(Un)affordable rents in Berm City

43 comments on “(Un)affordable rents in Berm City ”

• Comments are now closed

1. Ad 1

   3 October 2013 at 11:52 am

   I would suggest that seeking a policy answer from central government is no longer the first direction to look. From the NZHerald today:

   “Housing Minister Nick Smith and Auckland Mayor Len Brown are expected to announce a deal with communityhousing and Maori groups to build almost 300 homes on a 15.6 hectare farm next to a Child Youth and Fmaily child protection residence in Weymouth.”

   The partners taking this on are: the Housing Foundation, the Community of Refuge Trust, the Tamaki Collective of Auckland, and the Onehunga Hostels Endowment Fund.

   Just to pull one of those out, the Community of Refuge Trust (CORT) was set up in rection to Mayor John Banks selling off much of Auckland City Council’s public housing. It began out of Ponsonby Baptist Church, and started acquiring houses and flats in the Popnsonbly and Freemans Bay area, and now has over 90 of them.

   It focussed on helping people coming out of jail, and people recovering from mental illness.

   In discussion with Molly yesterday I was admitting that we are too far down the neoliberal paradigm in housing to expect the state or city to really help other than as broker to NGOs. I have seen the work of CORT first-hand and it’s really good. It’s the NGOs in my view that are really sorting the desperately needed from the remainder of the stressed (where state and city have long since abnegated any role).

   Maybe seeking the same old policy fix from political parties is looking for the solution in the wrong direction. The scale of the NGO response in the Weymouth example means it’s a whole lot less likely for policy outcomes to be overturned by successive governments (eg Hobsonville) if the NGOs are enabled to get on with allocating for need, and developing it.
   • Molly 1.1

     5 October 2013 at 8:28 am

     Hi Ad. Back again after a couple of days away, haven’t returned to that thread… will do so when I catch up on the Standard news.

     Agree with you on the impact small groups can make. I personally would buy into a mixed housing scheme, and be comfortable doing so – one that sells houses, rents some out, and keeps a proportion in perpetual affordable housing. But I have not seen a development that offers that choice.

     If small groups of individuals or NGO’s felt able and supported in created small-scale affordability models, we might end up with a wealth of successful models to give inspiration to others (and the failures while disappointing, would not be on a such a scale as to be unrecoverable).

     (Realised later, that I was coming from a mostly social and affordable housing perspective, but if middle class purchasers are willing to buy into these schemes, not only do they end up in a more diverse community, they may pay more affordable rates themselves.)
     • greywarbler 1.1.1

       5 October 2013 at 11:57 am

       Molly
       Agree with you on the impact small groups can make. I personally would buy into a mixed housing scheme, and be comfortable doing so – one that sells houses, rents some out, and keeps a proportion in perpetual affordable housing. But I have not seen a development that offers that choice.
       +1
2. fambo 2

   3 October 2013 at 11:58 am

   As per usual, the Greens are the only one of the three major parties serious about finding genuine practical solutions to social issues like housing, and the only party one can be certain will act on them. Nice to see Labour go up in the polls but sad to see the Greens who have been doing all the opposition heavy lifting for the past two years with just 13 MPs drop so quickly. Hardly the reward they deserve.
   • Intrinsicvalue 2.1

     3 October 2013 at 5:51 pm

     Deleted

     [karol: Intrinsicvalue, you have been permanently banned for repeatedly posting while banned. So don’t keep trying to comment under my posts – it will be deleted.]
     • Colonial Viper 2.1.1

       3 October 2013 at 5:58 pm

       The NATs may hold some centre voters, but they definitely hold the right wing policy space.
3. Penny Bright 3

   3 October 2013 at 12:22 pm

   3 October 2013

   Press Release Auckland Mayoral candidate Penny Bright:

   “Cut out the consultants – mow the berms!”

   “According to the Auckland Council 2012 – 2013 Annual Report, the total spent by the Auckland Council ‘Group’ on consultants and ‘professional services’ was $169 MILLION,” says Auckland Mayoral candidate Penny Bright.

   (The Auckland Council ‘Group’ includes Auckland Council, Auckland Council Controlled Organisations (CCOs, plus subsidiaries).

   [http://www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/EN/planspoliciesprojects/reports/annual_report/Documents/annualreport20122013volume3.pdf (Pg 23 ) ]

   “Rodney councillor Penny Webster says that at a time when household budgets are tight, the council cannot afford the $12 million to $15 million cost of mowing berms for the whole region. ..”

   http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11133160
   ______________________________________________________________________________

   “The answer is simple. CUT OUT THE CONSULTANTS and mow the berms!”

