Aramoana Woolshed - Council does due dilligence

It was interesting to see a little investigative journalism on behalf of the CHB Mail recently. A children's playground was investigated for a safety concern and the article was reinforced with camera-work and was quite thorough. That is how it should be for significant community matters. This weeks 'Mail' contains information from Mayor, Trish Giddens, that council is currently going through 'due dilligence in regard to the Aramoana Woolshed matter. I wonder to what extent if any, council's 'due dilligence' process differs from the general understanding of that term? I would wonder if council was in fact checking to see if the interior of the building was as 'user ready' for council's proposed purpose, as it had been touted? I guess that council would be checking that there were not likely to be any 'compliance'costs likely to take the overall cost of the project much above the $100,000 estimate. Being made up of professionals prepared to be held accountable for their due dilligence in this matter, I guess that we can be reassured, that council in aquiring the Woolshed, would not be dragging ratepayers into further expensive issues, such as Health and Enviromental issues, anti-flooding and drainage work. I hope that there would not be a huge cost liability in having to tarseal kilometres of coastal access road (What an excellent unintended spinoff that would be for the eletist adjacent property development) I guess the point of all this is that I can see that if council's 'due dilligence' on this is shallow and little more than a rubber-stamping of the deal, the local populace, having suffered some local and general blows in the areas of their respective economys are likely to be very judgemental of the councillors involved and they in doing their 'due dillegence' should understand that. I feel that there will be accountability. Now, democracy and due dilligence in regard to the CHB Mail itself! While it is recognised that such community newspapers must be quite diplomatic when dealing with their advertisers, which include council,the news-gathering ethic would seem to dictate that the reporters and photographers should, on behalf of the local public, go over the Woolshed issues (and site) and deliver a full and thorough 'due dilligence' of their own.