The 2013 update of the Auckland Consumer Guide for the Sexually Active Guy

This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post.

Auckland on its most stressful day

Today (or rather, tonight) New Zealand will be either officially in mourning, or prolong its anticipation of winning the rugby world cup it has been waiting for for 24 years. So it was time to go and have a look what all the fuss is about in rugby heartland, a.k.a. The Cloud, on the waterfront.
It looks like a temporary structure, canvas flimsily held aloft by meccano-like structures, but if it was up to Maestro Warterfront on the Council it should stay there for another 15 years. I think that's highly unlikely and if a swift nor'easterly storm or hurricane doesn't do the trick, surely a cartload of pigeon shit will make it look tatty and old before its time is up.
Inside it looks spacious and airy but since the actually rugby wasn't on, it's run as a showcase for NZ companies. It reminded me of being taken to engineering and building trade shows by my dad: rather boring and pointless.
The remaining old shed next door has been 'transformed' into a booze barn with all the alcy charm and chummy coziness that entails.

So, after that rather disappointing excursion it was time to check out that other new development my tax dollars have been spent on, apart from the rugby, the newly refurbished Auckland Art Gallery.
A rather fetching new annexe with a spectacular kauri wood canopy abuts the Victorian French chateau-style original gallery, expanding the exhibition space enormously.
But it's still a very intimate gallery of contemporary and historic New Zealand and international art, which makes a visit manageable and not overwhelming. There are some spectacular pieces on show by Picasso and Goldie. My favourite was a very small painting by Piet Mondrian.

In all, I am very pleased my tax dollars have been spent on this, and the return will be far longer lasting and substantial than any rugby match series can.
The gallery website is here.

Think big city, act small town

Now that Auckland, auto-describing itself as "Big Little City", will be celebrating its 171st birthday in a few weeks' time, but the first one as a unified local authority, with a fireworks display that will cost $25,000 (!), it's time to put a bit local pride back into its various spread out villages and what better way to do this than to adopt new names for people living locally and who do not always want to be known as Aucklanders (or Jafas).
So here's a list of all the burbs in Auckland and suggested monikers for their residents. Please add your own so we can have a full complement to send to the Council.

Central Isthmus

* Arch Hill: Arch Hillbillies
* Avondale: Avondaleks, Avondalit
* Blockhouse Bay
* Balmoral: Balmoralists
* Eden Terrace
* Ellerslie: Ellerslie-ins
* Epsom: Epsomdomites
* Freemans Bay
* Glendowie
* Glen Innes: Glen Innocents
* Grafton: Grifters
* Greenlane
* Grey Lynn
* Herne Bay
* Hillsborough
* Kingsland
* Kohimarama
* Lynfield
* Meadowbank
* Mission Bay
* Morningside
* Mount Albert
* Mount Eden
* Mount Roskill: Roskillers
* Mount Wellington
* Newmarket: Newmarketeers
* Newton: Newtonians
* New Windsor: New Windsorknots
* Onehunga
* One Tree Hill: One Tree Hillbillies
* Orakei
* Oranga
* Otahuhu: Otahuhugrubs
* Owairaka: Owairakish
* Panmure: Panmurals
* Parnell: Parnellies
* Penrose: Penroses
* Point England: Point Engerlanders
* Point Chevalier: Maurice
* Ponsonby: Ponsonbyterians
* Remuera
* Royal Oak: Royal Oakleaves
* Saint Heliers
* Saint Johns
* Saint Mary’s Bay
* Sandringham: Sandringhamptons
* Tamaki
* Te Papapa: Te Papapas and Te Mamamas
* Three Kings: Myrrhs
* Waikowhai: Waikowhyohwhy
* Waterview: Brisbanites
* Westfield
* Westmere: Westmites

North Shore

* Albany: Albanians
* Bayswater
* Beach Haven
* Belmont: Belmontezumas
* Birkdale: Birkdaleks
* Birkenhead: Birkenheadcases
* Browns Bay
* Campbells Bay
* Castor Bay
* Chatswood: Chatswoodsmen
* Crown Hill: Crown Hillbillies
* Cuthill: Cuthillbillies
* Devonport: Devonportuguese
* Fairview
* Forrest Hill: Forest Hillbillies
* Glenfield
* Glenvar: Glenvariables
* Greenhithe: Greehithers and Dithers
* Highbury
* Hillcrest
* Long Bay
* Mairangi Bay
* Marlborough
* Meadowood: Meadowoodsmen
* Milford
* Murrays Bay
* Northcote: Northcoteries
* North Harbour: North Harbourgeois
* Rosedale: Rosedaleks
* Rothesay Bay
* Oteha
* Pinehill: Pinehillbillies
* Stanley Bay
* Sunnynook: Sunnynooks & Crannies
* Takapuna: Takapunakaiki
* Torbay
* Waiake
* Wairau Valley: Wairau Valley Girls
* Westlake: Westlacqueys
* Windsor Park: Windsor Parquettes
* Unsworth Heights

