The Porirua Wellington Web Blog - July to August 2005
This blog is about political and community issues in Porirua City and the Wellington Region. It is the view of one person, and you are not hearing the other side! For current material please visit The Porirua Wellington Web Blog.
Porirua City Councillor Robert Shaw
CULTURE SHOCK - MINISTRY OF EDUCATION
A friend has just been promoted from the Ministry of Economic Development to the Ministry of Education. It was a "culture shock" she said. How so, asks I. Evidently they begin meetings with a song and end with a prayer, all in Maori. She reports that they all work very hard, and I believe her. The general standard of public servants in New Zealand is very high. We have much to be proud of. Discover what public servants got up to in the good old days>
GOLF RANGE AT PLIMMERTON PROCEEDS
Councillors will consider the proposal onsite at 9 am to 10 am on Saturday 27 August, 2005. All with an interest can attend. Plimmerton Domain.
BUXTON GARDEN LEGAL VESTING
Why on earth is the Buxton Garden to be vested as a "local purpose" reserve? It is not that kind of reserve. It should be a "scenic reserve" or one of the many other admirable categories provided in the Act.
REGIONAL GROWTH STRATEGY
The two expensive documents arrived - consultation. I rush to the back to see what all this is going to cost the ratepayers. Not a word about the cost to us! We do get a nice picture of Jenny. We also get a section on "Measuring our success" - this is evidently easier than working out what we will pay. I will propose that any funds for this work be paid for by specific business rates struck by each of the Councils that support the strategy. Wait for the business spongers to suddenly struggle with the concept of "user pays". The real business people are all working hard and risking their own money. They want rates to come down now.
Incidentally, it is offensive that the Regional Land Transport Committee's
discussion document should be issued by the Wellington Regional Strategy Office,
C/- Wellington City Council. The Act says the regional council supports the
Regional Land Transport Committee (or at least it used to) and the whole point
of the RLTC is that the participants stand equal. The action is indicative
of their level of understanding of what they are about.
r
August 19, 2005
SUGGESTED
A blog reader suggests I change the blog's name to "Porirua City - its amazing".
I JUST ABOUT MADE IT
No one knows what is going on at Council. So when the mayor's secretary rang
me a few minutes ago to invite me to a very interesting meeting involving the
Ngati Toa, I became excited. Then she apologised, she had contacted the wrong
"Robert" (a voice in the background is calling out to the secretary "not him").
Who is the Robert who is to be admitted into the secrets of the Council, I
wonder. I was wished a good weekend.
August 19, 2005
A SOUND DISASTER
After the screaming match at the last Council meeting a councllor said to
me "we do not need the microphones" and she added "we do not
use the microphones".
True. More on the screaming match> The $35,000
purchase was an "upgrade" that failed. Before the purchase people
said make sure you get the clip on microphones that are discrete and that the
chairperson can control when the microphone for each participant is turned
on. We have ended up with ugly back cords everywhere, people unable to reach
the microphones, participants trying to share the microphones, an amplifier
with fits of feedback, and a mayor unable to push the right button. Presumably,
we can get our $35,000 back from the supplier. The system is not "fit
for purpose" and the Consumer
Guarantees Act applies. Unless of course you think it is the councillors who
are not fit for purpose - they come without any guarantees.
r
August 19, 2005
BUSY WORK KEEPS PEOPLE HAPPY - WHITIREIA PARK
I have just read the minutes of the Whitireia Park Board. It struck me that they are dealing with the same issues that they had in front of them when I was a member of the Board, about 6 years ago.
But, hang on a moment, was it not decided that the Wellington Regional Council would take over the management of the park. This, before the WRC called itself "Greater"?
So I located my paper dated 19 August 1999 entitled "Control and Management of Whitireia Park". There it all is.
At this moment there is consultation with the Ngati Toa about the future management of the Park. That must be fun for all. But, it was actually decided in 1998 following extensive consultation, and the drawing up of a formally signed agreement, that the Park would be managed by GW. But, never mind progress. It is more fun to consult forever.
In the meantime of course, Greater Wellington avoids its responsibilities towards the Park - as per the decision of the properly elected councillors in a vote over the table. The annual operating cost of the park was budgeted at $350,000 pa. Sounds a lot of money but it is not when you consider that the park is to be run at the same excellent standard as other GW parks. It is actually said to be less than the operating budget for Queen Elizabeth Park and Belmont Regional Park (that may not still be the case of course).
So when do we see the decisions implemented? Or are we going to keep consulting because we are all having so much fun?
The Porirua City Council should be right
in there with GW - but they prefer to stand back and do nothing much. Not quite
true of course, the minutes show that the Porirua Council's chief executive
wrote to the Board "complaining about rubbish". How much do the ratepayers
pay this man to write letters about rubbish on land that is not the Council's
concern? I stagger when I consider the things that the Porirua Council
does and should do. Busy work keeps people happy.
r
August 19, 2005
KENEPURU OPENS
That is the Kapi Mana headline. Annette King appears in election mode with board chairperson Bob Henare. Last time I saw him in Porirua City was a public consultation meeting at Pataka where they failed to explain the difference between an A&E and an A&M. Ordinary people are expected to know these things .Deputy mayor Murrell, a strong National Party campaigner, represented the mayor at the opening and looked as if he loved every moment of it.
Actually, the headline is wrong, most things close or have closed. What opens is a GP clinic and that in fact has simply moved away from the town centre where the people are to the hilltop two kilometres away. The alienation of the Porirua After Hours Service is a significant blow to the poor. Chief Executive Margot Mains is quoted as saying the opening is evidence of "how committed the board is to providing services throughout the region". She is right, it is indeed evidence. See the list of things we have lost>
DUCK CREEK FIASCO
The Kapi Mana News (16 August 2005) tells me what the secret workshop is about: esplanade reserves and foolishness.
The only other thing that will be emphasised at the secret workshop is how we are all "open to legal challenge" and must be very cautious. This warning from officers means "For God's Sake Do Not Do Anything" or "Leave it All To Us". I have learnt to ignore the legal mantra because I am not on Council to do nothing. My problem is lack of opportunity to do anything. The legal mantra is often played. It is always overplayed. It scares some councillors witless. It is true that Councils that do nothing are never in Court. But, what is wrong with fighting for what is right? And, the other hidden idea in there is the notion that democracy pauses because the issue is controversial is repugnant .Local government should be controversial - everyone should be involved. (Perhaps I do the officers an injustice with my prediction - we shall see. If they do not beat the legal drum I will claim it was the effect of the blog. Officers cannot win! However, we do pay them.)
Council should not look at esplanade reserves for Duck Creek alone. Council makes policy for the whole City not just Duck Creek, although you would wonder given the profile of Duck Creek. Jenny Brash was the chairperson of the special committee of Council that established the District Plan. I said repeatedly that we should establish esplanade reserves for 5 separate streams / rivers and along much of the coast. The decision went against me. Now Council has funded amendments to the District Plan. At long last we will get a chance to advance the City. Most of one's time on Council is spent waiting for an opportunity to do something.
I now wonder how much money and time has been spent on Duck Creek with no extant result. I cannot add anything new. See "Get Quacking in Duck Creek">
r
August 18, 2005
OLD PORIRUA HOSPITAL SITE - HERITAGE ASPECTS
Robert Sorry about the delay in replying. Below is a reply from Matt Trlin/Peter Matich of Strategic Policy . Matt Trlin (DDI 237 1505) is happy to talk if you want to follow up . Regards, Roger
The matter of the trees on the hospital site (and their contribution to amenity of the grounds etc) is something that Council staff are aware of. The Council's ecological site inventory programme (undertaken in 2000-2002) has not identified the trees and bush on hospital grounds as forming part of an ecologically significant site. However that is not to say that such bush and trees do not have other cultural or historic values that may be of significance and worthy of heritage management. Since May, work has been underway to develop a Heritage Management Strategy for the city, which will encompass items, features, sites and places of natural and cultural significance. Such strategy is intended to develop a system for assessing and evaluating sites, items, features with potential heritage value/s, and defining appropriate management systems for assessed items, together with a toolbox for managing heritage features, and be open to formal public consultation next year.
In so far as the trees and bush on the Kenepuru Hospital site are concerned, we expect that these will be looked at as part of the intended Heritage Management Strategy programme, along with other items and features on the Kenepuru Hospital site (e.g. the Porirua Hospital Museum ). We will be talking with the Capital and Coast District Health Board as part of this heritage programme. Over 2005-06 we expect there will be a focus on identifying and evaluating sites, places, and features with significant cultural heritage values, and appropriate systems for managing such features. We expect some trees, gardens and bush areas may be identified by and included in that programme, if it can be established that they have a definable cultural or historic heritage value (e.g. due to their association with, for example, a significant event, person, or occasion) worthy of protection and management.
