In August 2022, a large pōhutukawa, part of the Sacred Grove (Te Uru Tapu) at Takapuna Beach, fell during storms and came to rest on private land owned by the Sands Apartments. Residents wanted their lawn back. Local iwi opposed any disturbance, saying the grove is wāhi tapu — a sacred place associated with burial traditions. What might once have been a straightforward arboricultural decision instead dragged on for years, escalating into hearings, legal bills, protests, and deep community division before Auckland Council finally consented to the tree’s removal under strict conditions.
The cultural arguments have dominated headlines. But increasingly, cost — and governance — are what people are asking about.
Former North Shore mayor and Auckland councillor George Wood CNZM has been one of the most outspoken critics. Posting publicly on Facebook and speaking to the Rangitoto Observer, Wood did not mince words.
“I think we’ve been taken for an absolute joke,” he said, describing what he called the “mythical story” of the Sacred Grove — a narrative he says he was never aware of during his years as Mayor of North Shore City.
“It’s just crazy how this has been handled by the council.”
Half a Million Gone — and Counting
According to figures supplied by Auckland Council, just over $1 million has been allocated to remediate and manage the Sacred Grove. More than half of that budget — $560,217 — has already been spent, with the most contentious issues still unresolved.
The council spreadsheet breaks the spending down as follows:
“The engineering cost alone is a major commitment,” he said, questioning where nearly $191,000 has gone. He also singled out the $82,000 Mana Whenua line item, saying it appeared high and poorly explained.
But beyond the numbers, Wood’s deeper concern is about who is actually making the decisions.
“The Māoris don’t make the final decision,” he said. “The decisions are made by this board.”
He argues that elected local representatives — the people meant to be closest to the community — were effectively sidelined, with the local board “cut right out” of the project.
Who Really Holds the Power?
What the Sacred Grove dispute has also exposed is the extraordinary degree of influence that cultural sensitivity designations now exert over council decision-making. Across Auckland alone there are hundreds - possibly thousands - of recorded “Sites of Significance to Mana Whenua”, many mapped broadly, some loosely defined, and most carrying no equivalent obligation of proof, cost-benefit analysis, or democratic consent. Once invoked, these designations can override private property rights, sideline elected local boards, stall routine works, and trigger expensive consultation, engineering and legal processes — all funded by ratepayers. In practice, they function less as advisory inputs and more as effective veto points, giving iwi interests often disproportionate leverage over councils and public land management, often without clear limits, transparency, or accountability to the wider public.
The Price Paid by Residents
While council costs climbed, the Sands Apartments residents were paying their own price.
Their fight to reclaim use of their communal lawn — land they legally owned — cost them more than $100,000 in legal fees. For years, they lived with a massive fallen tree across their property, while being told it could not be touched, moved, or removed.
What rankles many residents now is how the saga ended.
After years of insisting the tree was too sacred to disturb, the fallen pōhutukawa that triggered the dispute has since been dumped back into the Sacred Grove itself. The result strikes critics as contradictory — even farcical.
A tree deemed untouchable on private land is now lying inside the very wāhi tapu it was supposedly protecting, after hundreds of thousands of dollars in public spending.
Wood’s assessment is blunt: “Not a good outcome.”
More Than One Tree
The Sacred Grove saga is no longer just about a single pōhutukawa. It has become a case study in how Auckland Council manages culturally sensitive sites, how quickly costs escalate, and how easily accountability can become blurred.
Supporters say cultural consultation, engineering safeguards and ecological protections are essential and long overdue. Critics argue the project shows classic mission creep: consultation morphing into control, costs ballooning, and democratic oversight fading into the background.
Either way, Auckland ratepayers are now more than half a million dollars in, residents are six figures out of pocket, and there is still no clear public explanation of how success will be measured — or when spending will finally stop.
The fallen pōhutukawa may now lie silent, but the system that put it there is anything but.
Geoff Parker is a passionate advocate for equal rights and a colour blind society.