   “The blinding hypocrisy of Auckland Councillor Penny Webster sickens me.
   Councillor Penny Webster, (Chair of the Auckland Council Strategy and Finance Committee), wants citizens and ratepayers to provide their lawn-mowing services free of charge, although there is no legal requirement to so do.

   However, she and her husband have entered into transactions with the Auckland Council Group, totalling $32,189 during 2012, for services provided by their jointly-owned private company, All Rural Fencing Limited . ”

   [http://www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/EN/planspoliciesprojects/reports/annual_report/Documents/annualreport20122013volume3.pdf (Pg 80 ) ]
   ______________________________________________________________________________

   All Rural Fencing Limited (NZ Companies Office)
   http://www.business.govt.nz/companies/app/ui/pages/companies/1512665/directors

   ______________________________________________________________________________

   “In my considered opinion, this is a clear ‘conflict of interest’,” continues Penny Bright.

   “As an anti-corruption /anti-privatisation ‘Public Watchdog’, I am totally opposed to any elected representatives personally profiting from contracts with Council or Council-Controlled-Organisations (CCOs) .”

   “I believe in the ‘public service model’, where people seek public office to look after the public and the public interest, not to ‘feather their own nests’, and enrich themselves from the public purse.”

   “The problem with Auckland Council, as proven by this 2012- 2013 Annual Report – is that ‘the books’ are NOT open – and we are NOT given the ‘devilish detail’ which explains exactly where our public monies are being spent, invested or borrowed.”

   “This is why, if and when I am elected Mayor pf Auckland Council, I will establish an Auckland Mayoral ‘Commission Against Corruption’, and will ‘open the books’, in order to find out where every dollar of citizen and ratepayer’s monies are being spent, invested and borrowed.”

   “This Auckland Mayoral ‘Commission Against Corruption’ will be staffed by a small team of forensic investigators, (whom I shall appoint, and who will report directly to me), funded directly from the Mayoral Office, using the budget which is set aside in order to help achieve the Auckland ‘Mayoral Vision.’

   “My Auckland Mayoral Vision is – to stop the corrupt corporate control of the Auckland region.”

   “Here is my ‘Action Plan’ to stop ‘white collar’ crime, corruption and ‘corporate welfare’:

   http://www.pennybright4mayor.org.nz/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/ANTI-CORRUPTION-WHITE-COLLAR-CRIME-CORPORATE-WELFARE-ACTION-PLAN-Ak-Mayoral-campaign-19-July-2013-2.pdf

   “For those who really want to know who is running the Auckland region, ‘like a business, by business, for business’ – check for yourselves http://www.committeeforauckland.co.nz (membership). ”

   Penny Bright

   ‘Anti-corruption /anti-privatisation Public Watchdog’

   2013 Auckland Mayoral candidate

   [lprent: I thought you’d already said this? Ummm nope the last one said much the same thing but was different and in a different post. But it is starting to feel like astroturfing with big cut-n-paste comments. ]
   • Ad 3.1

     3 October 2013 at 1:07 pm

     Why not tell us where you’re really going to get the $10m plus to to this for the old Auckland City residents. Because your media release is a joke.

     And while you’re at it tell us where you’re going to get the $40m (approx) that would be needed to ensure the whole Auckland region gets their berms mowed not just your elite few in the isthmus. Because not to reinstatte mowing for all is to drive home one service standard for one set of residents, versus the great majority of Auckland who have been taking care of their own front lawn for many electoral terms without any of this petulant whining.
4. bad12 4

   3 October 2013 at 12:54 pm

   Nice Post Karol, very timely, and again it silently asks the question of Labour, where does that Party stand upon the need to seriously address the dire lack of affordable rental housing for those trapped in the low waged economy,

   i am here asking the question in relation to the number of houses provided by the State via HousingNZ,

   In my opinion it is not good enough for Labour to be proposing the building of 10,000 homes which in the main only the middle class will be able to afford while retaining what appears to be the vows of silence on the fate of HousingNZ as an entity that is the only possible means of housing the numbers of people who’s working incomes and housing situations demand that the State take the necessary actions to house them,

   Carving up the HousingNZ portfolio in favor of having special interest groups,(NGO’s), own 20% of that portfolio can only have any effect in a positive societal way if the actual numbers of Social Housing is increased by at least that number of houses,

