007 we received a copy of the Covec report, originally received by Auckland City Council in November 2006. Whilst Covec touched on the impact of the by-laws on property owners, the true economic impact of the proposed draft by-laws is only now being fully understood: $120m in lost revenue and hundreds of jobs lost.

In the court of public opinion, Auckland City Council made no effort to consult building owners. The process adopted by Auckland City Council to date is in contravention of sections 155, 156 and 157 of the Local Government Act.

To clarify this point, any consultation process that does not enable a range of options and policy alternatives, and which involves a territorial authority that does not have an open mind as to the range of alternatives, could be construed to be contrary to the statutory requirements of the Local Government Act 2002.

Later this year the politicians will no doubt come knocking at the door seeking an audience, with a view to conveying warm soothing words about “partnerships ”, “relationships ” and a “constructive dialogue ”

By any reasonable measure, in relation to the proposed billboard and signage by-laws, Auckland City Council has failed to consult in good faith. A case of “do as I say, not as I fail to do ”.

Connal Townsend is the chief executive of the Property Council, an organisation that represents New Zealand's commercial, industrial, retail, property funds and multi unit residential property owners. The Property Council has branches throughout the country and its members represent some of the largest commercial property portfolios in Auckland, Wellington, Christchurch and Tauranga, the value of which exceeds $25 billion.

ends

© Scoop Media