Heart of the City chief executive Viv Beck was suspended after a letter from the board on March 27, 2026. Photo / Greg Bowker
Heart of the City chief executive Viv Beck has won a legal challenge against the board of the Auckland city centre business association which found she had an “arguable case” she was “unjustifiably suspended” over a range of alleged governance and behavioural issues.
An Employment Relations Authority (ERA) decision from May 15 orders the HOTC board to reinstate Beck as chief executive on an interim basis after she was stood down on March 27.
The ERA decision quotes a letter from lawyers acting for the HOTC board that alleged a list of 10 “high level concerns” with Beck.
These include: “poor communication”, “breakdown of trust and confidence between you and the Committee”, “hostile behaviour towards Committee members”, and “withholding of information said to be important to the Committee’s functions”.
It has also undertaken an urgent update of board and governance processes, including engaging “independent external special counsel” to ensure board meeting processes, agendas, decisions and minutes were compliant “for the sake of transparency”.
Auckland Mayor Wayne Brown also wrote to HOTC in March with concerns about the agency’s governance before Beck was stood down.
ERA member Nicola Craig found the trigger for HOTC’s suspension of Beck was her raising concerns about “constitutional eligibility and conflicts of interest of the [HOTC] chair”, alleging he was not a member of HOTC, and calling for a special general meeting to resolve this.
“However, [HOTC] then chose to expand the list of concerns to include other earlier issues. It was not seemingly willing or able to provide sufficient detail as at the time of suspension,” Craig said.
“There is some strength in these circumstances to the submission on Ms Beck’s behalf that the cart was put before the horse – the suspension was enacted before it was even decided what the allegations against her were. It is challenging to see suspension as warranted when conducted in such a manner.”
Malcolm McCracken was confirmed as the new HOTC chair on February 25. McCracken was a manager of KPMG’s infrastructure advisory but has since left that position to take on a role as a commissioner on the Independent Hearings Panel for Auckland Council Plan Change 120 - a shake-up of the city’s planning rules.
The ERA decision reported HOTC placed the start of a breaking down in the relationship with Beck in October 2025 follwing publicity about a business survey the board was not anticipating. Beck however disputed this description, “placing tensions being rather more recent”.
Beck also cites a media article “headlined by a negative question” which McCracked was involved in as a concern in a March 18 letter to the HOTC board.
Craig said HOTC’s alleged grounds for Beck’s suspension were largely related to “several risks … namely interference” of her presence on the investigations it had launched.
But while acknowledging “the CEO’s role has power”, Craig said “it is arguable that the grounds are too speculative” for Beck’s suspension.
“Focusing on the reasons given for suspension, there is little to establish that the nominated risks make it impractical or unreasonable for her to be reinstated,” Craig said.
After suspending Beck without notice, the pace of HOTC pursuing its investigation “could be seen as relatively slow”, Craig also judged. It took two weeks to provide details of the concerns, then three weeks before an independent investigator was appointed and another week to send draft terms of reference for comment, Craig said.
It is noted in the decision that none of the concerns raised by HOTC in its suspension of Beck “prima facie indicate any financial impropriety”.
A spokesperson for the HOTC executive committee [board] said although non-publication order has been lifted on this particular matter “HOTC is still unable to comment on the specificities of individual employment situations”.
“The Executive Committee considers employment matters carefully, and as a whole, and has acted with the benefit of advice, and continues to do so.”
As part of the ERA challenge, Beck gave evidence of being employed for 10 years “without issue until recently, including receiving positive feedback from previous boards and the awarding of performance-related bonuses”.
The resulting “substantial media coverage” of Beck’s suspension had left Beck “very concerned” about the potential for professional reputational damage, the ERA decision notes, with a speaking engagement already withdrawn.
In the concluding judgment, Craig said that “on the limited information available”, she rated Beck’s argument of being unjustifiably suspended as “rather stronger than the ‘weak’ categorisation accepted for Heart of the City” in their submissions to the ERA.
However, Craig pointed out that “more evidence on the reasons why removal from the workplace was considered necessary could change that... [Beck’s] case for permanent reinstatement may also alter on the basis of further evidence”.
She said it was “currently uncertain” whether the ERA would “substantively investigate” the suspension matter of Beck at a future time.
Beck was not seeking to “halt the investigation or any disciplinary action”, but “rather she is seeking to be able to return to work in her role during the investigation”.
The HOTC spokesperson was keen to strees the ERA: “did not issue any final ruling as to whether the suspension was unjustified. The ERA has found only that, at this interim stage, on untested evidence, that there may possibly be an arguable case for Ms Beck”.
“Untested evidence means that the Authority has not looked into the evidence presented, or questioned the parties concerned beyond the paper materials provided.”
Craig ordered HOTC to reinstate Beck on an interim basis by allowing her to return to work as chief executive. She required both parties to “work together in good faith” in mediation and reintegration over the five days after the May 15 ERA decision.
Beck was then permitted to start back at work within three working days after the mediation occurred.
Beck allegedly attempted to “persuade” HOTC’s executive committee to elect a specific new chair early this year.
Waitematā local board chairwoman Alexandra Bonham also told the Herald that Beck tried to convince her to elect a specific liaison person appointed by the local board to oversee funding decisions for HOTC’s $5.6 million annual budget.
A HOTC spokesperon said the board was satisfied that the chair, McCracken, was a HOTC member by virtue of being an occupier or tenant in the targeted rate area and operating a business in such a property.
HOTC is funded through a targeted rate and levies paid by the CBD’s 15,500 businesses and landlords. It has contractual obligations as an approved Business Improvement District and annual accountability reporting to Auckland Council.
Beck has been contacted for comment.
Sign up to The Daily H, a free newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.