Porirua City Councillor Robert Shaw

Custom Search

reply by nick

Thanks for the right of reply Robert.

Can I suggest you read the report before jumping in and pronouncing my statement, WRONG!

Firstly, this paper came to my committee, I didn't agree with it and felt it required further detail. However, as it was an issue the Mayor had been working with the CE on I felt the best way to deal with it was to democractly put it before the committee and they could either support it, or vote it down. Robert you said I 'left it hanging.' No. I didn't move it because I didn't agree with it, knowing that many councillors did I knew someone else would move it.

In the end Crs Manu and Ah Hoi moved and seconded it. There is a long established rule at PCC that if a chair doesn't want to lead a debate or doesn't agree with the issue, they simply don't move a recommendation. Chair people are not all-powerful, they are facilitators of a process. They hold no executive power and have the same ability to influence a vote as any other councillor. Some perspective, please!

Specific Points $50,000.00 cash and $25-$50k of officer time. ie. Up to $100,000.00. Certainly at least $75,000.00. (Paras 1 and 2 of page 2 of the report) Read the report. 5 people will be employed initially. Page 139 of the order paper under heading 'Project Scale.' Up to 20 eventually if things go well. This is totally a failure of discipline.

We have an annual plan and process to signal very clearly within a budget and timeframe how much and what we are going to spend ratepayers' money on. We were signing the Annual Plan off that evening. It wasn't good decision making to say, "Ratepayers, here's our budget for the next year, many of you have submitted and told us what you think, but wait here's another project you haven't been able to comment on." Robert said: "The only decision in front of the committee was to approve the use of a trust (which the council had set up)." We are a partner in the Employment Hub (which Robert you had to be told about at the meeting).

They are NOT the Trust that is doing the work. The Employment Hub will manage the contract between PCC and the Te Kotahitanga Trust. A 'middle man' if you like. They won't be using other groups as Robert suggests, just this one. There is no strategic reason for council to be doing this work. It is not a case of 'general maintenance' either as Robert suggests.

The Council report states clearly that if PCC were to do this work, they would use machines, not people with tools as the most effective method. Robert is right about maintenance budgets being standard. But if this were mere maintenance and operational in nature it wouldn't come before the council. Why would I move this into the next budget round as chairperson? I don't agree council should be doing this project and I don't come from the pedigree that you put everything off so you don't offend people. The council is there to do a job and make decisions. A committee that sends things a lot of issues back for consideration is scared to do the business required of it. PCC has a resource issue in some areas with projects being carried over for completion in the last financial year. Read between the lines of the officer report on this matter and you will see that this project would be difficult and labour intensive for council staff. Why would we want to add the burden when projects are already behind??

Robert says my job as chair was to advocate and defend the decision of the committee. My first responsibility is to the residents of Porirua City. I believe I was justified in going to the media because I felt this exercise was a big waste of council's time and money. The public support I've had on this issue reinforces this.

And a personal note: I'm, like all my colleauges Sue Dow, Euon Murrell, Tim Shepphard and Liz Kelly (who voted against) am in favour of assisting the long term unemployed find meaningful work. In fact in my speech I proposed that council sponsor one position in every project contract it tenders for someone who is unemployed, so they can be mentored, up skilled and supported by an experienced contractor. When council contracts for work however, we have to be sure we are getting value and that the project can be completed. This issue is about how council does it's business, not about the guys wanting to have a decent crack at work. They are fully supported by the whole council on that front. It's likely this will go back to the Strategy and Finance meeting this Wednesday so officers can report more fully on the expenditure and project.

Watch this space. Debate is healthy!

Hope you are enjoying the UK Robert. I see Labour were pushed into 5th place in a by-election in Boris JOhnston's seat - behind the Nationalists!!!! Ouch.
Cheers Nick

QUICK COMMENT ON NICK'S MEDIA RELEASE

MEDIA STATEMENT ISSUED BY CR LEGGETT  ROBERT'S COMMENTS IN YELLOW

Porirua City Council last night voted 8-5 to spend almost $100,000.00 WRONG of un-budgeted WRONG ratepayers' money on employing five WRONG gang members WRONG to clear scrub WRONG.

City Services Committee Chair Nick Leggett, refused to move the motion HE LEFT THE OFFICER'S ADVICE HANGING WITHOUT MOVING ANY MOTION - HE SHOULD HAVE ARRANGED FOR IT TO BE MOVED, OR HAVE MOVED TO REJECT IT, OR MOVED THAT IT BE CONSIDERED AS A PART OF THE NEXT ANNUAL PLAN DELIBERATIONS - THAT IS THE RESONSIBILITY OF A CHAIRPERSON WHEN HE HAS SERIOUS ADVICE FROM THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE for the six month project WRONG when it came through to his committee and is outraged that councillors could be so un-disiplined THIS IS NOT AN EXAMPLE OF THE FAILURE OF DISCIPLE.

