Gillman sale ‘not backed by valuation’: Maras
Property developer Theo Maras says the Renewal SA board was asked to make a decision on the controversial Gillman land deal without the backing of a valuation.
Maras, who resigned from the board last year, told a parliamentary inquiry that the board had voted unanimously against the Gillman sale, with the exception of one member who had excused themselves because of a conflict of interest.
He said he felt he was left in “absolute and total darkness” about the decision due to an absence of a valuation or instructions to a valuer.
Asked by parliamentary committee member John Darley, a former Valuer-General, whether he had ever been asked to vote on a proposal with so little information or discussion during his time on the board, Maras replied: “No.”
Maras also revealed he told then infrastructure minister Tom Koutsantonis of his concerns about the deal at a board meeting last year.
He said Koutsantonis argued that the Government wanted to go ahead with the deal because there were no other “serious” offers on the land.
Maras responded: “We never put it to the marketplace – how would we know?”
InDaily has previously reported that the board prepared advice for the State Government opposing the sale without tender. However, the board later approved the deal on the basis that it was an appropriate use of the 400 hectare former MFP site at Gillman.
Maras told the inquiry today of a range of concerns about the State Government’s deal with Adelaide Capital Partners (ACP), including the valuation of the land.
You might like
The Government has consistently argued that the deal represents a good return for taxpayers. Outgoing Renewal SA chief executive Fred Hansen told an earlier hearing of the parliamentary committee that the proposed sale price to ACP was four times the value given to the land by Renewal SA’s valuer.
However, Maras said today that any valuation which didn’t take into account the changing use of the land was “not fit for use”.
He said he did not understand how the “monopolisation” of such a large piece of land near the city could be in the interests of the state.
“We were making a decision … that wasn’t backed up by a valuation or instructions to a valuer,” he said.
As a board member, he said he did not receive documents showing a valuation or instructions.
“I was in absolute and total darkness,” he said.
He said the board did not receive any legal advice about whether it could sell the land without going to tender.
“We were asked to make a decision in a short period of time,” he said.
He said the land was of general interest to the development industry and could garner up to half a billion dollars in landfill for the developer.
“Unless you put a piece of land on the marketplace, you can never know what its true value is,” he said.
Renewal SA chairperson Bronwyn Pike later told the committee that while she would have preferred the deal go to tender, the ACP proposal did provide value for money.
“It was seen as almost a too good to be true proposal,” she said.
Stay informed, daily
The main risk of not going to public tender was its potential impact on public confidence.
Pike, a former Victorian Labor government minister, said an urgent out of session vote was called because she had been advised the proposal would go to cabinet and needed to be dealt with “as a matter of expediency”.
Earlier, Maras said he was told by the board secretary that, in an out of session vote, all board members had voted against the ACP proposal, except one member who excused themselves on the basis of conflict of interest.
He disputed previous claims by Renewal SA that the out of session vote was withdrawn before being voted on.
“Of course it was voted on, and I received advice that it did not get up,” he said.
Maras said there had been no board discussion on the sale proposal.
“There should have been, but there wasn’t.”
He said he resigned from the board because “I felt that we were going down the wrong path”.
“This was a major diversion from our normal path of business,” he said.
Advice from Renewal SA “was being put to one side”
About 30 minutes after he resigned, he had a meeting with Koutsantonis and explained the reasons for his resignation.
The minister “did not try to impose any other view”.
Maras said it was “absolutely” the right of government to make decisions on the sale of land if they believed it was in the state’s best interests.
“Ultimately, the government can do anything they want,” he said.
– reporting by Bension Siebert
