Mounting Legal Threats And Property Deal Patterns Spark Fresh Call For National Inquiry

Thursday, 3 July 2025, 2:25 pm
Press Release: Lobby for Good

Tauranga, NZ – Civic watchdog and advocacy group Lobby for Good is renewing its call for an independent investigation and a full Auditor-General inquiry after its legal advisor, Kirsten Murfitt (Principal at KM Law), uncovered another high-risk land transaction involving Tauranga City Council. The deal saw land at 57 Pitau Road, sold to a developer for $6.65 million, then bought back within seconds the same day for $13.59 million.

No open tender. No clear explanation.

Even more concerning, the land appears to have been subject to the Public Works Act, which legally requires it to be offered back to the original owner. That offer-back isn’t recorded on the title, and Council’s justification relies on a vague reference to a “successor.”

“This isn’t just about one deal,” says Erika Harvey, Director of Public Affairs at Lobby for Good.

“It’s about a pattern, deals that quietly transfer public value to private hands, often without oversight or genuine public input.”

Harvey says that in investigating other developments across Tauranga, Lobby for Good and her legal advisor Kirsten Murfitt have already encountered legal threats aimed at stifling scrutiny and public questioning. “These legal threats didn’t arise from the Pitau Road development, but based on the behaviour we’ve seen elsewhere, we are concerned that the same approach could be used to silence public concern here too,” Harvey says.

Lobby for Good, in partnership with its external legal advisors at KM Law, have now documented at least seven concerning property or governance decisions made under Tauranga’s unelected commissioners, including the undervalued sale of the Marine Precinct, hidden influence over candidate selection, heavily redacted information requests, and clauses in elder housing contracts requiring Council to repurchase land before on-selling it.

“This is soft corruption,” Harvey says.

“Legal-looking deals that quietly shift public value into private hands. And now, instead of transparency, we are seeing patterns of legal intimidation being used to discourage public scrutiny.”

Lobby for Good reports that residents from the Pitau Road community have contacted them, feeling helpless, angry, and voiceless. They’re deeply concerned that this high-rise development will overshadow their homes, devalue their properties, destroy the neighbourhood’s character, increase traffic and stormwater problems, and set a dangerous precedent for suburban intensification without proper consultation. Residents say they’ve been shut out of the process from day one, with decisions made behind closed doors under fast-track consenting rules that silenced the community’s voice.

“We hear you,” says Harvey.

“This is your neighbourhood, your skyline, your home. You deserve to be heard.”

Lobby for Good is calling on residents affected by the Pitau Road development to visit www.LobbyforGood.co.nz and register their interest to attend a community meeting about the Pitau development. If there is sufficient interest, Lobby for Good will support residents in bringing their voices into the mainstream, connecting them with wider networks, and working together to prevent this from happening to other everyday Kiwis in communities across New Zealand.

“In a healthy democracy, journalists and advocates shouldn’t need legal defence just to ask questions,” says Harvey.

“That’s why we’re again calling on the Office of the Auditor-General and the Department of Internal Affairs to investigate the full scope of governance failures, and whether legal intimidation is being used to suppress public participation in Tauranga.”

Lobby for Good is calling for:

• A public-facing, independent investigation into all land and asset sales approved under Tauranga’s unelected commissioners.
• A formal inquiry by the Office of the Auditor-General into Council financial decisions, consultation failures, and conflicts of interest.
• An immediate review of the use of legal threats to suppress scrutiny of public decisions.

“If nothing improper occurred, there should be no need for threats, only answers,” says Harvey.
“And if this is happening in Tauranga, what else is happening behind closed doors across New Zealand?”

© Scoop Media