   Carving up the HousingNZ portfolio in favor of special interest groups is simply more of the Neo-liberal abdication of responsibility which successive Governments have foisted upon the electorate as ‘progress’…
   • Ad 4.1

     3 October 2013 at 1:09 pm

     It’s been carved up several decades ago and will not be reversed. Doesn’t matter whether you like NGOs or not – they are the the most active and response players in the market. The command and control policy response is no longer possible.
     • bad12 4.1.1

       3 October 2013 at 1:46 pm

       Perhaps you would care to explain that dribble of drivel in more basic English, as it is written it’s a perfect piece of gobbledy-gook…
       • Ad 4.1.1.1

         3 October 2013 at 1:59 pm

         OK try: you’re dreaming it’s no longer possible.

         Read my first post at the top of the page you will figure it out.
         • bad12 4.1.1.1.1

           3 October 2013 at 4:22 pm

           No longer possible, now that is a statement based upon dreams if i ever seen one, the decision to either build Social Housing through the Governments own HousingNZ or through NGO’s is simply the neurons of the brains involved moving in response to certain impetus,

           Such an impetus if applied loudly and for a long length of time could change such decisions, i am tho operating under a certain belief that matters surrounding HousingNZ going into the future may have been to a certain extent ‘decided’ by an unsaid political consensus,

           National have it would seem silently agreed that the HousingNZ stock will be rented to tenants at 20% of their income,

           National have taken on board the previous Labour Governments idea looking to alter the mix of Housing stock they possess by selling off some houses and adding bedrooms to others,

           i assume that having NGO’s provide rental accommodation to their tenants at 25% of income and gaining the same subsidy as HousingNZ was also in the pipeline from Labour and was simply half-inched by National as they really do not have a clue about low cost rental housing or how much is needed,

           i see in your previous comment no valid reason why Governments have chosen to try and wind down the role of the State in the provision of affordable rental accommodation to be inclusive of only supplying monies to providers in the private sector except for politicians wishing to remove themselves from that responsibility,

           Having said that there is nothing wrong per se with private NGO’s being involved in low cost rentals especially when they are both housing and delivering other social services to those that they are housing,

           However there is still a gross shortage of affordable rental housing which has in the main left the lowest waged working families shut out of State provision that needs to be addressed and addressed urgently…
           • karol 4.1.1.1.1.1

             3 October 2013 at 5:15 pm

             Well said, bad.

             Also, ad’s line of argument just seems like capitulation to the neoliberal scam, rather than planning seriously for the future requirements of livable communities.
             • Ad …

               3 October 2013 at 5:27 pm

               You say capitulation, I say delivery of full project by 2017 that really helps vulnerable people.

               Shift all the neurons you like.Today, Smith, Brown and the NGOs won and delivered. Can the Greens or Labour deliver any better or faster?
               • bad12 …

                 3 October 2013 at 6:31 pm

                 Yes i can see the banner headlines and election billboards, National deliver 120 affordable rental homes to Auckland in 6 years of Government,

                 Really really good numbers i think not…
   • McFlock 4.2

     3 October 2013 at 5:57 pm

     The economy delivers jobs across a wide range of remuneration levels, always has [at least 6.4% of the country would disagree with you, probably closer to 30% if you include under-employed and people bullied into other benefits or prison]. Those on lower incomes are massively subsidised by those on higher incomes via income distribution methods such as Working for Families [and yet a fifth of children in NZ live in poverty and hardship]. Housing is more affordable in Auckland now than it was in 2008 (cite: Roost)but people are still paying most of their income on unhealthy hovels], thanks to lower interest rates and taxes[which only help the already rich, as the poor got hit by the GST hike and ended up worse off] . The housing crisis is another left wing lie, just like the manufacturing crisis was, that made Labour the laughing stock of NZ [well, for those New Zealanders who haven’t lost their manufacturing job in the last thirty years]

     FIFY.
   • bad12 4.3

     3 October 2013 at 6:26 pm

     Yeah right, as National tumble in the polls i think the laughter at the laughing stocks is becoming apparent from another direction,

     (…PS, if you are going to cite something pleases do so in a usable fashion)
5. Penny Bright 5

   3 October 2013 at 1:44 pm

   “Why not tell us where you’re really going to get the $10m plus to to this for the old Auckland City residents. Because your media release is a joke.