-----Original Message-----
From: Robert Shaw [ mailto:robert.shaw@porirua.net ]
Sent: Saturday, 4 June 2005 5:21 p.m.
To: Roger Blakeley - PCC
Cc: Donald Borrie
Subject: Hospital trees
Hi Roger: What has been done, and what is being done,
and what is proposed to be done, to preserve the bush and significant trees
at the Kenepuru site of the DHB? Thanks, r
PAUATAHANUI (SH58) FLOOD MANAGEMENT PLAN
"The progress is the study is underway, we expect initial results to be
available at the end of September but will probable require some further
work before the investigation is complete.
Regards,
Peter Bailey"
August 15, 2005
TAKAPUWAHIA FLOODING
Thank you Roger for your further clarification. Unfortunately what often happens when you over hear something it can be taken out of context. My conversation with John Green was expressing my frustration in his lack of commitment to help solve or direct me to finding a solution with the problem at Takapuwahia in his role as Chairman of Infrastructure. What you over heard was my annoyance and frustration that even though I have bought to the attention of councilors the problem at Takapuwahia on several occasions there seemed little interest if any in looking at the problem, or suggesting we as a Council look at the problem until I raised the point. I'm sure you will agree that a site visit speaks volumes, in fact the training to be a Resource Commissioner emphasized that a site visit is essential. For experienced Councilors to now say they were never invited to an inspection certainly maybe true but lacks conviction if we as a Council are claiming to have the best interests of all our residents at heart. I think it is important to note that short term suggested remedies to the above problem were given by Peter Bailey in his site visit report with me back in January 2005. I would be interested to know the progress on those suggestions and also what % of funding from the discretionary allocation has been given to this problem. I noticed in the weekend that work has been started at 32 Ngati Toa Street. I'm sure that the rate payers of Takapuwahia will start to feel a lot more confident that Council is finally starting to solve this huge problem that effects so many homes in this community. Thank you Roger and Peter for looking at the issues that need addressing , I look forward to the paper to Council outlining the way forward and are confident given some of the decisions made on Wednesday 10 August that the barrier of precedence can quite easily be overcome if we have a majority who consider the project is worth detracting from recommendations or past history of similar incidents. Regards Liz ----- Original Message -----
From: Roger Blakeley
- PCC To: Liz
Kelly (liz@kellyhygiene.co.nz) Cc: John
Green (john.green@paradise.net.nz) ; Sue
Dow (suedow@paradise.net.nz) ; Jenny
Brash - PCC ; Peter Bailey - PCC Sent: Sunday,
August 14, 2005 12:11 PM Subject: FW: Takapuwahia flooding
Liz
Just another point of clarification-my purpose is to try and ensure good communication
and minimise any misunderstandings. I thought I heard you say, at Council
on Wednesday 10 August 2005, to Cr Green or Cr Dow that they had not been
interested enough to come along to the "site visit" to Takapuwahia, or something
similar. If I heard correctly, I need to point out that the visit on
Friday 5 August 2005 by Peter Bailey and myself was not a formal "site visit" arranged
through a committee or Council and to which Committee members/all Councilors
were invited. You will recall that it arose from email discussion between
you and me and your invitation to me to show me the areas of concern re flooding
at Takapuwahia. I brought along Peter Bailey -it was an officers' visit,
which we were pleased to have. But because it was not a formal "site visit" with
a general invitation to a Committee or all Crs to attend, most other
Crs would not have been aware of it. No implication can therefore be taken
about lack of interest by the Chair, Deputy Chair of Infrastructure committee
or any other Cr. I hope this is helpful. As I note in my email below
, we will bring a paper about Takapuwahia flooding to the next Infrastructure
Committee on 31 August 2005, and you may wish to suggest at that meeting
that the Committee has a formal site visit to inspect the flooding problems
at Takapuwahia first hand. Regards, Roger -----Original
Message-----
From: Roger Blakeley - PCC
Sent: Friday, 12 August 2005 3:15 p.m.
To: Liz Kelly (liz@kellyhygiene.co.nz)
Cc: John Green (john.green@paradise.net.nz); Sue Dow (suedow@paradise.net.nz);
Ken Douglas (marilyn.ken@xtra.co.nz); Jenny Brash - PCC; Peter Bailey - PCC;
Gary Simpson - PCC; Naureen Palmer (naureenp@familystart-porirua.org.nz)
Subject: Takapuwahia flooding
Liz
Thankyou for arranging for Peter Bailey and myself to inspect the flooding
issues in Takapuwahia on Friday 5 August. Peter Bailey has discussed
this with Infrastructure Committee Chair Cr Green. The following
are the actions that will be taken:
Note : There is a question of responsibility for the flooding problems. The Residents have a clear belief that the Council and/or the Housing Corporation of NZ is responsible for the drainage problems and damp ground. The records held by the Council show a different picture that the action of two local residents in placement of fill material has created flooding problems for residents in the Te Arawi street area downstream at a lower level . However Council has not acted on this information in the past.
To determine the solutions for both these issues requires more work and it would be useful to know what changes, if any, will be made to the current storm water network. It may be preferable to defer a final decision on this matter until the catchment study is completed and any new works resulting from the catchment study have been designed. These issues would normally be treated as private owner issues . H owever past practi c e is that Council has helped the owners with technical advice towards the ir resolution. The extent that Council would carry out constructing new drainage work on private property would set a new precedent. We have similar ground water issues in other parts of the City where Council advi s e s owners how to address the problem but does not do physical work.
The above sets out the issues that need to be addressed. The paper to Infrastructure Committee will set out principles and proposed action for consideration by the Committee.
Regards, Roger
IT IS YOUR MONEY THEY ARE AFTER - FAIRY TALES ABOUT GROWTH
The same day that Wellington's business growth strategy is sent out for "consultation", Government announces it will give $2 million to central north island councils to promote their growth. Wellington ratepayers will pay for the Wellington project that will benefit a small number of businesses. Of course the hapless ratepayer is no match for the teams of consultants pushing this "growth strategy" nonsense. And, guess who pays for the consultants - yes the very ratepayers who must suffer the result.
Notice also the classic move to appropriate the language of the opposition - a project that started as "growth because our situation is desparate", has become "lets consider growth and quality of life initiatives". Foucault would be proud of them. Also note that still the second goal is to develop Wellington's CBD, which totally conflicts with the other goal of minimising train and car use. I will believe Wellington City Council wants to support us out here in Porirua the day they take a regional view on the hydotherapy pool. See the quote from WCC>
The strategy is being billed as a 50 year plan that makes it less threatening. But, what is this? They actually want our money NOW. It is only the good results that come in 50 years.
Things regional should be payed for by regional rates. This is transparent and democratic. Today we all pay regional rates and then some of the rates we pay to the Porirua City Council get channelled off to ad hoc regional groups. Tell me if you can, what are you paying for things regional? You see there is no transparancy.
By law your regional council must consult you on its long term and annual plans. By law your city council must consult you on its long term and annual plans. Now we have this other lot (that you are paying for) also consulting. The consultants profit from all the studies and consultations - do not expect a consultant to work for you.
Finally, reflect on this great regional spirit that is shown when Wellington
businesses want something - where were they when the hospital decision went
to Newtown? Where are they on Transmission Gully? Why do they not protest at
the Granda shortcut? Why have they not been asking Greater Wellington to put
in place a mandatory Regional Landscape Strategy, similar to the Regional Coastal
Plan? I will tell you why - because it will hit business in the pocket if they
actually have to adhere to rules that will protect ridgelines, maintain green
belts, and stay away from waterways, etc.
r
WHITBY RESIDENTS' ASSOCIATION - TRANSMISSION GULLY AND DUCK CREEK
Dear Robert,
I'm sorry not to have got back to you before but I have only been back from
a month away and have been catching up on a number of fronts
I totally agree with you on TG and we do need to mobilise. Unfortunately, I
had some disagreement in the committee that made it difficult for me to promote
the TG argument. I have recently gone out to members (at least those on email)
of the 46 responses 43 said go for TG (93%) and only 3 wanted to push along
the coast route. That I believe puts me back on the front foot with a clear
mandate to promote the TG option.
I think your proposals for going to "war" are right but we need leadership and
resources. That can only come from Council. We await 'orders'.
I should have included this matter for our agenda for tonight and I will include
it on the actual agenda.
I am concerned about the desire of Council officers for conducting workshops
on the subject of Duck Creek in secret. Not all councillors really understand
the issues and probably don't care much about Whitby anyway. They may opt for
the easy way out, especially bearing in mind the Council's cash position, and
give way to bully boy DB. We want to know that Council is really going to do
its best for Whitby and the environment and we don't want choosy deals with WCE.
