The Oamaru Whitestone Civic Trust is embroiled in a row over new members and its annual elections, but the disquiet goes deeper than that, David Bruce reports.
A battle is being waged over control of one of Oamaru's premium tourist attractions - its historic precinct in the Harbour and Tyne Sts area.
The Oamaru Whitestone Civic Trust has featured in the media recently over new members and the election for two board members.
But the controversy has been simmering for at least two years, and goes deeper than just an argument over who can vote to elect board members.
At the heart of the debate is who should control and determine the future of the trust (established in 1988 after a report by consultant Arthur Young for the then Oamaru Borough and Waitaki County Councils), its property holdings, and development of the historic precinct and Oamaru Harbour areas.
Arthur Young was asked to come up with a plan to ensure the long-term preservation and utilisation of the buildings in the Harbour-Tyne Sts area and the marketing of the area for tourist and commercial purposes. That report still forms the basis today for managing the area.
It recommended establishing a trust with a board elected by the trust's members and appointees from the now Waitaki District Council and New Zealand Historic Places Trust.
While voting rights, trust membership and this year's election are the focus of current attention, the controversy really erupted in March last year when board member Ian Little, a council appointee, resigned.
Mr Little, who said the trust should be abolished, and replaced by a new organisation, was frustrated with the way the board was operating, its failure to reflect the make-up of the local community, a lack of acceptance its role needed to change and that new skills were needed.
He accused ‘‘people in a pivotal role'' of never allowing the trust to develop and expand ‘‘in a manner that will realise the opportunities there''.
He voiced the frustrations of some people in the community, and in the historic precinct, with the direction of the board.
On one hand are people who want more businesses and activities and the historic area opened to more uses - not necessarily just those that reflect the Victorian era.
On the other are those who want to restrict use of the area to activities with a Victorian purity. That group includes some the elected members on the board, who remain true to the vision in the 20-year-old Arthur Young report.
An example of the opposing views was the trust board's decision to oppose, and then appeal to the Environment Court, resource consent being granted by the Waitaki District Council for property developers Jenny and Nigel de Geest's apartment complex in two disused wool store buildings at the Oamaru Harbour.
Some of the feeling goes back to a 1996 repfort from a Harbourside co-ordination group which questioned the trust's ability to cope with changes needed in the area.
The group suggested the trust be replaced by a charitable company, taking on additional responsibilities.
The friction between the groups led to a membership drive and about 50 applications being placed before the board at its December meeting.
If all had been approved before the end of the calendar year the new members would have been entitled to vote. The move was seen by some as an attempt to change the elected members of the board.
However, approval of membership was delayed until this year and the new members can not vote. That is being disputed by Mr Little, who is threatening legal action.
The future of the debate might depend on the outcome of the election.
If two board members are elected who favour change, the balance of power could shift.
