logo
Church's $100k fine shows importance of due diligence for Pacific communities, leaders say

Church's $100k fine shows importance of due diligence for Pacific communities, leaders say

RNZ News09-07-2025
Photo:
Auckland Council
A six-figure fine imposed on a Māngere church for illegal construction should serve as a reminder to all Pacific churches of the importance of conducting necessary checks before starting any project, community leaders say.
They emphasise the need for other Pacific congregations to ask questions, verify credentials, and seek proper advice to safeguard the contributions of their members.
Their comments follow the Auckland District Court's ruling that the Sāmoan Congregational Christian Church of New Zealand Māngere Trust and its representative, Sean Palala, were guilty of 15 breaches of the Building Act and Resource Management Act due to unlawful construction and use of a church and community centre on McKenzie Road in Māngere.
The Trust was fined more than $80,000 and ordered to pay an additional $25,300 to Auckland Council for costs. Palala also received a $7000 fine and was sentenced to 400 hours of community service.
The court heard that the church continued to use the building for gatherings despite receiving notices of its hazardous condition and orders to stop using the complex.
Pacific community leader Alf Filipaina says the church trust paid the price because it relied on someone who claimed to understand council processes but was uninformed about them.
The Manukau ward councillor says other churches can avoid making the same mistake by consulting with other congregations, verifying credentials and asking the right questions.
"They ended up contracting someone who indicated he knew the processes for building and resource consents, and he did not," he said.
"Having that talanoa first is so important. Talk to other churches. Who did you use? How did you do it? Always double check, triple check.".
The Māngere church boarded up after the Auckland District Court ruling, highlighting the consequences of ignoring stop-use orders.
Photo:
Auckland Council
Filipaina cites two recent projects as examples of how Pacific churches can successfully navigate these processes when they engage with the right people.
He says the Sāmoan Consulate complex, Maota Fale o Sāmoa, and the new LDS (Mormon) temple in Manukau both succeeded because they used certified planners who guided them throughout every step of the process.
He adds that investing in professional help upfront is more cost-effective than facing hefty fines later. Filipaina recently spent over $5300 on a building consent for renovations to his own home.
"When you have someone who truly knows the process -resource consents, building consents, inspections - it goes smoothly. That is the difference.
"That is money upfront, but that is nothing compared to the $100,000 they are paying now. Sometimes paying early saves your people later."
Apulu Reece Autagavaia, chair of the Ōtara Papatoetoe Local Board, says many small churches mistakenly believe they can handle complex consent processes on their own, but it is wiser to hire professionals to assist with these procedures.
He suggests that Pacific families engage younger generations, who are more adept at navigating the system, and use community or business networks to find trustworthy assistance.
"I encourage our communities to do the due diligence and get the experts in to provide professional advice. It might cost a bit, but it is worth it because then you have safeguards when things do go wrong.
"There are plenty of churches out there starting out. Do it the right way, get professional advice. If you do not know where to start, Pacific business organisations can help, or even your bank," Apulu said.
Tauanu'u Nick Bakulich, chair of the Māngere Ōtāhuhu Local Board, says good intentions are not enough when families contribute money in good faith.
"This situation shows how important it is to involve experts in building projects who can give qualified advice on regulatory matters," he said.
The Māngere property has since been sold, meaning the building is no longer owned by the church. Filipaina says this makes the lesson even clearer for other congregations.
"Our people gave to build that church. Now it is gone and they are paying fines on top of that. That is why you check first and do it the right way, so you do not lose what you worked so hard for."
An earlier image showing the church under construction on McKenzie Road, Māngere - a project that proceeded without proper building consents.
Photo:
Auckland Council
Auckland Council's David Pawson says ignoring court orders and using unsafe buildings would not be tolerated.
"Compliance with building and resource consent laws is essential for the safety of our communities," Pawson said.
Filipaina says the key takeaway is protecting the sacrifices of church members who contribute with goodwill and expect an orderly process.
"Our people give with their hearts. They deserve to know their sacrifice will not be wasted. We have seen it work when it is done right. Do the checks, protect what you build and protect your people."
Pacific leaders advise that any church planning a new building or renovation should consult with other churches that have successfully navigated the process.
Filipaina stresses the importance of hiring a qualified planner or consent expert and thoroughly verifying their credentials carefully. "It's money well spent."
Other recommendations include budgeting for proper compliance costs upfront and requesting a pre-application meeting with the council to address any uncertainties. '
Use trusted Pacific business networks for support.
The Sāmoan Congregational Christian Church of New Zealand Māngere Trust and Sean Palala could not be reached for comment.
LDR is local body journalism co-funded by RNZ and NZ On Air.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Lawyer censured for slapping one colleague's bottom, touching another's back
Lawyer censured for slapping one colleague's bottom, touching another's back