"Frankly, we are spending $20,000.00 per worker WRONG on a project that was invented out of thin air WRONG to give these guys something to do WRONG. It might make the 'bleeding hearts' feel good but in terms of common sense or doing what's right for these guys, it's madness," he says.

ROBERT SAYS

The only decision in front of the committee was to approve the use of a trust (which the council had set up).

The trust MIGHT repeat MIGHT hire another trust which has gang members to do some of the work. They might hire other trusts or groups, who knows.

It is true the Council rejected a particular project on this park in its Annual Plan decision making. That does NOT, repeat NOT, mean that council does not have budgets for park maintenance. I cannot remember the exact amount but it is probably between a quarter and half a million dollars. Maintaining parks is one the core activities of council and we budget for it.

The reason we supported the current proposal is that it brings central government money into play for us. Hence, we gain by having work done more cheaply. This is not about "bleeding hearts" as Nick says. It is about work on our parks.

You cannot say that this involves 5 people, let alone 5 gang members - because officers have not yet worked out what the project will be. We actually have a Management Plan in place for the park and there will be a project designed in accordance with that plan and the Trust that can access the central government money.

Another reason we support this work is that there is talk of a larger, ongoing, initiative. The plan being to use employment trusts regularly to do council parks work. This might work out well. Many remember the PEP scheme that built walls and did much park work in our city. We want to be able to use central government resources whenever we can. It actually saves the ratepayers' money. Hence, this $50k project is something of a trial. We need to know that the Trust that will manage the projects (and be the Council's contractor) can perform.

No ratepayer is paying any new money because of this project. You have all been hit for this funding already.

The Council is grasping an opportunity that has come forward after about two years of preparation. The idea that this is a sudden rush forwards is quite wrong. It should have been brought into the Annual Plan process in the last round and the officers now know my criticism of them on this point. I set this out when I spoke at the Committee.

But note, if the criticism is one of process, then the chairperson should have moved the motion that this matter be held over for consideration in the next round of budget decisions. That is a procedural motion and I for one would have voted for it. It would have carried. The only reason we considered the paper now because the chairperson did not take the appropriate steps. When I chaired the committee there were a steady stream of things that I headed off by bringing them into the next budget round. It is the correct thing to do.

The role of the officers in this is also important. They are hot to trot, and hence thinking of our staff management responsibilities, I am inclined to let them fly. On the other hand, this could divert them from their delivery of the Annual Plan projects and it will make them work harder. I do not support working people to death.

Further, the officers have to design the project in accordance with the Management Plan, the needs of the park, and the abilities of the Trust that is the contractor. The contract might seem simple but it has to address things like health and safety provision and so on. Most critical in this are the performance criteria. I spoke privately with the officer responsible right after the meeting and advanced my view that contract should be substantially "pay for performance". When  the work is done satisfactorily we will pay the Trust. I also emphasized to the officer that we deal only with the Trust that is our contractor and stay right out of their subcontracting other trusts including those that have gang members.

About Nick's media initiative and intention to oppose the recommendation, the matter should have been resolved at the committee but now the substantive debate will be held at the full council meeting. This puts excessive pressure on the full council, makes for long and miserable meetings, and renders the time spent in committees pointless.

Finally, the prime responsibility of the chairperson is to speak for, and represent, the decisions of their committee. Hence, once they had decided the issue, Nick was obliged to be the advocate for it and to defend it. That is why it is he who moves the motion at the full council "that the recommendations of the Services Committee be adopted". The fact that there was a majority at the committee and that the chair now must support the decision , assures that things run smoothly at the full council. It is also important in the officers knowing where they stand. Yo yo decision making costs us a great deal in officer time and morale.
r
28-Jun-2008

PS, Nick has a right of reply. He is not a bad chap.

puketiro wind farm proposal

It is very significant that the Guardians of Pauatahanui Inlet oppose the Puketiro Wind Farm Proposal. The Guardians are the intelligentsia of our City regarding environmental matters and their enduring commitment to the environment cannot be questioned. Their June 2008 annual report sets out the process of decision-making and the range of concerns.

With their opposition it is difficult to see the proposal making much headway.
r
June 22, 2008

support for nick (see item below)

A blog reader writes:

"Why did we have an Annual Plan to establish budgets? It certainly makes a mockery of the Annual Plan process.

I too have spent 30 years of my life working in often deprived environments and would like to see a more egalitarian society in NZ. This isn’t the way to do it.

Look at the way this type of support has backfired in Auckland with the Killer Bees. We just don’t seem to be learning. Bleeding hearts don’t make a difference.

