BayBuzz - Be in the know

April 30, 2012

I attended a meeting of the Waimarama Development and Protection Society on Saturday afternoon. It was actually their AGM meeting, but served also as a forum for Mayor Yule to explain why the Hastings Council had recently voted 11-1 to keep Waimarama’s community hall in its present location.

Email invitations were sent to Waimarama residents the Society had email addresses for, and a couple of notices were posted at the shop there and the Fire Station.

It’s all well and good that a local citizen group requested a presentation from the Mayor (that part of democracy I applaud).

However, the invitations were hit and miss, such that my next door neighbors back along the Tukituki, who as Waimarama bach owners are ‘villains’ at the centre of the ‘to re-locate the hall or not or where’ controversy, were not invited. They didn’t know of the meeting until I passed along the email forwarded to me by a friend in the Society. Nor, consequently, were they invited to address the meeting, as the proponents of moving the hall were. They nevertheless attended the meeting and were eventually recognised to speak along with other questioners from the floor.

The gathering eventually closed with a 45-15 vote in favor of moving the hall … now!

Effectively you had a meeting packed, not surprisingly, with advocates of the move, who were there to pillory Yule and the HDC. I can sympathise with that purpose. I’ve been there!

That said, this meeting hardly qualifies as the ‘public consultation’ the Hastings Council had committed itself to at its recent vote on the matter. And that’s why I’ve dwelt on the process. This event was like going to a Federated Farmers meeting and asking farmers if they’d like more water allocated to them. Let’s see a show of hands … duh! Or going to a local Forest & Bird chapter and asking how many would like to see a stronger commitment to biodiversity … hmmm!

So the Mayor and three of his Councillors left with a fresh ‘directive’ to reverse their position a second time and get on with moving the hall.

Until Saturday, I hadn’t realised that all one had to do to get the decision they wanted out of the Hastings Council was get a roomful of like-minded people in the room, take a vote, and expect the Council to march to that order.

Perhaps the WOW folks in Haumoana who’d like Hastings Council to build some erosion-stalling groynes should take this example to heart … Call a meeting for next Saturday! Just be careful who you invite.

Do I sound un-democratic?

My Tukituki neighbors are resisting the proposal to move a 400 square metre community hall onto a recreation reserve directly in front of their bach. Before their purchase, doing due diligence, they were assured by Council staff that no development could occur, given the land classification. Now, faced with loss of view, loss of home value, and an unwanted new ‘neighbor’, they’ve signaled with an adjoining property owner that they will challenge the legality of moving the hall onto the reserve.

They have every right to do that — it’s called rule of law — despite suggestions made to them on Saturday by one speaker to not be “anal” about their amenity and value loss. After all, chided another unsympathetic speaker, “shit happens”. None of these individuals raised their hands when my neighbor asked how many in the room would volunteer to lose $100k or more off their home’s value.

As I said above, getting 60 people in a room to lobby the Mayor and Councillors on an issue is indeed part of the democratic process. But only a part, and the Mayor and Councillors were remiss not to make that crystal clear on Saturday. They went to Waimarama. They listened. They need to reflect on what they heard. But also to take into account other points of view, including what might be minority views. Weigh up all the options and arguments. And then they make a decision.

If they ‘get it wrong’ too often, they get un-elected. That’s democracy. That’s their job.

Over the time I’ve been following councils in the region, I’ve found plenty to disagree with, as BayBuzz readers know.

And so I’ve written, lobbied, made submissions, organised public forums and petition campaigns, urged people to get involved, even run for office to attempt to change outcomes.

But I confess it’s never occurred to me that all this time there was an easier way — get the right 60 people in the room on the day, take a vote, and issue a directive to the Council. Sounds efficient. But frankly, I’m not sure how many public issues in Hawke’s Bay I’d actually want to see decided that way. How about you? If that makes me un-democratic, so be it.

So how will the Waimarama hall saga end?

Mayor Yule did his best to persuade the audience that immediate measures could be taken to protect the hall and make it usable where it is, leaving the question of its best future location be addressed as part of a broader community plan for Waimarama. That plan could be developed over 18 months or so with extensive public consultation and intensive public/Council interaction (following the successful model used elsewhere in the district).