RNZ News

time6 hours ago

  • RNZ News

Lawyer censured for slapping one colleague's bottom, touching another's back

By Al Williams, Open Justice reporter of File photo. Photo: 123rf A lawyer who slapped a junior male colleague on the bottom and touched a female colleague's lower back during a social function has been censured. The lawyer, a partner at an unnamed firm, urged a New Zealand Law Society standards committee to consider his behaviour in context, stating that more freedom should be allowed for conduct at an out-of-office social function than during the usual working day. However, the committee found his conduct was disrespectful and discourteous towards the employees, who were both junior to him. According to a recently released decision, the behaviour occurred in the context of socialising by some staff members after a team function arranged by their firm. The partner generally accepted that some of his behaviour was inappropriate, that he had blurred professional boundaries, and had consumed excess alcohol that night. However, he did not see that as a breach of professional standards or an abuse of power towards either colleague. According to the standards committee's decision, the lawyer submitted that slapping the male employee on the bottom was "paying [him] respect" and "blokey", and that he was behaving as a friend rather than a partner in the firm. "The committee sees absolutely no circumstance in which physical contact of this type towards any colleague could be described as respectful behaviour. "The committee also considers this behaviour risks perpetuating a workplace culture that the profession is at pains to transform in relation to interactions between colleagues." The lawyer accepted that he placed his hand on the female employee's lower back as she passed through a door. In his view, doing so was "an innocuous courtesy", and he intended "nothing sexual or sinister" by it. The committee did not ascribe any sexual intent to the lawyer's actions, but found it was clear that the female employee was uncomfortable at the time and afterwards. The committee considered that physical touch on the lower back carried an element of intimacy and overfamiliarity that may reasonably have been interpreted as inappropriate by her or a reasonable observer. While there were some contexts in which this would be acceptable to both parties involved, it was likely to be perceived as flirtatious and inappropriate in others, the decision said. The lawyer's evidence was that she approached him to show him a team photograph on her phone, and he assumed her reason for doing so was for him to comment on it. Referring to the photo, the lawyer commented that the woman was "beautiful" and said that, in that context, it was not intended to be disrespectful or discourteous. The committee accepted that the woman was anticipating a comment on the group photo, but not that she was inviting a comment on her own appearance to the exclusion of others (when there was nothing to draw attention to her over any other team member in the photo). The lawyer's contention that his comment was respectful and courteous in the context was not accepted. The committee considered it was more likely than not that the lawyer's judgement about what was appropriate was impaired. "When coupled with his admitted blurring of professional boundaries, his consumption of alcohol meant he was not well placed to exercise the judgement required of him." While the committee did not identify a specific abuse of any power imbalance, it said that didn't mean an imbalance did not exist "by virtue of their roles as partner and junior members of staff". The committee considered that the team's social function, including ongoing socialising that occurred after the formal portion of the function, was a professional, collegial occasion. It found that the lawyer's conduct across the three incidents demonstrated conduct towards both employees that was disrespectful and discourteous. It was generally conduct "that would be regarded by lawyers of good standing as being unacceptable and unprofessional". Due to mitigating factors present in the case, the committee said it did not consider it necessary to impose any penalty. This story originally appeared in the New Zealand Herald.

Drug farmer built 'shanty' on Waikato swampland to harvest cannabis plots
Drug farmer built 'shanty' on Waikato swampland to harvest cannabis plots