   And while you’re at it tell us where you’re going to get the $40m (approx) that would be needed to ensure the whole Auckland region gets their berms mowed not just your elite few in the isthmus. ..”

   What is a ‘joke’ about being consistent in calling for our supposed statutory rights to ‘open, transparent and democratically-accountable’ local government being enforced?

   You may be a bit ‘sheepish’ about upholding your LAWFUL rights ‘Ad’?

   http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/2002/0084/latest/DLM171810.html

   14 Principles relating to local authorities

   (1)In performing its role, a local authority must act in accordance with the following principles:

   (a) a local authority should—

   (i) conduct its business in an open, transparent, and democratically accountable manner;

   _________________________________________________________________________

   http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/2005/0040/latest/DLM345729.html

   Part 2

   Recordkeeping requirements

   Subpart 1—Key duties

   17 Requirement to create and maintain records

   (1) Every public office and local authority must create and maintain full and accurate records of its affairs, in accordance with normal, prudent business practice, including the records of any matter that is contracted out to an independent contractor.
   ____________________________________________________________________________

   I am not.

   Kind regards,

   Penny Bright

   PROVEN ‘Anti-corruption /anti-privatisation Public Watchdog’

   2013 Auckland Mayoral candidate

   http://www.pennybright4mayor.org.nz
   • Ad 5.1

     3 October 2013 at 1:58 pm

     Show us the money, Penny, or can you not make a basic link between making a political promise and a funding consequence?
     • Rogue Trooper 5.1.1

       3 October 2013 at 3:08 pm

       😀 “mow us the berms”
6. Penny Bright 6

   3 October 2013 at 3:30 pm

   errr… before I can ‘show you the money’ – by opening the books – first I need to get elected as Mayor of Auckland Council.

   I look forward to your vote 😉

   Kind regards,

   Penny Bright

   PROVEN ‘Anti-corruption /anti-privatisation Public Watchdog’

   2013 Auckland Mayoral candidate

   http://www.pennybright4mayor.org.nz
7. Tracey 7

   3 October 2013 at 3:33 pm

   I dont have a lawn mower, but if I did I would mow our verge.

   Never heard of a berm til this week.
8. vto 8

   3 October 2013 at 3:47 pm

   We live in a non-gated community where people let their animals eat the verges and berms. And various empty sections, Stops the gorse. Keep the goats in milk and the horseys happy too (why do they never just step over the single wire and waltz to freedom?). Perhaps city folk should try it too. Goats and horses are great for verge and other grassy maintenance. And the kids love them. And the grown-ups love them.

   the city could learn a thing or two

   go organic
9. Clement Pinto 9

   3 October 2013 at 4:09 pm

   Last night, John Campbell had an interesting item on this. He also referred to Auckland as ‘Bermingham’! That I found funny!
   • karol 9.1

     3 October 2013 at 5:18 pm

     Yes. That neo-language was funny, CP. However, this post is more about affordable rental housing.

     However, I also like vto’s no-gated community of borderless vegetation. Not sure where may renter s would keep goats & horses, though.
10. Steve Forbes 10

    3 October 2013 at 5:09 pm

    I wrote the Stuff article from 2011. Funny how little has changed in the past two years.
    • karol 10.1

      4 October 2013 at 7:27 am

      Thanks for the article, Stephen. Well, it’s sobering and frustrating that little has changed.

      Any change has been for the worse.
11. Paul 11

    3 October 2013 at 6:11 pm

    The Herald are taking the piss, right?

    “Man jailed for berm scan”
    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11134288
    “A former North Shore City Council employee has been sent to prison after signing off more than 150 invoices for road and berm maintenance work that was never completed.”

    Is it possible to satirise one’s own paper?
12. Tanz 12

    3 October 2013 at 9:31 pm

    The middle class is not the enemy. Why does the left hate the middle class? The middle class once voted Labour and could do again.
    • karol 12.1

      3 October 2013 at 9:38 pm

      You miss the whole point of the post. The problem is that the people on low incomes, and renters, are treated as the enemy, or ignored.

      PS: did I say I vote Labour?
    • Colonial Viper 12.2

      3 October 2013 at 11:33 pm

      The middle class is not the enemy. Why does the left hate the middle class?