Eradication of drugs, violence, sustainable employment etc etc will not be helped by 5 people cutting scrub at Ratepayer expense.

This is patronizing, feel-good luddite-ism at best. We have machines now in the 21st century to do this work. What sustainable skills will these people gain from an exercise like this? It equally suggests Porirua City Council is reverting to Jam Jar accounting practices which doesn’t fill me with confidence either.

Leave WINZ Officers to do their job and let the decent hard-working Council Officers get on with theirs."

CITY CENTRE REVITALISATION

As I said at the council table recently, we need action on the city centre, we do not need to heap more reports on those that we have. It is highly unlikely that the current owners, or any new investors, will invest in a major redevelopment. Yet we live on in an Alice-in-wonderland hope. Consider the extract below from an old report. It gives the completion dates for actions. We did not complete those actions. What make anyone think the Council is more competent now? Those who say we need to reduce expenditure should consider the things that cost us the big money.

Action
· Complete City Centre Review, by 30 September 2001, and implement it.

· Implement a City Centre Revitalisation plan to revitalise the city centre area under
the canopies, by 30 October 2001.

· Implement property, roading, landscaping, signage and other changes from the
City Centre Review, by 30 June 2003.

The completed 2001 review was undertaken by the people listed below. Evidently, we are not confident with what they said.

Alistair Aburn - Urban Perspectives Ltd
Resource Management Planner
Project Leader
Deyana Popova - Urban Perspectives Ltd
Urban Designer
Megan Wraight - Megan Wraight Landscape Architects
Landscape Architect
Graeme McIndoe - Graeme McIndoe Architect and Urban Designer
Architect and Urban Designer
Mark Georgeson - Traffic Design Group
Traffic Engineer
Frank Boffa - Boffa Miskell Limited
Landscape Architect
Dr John Bolland - Booz-Allen & Hamilton (New Zealand) Limited
Transportation Planning Specialist
Dr Philip McDermott - McDermott Fairgray Group
Strategic Planner
Robert Cameron - Wareham Cameron
Property Consultant
Different team members fulfilled different roles between Stages 1 and 2 of the
review.
John Bolland, Philip McDermott and Robert Cameron wrote Stage 1 “working
papers”. Megan Wraight and Mark Georgeson joined the core review team for Stage
2. The other members of the core review team (for both Stage 1 and Stage 2) were
Deyana Popova and Graeme McIndoe. Frank Boffa assisted with consultation during
Stage 1 and Stage 2 and acted as a peer reviewer for Stage 2. John Bolland also
acted as a peer reviewer for Stage 2,

Whist doing the same piece of research, I saw this:

"The Te Rauparaha Park proposals were a revelation. Kobus was clearly worried about the daunting visual impact of 14m high blank wall created by the S&EC to the west of the park. "

That prophetic comment was written by Jim Dearsley a few years ago.  The blank wall is now there and the main feature of "the brick" or the "cake tin" that is on our park.

According to what was said by officers at a recent council meeting, all our plans are in place but we are now consulting on them with selected groups or individuals prior to action. I have been trying to discover exactly what this means.
r
June 21, 2008

Smartlinx3

I was asked for a definitive statement on the investment of PCC in the private company Smartlinx3. Here it is as provided to the councillors by the ceo some years ago:

On 's formation in 2004 Porirua City Council invested $75,000. In May 2006, the Government launched it's Broadband Challenge Fund. This fund provided dollar for dollar matching funds for the roll out of open access broadband networks and presented a significant opportunity for the three cities. To seize this opportunity a further call was made on all shareholders, Porirua's contribution being $100,000. Porirua therefore has $175,000 invested in Smartlinx3. Smartlinx3 has advised they expect to be cashflow positive by the end of this year and no further call on shareholders is anticipated.

plimmerton & pukerua bay green action

Porirua Tree & Vegetation Policy
Plimmerton & Pukerua Bay Focus Group

Background
Porirua City Council is working to develop a Tree & Vegetation Policy to provide a consistent approach to management of trees and vegetation across council land in the City. Its scope will include all tree and vegetation management on council controlled land from street trees to public reserves, management of road reserves and clearance of services. The policy will set out how the City's green infrastructure of trees and vegetation will be managed and enhanced.

Tree and vegetation management is critical to the environment of Porirua City and will help ensure a City that is attractive and sustainable. The green infrastructure of trees and vegetation can provide major benefits in areas as diverse as stormwater management, amenity and biodiversity enhancement. However interference with services, views and sunlight can also create negative impacts. An effective and consistent approach to management is important to avoiding and resolving conflict between neighbours, residents and Council over vegetation issues.

The early development of this policy includes the following broad steps:
1. Focus groups to gain early community input. Separate focus groups will be held for different areas of interest.
2. Drafting of policy document
3. Review of an early discussion draft
4. Formal public notification and submissions on a draft policy document
5. Approval of final policy

Focus Group Meeting
We would like to invite you to a focus group meeting at:
The Supper Room
Plimmerton Hall (The Pavilion)
9 Sunset Road, Plimmerton
Thursday 26 June at 7pm.

This focus group will aim to provide particular input related to trees and vegetation in the Plimmerton & Pukerua Bay Communities. Other focus groups will seek input from different local communities.

Your input at this stage is important to help identify:
· The key issues for managing trees & vegetation in Porirua
· Existing community and other initiatives that need to be considered
· The opportunities for tree and vegetation management
· Ideas and solutions for management of trees and vegetation.

I hope you will be able to attend.

It would be appreciated if you could let me know if you will be attending, so I know approximate numbers.

Please contact me if you have any questions at this stage.

Many thanks for your input.

Regards

Peter Handford
PA Handford & Associates Ltd
Ph 04 904 0876
Email: peter.handford@pahandford.co.nz
Contracted to Porirua City Council

chairperson supports his committee - i joke

MEDIA STATEMENT ISSUED BY CR LEGGETT

Porirua City Council last night voted 8-5 to spend almost $100,000.00 of un-budgeted ratepayers' money on employing five gang members to clear scrub.

City Services Committee Chair Nick Leggett, refused to move the motion for the six month project when it came through to his committee and is outraged that councillors could be so un-disiplined.

"Frankly, we are spending $20,000.00 per worker on a project that was invented out of thin air to give these guys something to do. It might make the 'bleeding hearts' feel good but in terms of common sense or doing what's right for these guys, it's madness," he says.

The WINZ sponsored scheme focusses on Bothamley Park in Porirua East. No clearing had been planned in the area and council officers admitted that if they were to commence the work as a formal project, they would use machines.

"The council approved a 4.4% rate increase last night. I think ratepayers know we have better things to do than providing training for the long term unemployed that central government agencies should be prioviding.

This cost amounts to one third of one percent of our annual rates bill. Where is the benefit?" The council report states that there will be a $50,000.00 cash injection found from current budgets and a further $30-$50,000.00 staff time designing, implementing and monitoring the project.

"Porirua City Council is carrying over many important projects from last year because staff resources are stretched. Instead of letting our officers finish those we are loading them with difficult, pointless projects like this. Something's got to give."

The full council is required to confirm this decision at its meeting in early July.

Nick Leggett hopes enough councillors will see sense before then and that the Porirua community makes its voice heard on the issue.

ROBERT COMMENTS

There are several things wrong with the statement, some more serious than others. Let us see what the newspapers do with it.
r
20-Jun-2008

annual plan - costs you more

I could not help but smile when I read this:

"This year, we have set a budget that will require an average
rates increase on residential ratepayers of 4.4% which is lower than
the 5.1% prediction for the 2008/09 year in the LTCCP."

It is an extract from Jenny Brash's introduction to the annual budget. Our ratepayers are the hardest hit of all ratepayers in New Zealand. The target of 5.1% is an artificial figure that council invented. Go back a decade and the equivalent invented figure was 2.5% - each year for a decade. The is noting to celebrate in the 4.4% increase. Given that we are the highest rated people in New Zealand, the sum of money for a 1% increase in Porirua is greater than the sum of money for a 1% increase anywhere else in the country.

Jenny might celebrate the council's tax take, but you should note there has been absolutely minimal effort gone into the scrutiny of the budget, let alone deliberate effort to save money. Plans for a detailed look at everything were forgotten. We need leadership with a memory and adherence to intent.

We probably have the greatest inflation of staff numbers in the whole country this year if you count the part-time contract post ions (on a percentage basis).

monte ohia

It is with great sadness that I record the death of my friend Monte Ohia. We worked together on many projects in Maori education and I gained from him many insights. The work we did in Maori education is referred to in publications from time-to-time. One of the early publications was Te Reo O Te Taitokerau: He Tirohanga Na Nga Kaimahi. This is a very strange publication. Monte had strong views on how it should proceed and you see his influence at the start of the paper, and mine later. Within this single paper there is a working out of a project style that will be adequate for Maori within the context of the hegemonic public service. I quote from the leading text of the "guiding statement" that Dave Para wrote for Monte and I (some will recognise it):

Te Taitokerau - Te Hiku o te Ika nui a Maui

Ko to reo he mana - he wehi - he ihi - he wairua

whangaia a tatou tamariki mokopuna i te taonga tupuna nei

Kia tupu ake ratou i roto i te korowai o te reo a o tatou matua tupuna.

Ko te timatatanga of te kauri rangatira

Ko te kakano nohinohi.

I hope I can remember the many lessons Monte taught me along the way. We last spoke on the telephone just a few weeks ago. His death was most unexpected. Monte was all set to become a Member of Parliament for the Maori Party.

"For he was likely, had he been put on,
To have proved most royally." - William Shakespeare

r
June 13, 2008

where is smartlinks3 ????

ROBERT COMMENTS

I cannot find reference to Smartlinks3 in our new Annual Plan at all. Given that it is the only company in which we own shares on behalf of the ratepayers, I would have expected a bit of a nod in their direction.

I am reminded that over a long period of time I have been asking for financial information on our investment, and planning documents. I will ask again. In the meantime, below is the text of an earlier blog to remind people. I have as at 18 June 2008 asked again for the information on our company, including the last annual report. 

DOMPOST REPORT:

Publicity-shy Wellington telco FX Networks will spend tens of millions of dollars setting up an alternative fibre-optic backbone that will connect Auckland, Wellington, Christchurch and Dunedin. Managing director Murray Jurgeleit says its cable will contain 30 pairs of fibre, each capable of carrying data at 320 gigabits per second, and will provide much-needed competition to Telecom and TelstraClear. "We can offer bulk data transport at a substantial discount to Telecom. Simply because of the prices being charged, there is a very profitable opportunity." Mr Jurgeleit headed up multinational Logical CSI in New Zealand till its Australasian business was bought by IBM for $100 million in 2004. He says the first part of the link, between Auckland and Wellington, should be ready during the second half of the year. It is understood much of the cable will make use of railway line ducting to avoid trenching costs. FX Networks is one of 10 firms that was selected by the State Services Commission to provide infrastructure and services for the Government Shared Network earlier this year. The Government hopes all core government departments will use the GSN to some degree by 2008. IBM was selected as the main preferred contractor. The GSN is due to be piloted by August. Roger de Salis, formerly at Cisco, is a director of the company.

ROBERT COMMENTS Porirua ratepayers invested $70,000 in Smartlinks3. What have we for our investment? Are they doing what was said? Instead, I see other companies moving in and being competitive in our area. I do not blame Smartlinks3. They were smart in the move to get our money. The Council voted to give it to them. Last time they came to Council with a report I put my hands in front of my mouth to remind myself not to say anything. It is us who made the silly decision. The railway's cable that runs next to the main trunk line is a major network vitually unused. It is for train management and major emergencies. We could access it thought the blue painted building in Tawa, if my memory serves me correctly. Now it looks as if someone is going to capitalise on the opporutunity, and we will have to buy service form them - and pay for it!
r
Tuesday, April 4, 2006

light work

the power of prayer - silt

See the item earlier in the blog regarding the actual practice of silt control. The picture here shows one of several offending sites that could be listed. The action taken for silt control is to pray, as per the item below.
r
04-Jun-2008

parliament watch - well done anne tolley

On Thursday there was an opportunity to compare a senior government minister with the Shadow Minister of Education, Anne Tolley. Incredible as it may seem, she had the best of the exchange. Trevor Mallard lost.

How did this come about? It came about because Tolley had facts, including statistics, about schools, teachers, budgets, and the curriculum. She delivered these in a convincing, even-handed way.

Mallard did the usual thing. He commented in general terms about how Ms Tolley apparently has not been in schools recently. He listed the advances of recent times in broad sweeping terms. It was unconvincing. You only have to read the newspapers to know of the stressful situations in schools and the shortage of resources. Things are not going well. Mallard did not answer Tolley's statistics on leaving qualifications, possibly because he could not. Then Mallard turned to attack John Key. The standard operating procedure. But as a subsequent Green Party speaker observed, both National and Labour seem to only have one speech. It is more true of Labour than it is of National as Tolley's speech showed. Assessment of Tolley (who seems to have benefited from her long experience in local government):

And now Minister Mallard:

The one mistake Tolley made was that she left the House before Mallard had completed his speech in reply. Mallard, the experienced campaigner, managed to refer to this in his speech. It is very much against the Standing Orders to refer to the absence of a Member, and we heard the Acting Speaker correct the Minister. She was not outraged about it - she should have said more. But Mallard knows how to get away with it, and he scored a good point against Tolley.

If the National Party do not allow themselves to engage with Labour's strategy, Labour will be left stranded in the mud. All National has to do is make moderate, factual, thoughtful speeches. They must ignore the Government and not be seduced by their own voices. Chris Auchinvole has yet to discover this. He was totally unable to land one credible punch. His whole delivery (including the quote from Churchill) was all about his acting and himself. Even when he spoke about rail it was himself and his wife that featured, his substantial points were trite. He wasted the precious speaking time available to his Party and assisted the government. But, he obviously enjoyed himself. He ended with a foolish quote. Might I suggest a quotation for him to consider: As the great Prime Minister Whitlam often said: "less art and more matter".
r
29-May-2008

colonial knob name change

Hello Robert,

I am currently doing a Vic university assignment on Local Govt. Hence my procrastination and thought I’d flick you a quick email to get some discussion going in the community on my desire to see the name of our most prominent hill changed from Colonial Knob to what I understand is its Maori name of Rangituhi (painted sky). I brought this up at the opening of the track last year with none other than Litea Ahoy and Phil Goff (minister of corrections- there for the day since prisoners built the new track). It seemed so incongruous with a Ngati Toa elder speaking in Maori but breaking into English to say Colonial knob! Both Litea and Phil seemed quite supportive of the idea, with Phil giving advice on the precedents of moving to a combined name then eventually everyone just using the Maori name.

I am not sure of the Ngati Toa or other local Iwi’s attitude to such a move. I would have thought they would be supportive but I note there was no support for my letter in the Kapi Mana earlier this year from anyone but yourself. This doesn’t mean that there is no support (one Ngati Toa friend gave very positive feedback) but I don’t have easy access to local Maori elders to check it out.

Is this something that you via Council could do?

I am involved with the recently revived Ranui Heights Residents Association and could get feedback from our area. Colonial Knob/Rangituhi is a huge part of our outlook and effectively my families Maunga. It’s a fantastic walk with the best views in Wellington (on a good day) and my 5 year old has made it to the top twice already.

I don’t know the history of the name but neither Colonial or Knob are appropriate nowadays. The beautiful sunsets we get from Ranui heights over the hill make the Maori name (painted sky) very appropriate. I want my children to be proud of their mihi.

Regards

Richard Witheford-Smith

Eco-Kiwi Community Networker

Porirua

ROBERT COMMENTS

I support an investigation of this. I do not know much about the Maori name or the colonial name. Both are probably significant historically. Perhaps we need to have both. Comments from others on this are most welcome.
r
June 1, 2008

greater wellington on the economic aspects of the puketiro wind farm

ROBERT COMMENTS

I have often spoken about the need for full information regarding the wind farm proposal at Battle Hill and Puketiro. The last time I spoke about this at the Council table the mayor indicated that she supported the provision of full information in accordance with my request, and I said I was well satisfied with the statements PCC formally made to GW about wind farms.

Specifically, the PCC position is that no decisions should be made about applications until there is a geographical framework established that indicates where such things are allowed. Consequently, the PCC intends to have two specific parts of its District Plan refer to wind farms. First, there is chapter 1 which is the output from the Development Framework work that has been the subject of consolation and is well advanced. It is this that indicates the minimum sizes for blocks may be altered in Pauatahanui, the places (for example north of Plimmerton) that will available for development into suburbs. Here there needs to be the determination by PCC of where wind turbines are acceptable. Applications for precluded sites would simply never be processed.

Second, there are the rules to be incorporated into the District Plan which relate to how wind farm applications will be processed and the criteria to be used to judge the structures both individually and collectively. One contested matter in this is the distance that a turbine must be away from a neighbour's property. Height restrictions, access requirements, and development levies can all be incorporated here.

Both these actions are the responsibility of Cr Murrell as chairperson of the appropriate committee, and there is a dedicated but small team of officers working on them.

What PCC is asking of GW is that they set out for the region their geographic framework for windfarms. Presumably, they do not intend to allow windfarms where ever the wind blows sufficiently. So lets have some forward planning and the formal incorporation of this into planning documents.

It was in relation to my thinking about development levies to be imposed by PCC at the time wind farm resource consent decision-making, that I realised that I did not know much about the financial aspects of the current work by Greater Wellington. Accordingly, I asked the PCC chief executive to obtain from GW something that indicated the financial situation as they saw it. GW wears three hats in the wind farm business. First, as a land owner, second as the designated controlling authority for the regional parks, and third as a consenting authority under the RMA. We must also be mindful that GW is a representative organisation - our ratepayers are there ratepayers. They are acting in the best interests of the regional community as they see it, even when there view is not that of the PCC.

Consequently, I provide the statement from the ceo of GW as a contribution to the debate about the financial aspects of the wind farm business. You will be able to see that he advances a reasoned account of the benefits to Porirua City residents and indicates why GW is working to establish wind farms. He also responds to some specific matters I raised. This is published with the support of GW as a positive contribution to an important discussion.

STATEMENT FROM GW CEO ON WINDFARMS

Roger

Sorry for the delay in responding to Councillor Robert Shaw's comments regarding the Puketiro wind farm. I would comment as follows.