Secrecy creates suspicion and the past weak attitude of Council (officers in
particular) to WCE and some dubious decisions on notification of resource applications
do not fill us with confidence. We can discuss tonight. We are looking for a
strong position from our Ward Councillors.
Your emails have been passed on to other committee members so I have been keeping
them in the picture.
Once again my apology for not responding sooner or in more detail but I hope
it indicates we are strongly behind your position on these matters.
Best regards
Jim
August 15, 2005
See Get quacking at Duck Creek> also Wars are won by fighting>
Three councillors contacted me after the screaming session in publicly excluded
business last Wednesday night .Council meetings are in two parts, the public
part and the non-public part. I went home at 10 pm as things started
to deteriorate during the non-public part; and it seems that was a wise decision
for I missed the worst of it. Everyone agrees the Council is dysfunctional.The
morale of the officers suffers very much in the present circumstances. For
them, as much as for the City, there needs to be established a positive working
environment. We
see exactly the same patterns of interaction in the present Council that we
saw in the previous Council - which is what you would expect for we continue
to operate exactly the same structures and procedures, and no-one has learnt
anything new. We need radical change. See another
councillor's comment>
r
August 14, 2005
CONGRATULATIONS TO LINDIS TAYLOR OF TAWA
Lindis has a brilliant letter published in The Wellingtonian, 11 August 2005, setting out how Capital and Coast Heath are looking more and more disastrous as they attempt to develop Newtown at the expense of everyone and against all reason.
There are unclear messages about the hydrotherapy pool at Kenepuru. Is it
adequate, or is it not? Either way, we should take a serious interest in the
campaign being run in Wellington to have the Health Board spend even more of
our money on facilities we cannot access. We cannot access the hospital, we
cannot access the services associated with the hospital, and now our money
is to be used to make the situation even worse. The Wellingtonian, now run
brilliantly by ex "KapiMana News" Editor Rob Olsen, has a front page story
about the pressure being put on the Health Board by Wellington lobby groups.
What is the Porirua Council doing about this? I have heard nothing. My letter
below from a week ago pertains.
r
August 14, 2005
Editor
WELLINGTON CITY COUNCIL TRIES TO HEAVY THE HEALTH BOARD
Wellington City Council offers a subsidy to the Health Board in order that the
new hydrotherapy pool will be built at Newtown. Forget the needs of Porirua and
Kapiti they say. Porirua and Kapiti pay taxes to provide Wellington City with
health facilities. Porirua and Kapiti do not have adequate hospital facilities,
nor do they have adequate primary care facilities. In the action of WCC, you
see one of the reasons this injustice is perpetuated.
So here is Wellington City Council's disgraceful submission to the Health Board: "Council
notes extreme disappointment at the failure of C&C DHB to meet its obligations
and undertaking in respect of Project Margin and hydrotherapy projects and support
for mental health and addiction services. Council further notes that this failure
endangers not only these projects but future collaborations between C&C DHB
and WCC."
Robert Shaw
Porirua City Councillor
August 11, 2005
INTERNATIONAL TRAVEL AT THE RATEPAYERS' EXPENSE
Nishio 1994
Mayor John Burke
Cr Geoff Walpole
Cr Jenny Brash
Blacktown 1997
Mayor John Burke
Cr Noreen Palmer
Cr David Stanley
Nishio 1999
Mayor Jenny Brash
Cr Murray Woodhouse
Cr Helen Smith
Cr Noreen Palmer and daughter
Cr Kevin Watson and Mrs Watson
Gaylene Kells (staff)
Blacktown 2000
Mayor Jenny Brash
Cr Bud Lavery
Cr Noreen Palmer
Cr Sue Dow
Cr Nick Leggett
Helen Chipper (community rep)
Margaret Noonan (staff)
Nishio and Yangzhou 2002
Mayor Jenny Brash
Cr Sue Dow
Cr Nick Leggett
Cr Jasmine Underhill
Dr Roger Blakeley (staff) and Mrs Blakeley
Brian Cross (staff)
Blacktown 2002
Mayor Jenny Brash
Cr Kevin Watson and Mrs Watson
Cr Sue Dow and Mr Dow
Cr John Green
Gary Simpson (staff)
Nishio 2003
Mayor Jenny Brash
Cr Watson & Mrs Watson
Cr Maureen Gillon & Mr Gillon
Cr John Green
Dr Roger Blakeley (staff)
Mr Matiu Rei (kaumatua)
Blacktown 2004
Mayor Jenny Brash
Cr Nick Leggett
Cr Bud Lavery
Hemi Matenga
Brian Cross (staff)
Nishio 2005
Mayor Jenny Brash
Cr Euon Murrell
Cr Litea Ah Hoi & partner (own cost)
Dr Roger Blakeley (staff) and Mrs Blakeley (own cost)
Gary Simpson (staff)
Setsuko Pettman (contract staff 50% funded by Nishio CC)
FANTASTIC PHOTOGRAPHS OF PORIRUA CITY
A real estate company provides superb photographs of the city, beaches, and harbours. Congratulations to Porirua Property and the anonymous photographer. Follow the link to the photo tour.
http://www.poriruaproperty.co.nz/profile.php?id=1339
SOMEONE ASKED ABOUT THE HEALTH BOARD CAMPAIGN POLICY OF 4 YEARS AGO - THE TWO LETTERS BELOW, TAKEN FROM THE PORIRUA NEWS OF 10 OCTOBER 2001, COVER THE REQUEST
Editor,
Kenepuru Hospital should become the regional
centre for elective in-patient services.
This would build upon its current capacity and
make the hospital complementary to Newtown.
Newtown would then focus on acute surgery
and complex cases that require ICU.
We should also develop the existing acute
medical services at Kenepuru, because this facility
is best sited close to the population and
the work integrates well with the surgery.
The new plan of Capital & Coast Health is
still really their old plan. Medical and surgical
overnight beds are to go from Kenepuru – replaced
by other services.
The public want Kenepuru to have the same
base capacity as Hutt Hospital. This means
there must be acute medical and elective in-patient
surgical services. These services have been
available at Kenepuru for 22 years and any plan
that does not enhance this capacity in perpetuity
is not acceptable.
ROBERT SHAW
Wellington regional councillor, Porirua candidate
for Capital & Coast Health Board
Editor,
We delivered the petition on
Kenepuru, and services at Kapiti, to the
Minister of Health.
She will make the decision on where
to spend the $290 million available for
capital works.
Some people say the petition was for
the health board itself, but this was
never the case.
The board’s job was to consult the
public and report to the minister.
We started the petition because we felt
the board had not adequately surveyed
public opinion in the north.
An important feature of the petition
is that it reflects the Johnsonville, Tawa,
Porirua, and Kapiti communities.
The success of the petition will be seen
in the sum of money that the minister
decides will be spent to upgrade
Kenepuru and build facilities at Kapiti.
Up to now the plan has been to spend
90% of the money at Newtown.
Will this alter?
ROBERT SHAW and CHRIS TURVER
Wellington regional councillors
HAYLEY WAIN
Former Porirua City Councillor Nick Leggett tells me Wellington Councillor Hayley Wain from Tawa has a web blog. http://www.hayleywain.co.nz/
THE MYSTERY OF ELECTRICITY
In every month of 2005 Council has used more energy than in the same month in 2004. Why? The annual energy bill is about $1.3 million. Some say Council generates more heat than light, but that is a different issue.
I am asked "what should be done re Duck Creek"? The problem is that there are two different actions being confused.
Project A: Whitby Coastal Estates must apply to the Council for whatever consents or approvals they need to do what they want. The legal processes will operate, decisions will be made in accordance with existing rules, the legal timeframe will apply, and if anyone is not satisfied there will be mediations and appeals. Possible land swaps and the development of new reserves could become a part of this project. Until an application is made we should not shadowbox. Councillor Sue Dow is the chairperson responsible for deciding who will hear any applications.
Project B: Council changes its District Plan to better produce the kind of
City we all want. This, in my opinion, means establishing a greater level of
protection for existing residents and more green areas.
We want to produce the most open, comfortable, and high value land in the world.
This project relates to the whole City and I would need some persuading
that special arrangements should be made for Duck Creek (although that is possible,
witness the Aotea Block). Councillor David Stanley is the chairperson responsible
for driving this project. More on who is responsible>
August 12, 2005
TRYING TO SWIM IN DUCK CREEK WHEN YOU ARE AFRAID OF THE WATER
"Good morning all.