To me, that sounded like a prudent approach. Council’s commitment to a formal community planning process for Waimarama — looking at a host of development issues from water supply and sewage disposal issues, to civil defence and fire service needs, to optimal use of public spaces to meet a range of community needs — might well defuse the controversy. But most in the audience didn’t want to wait for the hall to be sited in that intelligent context; even though most seemed to nod support at the idea of a community plan.

Perhaps the Council would find more support for the community planning approach, consistently  advocated by Councillor Bradshaw I should note, if it conducted a more thorough canvassing of all Waimarama ratepayers … perhaps via a brochure mailed to all explaining the options and asking for feedback. That would fulfill its consultation pledge far better … whatever the outcome.

Otherwise, if the Council does decide to move the hall now, the matter will wind up in court … for months. With the hall in limbo until one party or the other is a clear loser.

Before lawyers’ fees start mounting, maybe all parties need a day of Council-sponsored mediation to determine if there’s a win/win possibility.

Tom Belford

•  Print This Post

April 22, 2012

I went to a Hastings District Council meeting last week, which began at 1pm.

I was interested in watching Councillors come full circle on the matter of relocating (or not) the Waimarama community hall. By now you probably know the steps in this process …

1. Go to Waimarama, host a community meeting with incomplete information, get a mandate from the multitude based on specious grounds to move the hall to a particular new location. Call that democracy.

2. Come back to Council chambers to deliberate, and decide instead to look at an additional location for the move.

3. Come back to Council chambers a second time and vote 11-1 not to move the hall after all, because new information provides a compelling case for sticking with the present location.

4. However, get self-conscious midway through the debate, and agree to a fuzzy caveat that another community meeting be held in Waimarama. Whether this is a meeting to announce and sell the decision, or to consult on the decision as though it were not an adopted decision, is unclear. I’m asking for a copy of the resolution.

But I’m digressing from my real point.

The first item on the Council’s agenda that day concerned a proposal to add a wee bit of cafe space on Heretaunga Street without a net loss of a single parking space on that block. The staff had found a way to promote latte’s (taking away a space) while adding one space on the other side of the street. Despite this elegant solution to an impasse that surely would have stymied economic development in the Bay, Hastings Councillors took just shy of one hour to accept the staff proposal (with two dissenting votes)!

Then they addressed agenda item #2 — to move the hall or not. That decision (or was it a decision?) took another hour.

By now it was 3pm … time for weary heads to take a tea break.

The third item on the agenda involved the fate of one plane tree on Fitzroy Avenue. I didn’t have the mental stamina to endure another hour of Council debate on such a vexing matter.

1 parking space + 1 community hall + 1 plane tree = 3 hours. With a full complement of senior staff on hand for the duration to guide Councillors on their voyage into the policy-making abyss.

I’m told that later in the meeting, Councillors did find time to accept the raises given them by the Compensation Commission.

Clearly, no member of the Commission has ever attended an actual Council meeting!

I don’t mean, however, to give the impression that the Hastings Council is unique in its behavior.

Each of our local councils has its quirks. The Napier Council meetings rarely last more than 15 minutes. There, even a debate over a single tree would be refreshing. Meetings over 15 minutes are reserved for bashing the Hastings Council and, even better, Mayor Yule. At the Regional Council, the same amount of time can be spent arguing over points of order as is spent discussing an issue like fracking or water allocation.

But at least when the Regional Council does get wound up, it’s deciding matters like $500 million dam projects. The stakes are high enough to warrant the meeting!

All of which leads me to flirt with a different concept — not amalgamation, but extermination.

Perhaps we should just eliminate the Hastings and Napier Councils (and does anyone possibly imagine the CHB and Wairoa Councils are any different?). Wipe them off the map, and take our chances that a newly empowered Regional Council might attract candidates commensurate with the responsibility.

It’s a gamble, I know. But there’s nowhere to go but up.

Tom Belford

•  Print This Post

April 16, 2012

As you’ve probably noticed, BayBuzz has been conducting an online and mail survey on attitudes toward possible councils’ consolidation … sometimes called amalgamation.