There will be considerable benefits to Porirua city from the wind farm development, particularly during the construction phase. Based on other wind farm developments, between 25-30% of the development cost will be spent in New Zealand which would amount to $70-90M. Some of this money will no doubt be spent within Porirua city. Also a small number of staff will be engaged in the future maintenance of the turbines. Furthermore, if the example of the wind turbine at Brooklyn is repeated, an increase in visitors to the Battle Hill Farm Forest Park is to be expected, though at this point, the public will only have walking access to the turbines, not vehicle access. It is acknowledged though that Councillor Shaw is correct in that there will be some disbenefits to Porirua city and I expect RES NZ Ltd to indicate the relevant effects in their resource consent application and indicate what means may be available (if any) to mitigate them.

I do not agree that there will be radical alteration to the use of the Battle Hill Farm Forest Park. At best, there may be 3-5 turbines positioned within about 50 metres from the eastern edge of the park. It is also possible a road may be constructed through the park to get to the site though there is already provision for a forestry road in the current Park Plan. RES is yet to advise whether they will connect the wind farm to one of the transmission lines in the Puketiro forest area to the west of the park, or run a new transmission line down the hill to near the proposed Transmission Gully motorway. The Council expects further details about access to the site and the transmission connection within a few months.

RES NZ Ltd was chosen as the potential developer as a result of a tender process, one of the factors considered was the amount they would pay the Council over the life of the wind farm. These details have not been made public. The Council is currently concluding another wind farm agreement for Stoney Creek in the Wairarapa and it is possible other sites may be considered in due course. The Council does not believe it is prudent to release the financial details.

As noted above, there will be both benefits and some disbenefits to Porirua city if the development proceeds. Greater Wellington is of the view that the financial benefits from the development should be used for the benefit of the region rather than partly allocated to Porirua City Council. Porirua City Council though has the opportunity, if it believes particular issues should be addressed, to do so through the resource consent conditions that are imposed if the development is approved.

There are several issues that Porirua City Council and Greater Wellington can work together on this wind farm project and I am sure we will continue to do so.

Cheers

Dave

parliament watch - maurice williamson

What a disaster Mr Williamson was on Thursday 29 May, 2008. He shouts and bobs, speaks too quickly, and confuses words. He called the Minster by his first name; expect the Hansard editors to fix that kind of mistake. He quoted well known right wing city councillor as if no one was to know this man's longstanding bias. Then he trotted out dated arguments about Telecom.

Michael Cullen replied. His voice is better modulated and although he spoke quickly but managed to be entertaining. Cullen continued the Labour strategy of attacking National, and he used the events of the week as his spring board. It created excitement in the House. Of course the strategy is to deflect serious debate away from themselves and it often wins on the day. However, nothing can save Labour and rightly so. Cullen spoke last in the debate, and hence he did not have to consider rebuttal. Overall, he did not convince anyone of anything.

I can see that there needs to be more thought given to the criteria, and I appreciate the emails from those who have been making criticism and suggestions alike.
r
29-May-2008

council meeting

Most councillors did not speak. Speakers were Ah Hoy, Shaw, Kelly, Leggett. I raised issues about the wind farm business and in particular the involvement of Greater Wellington. The mayor says we will follow up on the financial aspects of the wind farm business. That is a promise I note.

I also spoke against Local Government New Zealand. The officers will find out how much we send them in annual fees. Evidently, it is a number they do not hold in their heads. The mayor greatly supports Local Government New Zealand. I hear she told other councillors that next time round she intends to stand for Greater Wellington the Regional Council. It may be true.
r
May 21, 2008

parliament watch: ron mark

Assessment of Ron Mark's speech on the second reading of the the Young Offenders (Serious Crime) Bill, May 21, 2008.

Good points were made with an excellent focus on substance and not political gain. Simon Power and David Benson-Pope (used very extensive notes obviously provided by the public service) responded reasonably well, and acknowledged Mr Mark's sincerity. However, whilst they said the Bill was not the way to go, there were not many other ideas about how to address the issues. It is the case that "get tough" will not work. It was unfortunate for Mr Mark that a senior judge spoke out against the Bill. Judy Turner (United Future) spoke in support of Mr Mark and stressed that he had not had a fair hearing. Kate Wilkinson speaking for National was rather average with her head down and reading. If National were really committed to their Youth Plan, they would have sought to have aspects of it implemented through the current Bill.

All marks are out of 10 for Mr Mark on the basis of one performance.

For comparison, Kate Wilkinson who read all her speech with her head down. Apparently, she did not write the speech. If I remember rightly Members are not allowed to read their speeches:

senior net in porirua city

I am asked for the contact for Senior Net in Porirua City. They have a great service and are a part of the national network of Senior Net.

http://www.seniornet-porirua.org.nz/index.htm

The committee includes some regular contributors to this blog.
r
May 18, 2008

local government new zealand

Both Wanganui and the Far North District Council have left Local Government New Zealand. LGNZ is the council's union. It has been a dead loss for years.