South Auckland and eastern suburbs

* Airport Oaks
* Beachlands
* Brookby: Brookbyterians
* Bucklands Beach
* Chapel Downs
* Clendon
* Clevedon: Clevedores
* Clover Park
* Cockle Bay
* Dannemora: Dannemoralists
* East Tamaki
* Eastern Beach
* Farm Cove: Farm Covens
* Flamboro Heights
* Flat Bush: Short & Curlies
* Goodwood Heights
* Greenmeadows
* Half Moon Bay: Half Moonies
* Heron Point
* Highland Park
* Hill Park
* Howick: Howickeds, Howickets
* Kawakawa Bay
* Mahia Park
* Mangere
* Mangere Bridge
* Mangere East
* Manukau
* Manukau Heights
* Manurewa
* Maraetai: Maraetaidyeds
* Meadowlands
* Mellons Bay
* Middlemore
* Murphys Heights
* North Park
* Orere Point
* Otara
* Pakuranga: Pakurangutans
* Papatoetoe: Papatootsies
* Porchester Park
* Puhinui: Puhinuiguineans
* Randwick Park
* Redoubt Park
* Richmond Park
* Settlers Cove
* Shelly Park
* Silkwood Heights
* Sommerville: Sommervillains
* The Gardens
* Totara Heights
* Tuscany Estate: Tusks
* Waimahia Landing
* Wattle Cove
* Wattle Downs
* Weymouth
* Whitford
* Wiri

Papakura

* Addison: Addisons & Daughters
* Alfriston: Alfristoners
* Ardmore
* Conifer Grove: Conifer Grovelers
* Longford Park
* Manurewa East
* Pahurehure: Pahurehurlings
* Papakura: Papacures
* Opaheke
* Red Hill: Red Hillbillies
* Rosehill: Rosehillbillies
* Takanini: Takaninnies

West Auckland

* Glen Eden
* Glendene: Glendenizens
* Green Bay: Packers
* Henderson
* Hobsonville: Hobsonvillains
* Kelston: Kelstoners, Kelstone Cops
* Konini: Koninnies
* Laingholm
* Massey
* New Lynn
* Oratia: Oratiaras
* Ranui
* Sunnyvale
* Swanson: Swansongs
* Te Atatu: Te Atatutus, Te Atatutsi
* Titirangi: Titirangitanes
* Waiatarua
* Waitakere
* West Harbour: West Harbourgeois
* Whenuapai: Whenuapies

Gulf Islands

* Great Barrier
* Rakino
* Waiheke

Auckland governance ward system

I got a reply back from the Local Government Commission on my submission on the ward and electoral system for Auckland City:

Thank you for your submission. The Commission has completed an initial information gathering phase in its work to assist it prepare draft proposals for consultation. These proposals will be released on 20 November with submissions invited until 11 December. In relation to your email, I should point out that the Commission's tasks are prescribed by the Local Government (Auckland Council) Act 2009 this includes a requirement that there be a maximum of 20 councillors all elected by wards and that the electoral system will be first past the post.

So all we can make really a submission on is how the wards should be gerrymandered to suit the powers that be, and we are not allowed to speak truth to power.

Submission on the ward representation system for the Auckland Council

Proposal background: The Auckland merged city structure should be governed by city-wide visions and policies. The new Auckland Councillors will, after all, represent the total population of the isthmus, not parochial interests. The way they are elected should reflect this, and electors should be given the chance to vote on policies for the city rather than be distracted by personality politics and contests.