At this point, 342 people have responded, with 56% from Hastings (voting residence), 42% from Napier and 2% from CHB.

Jumping right to the bottom line, as respondents understand the issues right now, 85% agree that “some kind of consolidation might be prudent (including 75% of Napier respondents), while 14% think “our present structure is probably the right one.

49% support combining the four territorial councils (Hastings, Napier, CHB & Wairoa) plus the Regional Council, while another 21% support combining just Hastings, Napier and Regional Councils.

73% agree that “While more cooperation would be helpful, that’s not sufficient to deal with the challenges we face.” And only 26% believe “In fact, councils are already cooperating in significant ways.”

The most persuasive reasons for reorganization: providing one vision and voice for the Bay (72% strongly agree), saving ratepayers’ money by reducing duplication (71% strongly agree), and strengthening clout with central government (66% strongly agree).

Chief concerns respondents have about reorganization are: burden some communities with debt of others (49% agree or are not sure), local communities might lose voice/identity (47% agree or not sure), and might cause rate increase (40% agree or nor sure). Note that in each case, majorities do not share these concerns.

The Government is proposing that a simple majority in the entire region could permit reorganizations to occur, as opposed to the present provision where majorities in each affected district must approve (or the reorg fails). Our respondents agree overwhelmingly (69%) with the Government proposal (57% of Napier respondents agree).

The BayBuzz survey was included in the March/April BayBuzz magazine, which is distributed primarily in Hastings and Napier (in fact this edition was ‘over-weighted’ distribution-wise to Napier). We expect that respondents would tend to be individuals who are particularly ‘energized’ — one way or the other — by the potential of reorganization. But effectively the surveys were random — anyone could have picked up a copy from our ‘take one’ stands throughout the area and responded.

Overall, the results indicate that a significant base of support for reorganization exists in both the Hastings District and Napier.

Tom Belford

P.S. You can view the complete results here (for online returns) and here (for mail returns). Unfortunately the mail responses need to be manually entered separately, so the consolidated results must be calculated by merging the two.

•  Print This Post

April 10, 2012

Last week our region’s four mayors and Regional Council chairman had one of their regular public-excluded sessions where they scratch each other’s back, make their mutual support pacts of the day, and seek to manage away potential embarrassments concerning their group stewardship of Hawke’s Bay.

The meeting yielded a media release, which I publish in full, as follows:

The Mayors and Chairman of Hawke’s Bay’s five councils have agreed to support a prosperity study for the region. All the councils have signed off the terms of reference for the study, which will be led and funded by Hawke’s Bay Regional Council. Work will now get underway to find an independent body or person to undertake the work.

In other words, our ‘leaders’ merely confirmed an announcement they already made last November. Since then, absolutely nothing has occurred, while they disputed who was allowed to speak to whom, and what the identical terms of reference originally adopted back then actually meant.

Last week’s ‘new’ announcement sheds no light on the key bone of contention … whether the ‘prosperity study’ will or will not include a comprehensive review of the region’s governance structure — i.e., are we best served by having five councils?

The fact that our five leaders cannot put their names to a plain English statement indicating YES or NO to that understanding of the study’s scope indicates is still no agreement on that most fundamental issue .

[If I've got that wrong, I invite any of the five leaders to set the record straight with an unequivocal 'plain English' public statement on behalf of the group.]

So they sit right where they were six months ago … on their thumbs.

This kind of stalemate is precisely why Government is intervening to set new ground rules for how local government reorganisation can be reviewed. Knowing full well that councils will never question their own existence, Government will legislate new procedures that allow “the community” to trigger the review process independently.

The job is too big for self-preserving councils to undertake, much less lead.

It’s time for the Hawke’s Bay community to seize the initiative, and prepare to lead under the new ground rules. And hopefully A Better Hawke’s Bay will do just that.

Tom Belford

•  Print This Post

April 10, 2012

Our industrious councils have released for public consultation their spending plans for the ten-year period beginning 2012/13.

It ain’t pretty. So many worthy projects (I’m sure), and so few ratepayer dollars to fund them with.