      Same reason that the Right hate the poor.
13. joe90 13

    3 October 2013 at 9:51 pm

    Could something like this be constructed to demonstrate the problem?.

    http://a.tiles.mapbox.com/v3/phes.RentAffordabilityRevised/page.html#13/37.7549/-122.4167
14. xtasy 14

    3 October 2013 at 10:44 pm

    From the Housing New Zealand website, see also this link:
    http://www.hnzc.co.nz/rent-buy-or-own/rent-from-housing-new-zealand/waiting-list

    Extract:

    “Current waiting list

    As at 31 August 2013 there were 5,017 people on the waiting list. Of this:
    1,315 were Priority Eligible – A
    2,698 were Priority Eligible – B
    593 were C (assessed before 30 June 2011)
    411 were D (assessed before 30 June 2011)

    Priority C and D applicants confirmed on the waiting list before 30 June 2011 remain on the list until they accept an available state house not required by any priority applicant, or they exit the list.”

    I read above from a quote from the Western Leader from 2011 that there were about 1,000 persons on the waiting list in West Auckland then! Now that was before Housing NZ changed their whole priority system and how they work. Where have they all gone that were on the waiting list?

    I can tell you, they have been “off-loaded”, as Housing NZ no longer bothers with those that have no immediate, desperate need for housing. Even staying in a boarding house in a room, with shared toilets and whatever is considered as being “adequately housed” these days. A non leaking roof, four walls around you, damp or not, a door that can ideally be locked, and no heating, that is “adequately housed” according to Housing NZ!

    Categories C and D, which were cases where a socially and economically justified need once was accepted, have since been excluded from the list. Those that remained on the waiting list in those categories since mid 2011 have been sent letters every three months, to ask them to contact Housing NZ whether they still required “help”. Many will not have bothered to respond, as Housing NZ staff would also have told them, that their chance of getting a Housing NZ home would be next to zero, given the new focus only on priority categories A and B. Indeed it is only category A persons that have a realistic chance to get a Housing NZ home now, as category B ones mostly only get “supported” to find other suitable housing on the market. C and D waiting list persons will have dropped away by the thousands, unless they would have stubbornly stuck to the gun and insisted on being kept on the list.

    See also the present waiting list figures by offices:
    http://www.hnzc.co.nz/rent-buy-or-own/rent-from-housing-new-zealand/waiting-list-by-nu

    I went through the new process mid to late 2011 with a friend, supporting him, and it was a nightmare!

    What New Zealand needs is a large scale public housing program, ensuring that at least all long term beneficiaries, plus those permanently on low incomes and with little chance of improving their income circumstances, get housed in an affordable manner, by paying rents they can afford.

    All else is tinkering with bits here and there, and catering for the middle class, some of whom would not buy or rent in more affordable South Auckland, for the simple fact, they dislike living among “brown folks”, and having their white or olive skin coloured kids share classrooms with brown skinned kids!
    • bad12 14.1

      4 October 2013 at 9:09 am

      4079 people who have accommodation that puts them and their families ate ‘risk’ or have an urgent need of stable rental accommodation that they can afford with a severely limited income and what has Nick Smith and National achieved in 6 years of Government,

      The short answer= NOTHING, except announce the selling off of even more of the HousingNZ portfolio claiming the homes being sold are ‘unwanted’,

      ‘Unwanted’ of course is a subjective term depending who you are, how much you earn, and how badly in need of stable,affordable rental housing you are,

      Smith, the Minister of Housing has recently been attempting to scam the electorate with a number of publicity stunts, having sold off into the private sector at least 1000 HousingNZ homes in the past 5 years Smith and National are now trying to appease the electorate with the sell off of even more with the false claim that these houses are ‘unwanted’,(when shortages in the major cities could have been relieved by offering long term city tenants such ‘unwanted’ tenancies further away from those main centers),

      The latest publicity stunt from Smith will include 120 odd affordable rentals in a new housing development, of course once the publicity has been wrung from this particular announcement there is no guarantee that the housing will in reality be used for that purpose,

      Hobsonville Point is the classic case to point at where National after having wrung the publicity from making grandiose announcements about the number of State rentals to be ‘pepper-potted’ among the new housing estate have then cancelled such additions to the social housing stock presumably not wishing to upset the ‘new’ home buyers with a wish not to have the poor living among them…
    • AsleepWhileWalking 14.2

      4 October 2013 at 9:12 am

      Hi X,
      I agree with all your points, particularly the need to prioritise those who are CLEARLY unable to work in the long term. For these folks it is bad enough to have a severe disability without being discriminated against in the housing market, and suffering financially because of it.