Electoral system for Auckland City: The city should be established as one constituency, not split up into wards. All Auckland electors can vote to elect Councillors from one ballot listing all tickets and candidates.
20 Councillors (but preferably more, say, 50) should be elected from ticket/party lists applying strict proportionality in the voting system: 5% of the valid vote yields one seat. In the case of 50 seats the threshold falls to 2%.
Voters choose one candidate on the ballot (organised in ticket lists of maximum 20 candidates - independents can stand too and be subject to the same threshold).
When votes are counted the total of all candidates on each individual list will be tallied to determine how many seats the list is awarded on the Council: 1 seat per 5%.
All individual candidates who clear the threshold hurdle will be automatically elected. If more than one seat is won by the list, they go to the highest polling candidates on that list.
Note that this does not mean your placement on the list will trump votes received by another candidate on your list - list leaders will thus not automatically be elected when the list clears the threshold.
Independent candidates outside the lists will need to clear the threshold in their own vote to be elected. The "leftover" effect of the lists means that independents are actually encouraged to organise themselves into lists in order to profit from the same effect. This will benefit voters as lists will emphasise policy and vision instead of glamour or single issues.
The system is easy to understand and administer, does not distort vote weight (all votes are equally valid) and lists will have space for a wider variety of candidates than under any other system based on ward representation.
There is also no need for separate reserved seats for Maori or any other group because a low threshold will ensure a possible wide variety and proportionality of representation.
There is even no need for a separate election for mayor. Like in the parliamentary system, the largest faction elected on the Council should have first dibs on forming an Auckland government with its leader as Mayor. This will greatly help integrating the mayoral office with the power structure on the Council.

Auckland Council Bill

Submissions on the Auckland Governance Bill have to be in by this Friday, so get your skates on if you haven't already. How to do this is explained here.
The text of the Bill is here, but you can only comment on the sections, not propose any new or radical ideas (such as abolishing property taxes and rates).

My submission is largely the same as the one I made for the Royal Commission last year:

Dear Sir,

Thank you for the opportunity to make a submission as a private citizen.
I have no particular expertise in local government - apart from paying rates - but as a Waiheke Islander, I am concerned that the future governance structure in Auckland will take insufficient stock of the needs and wants of small geographically distinct entities such as Waiheke Island and the other Hauraki Gulf islands.
It's a pity we can't have our County Council back unless we have 10,000 residents (at the last census we barely made it to 8,000) which would be my preference. So for the time being we have to deal with Babylon-Across-The-Sea that is Auckland City.

My submission concerns the future governance structure.

1 Auckland Council

Section 7: The new Auckland Council should become a geographical entity that will be known as Auckland around the world. The current city and district councils should be abolished and their current competences, such as planning, environment, dealing with central Government, transferred upwards to the new Council.
The non-urban areas of Rodney and Franklin should not be included.
The Council should run and own the regional entities responsible for water, sewage, transport, roads, infrastructure, culture and regional well-being.

Section 8: The Auckland Council should have 50 elected members from a proportional region-wide list system (the city as one ward) where your party list gets a seat for every 2% it polls in the election.
The leader of the faction who can form a workable majority on the Council should become leader - in effect a mini version of parliamentary democracy but with stricter proportionality.

Section 9: The leader of the faction who can form a workable majority on the Council should become Mayor - in effect a mini version of parliamentary democracy but with stricter proportionality.
No separate Maori seats are needed under this system as all votes will have equitable weighting under the proportional system.

2 Community Boards

Section 13: All localised issues such as district and local planning should be devolved downwards to the beefed-up community boards who should become responsible for local planning issues and all localised matters (following the subsidiarity principle that policies should be determined and carried out at the lowest possible level) and be properly funded for their allocated tasks.
Community boards should cover natural geographical entities within the region, but do not need to be of the same size or population.
They should be approved by a popular vote after their design.
Their number and boundaries should be determined by local demand.

I do not wish to make my submission in person. Thank you for your attention.

Yours sincerely,

Auckland, the new Copenhagen?

Finally, at last, a piece of good news in town planning. The National Business Review reports (link via the Campaign for Better Transport Forum) the little warren of side streets of Auckland's main thoroughfare, Queen Street, is to be made more "European", i.e. people-friendly, by redesigning the street surface taking out all signalling, traffic lights, kerbs and road markings.
This is an excellent idea. The Fort St/High St/Lorne St area is currently clogged with parked cars and traffic, and pedestrians, who actually try to enjoy the inner city life and shopping, are marginalised on tiny footpaths and take their life in their own hands when trying to cross the street. (If you have Google Earth, the area is available in Street View)
Now if they would just get on with the job, so Auckland can finally become a proper city, like Copenhagen.

Auckland moves up in the world

It's that time of year again when expat multinational company staff report what the conditions are like in the far flung outpost they have been dumped in by their bosses and which ones they would prefer to move to.
Auckland climbed from 5th place to joint 4th with Vancouver, with Vienna, Zurich and Geneva again in the top 3 in the Mercer Global Quality of Living survey.
In terms of infrastructure, Auckland doesn't rate that well, surprise surprise. Singapore does best there
The criticism of this survey remains the same. But feel free to come check us out.

Auckland Governance Report

The Royal Commission has released its report with recommendations on the future governance structures for the Auckland region. An executive summary is here [PDF]
Auckland will get one Council, abolishing all current structures of city and regional councils. Plus it will get an "executive mayor", much like London's Lord Mayor. Expect jostling for that position to become as fanciful as in London. My bet is that John Banks (JoBo) will become Auckland's BoJo.

The devil will be, of course, in the details and how much and what of the report will be implemented by legislation. But I quite like the idea of a unified Council for the region with stronger community boards, as I have outlined in my submission to the Royal Commission.
Waiheke Island gets mentioned once and it's all promising:

33. Generally, community boards will no longer be required in the model the Commission proposes. The Commission recommends that an exception be made for the Great Barrier and Waiheke Island Community Boards, which should be retained, with wider delegated powers.

What those delegated powers will be is still the question. But any improvement on what the community board competences are now is a plus.

The electoral process of those 23 Auckland Councillors has been rightly criticised as unfair and inequitable. It's inevitably what you get with a First Past The Post system.
The only solution is to go for 25 Councillors elected from party lists. You really don't want 25 beauty contests of candidates, but that super council to implement solid policies for our region. So why can't we vote for policies instead of show ponies? An effective 4% threshold for your list of candidates would seem much fairer than what is being suggested now - and no need for race-based seats either.

UPDATE 7 APRIL: The Government has published its decisions on what the Royal Commission has recommended.
They have reduced the number of Auckland Councillors from 23 to 20 by abolishing race-based seats (good) but not really addressing the voting system. 20 seats would give a 5% threshold if proportional voting was introduced (good) but 8 will be elected at large (bad) and 12 from wards (bad too) and this will lead to under-representation of minorities and an over-representation of the moneyed classes and lobby groups who can mount a city-wide election campaign.

The Royal Commission executive summary is not without its humour: they have been unable to find a Maori name for the Rodney area. Even the Herald was asking: "Who was Rodney?" To which any post-colonial citizen answers: "Who cares?"
On the other hand, since North Shorians are less than happy with their new name "Waitemata", it would recommend that area to be renamed "Del-Boy"

Auckland again 5th best city to live in the world

Zurich, Vienna and Geneva are the best cities in the world as far as quality of live is concerned, says Mercer Consulting in a survey published in June 2008. Vancouver (Canada) and Auckland (New Zealand) are placed fourth and fifth respectively, followed by three German cities: Düsseldorf, Munich and Frankfurt. Tokyo, London and Madrid are all outside the top 25. Overall, Baghdad is, not surprisingly, the lowest ranking city in the survey.

And again, nothing has changed, so I'll repeat myself too: an incredible result considering Auckland has the worst public transportation system and the worst sprawl of any developed world city. It certainly doesn't feel as a world class city to live in (that's why I live on an island 25km away) due to its rather mediocre facilities and cultural treasures. But then that may be of no importance to multinational expatriate employees the survey is aiming at.
Personally, if money, time or job restrictions were of no import I'd rather live in Madrid, Copenhagen, Paris, Edinburgh or Luxembourg. But given those choices are not really available to me, I'm quite happy on my little rock in the South Pacific. I hope you are happy too wherever you live and if not, well, get out.

Auckland governance

The Royal Commission on Auckland Governance is busily updating its website adding all submissions it has received. Apparently there will be some 3,000 entries including over 1,200 from Waiheke Island alone! We are a very politicised island.
I am, of course, pleased to see my submission has been added too.
And Herald columnist Brian Rudman in most parts seems to have same ideas. So all good if that advice were followed in the Commission's final report.

Submission to the Royal Commission on Auckland Governance

I have outlined it before but I have now sent it off to the Royal Commission. You can too here.

Thank you for the opportunity to make a submission as a private citizen.
I have no particular expertise in local government - apart from paying rates - but as a Waiheke Islander, I am concerned that the future governance structure in Auckland will take insufficient stock of the needs and wants of small geographically distinct entities such as Waiheke Island and the other Hauraki Gulf islands.
It's a pity we can't have our County Council back unless we have 10,000 residents (at the last census we barely made it to 8,000) which would be my preference. So for the time being we have to deal with Babylon-Across-The-Sea that is Auckland City.

My submission consists of two parts. One concerns the future governance structure, and two, an argument to replace the funding mechanism of local government with something resembling a more equitable burden sharing among the citizenry.

1. Auckland governance:
The Auckland Regional Council should become a geographical entity that will be known as Auckland around the world. The current city and district councils should be abolished and their current competences, such as planning, environment, dealing with central Government, transferred upwards to the new ARC. The regional council would also run and own the regional entities responsible for water, sewage, transport, roads, infrastructure and culture.
All localised issues such as district and local planning should be devolved downwards to the beefed-up community boards who should become responsible for local planning issues and all localised matters (following the subsidiarity principle that policies should be determined and carried out at the lowest possible level).
The ARC should have 50 elected members from a proportional region-wide list system where your party list gets a seat for every 2% it polls in the election. The leader of the faction which can form a workable majority on the Council should become leader - in effect a mini version of parliamentary democracy but with stricter proportionality.
Community boards should cover natural geographical entities within the region, but do not need to be of the same size or population. They should be approved by a popular vote after their design.

2. Local government finances:
Rates and other property taxes should be abolished. The new community boards and ARC should be financed from a portion of the income and business taxes paid to the national Government: say, 2 percent of your gross tax should be transferred to the local board where the taxpayer resides, plus, say 1 percent of locally generated GST should be refunded to the boards and council - rather than setting up a local sales tax.
This would spread the tax base of local authorities far wider and more equitably than the current system, and those percentages should be set locally with Government setting the ceiling.
These new transfers would offset any current central Government subsidies for local governments and are easy to administer and transparent for payers and receivers.
In essence, local government funding would be done completely from the national tax take instead of local authorities constantly pushing up local rates (which also push inflation), cut out a massive layer of bureaucracy and local authorities would be forced to live more frugally and work smarter with far more control, input and oversight of local citizens.

Yours sincerely.

The mess that is public transport in Auckland

Auckland gets frequently high grades in the livable city surveys but they are usually aimed at and compiled from high flyer expatriates on foreign currency salaries who don't need to use local amenities like public transport very much. Locals have a very different view on how Auckland is lived in and you know I have a particular beef with the local public transport system, being European and all.
There is a public transport internet forum set up by Maxx, the public transport authority, for users to vent their opinions, which, I suspect, are then studiously ignored by the powers-that-be, considering the lack of replies from higher up to any concerns voiced. But we soldier on and I like contributing there.
Here's my latest missive on horror design stories around town involving bus stops and bus lanes:

1. The Britomart forecourt horror
Even Brian Rudman noticed "what an uninviting hell-hole the environs of that lovingly redeveloped historic building has become, now the area is wall-to-wall with noisy, fume belching buses." It's used by private cars with impunity now too. Why did we lose our pedestrian QEII Square for that?
Solution: abolish all route termini at Britomart and have through-line bus stop only. This will avoid buses being stationary for too long blocking the bus stops. Bus routes should have a spiderweb pattern with most crossing the CBD not terminating there. It'll make possible to narrow lower Queen Street in front of Britomart and increase pedestrian space.

2. Albert Street right turnoff into Customs Street.
Frequently cited to me by bus drivers as Auckland's worst intersection for buses to use. Waiting times of 10 minutes are not uncommon which is frustrating since it's in sight of your end destination at Britomart.
Solution (which I have successfully suggested to bus drivers but is considered an illegal move by bus company bosses): drive straight through to Quay Street and use the bus lane to turn into Britomart. Took 1 minute the other night.

3. Queen Street bus lanes.
Why aren't there any? The city's busiest bus route and they have to sit with the other traffic. Easily the dumbest PT idea Auckland planners have come up with and it wasn't remedied by the Queen St upgrade. Brian Rudman's comment here.

4. Albert Street bus lanes.
They are there but they are constantly clogged up by stationary buses forcing passing buses to move into the general traffic lanes.
Solution: as in point 1., remove termini from the CBD and only have bus through routes north-south, east-west and radially. Austin in Texas has a bus system like that.