Hope this email finds you all well. This email is intended to update you all on how Porirua City Council intends to progress the matter of 'Duck creek' over the coming month or so. Council workshop Council has set a Council workshop to discuss Duck creek, and matters associated with its potential future development, on: Thursday 25 August. 6:00pm Council Chamber Porirua City Council. Under Council's standing orders all workshops are run "public excluded". Councillors can not make decisions at a workshop. Any decisions that Councillors may wish to make must be made by way of Council's committees and Council. While the workshop will be closed to the public, it will be preceded by a ~½ hr public delegation session where Whitby Coastal Estates (the Landowner), the Whitby Residents' Association and the Pauatahanui Inlet Community Trust will each have a ~10 minute opportunity (if they so choose) to briefly address Council.
The public session will be: Thursday 25 August 5:30pm -6:00pm Council Chamber Councillors will then retire to their workshop to:
* review the Duck Creek design exercise, (i.e. what its purpose was, who it involved, what it covered, what it produced etc)
* review the outcomes of that exercise (i.e. issues and opportunities, areas of agreement, outstanding issues etc), and
* consider outstanding issues from that exercise and council's possible position on those issues, and
* consider how, if at all, Council may wish to progress any future discussions with the landowner and the community on the former golf course sites potential future development.
A key matter that will be considered in the workshop will obviously be the issue of potential esplanade reserves, and potential reserve provision within the former creek site (should it be developed). Council will use the workshop as an opportunity to consider whether, if at all, it will set a 'base position' on the matter of esplanade reserves and general reserve provision. It will also consider how, if at all, it may wish to progress the exercise of working through the resolution of issues associated with reserves, which it started with WCE and the community back in mid 2004.
Council report
Following from the workshop, it is expected that a report will be taken to the Strategy and Finance Committee on the 6th September. That report will summarise the outcomes of the Duck creek design exercise, outstanding issues, and options for council to consider in relation to how it may wish, if at all, to further progress the Duck creek design exercise with the landowner and community. That report is intended to provide officers with guidance for progressing the Duck Creek matter (i.e. do nothing and await subdivision/land use applications for the site, or undertake further discussions with WCE etc). At this stage the report is expected to be public excluded to enable Council to have a free and frank discussion on its options, without prejudicing any future discussions or negotiations that it may choose to undertake with Whitby Coastal Estates.
However as with the workshop there will be an opportunity for the public (i.e. WCE, WRA and PICT, and others) to present delegations at the start of the Strategy and Finance Committee meeting.
Questions
I hope that the
above provides you with a clear indication of what will be happening over the
coming month or so. If you have any questions relating to the above please
do not hesitate to contact me direct. Please note that I will be making contact
by phone with David Bradford, Ash Johnstone and Russell Plume to ensure that
they are aware of the information I have outlined above, and are able to
confirm whether they wish to briefly present to the public session on the 25th,
and/or present delegations to the Strategy and Finance Committee on the 6th
September.
Regards
Matt Matthew Trlin
Manager Environmental Policy"
ROBERT COMMENTS
As I have now said on many occasions Detail>: we have meetings and we have workshops. The meetings can do things (ie make decisions) and the workshops can do nothing expect educate people. Informal gatherings are fine for tennis clubs but we are local government properly constituted by Act of Parliament. When important matters are being considered both councillors and residents have a right to the protection of the law and proper process.
Why are selected participants being given rights to address councillors above the rest of the public? Is it intended to close off some ideas, or to deny discussion of some viewpoints? Or do we just not like some people? The "public delegation session" is hardly a "public" session when officers have decided in advance which members of the public they want to see.
I do not want secret "free and frank" discussions - I want the public to be totally involved in every aspect of the decision-making and to understand fully who says what and how they reason. Council must learn to trust the public.
I have yet to see any reason that justifies secrecy - why can the public not hear a review of the exercise to date? why can the public not hear about outstanding issues? why can the public not hear a discussion about the future of the golf land (the owner of the land has a particular right to be know as do those who live next to the land)? why are issues about public reserves to be secret? How could any discussion "prejudice" a "future direction"? Are some ideas to be hidden when the "future direction" is finally revealed to the public? Does the council plan to spring something on people, perhaps through a legal action? Is it thought that an uttering by someone in a broad debate is to be taken out of context and read as a commitment? Is it thought that the public is incapable of understanding the concept of "initial wide discussions"?
The committee chairperson responsible for this is Councillor David Stanley (Environment, including the District Plan specifically) Detail> - he must have agreed to the proposed action; likewise does the Mayor support it? Who actually decided how we would proceed?
We must also ask why District Plan issues, and a local matters like this, are now being referred to the Strategy and Finance Committee. The effect of this is to replace David Stanley with Ken Douglas (chair of Strategy and Finance). All the hot issues go to Strategy and Finance, and the other committees are left with the rubbish.
I may well ask the Ombudsman to review several aspects of the Duck Creek exercise.
r
August 12, 2005
A CRISP SUGGESTION
Paul Crisp has produced a detailed analysis of the technical challenges presented by the construction of the Grenada-Horokiwi Link. This he has sent to Maunsel Limited. I always admire people who use their professional skills and donate their time to contribute to public issues.
TIM AND LANA WRITE ABOUT THE REGIONAL SPORTS COMPLEX
Tim & Lana Sheppard
ROBERT COMMENTS
August 12, 2005
SOUTH BEACH RUBBISH
Robert
Peter Bailey has investigated the issue you have raised and found out the following.
There was an issue about 3 weeks ago when the rubbish was not collected in South Beach Road, together with some other areas. Allbrites was instructed to go back and collect again from these areas but apparently missed South Beach Rd again. In our customer system there is no record of regular missed bags in South Beach Road. Note we monitor the number of reported missed bags each month. We have discussed this report of regular missed bags in South Beach Road with Allbrite and they have put this Road on their driver "hot list", meaning the drivers need to report when they have collected from the Road. As requested, I have called xxxx to explain.
Regards, Roger (CEO Porirua City Council)
EMPLOYERS' AND MANUFACTURERS' ASSOCIATION
From: Janet Perkins [ mailto:janetp@emacentral.org.nz ]
Sent: Wednesday, 10 August 2005 4:25 p.m.
Subject: Flawed Decision Making for Wellington's Northern Access
Dear Sir/Madam
Transit New Zealand's decision to axe Transmission Gully has outraged local business leaders.
"Pulling the plug on the Transmission Gully option just doesn't make sense," says Paul Winter, Chief Executive of EMA Central, and a member of the Transport Action Group.
"It seems to have more to do with getting roads off the agenda before the election than with a genuine desire to find the best outcome." Paul Winter said Transmission Gully potentially offers a robust, long-term solution to the region's transport needs.
"A good roading network is vital for local business, as well as the rest of the community," he said. "And the strategic importance of Wellington's roading network is huge. All traffic between the North and South Islands goes through Wellington. It's the capital city, but our only northern transport corridor is vulnerable to natural disasters, such as floods or earthquakes." Paul Winter says the Greater Wellington regional council land transport committee should have been allowed to complete their review first. "This kind of ad hoc, unilateral decision-making is just what we don't need for important long-term structural investments," he said.
"The cost of Transmission Gully is important, but there hasn't been a real discussion of development options. We should also be considering funding options such as tolls or borrowing. "Transit New Zealand should not have made a decision in this way," he said. "Particularly when the only alternative through Paramata is very unlikely to go to four lanes, because of protracted legal battles." "We want to see Transmission Gully back on the table."
Contact for further information: Paul Winter Chief Executive, EMA Central
EXTRACT FROM DOMINION POST EDITORIAL - PORIRUA CITY COUNCIL'S CHALLENGE
"The decision of Transit New Zealand to adopt the widening of the coastal highway as its preferred option is a significant tilt of the playing field, but does not mean game over for the advocates of the Transmission Gully alternative, spearheaded by Porirua City Council. What is important now is how Transmission Gully's supporters play the game.
Transit New Zealand has included two significant provisos in its decision.
First, it wants confirmation that the coastal highway option will deliver on its promise of considerable cost savings over alternatives.
That is sensible. Wellington Mayor Kerry Prendergast believes the coastal option is the only affordable one, and seems to have the tacit support of the Government, which will be providing much of the cash, for that view. That does not guarantee she is right.
However, it is up to the supporters of Transmission Gully to prove that their alternative is financially viable. If tolling is to be used to help pay for it, they must show that their estimates of toll income are robust and take account of a reluctance of truck drivers to use what will be a steep route. They must also show that the construction costings are robust.
Transit also wants to be satisfied that there is a reasonable chance of success in driving through the resource consents that are needed for the work.
There is a strong possibility that the whole process could become as snarled
as the traffic on the coastal route, even if the "call in" procedures available
under the Resource Management Act are used to streamline the process. As a
report prepared for Porirua City councillors notes, even if those procedures
are used, there is no guarantee that the consents will be granted."
August 11, 2005
AUTOMOBILE ASSOCIATION SUPPORTS TRANSMISSION GULLY - AS THEY ALWAYS HAVE
Dear all
I had a call on Tuesday from John Christianson, Chairman of AA Wellington, saying they still strongly supported Transmission Gully.
They issued a press release expressing concern at Transit's premature & unilateral decision (but I haven't seen this press release printed, have you?) and repeating that CH has the highest risk.
John has also written to an AA member in Tawa who had had the temerity (stupidity) to express preference for CH. John is a Brit civil engineer by background and gave the nincompoop a good blast!
John sent me only hard copies of both his press release and his letter, but I have scanned them into the attached Word docs. While the AA logo and a bit of alignment is askew, the scanned copies are clearly legible and make encouraging reading.
Perhaps you could circulate these to all members of the RLTC, and you might be able to make further use of them. In particular I wonder whether, for yr Friday afternoon PR campaign mtg, you might consider linking in with John and the power of the AA.
Good luck and regards,
Tim Sheppard
August 11, 2005
COUNCILLOR TAIMA FAGALOA WRITES ABOUT OUR DYSFUNCTIONAL COUNCIL
"I didn't have the opportunity to say what I wanted to say last night so I am going to take responsibility for this now. My concern grows for our City as I continue to watch the deterioration of relationships between Council staff and Councillors (including our Mayor), and Councillors and Councillors. As the youngest and one of the newest Councillors on the block who is also responsible for advocating for young people and the elderly through various Committee roles and Community responsibilities, I felt quite despondent last night as I watched our team (including Council officers) try very hard to work through some very difficult challenges with a high level of emotion and frustration – some of you will say in response to this “well welcome to PCC, welcome to local politics'.
When I took up my post as Councillor we all attended a two day retreat in Otaki. If you recall we talked about the whole thing around exclusion - there are those that are excludors and those that are excluded. I think we also discussed the whole thing around the need for us to learn how to respond and not react. Last night there was reaction from all of us whether verbal or in silence to being excluded at a local and regional level (Transmission Gully). We can continue to sit around the table and debate these issues, what's more important to me is the aftermath. I cannot begin to agree with Cr Douglas's suggestion wholeheartedly and I am glad we have now all agreed to this. However as a visionary I tend to look beyond what's in front of us, like many of you, and it is important for me to know that whatever the outcome of Transmission Gully, that as a Team we do not atone blame or judgement on anyone or any group – whether it be Councillors or Council Staff – that we agree to keep moving as our City and citizens would expect us to.
When WRC presented their workshop on the Draft WRC Strategy we talked about losers and winners, my response to this was “I understand with certain situations there can only be a loser or a winner, but does it have to be same Cities that lose all the time!
GOOD LUCK TO OUR TEAM AND GO HARD!!!
Please do not insult my efforts here by beginning a negative email war – I'm only trying to put forward my 10 cents worth.
Regards
Taima
Taima Fagaloa
Bachelor in Social Work
Pacific Community Liaison
Whitireia Community Polytechnic"
August 11, 2005
JENNY GOES IT ALONE AS USUAL
How do we get the mayor to think more like Winston Churchill and less like Polyanna?
Last night at Council we had a long debate on Transmission Gully, and I spoke about the need for a coordinated advocacy strategy. There was good support for this from Councillors both at the table and after the meeting.However, the mayor does not want a proper meeting, but instead wants an informal gathering in her office. Thus, she locks out people and resources. The Dominon Post's editorial this morning has it right: what happens now depends on the strategy and ability of the Porirua City Council's leadership.
Then, this morning, as a complete surprise to me, in comes a press statement from the Council about Jenny Brash's approach to the Minster of Transport. Why was this not mentioned last night at the Council meeting? We cannot work together if we are all kept in the dark.More> What is needed now>
Council Media release: URGENT MEETINGS SOUGHT OVER TRANSMISSION GULLY
Porirua City Council is seeking urgent meetings with the Minister of Transport, chair of Transit New Zealand and chair of Land Transport New Zealand over future transport options for the Western Corridor. "On August 3 the Transit New Zealand board resolved to support the four laning of the coastal route rather than Transmission Gully. "This decision completely flies in the face of the promise made by Transport Minister Pete Hodgson on July 5 that the final decision would rest with the region. It also undermines the process being followed by the Regional Land Transport Committee, a process all regional representatives have agreed to," said Porirua City Mayor Jenny Brash. "In a statement today Transit New Zealand said the Board had only agreed to accept the 'draft Wellington Western Corridor Plan' as suitable for formal submissions and hearings.' "The resolution passed on August 3 however is much more explicit and says the Board 'accepted the draft corridor plan with its provision for four laning on the coast as suitable for formal submissions.' "There is a serious discrepancy between what Transit agreed to last week and what it is saying today and we need to clarify this. How can the public of the region have confidence in the integrity of the next round of consultation when Transit appears to have taken a stance behind closed doors? "There are also other issues of concern. "Cost estimates seem to change with the weather. Estimates for Transmission Gully seem to vary between $850 million and $1.5 billion, depending on who you talk to or the time of the week. The cost of the coastal route changes similarly. "This is extremely frustrating and threatens the process. How anyone can make decisions when the goal posts keep changing is beyond me."
TRANSIT FOOLS NO-ONE
In damage control mode Transit NZ issues a press statement that supposedly
quotes the motion from their Board. But they left out the critical bit of
the motion. The bit left out: "accepted the draft
corridor plan with its provision for four laning on the coast as suitable for
formal submissions" (sic).
r
August 10, 2005
WELL PORIRUA'S GRAND TRANSMISSION GULLY STRATEGY AND ITS EXECUTION IS TO BE MANAGED BY MAYOR BRASH IN AN INFORMAL MEETING AT 4PM ON FRIDAY IN HER OFFICE WITH DRINKS - SHE HAS ISOLATED HERSELF
Should anyone have any comments on tonight's full council meeting I would
be pleased to hear them. I left the meeting in the publicly excluded part at
10pm when there was an incredible screaming match going on. The result, on
Transmission Gully, so far as I can figure it out, is that the Council now
supports the northern half of Transmission Gully (on a motion from Ken Douglas)
and we have no plans about advocacy. It was good to see the Regional Land Transport
Committee chairperson, Regional Councillor Terry McDavit, in the public gallary.
r
August 10, 2005
BIT OF AN OVERSIGHT
I never fuss when administrative mistakes are made. I made one myself once.
So when the officers forgot they needed money for the computer software necessary
to produce the Long Term Council Community Plan, I did not take much notice.
However, reflect on the ease with which an extra $124,000 was found in contrast
to what is said to the community when projects are brought forward.
August 10,
2005
DOES IT MATTER THAT MASTERTON'S MAYOR OPPOSES TRANSMISSION GULLY?
It matters. The Wairarapa has 5 votes on the Regional Land Transport Committee. They stick together and last time they supported Transmission Gully. Without them, the Gully does not stand a chance. Blog readers will know that I have been saying - get teams of speakers to Masterton right now. According to Masterton mayor Bob Francis all three Wairarapa mayors oppose Transmission Gully (Dom Post, 10 August, 2005).
"GULLY ROUTE AXED"
Says the Dominion Post a day after blog readers had the news. More>
Now watch for Jenny Brash to make all the mistakes she made in the hospital debate. First, "we do not need a meeting" which means "I am in the lime light and no one else is wanted". Second, "Roger can do it all from the communications budget" which means "I do not want anyone else involved". Third "we can have an informal gathering after the council meeting", which means "I can do what I like because no actual decisions will be made". Locking out the councillors and the community is a very bad way to go. And, what is most worrying of all, is the touching belief that Jenny has that the vote will go our way because she has talked to people who have nodded and smiled. At this moment we have lost in a thunderous defeat.
We need every councillor and the community to work together in a coordinated and focused way. Officers have to be directed, tasks assigned, a budget drawn up, and the vital follow-through managed.
The chairperson of the Infrastructure Committee, John Green, has much to do.More
on who is responsible>
August 10, 2005
TRANSIT NEW ZEALAND'S WELLINGTON PROJECTS THIS YEAR (click for detail)
| SH6 Murchison Erosion Realignment | June 2005 | 482,000.00 |
| Mt Victoria Tunnel to Evans Bay Parade Lighting Upgrade | May 2005 | 252,000.00 |
| Petone Overbridge Concrete Repairs 2005 | May 2005 | 49,300.00 |
| SH1 Ihakara Street Intersection Improvements | May 2005 | |
| SH1 Raumati Stormwater Upgrade Non Hybrid Major Drainage | May 2005 | 440,000.00 |
| Nelson Maintenance of Highway Lighting | May 2005 | |
| SH1 Otaihanga Rd Intersection Improvements | May 2005 | 149,699.00 |
| Terrace Tunnel Approach Wall Anchors:Groundwater Instrumentation and Drainage | April 2005 | 99,950.00 |
| Rocks Road Seawall Stonework Repairs | April 2005 | 43,500.00 |
| State Highway Bridge Management: Region 9 | March 2005 | 535,520.00 |
| Paierau Road Intersection Improvements | March 2005 | 74,500.00 |
| Centennial Highway Median Barrier | February 2005 | 536,000.00 |
| Non Hybrid Major Drainage SH53 | February 2005 | 87,100.00 |
| Rocks Road Seawall Repairs | February 2005 | 34,000.00 |
| Wairoa Bridge Bearings and Miscellaneous Maintenance | January 2005 | 32,000.00 |
FOR THOSE WHO NEED REMINDING - TRANSMISSION GULLY AND GOVERNMENT FUNDING
Undated statement from Transit NZ in early 2005 (in advance of the national elections, you might say).
Transit New Zealand welcomed the announcement of an additional $660 million
for Wellington’s Western Transport Corridor announced earlier this
month by the Minister of Transport Hon Pete Hodgson.
“The first part is a $225 million package to deal with the highest priorities
which include travel demand measures such as the provision of better information
to road users, and from Transit’s perspective, safety improvements to
a number of intersections,” said Transit chief executive Rick van Barneveld.
“We also welcome the focus on enhanced passenger transport as we fully
recognise that we cannot build our way out of congestion on key state highways,” he
said.
The funding comes in two parts. The first is a $255 million package to
deal with the highest priorities identified in the Western Corridor Transportation
Study - a joint study between Transit New Zealand and Greater Wellington
Regional Council.
The four priorities include:
• Enhanced passenger transport. This involves some double tracking and
electrification of rail to Kapiti, along with additional rolling stock.
Improved bus/rail interchanges and park and ride facilities will be built in
Kapiti and Porirua. The result will be a 15-minute peak frequency level of
service from Kapiti.
• Better traffic demand management. Variable message signs for motorists
advising of delays, closures and alternatives.
• Intersection safety and bottleneck improvements. Flyovers and underpasses
are needed at major intersections, a completed median barrier from Pukerua
Bay to Paekakariki, and a possible two-lane bypass of Pukerua Bay.
• Two new roads. Petone-Grenada and the Kapiti Western Link Road which
will significantly relieve congestion.
The second announcement is a $405 million package, in addition to the $255
million, to address the issue of a four-lane highway between Paremata and
MacKays Crossing. The options being looked at are the $710 million coastal
route or the $1.14 billion Transmission Gully route.
The funding is dependent on two conditions. Firstly, Transit and appropriate
local authorities are to report by December on a detailed implementation
plan for the western corridor including a consenting strategy for the coastal
option. Secondly, there must be regional agreement as to the preferred option.
Both options, the coastal route and Transmission Gully, are amongst the more
challenging in the land transport landscape and pose significant consenting
and engineering challenges. The implementation and consenting strategy report,
due in December will inform, and be informed, by the Wellington Regional
Strategy, due for completion in a year. The implications of the proposed
Regional Strategy for the western corridor are likely to be clear by Christmas.
MEDIA RELEASE
TRANSIT NEW ZEALAND DUMPS TRANSMISSION GULLY
Transport Minister Pete Hodgson and the Board of Transit New Zealand ought to sing the same song says Porirua City Councillor Robert Shaw.
Councillor Shaw is “angry and dismayed” that the Board of Transit
New
Zealand supports the Coast Highway upgrade subject to the confirmation
of four points.
“This mocks Minister Hodgson’s guarantee to us that the region will decide.”
On 5 July 2005, Transport Minister Pete Hodgson gave Wellington an
unequivocal assurance that the region as a whole would decide about
Transmission Gully.
“All the hard work that is being done at the moment in preparation for the historic decision has been preempted by Board of Transit New Zealand."
“On the 3 August 2005, without any input from the Wellington representatives, Transit decided to accept the consultants plan to upgrade Centennial Highway subject to the checking of some facts”.
“They ignored the Minister of Transport and the rights and responsibilities of Wellington’s mayors and representatives.
“Transit NZ has one member on the Land Transport Committee that will decide about Transmission Gully on 29 August.”
“It is clear that the Board of Transit has instructed their
representative on how he will vote on the 29th - regardless of the
points that are raised at the meeting, and regardless of the views of
Wellington people.
The Board has also decided what it wants to do, having seen the consultants’ report that is denied to the rest of us.
Obviously the officers of Transit who are working in the officers groups
that is developing reports for the planned meetings have given their
bosses advanced insight.
For more information Porirua City Councillor Robert Shaw ph 04 233 0252
COPY OF RECORDS FROM THE BOARD OF TRANSIT NZ
At the Transit Board's 3 August 2005 meeting, the Board accepted the draft corridor plan with its provision for four laning on the coast as suitable for formal submissions.
The Board also resolved that Transit's proposals for a final corridor plan will be subject to, inter alia:
"(i) confirmation that the completed consenting strategy for a coastal
highway route shows a reasonable prospect of success;
(ii) confirmation of a significant cost saving for a coastal highway route
when compared with Transmission Gully Motorway at
acceptable levels of cost and time risk;
(iii) confirmation on the basis of short term performance monitoring, that the Transit High Occupancy Vehicle lanes at Mana are predicted to perform satisfactorily over the next ten years; and (iv) consideration of the issues raised during the submissions and hearing process;"
CONSULTANTS SUPPORT COASTAL ROUTE
The consultants who will advise the Regional Land Transport Committee will come out in strong support of the coastal route. They are trying to keep within the financial envelope and stress that the new Land Transport Management Act says things must be "affordable". You heard it first on the Porirua Wellington Web Blog.
WAR BEGINS - MEDIA RELEASE FROM THE PUKERUA BAY RESIDENTS' ASSOCIATION (who are usually docile)
Wellington Mayor Attacks Neighbour
“Kerry Prendergast is waging war on neighbouring Porirua,” says a spokesman for the Plimmerton Residents' Association. “She wants to throw 300 of our families onto the street with her short-sighted plan to expand the Coastal Highway .”
The Wellington Mayor and the Regional Council Chairman, Ian Buchanan, are the two leading proponents of a further temporary upgrade to the existing SH1, at the expense of future-proofing access to the Capital with the long-term development of Transmission Gully.
“Their plans to widen the old road rip the guts out of Porirua. They plan to confiscate 300 homes in the Paremata-Plimmerton community – and more in Pukerua Bay and Paekakariki. They want to desecrate the historical Ngatitoa Domain. The south end of lovely Plimmerton Beach would be lost for all time, with the marine ecology wrecked. And the rugged beauty of the Pukerua-Paekakariki foreshore would be ravaged by huge, ugly clip-ons to widen the road there.
“We have made repeated submissions to Prendergast and Buchanan, but they are cavalier in their disregard of us. We are not Wellington City voters so clearly Kerry doesn't see our families worthy of respect and of security in our homes.
“Porirua Mayor Jenny Brash has been staunch in support of our city but even she cannot seem to get through to these two prejudiced regional heavyweights. There is none so blind as they who will not see.”
PRA Contact: Tim Sheppard , 233.6373
CHAMBER OF COMMERCE SUPPORT TRANSMISSON GULLY - AGAIN
The Wellington Chamber of Commerce has come out in support of tolling to solve the Western Corridor roading problem.
* 82% of Wellington Regional Chamber of Commerce members say they are willing to pay a road toll to fund any shortfall between Government funding and road construction costs in solving Wellington's Western Corridor access problem.
Tolling only applies to Transmission Gully-not the Coastal Route (because Govt policy is that you cannot toll a route if there is no alternative route).
This confirms the "Willingness to Pay" survey of some years ago. And, it confirms the consistent vote of the commercial and business people at the Land Transport Strategy Committee to support Transmission Gully.
r
August 9, 2005
WARS ARE WON BY FIGHTING - TRANSMISSION GULLY
As Winston Churchill said "Wars are won by fighting". We need a sense of urgency, purpose, and direction regarding Transmission Gully. Never was there a more critical week than the present week. An urgent council meeting should be called for THIS Saturday (the mayor or the chief executive can do this) and all TG supporters/workers need to be invited. The meeting should quickly move into workshop format to devise a campaign of war and assign tasks. Then the meeting would move back to being a full council meeting and the councillors should vote funds for the campaign and direct officials. This exercise could cost up to $100,000. It is the most important community advocacy task the Council has ever undertaken. I have sent an email to the mayor and chief executive suggesting about 20 actions that are needed right now. ACTION ACTION ACTION
Robert Shaw
Porirua City Councillor
August 9, 2005
EVERYONE THINKS THE MAYORS DECIDE ON TRANSMISSION GULLY - AND HENCE WE ALL JUST SIT TIGHT
The email below, from the Porirua Council's chief executive, is along the
right lines in that it identifies the critical decision-making meetings.