      HNZ just don’t handle disabled well, particularly when it is a mental issue that has a medical requirement for a specific type of housing in a location suited to the disability.
      • AsleepWhileWalking 14.2.1

        4 October 2013 at 9:14 am

        https://fyi.org.nz/body/hnzc
        In case anyone is interested : )
      • bad12 14.2.2

        4 October 2013 at 9:51 am

        AWW, in my view everyone loves to hate on HousingNZ, that organization can only operate with the tools that a particular Government gives them,

        It is a political matter as to WHO is considered to be most in need of a seriously rationed number of houses, in the current climate HousingNZ and it’s staff are nearly as victimized as those who are in desperate need of affordable rental housing…
15. xtasy 15

    3 October 2013 at 11:27 pm

    OECD Better Life Index:

    http://www.oecdbetterlifeindex.org/topics/housing/

    “In New Zealand, households on average spend 26% of their gross adjusted disposable income on keeping a roof over their heads, one of the highest levels in the OECD, where the average is 21%.

    In addition to housing costs it is also important to examine living conditions, such as the average number of rooms shared per person and whether households have access to basic facilities. In New Zealand, 92% of people say they are satisfied with their current housing situation, more than the OECD average of 87%.”

    In contrast: In Australia households on average spend 19 % of their gross adjusted disposable income on keeping a roof over their heads.

    In any case, these are national averages, so living in Auckland, New Zealand is living in one of the most expensive cities in the world, especially when you are renting, as most rents in Europe and North America are lower in most places, except perhaps the top metropolitan cities in places like Paris, London, New York and the likes.

    Yet another perspective on housing ownership versus renting:

    http://www.theguardian.com/money/2011/mar/19/brits-buy-germans-rent

    “So what keeps prices down, and why don’t more Germans buy? Firstly, there is the supply of good quality rental accommodation. According to CB Richard Ellis, German housing associations and municipal authorities hold about 12% of stock, private housing companies 10%, and property funds about 1%; the rest is held by private investors.”

    “Regional variations are enormous – in Berlin, the rental property share is an incredible 90% of the total residential market, which obviously keeps prices down; even in prosperous Hamburg the rental market is nearly 80%. But in other states like Saarland and Rhineland-Palatinate, homeownership is almost 60%, the highest in Germany.”

    With high home prices in the UK no wonder so many Brits, also like some investor Australians and Chinese come to buy property here, as few countries make it so easy to buy property as a non resident, as New Zealand does.

    This all affects the local first time buyers and also the renters, paying through the nose to be “housed”, while incomes in New Zealand are for many not that high at all.
    • bad12 15.1

      4 October 2013 at 9:30 am

      The question New Zealand need ask itself has 3 fingers but nonetheless is simple: (1), Is a Man, His Wife, and, their 3 children, working variable hours for the minimum wage, all living in 1 room in a city boarding house an acceptable standard of housing,

      (2), Is any number of families, because of their economic circumstances, living in garages, many of which have no basic services, an acceptable standard of housing,

      (3), Is having invalids beneficiaries living in private rentals, paying $290 a week rent, being told by WINZ they will have to move as the top ups to their benefits cannot be legally sustained long term by WINZ, an acceptable standard of housing,

      These are the people that Nick Smith and this National Government consider to be adequately housed and therefor having no need to appear on the A or B list of HousingNZ’s waiting list,

      These are the people in my opinion, in a decent society, the State should be building housing for…
16. Neoleftie 16

    4 October 2013 at 6:22 am

    If berms are as we call them in the south grass verges property owner maintains them as a civic duty either directly or contract out of thier duty.
    Very sad reflection that people are neglecting thier civic duties and that, as Karol, has pointed out overshadowed such other more important relevant issues that we face as a community.
    • karol 16.1

      4 October 2013 at 7:37 am

      I’m a born and bred Aucklander, and never heard the term “berm” before this week. Always heard it referred to as grass verge.

      I often mowed our grass verge when I was growing up, as did others in my family. Sometimes a neighbour did it and vice versa.

      In the earlier days we used a non-motorised mower.

      But, yes, there are far more important issues for local body candidates to focus on.
17. AsleepWhileWalking 17

    4 October 2013 at 9:24 am

    This is from the Wairarapa, but how long before we hear an entire family (like the one in the article above) is wiped out this way? Garages are NOT suitable housing just because it has become common.
    http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/news/wairarapa/9242419/Cousin-too-late-to-save-gentle-giant

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS