It is important that street lamps not have their light impeded at night by large tree vegetation obstructing them. If you notice such a situation, tell the council about it; they will investigate and take action if they agree.
Local press: KCDC attempted intimidation and silencing of Kapiti ratepayer
KCDC police state tactics
I was visited by a police constable on 28 September, who handed me a copy of Section 4 of the Harassment Act 1997, and copies of flyers and a poster published by me, critical of council lies and defamation.
A complaint was supposedly made by Cr Diane Ammundsen in regard to a flyer she allegedly had delivered to her letterbox. Although I and several other
ratepayers have handed flyers outside KCDC premises on Rimu Road, any other
flyers have presumably been letterboxed by other ratepayers who have found the flyers of sufficient public interest. Coincidentally, Cr Ammundsen is the subject of a complaint by this writer, filed with the Ombudsman, concerning her faking of an “affadavit” (sic) containing untruthful allegations.
The issue is mainly in regard to my having been falsely accused of chasing Cr Holborow with my walking stick in chambers on 26 February and of having a threatening manner towards staff in the foyer on the way out, resulting in my being trespassed from council premises. Complaints of misconduct under the Code of Conduct against Crs. Ross Church, Janet Holborow, Diane Ammundsen, Penny Gaylor, Gavin Welsh, Murray Bell and Michael Scott, as all being complicit in lies and defamation, were rejected on their own collective vote, on the basis that standing orders supersede the Code of Conduct (although the main element of the complaints did not allegedly occur during a council meeting).
This latest ploy by Council is another breach of common law and the Bill of
Rights, which guarantees the right to distribute information anywhere at any time in the public interest. Again it shows that this council fears transparency and public scrutiny. It is telling as to its character that KCDC attempts to use the ploy of the Harassment Act to prevent public accountability of representatives who are supposedly elected to serve the public and to be accountable to Kapiti residents.
This is another means of intimidating Kapiti ratepayers in general, having first used the trespass act against myself, and subsequently the warning of trespass against three ratepayers at the 27 August misconduct hearings. This is an unequivocal message to the public that should they question KCDC or councillors this can be deemed as “harassment”, and a visit from police might occur.
The KCDC complaint is itself harassment, and it is disturbing that the police should have been used in such a shameful manner to suppress legitimate and entirely factual criticism. It is tin-pot governance Zimbabwe style.
I am hoping that Kapiti police can organise a meeting of conciliation between KCDC and myself to resolve the issues amicably, but doubt that KCDC has the integrity. A statement has been sent by this writer to Snr. Sgt Anita Dixon requesting police intervention to help in this matter.
We have not seen any mailboxed flyers referred to, although the photo on the front page of the Kapiti Observer at the time contained what seems to be the poster mentioned.
For interest, the section of the Harassment Act that Dr Bolton refers to is shown below. We investigated the provisions of the Act ourselves in 2013 because of the behaviour of a certain property developer’s unsavory employees in our neighbourhood in Waikanae.
Basically, this Act covers threats of physical violence and physical intimidation, and certain things need to be done by one or more specified persons within a specified time period. Unfortunately, there is no provision in NZ law for civil harassment as there is in American law, for example.
If the complaint against Dr Bolton only consists of what he states, then it has no basis under this Act.
Here is the ‘White Ribbon’ leaflet referred to. It does concern us that “Standing Orders” should supersede the Code of Conduct, as decided by a majority vote, and agree with the comments by Councilors David Scott and Gurunathan as quoted. A ruling on this by either the Ombudsman or the Local Government Commission is needed.
On a crisp Spring morning. This is taken on the south bank of the Waikanae River at Otaihanga, close to where the estuary walkway begins, see the previous post. That yellow flowering shrub isn’t gorse or broom, although gorse is still a problem in the estuary, one of the weeds that DOC wants to eradicate.
We had a walk along the pathway this morning, which is a 1.2 km formed gravel and boardwalk path through the wetlands forming the south part of this area at the river mouth. It can be accessed at both Otaihanga and the north end of Paraparaumu Beach. The Department of Conservation webpage has info.
This was held in the Boating Club on the beachfront last night. It was fairly clear from comments heard that most attending wanted the general beach area to retain its present minimal commercial appearance and feel.
What property developers see is that with not only the present Sandhills Expressway construction, but also the Transmission Gully Expressway which has been on the plans for a long time, Waikanae will be only a short drive in terms of time from Wellington and that the general beach area will boom as a weekend retreat for city ‘yuppies’, who will want nightlife, shops, etc.
There were a significant number of comments expressing concern about the height of buildings that overlook the beach. At present council policy allows buildings up to 8 metres — the height of a two-story house — without a resource consent. People don’t want resource consents issued for buildings more than that.
According to Michael Scott, fast food burger joints won’t be able to build near the off/on ramps. He says a council policy will be developed over the coming months and referred back to the community.
The council wants your submission on the proposals by Friday, 30 October.
Property developers are sure to be arguing that they should be allowed to destroy whatever native trees they like.
Needless to say, as conservationists we strongly take the opposite view.
Scenes taken around the region, including some near Waikanae.