The idea that the mayors decide is nonsense. Worse,
it is causing us to take
a defeatist attitude.
r
Tim
Re your email below.
Attached is a paper to Porirua City
Council for consideration next Wednesday 10 August 2005. It is now in
the public domain. We have a package which I would like to think we can
get agreement from at the RLTC workshop on 18 August to
discuss a preferred option between the Coastal Route and Transmission Gully,
but it will require a major collective effort! Congratulations on the
efforts that you and others are making to get your views in front of he decision
makers-eg your letter below. Re your question: "but what else can we
do from the perspective of local residents' assns?". The message I am getting
from the central government and local government decision makers is they think
Jenny is fighting a lone cause at the political level and they are surprised
at how quiet (they perceive) the Residents Associations to have been about
the Coastal Route option-that is they do not seem to be aware about the strength
of feeling about the Coastal Route from within the communities that will be
destroyed by it! I know that is not the case!! So anything you
can do to get the community's concerns into the public domain before the 18
August RLTC Workshop to discuss a preferred position could be vital. After
that it will be hard to change the decision. After the workshop
on 18 August, the issue goes to the RLTC for decision on 29 August and
then out for public consultation. It is essential to get Transmission Gully
agreed as the preferred option at the RLTC workshop on 18 August. Jenny
is working on her Mayoral and other colleagues on the RLTC and I am working
on my CE colleagues in other Councils and agencies and Peter Bailey is working
on his GM colleagues but there is nothing like RLTC members hearing directly
or through the media from the people in all of the local communities who will
be directly affected!! Regards, Roger
AN ALTERNATIVE TO SPENDING $13 MILLION ON A REGIONAL RECREATION FACILITY THAT WILL SOON NEED ITS ROOF PATCHED
Try this idea: invest
the $13 million and get a return of a million a year - award that $1 million
to the top NZ sports person each year, as decided by the councillors. Call
it the "Porirua City's Michael Campbell Memorial Award". We would never have
to pay to market Porirua City ever again; and we would still have the $13
million.
r
COST OF REGIONAL RECREATION
I am asked what is the real cost to ratepayers of the recreation centre? Impossible
to say, but the estimates are: Capital cost $1.2 million a year
(principal and interest), operational costs unknown (no realistic estimate
available, in my view). The $13 million project does not appear in the just
published "Leisure and Recreation Plan 2004-2014", which makes me wonder why
we paid for that Plan.
r
August 6, 2005
WHO IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE DISTRICT PLAN WORK?
In response to the blog below someone asked: who is responsible for the District Plan revision programme? The answer is Cr David Stanley as chairperson of the Environmental and Community Protection Committee. He manages resources and advisors for that job. Previously, Cr Sue Dow held that position but she is now responsible for the regulatory side of the environment business. I presume David will chair all the workshops and informal gatherings. More on who is responsible for things>
DUCK CREEK - TRYING TO MAKE AN INADEQUATE DISTRICT PLAN WORK IN SECRET
Now we are to have a workshop on Duck Creek. We have been through incredible machinations over Duck Creek, it is of high public interest, and I well remember several private briefings for councillors by interested parties.
In public, in a "public delegation session", on 25 August, the councillors are to hear from:
The "public delegation session" is not an official council meeting, nor is it an official workshop, the Standing Orders of the Council will not apply (the rules will be made up by someone as things proceed), any records kept will be informal, and the legal protections that apply to people in council meetings will not apply. In fact, it is a group of friends having a chat at the ratepayers' expense. I WILL NOT ATTEND - I am an elected councillor and feel obliged to act like one if I can. The oath of office I took was to do my best to follow the Local Government Act, not to invent alternatives.
I could speculate on why Council is adopting these ad hoc, casual, and informal ways, without using the procedures set out in law and which work perfectly well. But, I will leave that to your imagination.
However, after these three groups have spoken, the councillors will have a secret briefing by the officers. That will be in a formal workshop and what is said will automatically be secret under Porirua's workshop rules. Why should the officers words be spoken in secret? What are they going to say that I can know, but my neighbour cannot? It is about esplanade reserves according to the published notice - why should discussions on esplanade reserves be in secret in an open, participatory democracy? Do these provisions in the District Plan not impact on everyone? Do land owners not have a right to know what the officers' advice is when it may impact on their private property? "Everyone" and "landowners" are ratepayers - they are paying for this.
When you do things in secret, you create secrets. Do we need more secrets in Porirua City? Do I want to know secrets? Do the officers want to bring me into their secrets; implicate me in their secrets? What do we mean when we say we want to build a community and that we support community cohesion? What is the effect of secrets on these goals?
And, finally, watch for the half-truths,
confusions, allegations, and mistrust that follows for about four weeks;
and the stress and tension that impacts on peoples lives.
r
August 5, 2005
LAWYERS GET RICH EASILY
In any legal action there is only one certain outcome: the lawyers will be paid.
So it was when a councillor asked officers whether the Cove Bar had "existing
use rights" regarding poker machines. The Cove Bar had not actually made
any claim to "existing use rights" - how could they, the place had
only ever had 6 poker machines. Nor did they ever use an existing
use right augment in their earlier application for a licence. That did not
stop Council paying for a 13 page legal opinion on whether another opinion
by Chen Palmer and Partners was correct. Be it correct or not, it is irrelevant,
because there was not an issue before the Council. The Chen report actually
said an operator could apply for more than 6 machines, and so they can of course,
they can apply for 1,000 if they wish, but the policy is still 6. Which is
what the Cove Bar had and will have. Never mind the extraneous cost to ratepayers.
August 5, 2005 .
A NEW LINE OF WORK FOR YOUR COUNCIL
Ratepayers will be delighted that their out-of-control Council has found another new line of work. They are now going to fund efforts to produce more Michael Campbell's. The launch of the Leisure and Recreation Plan 2004-2014 (launched a year after it began evidently) was an occasion to stress the Campbell model. Actually, Campbell achieved what he achieved by his own efforts and never asked for anything from the ratepayers. Recently, the Council established the position of sports coordinator, arguing that sport was very successful in Porirua and hence the ratepayers should fund it. Horrendous rates are the result of such decisions.
PUKERUA BAY RAHUI - WATCH THIS SPACE
There is a rahui in place around Pukerua Bay. That is a protected area of the coast. I have been invited to discuss some issues with those involved. More on this shortly.
SOUTH BEACH OWNERSHIP ISSUES
The blog item on South Beach prompted a question about land ownership. The
South Beach land with 9 houses is leased land and the road is a private road,
not a Council road. The majority of the land was owned by the Wellington Manawatu
Railway Company. It then passed through various government agencies until it
was in the process of disposal by Land Information New Zealand in July 1998.
Transit NZ expressed interest in the ownership of some land. The plan, according
to the Minister of Lands, John Luxton, who wrote to me because I was asked
to represent the interests of some residents, was to hand it on to a real estate
agent once it had been established that no part of it had to be offered back
to the previous owner (a provision of government policy). The land was to be
disposed of subject to the existing leases. What happened then I am not so
sure, but the issue went away.
r
August 3, 2005
ASSESSMENT OF THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE
The consultant employed to assist with the assessment of the performance of
the chief writes to all councillors: "As agreed at the Council workshop
on Monday evening I have put together a template for your assessments of the
CEO’s
performance during 2004/05". I despair: a council workshop can agree to
nothing, let alone initiate an action. The law says this, and Council's throughout
New Zealand all manage to follow the law; except Porirua evidently. Until your
Council makes its decisions in proper legally constituted meetings, it will
not work.
r
August 3, 2005
TRANSMISSION GULLY DEAD IN THE WATER
Given that the Labour Party dominates the Porirua City Council, you would think that we could communicate effectively with Government Ministers. The word is they are opposed to Transmission Gully on the grounds of cost. And, it appears we will accept that doing the right thing is all to hard. As we meekly did with their decision to provide a hospital to Newtown and ignore 100,000 people to the north. I wonder why we pay taxes, just to subsidise Wellington City evidently.
The Plimmerton Residents' Association sends this, but will reason prevail?
Dear Regional Councillors
Plimmerton Residents, like those of neighbouring Paremata and all Porirua City and Kapiti District, firmly favour the Transmission Gully option. We urge you to give that your support in the Regional Land Transport Committee.