However, there’s little to indicate that true ratepayer affordability enters the councils’ planning process. As far as councils are concerned, we should be supremely grateful if and when the annual spending increases do not exceed the rate of inflation. That’s what ‘affordability’ means to councils.

Unfortunately, that measure is not particularly meaningful if you’re out of work (or working fewer hours), or don’t get raises that automatically match or exceed inflation, or live off diminishing retirement assets.

I’ve done just a first pass through the summary documents Hastings, Napier and Regional Councils made available last week. As a fairly diligent student of council activities, I find the summaries tough to follow and sometimes rather craftily written, perchance to obscure reality. If you pick one up, do not expect to find simple declarative sentences like: Next year we’ll be spending X dollars, of which ratepayers will be funding Y percent. And we’ll do the job with Z full-time equivalent employees.

Yet these brief presentations represent probably the most information most ratepayers will ever see or try to absorb … if even that much. So ratepayers are to be forgiven if they draw erroneous conclusions.

If you want to get the total picture of what councils are planning for Hawke’s Bay, you need to read five LTPs, which I strongly doubt any individual in Hawke’s Bay has ever done! And of course, each council uses a different format to present its plans, making key comparisons difficult … those will need to await an opportunity to decipher the full LTPs.

For now, here’s simply a list of spending projects valued at $1 million or more, as proposed by the three major (as in, biggest spending) councils. Keep in mind that you are footing the bill for two of these councils. So, for example, you are privileged to pay twice for some projects (e.g., sports parks, museums, cycle trails), first to your favorite district or city council, and then to the regional council.

Big Ticket Items — 2012-2022

Hawkes Bay Regional Council
Ruataniwha dam:                                $170 million (current estimate)
Ngaruroro dam:                                   $85 million
Hill Country Afforestation:                $47 million
Port of Napier improvements:          $32 million
Beefing up flood protection:              $15 million
HeatSmart assistance:                        $8.8 million
Solar hot water assistance:                 $6 million
Regional community facilities           $3 million
(e.g., international hockey park)
Economic development support:      $1.2 million
Fix leaky Council roof                          $1 million

Hastings District Council

Haumoana coastal protection:           $30.2 million
Rural road priorities:                            $13 million
District Aquatic Centre:                       $14 million
Civic Square redesign:                          $7 million
Compliance work on existing pools:  $4.5 million
Whakatu arterial road:                         $4.4 million
Haumoana managed retreat:              $4.3million
Regional Sports Park:                           $4.3 million
Flaxmere development:                       $3.6 million
Park/playground enhancements:      $3.2 million
Cycling/walking enhancements:        $3 million
Road safety:                                            $1.9 million
Public toilets:                                          $1.4 million
Te Mata Peak Visitors Centre:            $1.1million

Napier City Council

Wastewater treatment plant:              $32.7 million
HB Museum & Art Gallery:                 $18 million
Wastewater outfall replacement:       $13.5 million
CBD parking improvements:              $8.3 million
Recreation/reserve facilities:              $6.6 million
Taradale stormwater upgrade:           $5.4 million
Ellison St stormwater pump:              $5.4 million
Park Island sports expansion:            $5.3 million
CBD stormwater upgrade:                  $5.1 million
Water supply projects:                         $2.9 million
Marine Parade improvements:           $1.8 million
McLean Park improvements:              $1.4 million
Napier Aquatic Centre:                         $1.3 million

Note that in some cases, the amounts given above do not reflect full costs, because the council involved expects funding to materialise from other external sources — e.g., central government, private funders, other councils. Sometimes these promises are kept; sometimes not!

And in a few cases, councils are presenting spending options that they are still mulling over. So there are a few instances, not many, where councils really are testing the waters with ratepayers/voters.

No doubt you will have seen on the list a project or two that warms your heart, and a few others that chill you to the bone!

The submission windows are now open … make the most of your opportunity.

Regional Council LTP here.

Hastings Council LTP here.

Napier City LTP here.

Tom Belford

•  Print This Post

April 5, 2012

Here is the ‘behind the scenes’ event you’ve been waiting for. Better than the Conchords.

According to a media release just issued (download here … it’s real), Hawke’s Bay people will have the chance to go behind the scenes at Hawke’s Bay Regional Council. HBRC is going to hold an Open Day at its Napier offices on Tuesday 17 April.

