Councillor Hayden Evans is settling out of court over the ongoing dispute with the Tauranga City Council over a pipeline easement across his land.
He confirmed today that he is settling out of court for an undisclosed sum – with which both parties are happy.

Cr. Hayden Evans.

The council offer from CEO Stephen Town and Mayor Stuart Crosby was made Hayden says, to prevent him appealing hearings commissioner Doug Arcus' decision to award the easement to the Tauranga City Council.
Hayden says Arcus' decision is seriously flawed,
'Mayor Stuart Crosby and CEO Steven Town asked to have a meeting with me a week ago to discuss the hearing,” says Hayden.
'The Mayor asked me before the meeting if I had started the process of an appeal. I confirmed to him that I had. He then asked that before I went too far down that road that we meet.
'During discussions with the Mayor and the CEO they informed me that they did not want to go to court and preferred to settle the matter. I agreed that this would be the best option for everyone.”
Commissioner Arcus' decision is unsafe says Hayden. In his decision the commissioner states Shady Lane was Hayden's suggestion as an alternative, when it was a council suggestion.
At the hearing Mr Arcus made it very clear to council and myself that in taking another route, or path over my land, cost could not be used as a reason, says Hayden.
Nor could the use of extra pipe on a longer alternative route be used as a reason.
'To use section 181 of the Local Government Act 2002, the Tauranga City Council had to demonstrate that the path across my land was the only practical route for the pipeline,” says Hayden.
In his decision the commissioner included cost and additional length of pipe as reasons why the pipeline had to go over Hayden's land.
'This is in direct contrast to his reasoning in the hearing where he told us we could not debate it,” says Hayden.
'A path that went through the neighbour's property needed less easements than mine but was not even included in Mr Arcus' report,” says Hayden.
'There were many other route options that council could have looked into. The answer that staff gave to the options that I put on the table was that they had not looked at them.
'One of the paths was over a neighbour's property. This was shown on the council report. I asked why they did not take that path and their answer was the neighbour had protested against it and this was why they chose not to go down that path. There was no other proof put on the table by the council to refute that.
'The four other options that were put on the table by me were never refuted by council. No proof by the council was provided to show that they had looked at these other options. This clearly demonstrates that the council has not looked at all other options to meet the requirements of section 181 to take land.”
Hayden says Councillor Mike Baker, who is a council hearings commissioner, sat in on the hearing, and scored in Hayden's favour 8-3.
'He sent an email to council staff after the hearing finished harshly criticising them for doing a poor job in defending their position,” says Hayden.