RNZ News

time8 hours ago

  • RNZ News

Drug farmer built 'shanty' on Waikato swampland to harvest cannabis plots

By Belinda Feek, Open Justice reporter of Huntly men Jason Evans and Jayson Woods were charged after police discovered their cannabis growing operation on the shores of Lake Waahi in Huntly. Photo: Google Maps A drug farmer built a makeshift structure on the edge of a Waikato lake so he could row out and check on his cannabis plots, which he claims were at some point worth more than $200,000. In March 2021, Jason Edward Evans, 46, spent about eight weeks building the "shanty", which sat on the shores of Lake Waahi in Huntly. He and co-offender, champion New Zealand powerlifter Jayson George Woods, then used wooden pallets to get access around the cannabis plots on the swamplands surrounding the lake. Hamilton District Court recently heard that after building the structure, Evans lived in it for at least three weeks while he tended to his crop, harvesting the plants and setting up drying racks. Parts of the area were only accessible via boat. Then, in February 2022, police discovered about 1000 cannabis plants in six different spots in the lake area, describing the cultivation as a "large-scale commercial cannabis" operation. The discovery led police to Evans and Woods. When searching Evans' home in April that year, officers also found 15 x 500ml bottles of cannabis oil, $2480 cash, ammunition, 1kg of cannabis cabbage, 10 vials of steroids, and bottles of Jungle Juice and Rush. Jungle Juice and Rush are leather cleaning products but they can also be misused for other purposes. Evans told police he had harvested more than $200,000 worth of cannabis plants from his lakeside plots and that the cannabis oil and steroids were for his personal use. Aggravating Evans' situation, he was later busted with methamphetamine, cocaine, a firearm and prohibited firearm magazines this year, while on bail for the earlier offending. He was caught with those items when a firefighter was looking for a missing cat under a bed after a suspicious fire at Evans' Huntly property. The firefighter noticed a .22 rifle under the bed and reported it to police. The rifle was loaded with six rounds of ammunition, and, as it can hold 25 cartridges, is classified as a prohibited magazine. In a black bag, officers found 1.3g of cocaine, 172mg of meth, a meth pipe, Evans' passport, driver's licence, bank cards, medication and his phone. In his garage, they discovered a lathe surrounded by more ammunition, including a Ruger magazine, silencer and other firearms parts. After the earlier cannabis discovery, police also searched Woods' Huntly home and found 216 vials of prescription-only steroids and more than 300 unidentified pills. Officers also found a "small fully functional indoor cannabis grow room" in his garage, which had 18 seedlings, lights, power ballast, a timer and a mobile air con unit. A packet of unopened bullets and $4250 were also seized. Woods, 33, accepted there were "a couple of ounces of weed" at his house and said the steroids were his. According to court documents, he said he took them "because he is a New Zealand powerlifter". At Evans' recent sentencing, his counsel, Jasper Rhodes, said in explaining the 1000-plant discovery that it was grown in the wild and only about half of it would be "usable head". "It can only be harvested once a year because of the weather," he said, before stating that it was different from a hydroponic set-up in which all plants could be harvested. Judge Arthur Tompkins pointed out that, despite that, Evans had told police he had harvested more than $200,000 worth of cannabis. Rhodes said Evans was "primarily growing for personal use". He submitted that the operation was a "one-off, unsophisticated" situation with Evans "going in and out" to the hut by kayak. "This little hut [had] no glass, no windows, no walls, basically a shanty in the middle of the bush, compared with a person who is growing in hydroponic set-ups purely for personal gain with more plants." However, Rhodes accepted the drug offending Evans committed while on bail was an aggravating feature. He said Evans had the weapons and ammunition because he'd been the victim of attempted burglaries, break-ins and a violent home invasion in which he "almost died". As for the fire, that was investigated as arson, he said. "Without suggesting he was right to have a gun, he was right that he thought he was under threat," Rhodes said. "He had a reason, not a legitimate reason," the judge replied. Rhodes pushed for an end sentence of around 18 months, which would mean his client could walk out of prison, on time served, in about a month. But, on numerous charges, including cultivation of cannabis, possession of class A, B and C drugs, unlawful possession of firearms, prohibited magazines and ammunition, Judge Tompkins jailed Evans for two years and three months. Woods was sentenced earlier to 11 months' home detention on charges including cannabis cultivation for his involvement. * This story originally appeared in the New Zealand Herald .

One injured, shot fired in armed robbery at Whangārei bar
One injured, shot fired in armed robbery at Whangārei bar

RNZ News

time9 hours ago

  • RNZ News

One injured, shot fired in armed robbery at Whangārei bar

Photo: 123RF The owner of a Whangārei pub says a customer is injured and staff are traumatised after an armed robbery last night. Craig Woods who owns the Kensington Tavern said a man with a gun burst into the premises about 9.30pm, went behind the bar and ordered staff to give him the till's cash drawer. He said two staff and three customers were still at the pub as it was closing. "The staff did the correct thing by giving them the till, and it all happened pretty quickly. But one of the patrons intervened. The offender sort of broke free, and so the patron backed off." St John said it took one person to hospital with moderate injuries. Detective Sergeant Ryan Cooper who is the head of the Tactical Crime Unit said officers were called to the bar at 10pm, after a man entered the bar holding a firearm and demanded money. He then fired a shot towards the roof of the bar and assaulted one of the patrons, before taking cash from one of the bar's tills. He then fled the scene in a white Toyota Aqua or a similar model, driven by a second person. The car had stolen licence plates attached, registration KHA69. The injured person was transported to hospital, but has been discharged. Police said they are urgently working to locate the two offenders, and anyone with information is urged to contact 105 online or via phone, quoting file number 250726/2971. Information can also be provided anonymously via Crime Stoppers on 0800 555 111. Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero , a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store