The cultural arguments have dominated headlines. But increasingly, cost — and governance — are what people are asking about.
Former North Shore mayor and Auckland councillor George Wood CNZM has been one of the most outspoken critics. Posting publicly on Facebook and speaking to the Rangitoto Observer, Wood did not mince words.
“I think we’ve been taken for an absolute joke,” he said, describing what he called the “mythical story” of the Sacred Grove — a narrative he says he was never aware of during his years as Mayor of North Shore City.
“It’s just crazy how this has been handled by the council.”
Half a Million Gone — and Counting
According to figures supplied by Auckland Council, just over $1 million has been allocated to remediate and manage the Sacred Grove. More than half of that budget — $560,217 — has already been spent, with the most contentious issues still unresolved.
The council spreadsheet breaks the spending down as follows:
- Engineering: $190,951
- Internal council time charging: $144,787
- Mana Whenua: $82,197
- Arboricultural work: $39,726
- Boardwalk removal: $52,763
- Fencing: $22,168
- Ecological work: $14,650
- Deadwood removal: $10,480
“The engineering cost alone is a major commitment,” he said, questioning where nearly $191,000 has gone. He also singled out the $82,000 Mana Whenua line item, saying it appeared high and poorly explained.
But beyond the numbers, Wood’s deeper concern is about who is actually making the decisions.
“The Māoris don’t make the final decision,” he said. “The decisions are made by this board.”
He argues that elected local representatives — the people meant to be closest to the community — were effectively sidelined, with the local board “cut right out” of the project.
Who Really Holds the Power?
What the Sacred Grove dispute has also exposed is the extraordinary degree of influence that cultural sensitivity designations now exert over council decision-making. Across Auckland alone there are hundreds - possibly thousands - of recorded “Sites of Significance to Mana Whenua”, many mapped broadly, some loosely defined, and most carrying no equivalent obligation of proof, cost-benefit analysis, or democratic consent. Once invoked, these designations can override private property rights, sideline elected local boards, stall routine works, and trigger expensive consultation, engineering and legal processes — all funded by ratepayers. In practice, they function less as advisory inputs and more as effective veto points, giving iwi interests often disproportionate leverage over councils and public land management, often without clear limits, transparency, or accountability to the wider public.
The Price Paid by Residents
While council costs climbed, the Sands Apartments residents were paying their own price.
Their fight to reclaim use of their communal lawn — land they legally owned — cost them more than $100,000 in legal fees. For years, they lived with a massive fallen tree across their property, while being told it could not be touched, moved, or removed.
What rankles many residents now is how the saga ended.
After years of insisting the tree was too sacred to disturb, the fallen pōhutukawa that triggered the dispute has since been dumped back into the Sacred Grove itself. The result strikes critics as contradictory — even farcical.
A tree deemed untouchable on private land is now lying inside the very wāhi tapu it was supposedly protecting, after hundreds of thousands of dollars in public spending.
Wood’s assessment is blunt: “Not a good outcome.”
More Than One Tree
The Sacred Grove saga is no longer just about a single pōhutukawa. It has become a case study in how Auckland Council manages culturally sensitive sites, how quickly costs escalate, and how easily accountability can become blurred.
Supporters say cultural consultation, engineering safeguards and ecological protections are essential and long overdue. Critics argue the project shows classic mission creep: consultation morphing into control, costs ballooning, and democratic oversight fading into the background.
Either way, Auckland ratepayers are now more than half a million dollars in, residents are six figures out of pocket, and there is still no clear public explanation of how success will be measured — or when spending will finally stop.
The fallen pōhutukawa may now lie silent, but the system that put it there is anything but.
Geoff Parker is a passionate advocate for equal rights and a colour blind society.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Thank you for joining the discussion. Breaking Views welcomes respectful contributions that enrich the debate. Please ensure your comments are not defamatory, derogatory or disruptive. We appreciate your cooperation.