“This is a fantastic opportunity for the public to find out more about our key projects and take a look at the wide range of work our staff are involved in,” says Chairman Wilson.

BayBuzz has the inside scoop on the activities planned for the full-day program. And you can witness it all.

8:30am
Media Fluff – Councillor Kevin Rose offers a resolution endorsing sunshine, giggling babies, ANZAC Day and the All Blacks. Followed by a ‘Puff Yourself’ audience participation exercise.

9:00am
The Right Debate – Watch with awe while canny Councillors Christine Scott and Eileen von Dadelszen debate whether, according to Standing Rules, minutes from previous Council meetings can be “amended” or merely “corrected”.

10:15am
Morning tea

10:30am
High stakes debate continues. Audience gets to vote on who won. Loser resigns from Council immediately.

11:00am
Water Policy – To provide relief from the tension, Councillors take turns throwing water balloons at their favourite target, Councillor Remmerswaal. The public is invited to get wet!

11:30am
Sound Science – Watch the science staff in action as they draw straws to determine who must inform CEO Andrew Newman that adding 25,000 hectares of intensified farming in Central Hawke’s Bay will in fact further degrade the Tukituki. Not for the queasy.

12:00pm
Lunch — bring your own
[Optional field trip: Chairman Fenton Wilson leads a tour of the Council Building’s million dollar leaky roof. Gold coin donations are welcome for the repair fund.]

1:00pm
Stern Oversight – Watch your Councillors in action as they receive staff reports on the Fracking Is Your Friend program, stupid things the Hastings and Napier Councils have done, and the myth of global warming. Spirited jocularity is expected. Get ready to join in the mirth!

3:00pm
Afternoon tea
[Optional field trip: Join Councillor Ewan McGregor on the lawn outside the building for a lesson in planting poplar poles.]

3:15pm
Fine Art of Debate – Marvel at the trench warfare of Council policy-making as Councillors Neil Kirton, Tim Gilbertson, Eileen von Dadelszen and Christine Scott demonstrate their fast-paced repartee laced with witty asides, snarky comments, odd observations and mutual disdain. [Warning to sensitive ratepayers: This could get ugly.]

3:59pm
Bi-cultural Moment – Learn what’s on the mind of the Maori Advisory Committee, as detailed by Maori representative Mike Mohi.

4:00pm
Photo Opportunity – Get your commemorative photo with your favourite Councillor(s). Copies of HBRC’s promotional publication, Our Place, personally signed by each Councillor and the Chief Executive, will be distributed free of charge.

4:30pm
Transparency – Council will go into public-excluded session. However, members of the public will be invited to watch the proceeding through the windows, and to guess the subject by reading Councillors’ lips. First person to correctly identify the topic will receive a free Go Bus voucher.

Children are welcome to attend the Open Day; however parents are advised that Councillor Alan Dick will be in attendance, and language may offend.

That risk aside, the HBRC Open Day promises to be a scintillating event, opening your eyes to the intricacies and gravity of Council work. A day you’ll never forget.

Tom Belford

•  Print This Post

April 1, 2012

BayBuzz has been conducting a survey of attitudes about possible local government reorganization here in Hawke’s Bay. At this point, we have several hundred responses, with nearly equal numbers from Hastings and Napier (not so many from further afield). If you haven’t taken the survey yet, you can do so here. (Be forewarned, the system lets you take the survey only once!)

We’re hearing from all sides on this issue, and we’ll report the full results soon. But most of the respondents who have volunteered comments so far explaining their opinions have tended to call for change. Here’s a sampling. If you disagree with these views, give us your own.

Tom Belford

Verbatim Comments from BayBuzz Survey (sample)

Local Government do not possess a YES attitude. Their default is NO, plus a lot of How Hard Can We Make This?

Procrastination has been developed into an art form in Hawke’s Bay.