5. The K Road bus stop configuration.
When taking a bus downtown you have to gamble at which bus stop you will get the first available bus since the Queen St buses and Pitt St buses have, inexplicably and frustratingly, different stops on K Road. And they are far enough apart to prevent making a successful run to the other one. Obviously Auckland PT planners never take the bus.
This bad configuration has been copied to the bus stops in Grey Lynn in the Gt Nth Rd/Williamson Ave area.

Public transport wonking

Maxx has a public forum where one can rant and rave about the diabolical public transport system in Auckland. Here are my recent contributions:

- on the free City Circuit bus: When looking at the huge crowds waiting every morning for the free City Circuit bus that takes them to their places of learning, it struck me that many of the students would benefit health-wise by trekking up the hills to University or AUT by actually walking instead of taking the free bus. I mean, they sit in lectures all day long and the exercise would do wonders to fight their obesity risk.
Then we could use the annual subsidy now spent on it to lower fares across Auckland.

- On integrated ticketing: When integrated ticketing comes in, it must ensure that fares are linked to distance traveled, regardless of transport mode. I.e. taking the bus or train from Britomart to Manukau should attract the same fare. The same should be the case for taking a bus to Howick and the ferry to Waiheke, since it's the same distance traveled. This is the case in Germany.

- On Pacific Blue $39 fares to fly to Auckland to Wellington: I have long suspected that flying to Wellington from Auckland will soon be cheaper than going to Waiheke by ferry. And although I'm cheerful that this is happening faster than I expected, it doesn't bode well for the future tourism prospects for the island. It just shows how a bit of free market competition benefits customers, while monopolies gouge us to the max.

Newmarket demands a subsidy from Waiheke

The Broadway Newmarket shopping area is a dreary open air mall, a bit like Kowloon's Nathan Road without the underground railway but with the exhaust fumes (a motorway and thoroughfare both run through it), and it prides itself on being the nation's premier shopping destination. Not that I would ever take any overseas visitors there.
Of course, the area has its own spinmeister in the form of Cameron Brewer, ceaselessly marketing his strip mall to the city and the country. He has been talking to his counterparts in Takapuna, and the North Shore Times reported he said:

"Broadway is about to be upgraded and this was achieved because we adopted the Waiheke Principle - that is if you make enough noise you're more likely to get what you want."

I had never heard of this "Waiheke Principle" or it being defined as behaving like undeserving upstarts. I would have associated it with being laid-back and generous to your fellow citizens in other parts of the city, what with Waiheke subsidizing their lifestyles as the Council pulls off much more in rates cash than it spends on the island.
So it surprised me that champions of the free market like Mr Brewer would exhort his fellow merchants to bray for council subsidies and "blame" the practice on an island that actually provides the dosh instead of creaming the system. That's a doubly perverted use of language and a slur on his supporters and customers. I think I will be shopping on the island instead and help subsidize his lifestyle. He should be more grateful to the hand that feeds him.

Auckland in 5th place as best place to live in the world

The annual Mercer World-wide Quality of Living Survey is out. It covers more than 350 cities to help governments and multinational companies place employees on international assignments.
Auckland is rated 5th in the world after Zurich, Geneva, Vancouver and Vienna, and up from 8th last year. This is an incredible result, considering it has the worst public transportation system and the worst sprawl of any developed world city. It certainly doesn't feel as a world class city to live in (that's why I live on an island 25km away) due to its rather mediocre facilities and cultural treasures. But then that may be of no importance to multinational expat employees the survey is aiming at.
Personally, if money, time or job restrictions were of no import I'd rather live in Madrid, Copenhagen, Paris, Edinburgh or Luxembourg. But given those choices are not really available to me, I'm quite happy on my little rock in the South Pacific. I hope you are happy too wherever you live and if not, well, get out.

Smallville Auckland

Auckland City's Fathers (and mothers) have been busily planning the future of their town, presumably before it totally turns into a huge slum.
Britomart, indoor arena, waterfront access, marina purchase, Queen Street redevelopment, you name it, it'll turn into a building site soon.
Of course, no city is worthy of that epithet if it didn't have any red light districts - you can only distinguish a vibrant metropolitan/urban area from a mere settlement by the number of red light districts it has.
In that respect the Mums/Dads are resolutely opting for the smalltown version: no matter that prostitution is now a legal economic activity, they deem it best to be kept under wraps/underground.
Silly me for thinking I was living in a real city.