You won't be surprised to hear of our preference, since in this area we would all be very badly affected by the Coastal Highway option, but our views are not based on irrational “nimbyism”. Rather we believe the objective facts support Transmission Gully in terms of strategic needs, financial costs, effectiveness, political acceptability, environmental effects and legal feasibility.
Strategically, the Wellington Region needs a second main access artery from the north.
Financially, we acknowledge that the base costings of TG appear on the surface to be higher than those of the Coastal Highway , but the latter do not take into account the far higher collateral costs. As one example, note the hundreds of houses that would need to be compulsorily purchased for the CH – currently estimated at an additional $200 million and undoubtedly even more costly by the time of any approval.
Effectively, TG offers far greater traffic capacity and better “future proofing”.
Politically, TG adversely affects the lives of far fewer regional residents. The political fall-out from CH would inevitably be very substantial.
Environmentally, CH would be a disaster, especially on the marine eco-system of the Mana-Plimmerton and Pukerua Bay-Paekakariki foreshore.
Legally, we consider TG is far more acceptable in terms of the Resource Management Act. CH would breach previous undertakings to the Environment Court and would face far stronger opposition.
The issue of northern road access to our capital city has been researched and considered for decades. Almost all previous studies have clearly favoured the Transmission Gully option. To reject now the findings of so many earlier studies and favour instead the quick and dirty, makeshift option of the suggested Coastal Highway upgrade could be seen as irrational folly.
I attach two appendices which expand on our reasoning and summarises the milestones of the last 20 years.
Residents of the Porirua-Kapiti area overwhelmingly prefer Transmission Gully and we urge that you do too.
Yours sincerely,
Tim Sheppard
For Plimmerton Residents' Association
SOUTH BEACH
No word from the Council in the request from South Beach Plimmerton
residents regarding rubbish and related matters (request sent on 26/7/05, allow
three weeks for a reply). I will post the reply here. I did learn there is
a TV programme called "South
Beach" but
it is not our beach, evidently.
August 3, 2005
AOTEA BLOCK
I was asked about progress on the Aotea Block by someone with an interest in the EDG. Just over three years ago the City Economic Development Group met with Paul Adams of the Carrus Corporation to discuss issues about the development of the Aotea Block. The key points were:
Positive things were said about all of these issues. Today the Economic Development Group has folded, but people would still like to know which of these things have been solved or come to fruition? Access to the CBD will cost up to $12.5 million and needs to be put in the Long Term Council and Community Plan. John Green is the chairperson responsible for roading. The business park and hotel plans depend on the new owners of the land and the idea seems pretty dead. The latest that I have heard about the Aotea Block is that there will be a rest home / private hospital built. To help that along the Council decided that it would alter the definition of a business to save them paying business rates.
July 31, 2005
AND THEN I LEARN
Motels and backpackers also provide accommodation and hence are residences, and they now want the rates break. An advocacy job for Business Porirua, I think. Moral: do not use the tax system to subsidise your mates.
MY FRIEND DON BORRIE REPLIES WHEN I SEND HIM A COPY OF A REQUEST FOR INFORMATION
Good on you, Don
----- Original Message ----- From: "Robert Shaw" <robert.shaw@porirua.net>
To: "Roger Blakeley - PCC" <RBlakeley@pcc.govt.nz>
Cc: "Donald Borrie" <dborrie@.....>
Sent: Saturday, June 04, 2005 5:20 PM
Subject: [unclassified] Hospital trees
Hi Roger
What has been done, and what is being done, and what is proposed to be done,
to preserve the bush and significant trees at the Kenepuru site of the DHB?
Thanks
r
AND LET ME SAY WHY THIS IS HERE
Because we are still waiting for a response to the request. Perhaps I missed
something, that does happen from time-to-time.
July 31, 2005
PACKING 'EM IN - GETTING MIGRANTS TO OUR DOORSTEP - COUNCIL PRIORITIES AND FOCUS
It is well over a year since Council announced the $200,000 scheme to attract migrants to the region. It was a joint effort with all the local councils implicated. Much officer time and our rates money went into developing the scheme. Dr Blakeley in a clever conflation of jargon never to beaten said we were to become a "centre of excellence for settlement". He also said attracting people was "vital" (Dominion Post, 9 June 2005, page A13).
An amusing part of the deal was the plan to set up a telephone hotline for migrants at a cost of $85,000. Presumably, this is to be a multi-lingual service, however right next to that announcement was a news story where real migrants said they were delighted that the Inland Revenue Department sent someone to visit them to talk about tax. Ratepayers are disappointed they missed a chance to further duplicate existing services.
Another hilarious part was the plan to have ratepayers' pay to help overseas students settle in New Zealand. Whilst our sons and daughters are being forced overseas by central government's student loan scheme, our local government thinkers think ratepayers should pay to settle other people's children here - the "swap-a-child" scheme. (Southland killed all student fees, like Scotland - and we should do the same - but that is too hard; the last thing local government needs is to take on something that is a real worthwhile challenge.)
Evidently, I was alone when I celebrated the fact that our growth over the
next 20 years was projected to be 5 per cent, compared with 69 per cent for
Auckland. Now there is something to which we can aspire - 69%! Bring on the
smog, traffic congestion, human alienation, racial tensions, organised crime,
and stress.What is more, make the ratepayers pay for their own demise. I
hope the scheme died a natural death; nothing was said about it when councillors
discussed the new Annual Plan of the Porirua Council. Incidentally, one thing
we can learn from this is that the councillors must find a way to focus the
chief executive on the real problems we face, like the level of rates which
was brought to us as a priority issue by a citizens group just a week ago.
July 31, 2005
We are told to celebrate the opening of the new Kenepuru Clinic. But, we have not forgotten what we had before the Health Board decided against our interests.
Just two years ago Kenepuru had:
Now we have a GP clinic, the same diagnostic services provided to Johnsonville by private enterprise, and something called an Accident and Medical service which is stopping place on the way to Newtown if there is anything wrong with you. More >
And how do our local self-appointed advocates for health explain this success? The old strategy:
In the last two weeks, two of our "healthy people" have said to me what a success Kenepuru is and how they worked so hard for it - I just smile and nod.
July 31, 2005
WHO IS RESPONSILE FOR COUNCIL SERVICES - WHO CAN HELP YOU?
Citizens telephone me about all sorts of things. I enjoy the councillors' role and I am always willing to help. But, there is an issue as to the most efficient way to proceed.
Say you have a complaint about a council matter (blocked drain, dangerous dog, sewerage back-flush, car on a beach, trees blown over, revolting public toilet, whatever), who do you complain to?
The chain of command is:
Notice the ordinary councillor does not appear except as a participant in
full council meetings.
The key person is the Chairperson of the Committee, because they stand between
the elected people and the officers, and they have special powers and responsibilities.
Hence, Councils key people are:
You would not know these are our key people by reading the current Annual Plan. They are hidden away, 7 pages from the end of the book. More on the role of chairpersons. The normal councillors' role takes on average about a day a week (half for meetings and half for reading), and the chairpersons' role is at least two days a week assuming you have a good knowledge of the portfolio, read quickly, and have good communication skills (an estimate because I have never been a chairperson).
Robert Shaw
Porirua City Councillor
July 30, 2005
FLYING JENNY
Traveling Jenny Brash is off again, this time to San Francisco to launch
the Eternal Threads Exhibition. We can only wish she would pull together a
few threads in Porirua. Anyway, fear not for it is the taxpayer and not the
ratepayer who pays for this trip .Congratulations to Darcy Nicholas and his
dedicated staff on Pataka's Eternal Threads Exhibition and its internationalisation.
July 30, 2005
MANAGEMENT OF THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE
When would "stretch objectives" not be stretching objectives?
When:
You understand these are a few random thoughts tossed in for good measure. Council has yet to consider the matter, let alone involve the ratepayers who must pay. When people do not really understand and commit to concepts, they cannot implement them.
Meanwhile, ratepayers have just paid for Jenny Brash to attend a conference on the management of chief executives, but I fear it is dominated by the same consultants who precipitated the current problems throughout New Zealand. "Why is logic never even tried" said the Professor but he was speaking about women not mayors and consultants.
Robert Shaw
Porirua City Councillor
July 30, 2005
Final note:
I began the blog because I believe councillors have a responsibility to inform people about issues and their opinions. I hope that debate develops and in that way our region becomes smarter and the Councils make better decisions. The letters copied here are in their original form, and not the way they were published by the newspaper. Most of the letters were sent to the Kapi Mana News, The Porirua News, The Dominion-Post, the Whitby NewsBrief, or the Northerner.
Robert Shaw
Porirua City Councillor