We are still dumping sewage into the ocean because our council is dictated to by large industry. I would happily subsidise a clean environment, rather than a sports stadium, splash planet etc. I resent watching fireworks displays when I can’t swim in local rivers. Poor priorities are affecting social and environmental well-being. A clean environment will be more attractive in the long run to people and tourists, which results in economic growth. I am ashamed of Hawke’s Bay’s environment and now households are being threated with water levies when there is was no water shortage before vineyards and dairying, which have just increased our environmental problems.

Lack of direction to organisers of two of Hawke’s Bays two major events — Horse of Year and Triple Peaks held same weekend. Accommodation providers unable to receive optimum exposure, Requires tuned-in local catalyst.

Actions affect environment. Private sector largely affects economics. Best municipalities can do is install and maintain top-notch infrastructure to facilitate private investment.

Our local government bodies have huge potential to have an influence over the well-being of the Hawke’s Bay community. However, the separatist nature and backward functioning actions of nearly all of them mean that rate payers essentially support administrators that waste public money due to the lack of leadership of the councils. Councils could do some much more to support the environment, build our communities, and invest in events and the positive outcomes through sport and the arts. All these opportunities are lost.

It is crazy for a region this size to have 5 separate governing bodies. As one, we would be an amazing region and get on with what is needed for Hawkes Bay to grow!

Hawke’s Bay region needs an advocating voice in unison. Regrettably there appears constant squabbling between the present 5 councils. The latter is a major impediment for the region as we have 5 fractional voices.

Why can’t the NCC Councils at least open their minds to the possibility of a better way? As a NCC Rate Payer I will be using my voice and my vote to ensure the next election provides a representative council that actually has the courage to lead.

This situation has been holding Hawke’s Bay back for years – it used to be difficult, now it is actually threatening the region’s prosperity.

I think we need to attract some higher skilled and more capable councillors in general, this would make a difference to local government -merged or not. Unfortunately most people vote for the old folk they know and capable people are too busy to take the job on. Seems to be a bored housewife/retired man coffee club to boost their egos rather than a functioning council.

The current structures suffer through selfishness, self-interest and lack vision to provide a progressive program for the whole region.

There are many examples of councils NOT working together — eg water; sewerage; sports amenities; Fracking!

HDC and NCC take every opportunity to disagree and in turn try and one up each other. The Hawke’s Bay community misses out with a disconnected, inefficient, vision lacking leadership that is holding the province back.

We have lived and worked here twenty years and the same problems then are still here. We struggled to ‘sell the region’ when in our tourism business because we struck such division and lack of cooperation ‘amongst the old die hards’ of parochialism. New blood to HB is the necessary ingredient in strong regional leadership. Oh Boy, what did I say? I will have to wash my mouth out!

Councils may be co-operating but it’s all lip service. Significant issues and policy that contribute to business development and growth are not being unified.

While cooperation should work, history shows that it doesn’t.

Re Councils cooperating – token gestures. The biggest indication of any form of cooperation is being driven by Business HB and the bureaucrats, not the politicians, who are playing the game!

I think it will be important for communities to have meaningful mechanisms for their particular needs and views to be heard.

Community identity is essential – but our current system doesn’t provide it. Look at the NCC Council – there is absolutely no way you can tell me that that is representative of Napier communities. It’s more representative of a rest home.

‘Intelligent’ social knowledge and understanding of a community would be very useful in decision making and would need to be collated by a reliable and efficiently run ‘board’ of sorts. Nit picking, egotistical drones need not apply.

Community identities can be retained easily if someone is looking at an umbrella strategy correctly – they are only lost when group marketing and business isn’t understood. Community Boards could be helpful but I’d avoid any additional bureaucracy and slowing down of needed joint and collective growth.

I think representation on the council from these communities is better than a formal board that simply adds a layer to bureaucracy. The individual councillor may wish to appoint an advisory group (non-paid).

It is vital that the smaller and more far-flung communities don’t lose their identity or voice in decision-making.

Hawke’s Bay is not that big. The only justification for local boards is to make it politically saleable. Waste of resources, better to consult on local issues as they arise.

It’s ridiculous that the smaller district should prevail over a regional majority. These citizens benefit just as much from the regional GDP contributions from the surrounding areas.

What are we going to call it? Let’s call it Napier so we don’t have another 20-year debate!!

•  Print This Post