Oranga Tamariki calls in consultants to help with job cuts, why Three Strikes could add to court backlogs and the first witness in Trump’s trial in the latest NZ Herald headlines.
A property developer has been fined $96,000 for trimming a protected tree after a severe weather event in South Auckland.
The prosecution was one of three recently before the Auckland District Court where companies or individuals breached the Resource Management Act to the detriment of the environment.
Altering a protectedtree in Papatoetoe, carrying out illegal earthworks at Pāremoremo and unlawful material being dumped on a Helensville property were the activities, according to the council’s summary of the cases, in the District Court at Auckland, released today.
The actions of the people or companies had a detrimental effect on the environment, the council said.
This protected Norfolk pine in Papatoetoe was altered illegally.
The altering of a protected Norfolk pine at a property on St George St, Papatoetoe, in June 2021 resulted in fines totalling $96,000 being handed to property development company Z Ali Investments Limited and its director Zulfika Ali.
The changes were made immediately after a tornado in June 2021. Work was carried out by a professional tree contractor with 15 years’ experience, under the instructions of Ali.
Judge Sheena Tepania concluded in sentencing that Ali’s actions were deliberate and his culpability high because he was experienced in the business of earthworks and property development and was aware the tree was protected.
“The opportunistic and commercial nature of the offending supports the characterisation of Ali and Z Ali Investments’ offending as deliberate rather than reckless,” the judge said.
“Mr Ali’s rush to judgment without any evidential basis for his assumption provided an opportunity for him and the company to realise their development aspirations for the site.”
She hoped it was a useful reminder that a natural disaster was not an opportunity to commit offences for commercial gain.
She concluded a strong deterrent message was necessary to reinforce compliance.
David Pawson, Auckland Council’s team leader of investigations, said after the case: “It is important for commercial enterprises and developers to familiarise themselves with relevant rules and comply with them.
“The behaviour of the defendant showed a total disregard for environmental rules and regulations and a lack of understanding of appropriate practices.”
Case two: $40,500 fine, illegal earthworks
Illegal works were carried out at this property at Pāremoremo. Photo / Auckland Council
Ronald Bank and Auckland Contouring and Fill Specialists (ACFS) were sentenced on one charge each of unlawfully carrying out earthworks without best practice erosion and sediment control measures in place in breach of the Resource Management Act 1991.
In 2022, Bank and ACFS undertook earthworks importing fill to 477 and 473 Ridge Rd, Pāremoremo, next to the Pāremoremo Reserve and creek.
This work was approved by the property owners.
The site had already been subject to extensive modification and a previous prosecution had been brought against Bank and another of his companies, Albany Earthmoving and Landscaping Services. It was also subject to ongoing enforcement orders.
Judge Melinda Dickey found Bank and the company were “highly culpable” and said it was difficult to conclude the conduct was “anything other than a deliberate disregard for the rules and the environment coupled with a lack of knowledge as to how to undertake earthworks appropriately”.
“The potential for adverse effects on waterways was not in doubt. It is, perhaps, good luck and not good management that the actual adverse effects are at the lesser end of the scale.
“Having said that, sediment to waterways is a continuing problem and mismanagement of work sites is a continuing concern. The necessity for adequate erosion and sediment measures has long been known and failure to ensure adequate protection is inexcusable,” the judge said.
Bank was highly culpable for this offending. Previous offending for largely similar failings on appropriate erosion and sediment controls added to the court’s concern.
There was a heightened need for deterrence, given the previous offending.
Case three: $20,000 fine, unlawful material dumped
This property at Helensville is owned by Robert Noe. Photo / Auckland Council
Robert Noe was found guilty of one charge of breaching the Resource Management Act 1991 for failing to comply with an enforcement order issued by the Environment Court in 2020.
The offending began in 2019 at 2294 State Highway 16 in Helensville.
Tonnes of unlawful material were dumped on the property in breach of the Auckland Unitary Plan and the Resource Management Act.
An enforcement order was issued by the court requiring Noe to remediate the site because of the ongoing and serious risk to the environment and human health from asbestos exposure and concentrations of lead and zinc from the fill material leaching into groundwater. The court found the ongoing effects on the environment were serious while the site remained unremedied.
Judge Dickey said the failure to comply with an enforcement order was serious.
“Noe’s continued failure to comply with the enforcement orders is perplexing. In the face of reports which summarise the effects of the offending, and the pathways to remediation, Mr Noe continues to sit on his hands.