I do not know what we pay to LGNZ, probably about $100,000 a year. We need to hold a debate about our ceasing to be a member.

When I was a younger councillor, I thought LGNZ could save us all. I wanted to attend their conferences. Year after year I tried to gain support for this from John Burke to no avail. Then I actually had a paper I had written accepted for presentation there - still the Porirua Council was not prepared to send me to the conference.

At another function I met Basil Morrison shortly after he became president. Oh dear. Later, when on the regional council, I became involved in moves to reform LGNZ led by some very senior and insightful people. There was a major employment problem with the ceo of LGNZ but we went beyond that in a mature way.

What are my substantive concerns? One is that they do not bring out the statistics we need to know the position of ratepayers in the country. Their statistics are as you would expect from a union, they are about self justification.

Also, they are too much of a talk shop. They are focused on their own selves. Witness the recent debate about having a Maori unit within the organisation. It is a good training ground for our young councillors so I support the debate and advance, but let us not pretend that it does anything for local government.

Also, watch as people manoeuvre towards the gaining of key positions in the organisation and the structuring of the organisation. Have you heard of the "metro group"? for example. It is all "support me, support me" stuff. Nothing about real vision or advance. Our Jenny loves it all.
r
May 18, 2008

public administration

As one interested in public administration, I am appalled that a senior official can tell a significant lie, be found out, and be allowed to stay in the employment of the public sector. That is contrary to the code of conduct the State Services Commission promulgates, and it is unfair on all the honest people who might have applied for her position.
r
May 17, 2008

i am asked about the cost of trains

My comment on the increased cost of rail transport for Porirua City people is based upon the $210 million spent by GW's company to purchase new trains. The purchase of the new trains is good, but someone still has to pay That someone will be ratepayers and train travelers. There is no one else. There is other money also available from central government subsidies and you can be sure GW will do a good job accessing these. I have not looked up the details in GW's AP but they may not be there because the business is managed within their company.
r

plimmerton residents' association inc submission

Please note that Robert's comments are inserted after some items. Marked in yellow.
r
May 17, 2008

  SUBMISSION  -  DRAFT  ANNUAL  PLAN  -  2008 – 2009

Contact:  Pip Piper -  tel:  233-8591   or  email:   pippiper@paradise.net.nz
We wish to be heard   on   Friday – 23 May  - anytime.

1)   We note that the DAP increases average rates by 4.5% which is higher than the increase for pensions and most wages.  Why is this proposal above inflation?

The level of rates is no longer an issue in Porirua City. The balance of opinion around the Council now is very much on the side of a high rates City. We are probably the highest rated ratepayers in New Zealand. No one can say this is true or false because the right data is never collected by local government people. Consumer Magazine has in the past done the correct kind of investigation.

Council had at a retreat agreed to a new form of budgeting that was designed to bring the rates down over time. With the advent of new chairperson's and Jenny obtaining a majority of votes at the table (coalition of the Labour Party and the real estate agents), the challenge of the budget was abandoned and we reverted to our old ways.

Personally, I think the Council spends too much money and there is something that can be done about it. However, I have been saying that for years and it is rather obvious that nothing is going to happen.

2)   DAP p. 8 + 25 – Litter Enforcement Officer – ($60,000) – How does this proposed person actually enforce and prevent people dumping rubbish and litter ? $60K for “management support” – does it mean support from managers i.e. extra staff?

Council seems to have given up the litter control officer scheme whereby councillors and appropriate people in the city can hold warrants in the area of litter control. This was a scheme that worked well in the past (I was one of those with a warrant). The level of paid staff and contractors is a real concern for us.

Another aspect to the litter question is the establishment of security cameras. The commercial sector has been asking for this for years and somehow it seems to be beyond the Council's ability.

3)  DAP p.9 + 28 -  Te Hiko/Wineera intersection – ($700,000) – How much of this is for overheads and administration? This is much more than a “minor” variation to the LTCCP.  It does not set a very good precedent for other city intersections that need improvement.

All overhead and administration costs are now to be set into the overall project budgets. Thus the "true" cost will appear in the AP. This is a part of the move to increase dramatically the number of contract staff and to complete more of the asset management projects. I am sure officers will be able to provide the breakdown of costs for this project.

4)   DAP p.9 – Toby replacement programme – ($50,000) – this partial deferment of  $114,000 for pipe-line renewals is reasonable.  However, this programme needs a firm check on the contractor – many toby replacements have sunk below footpath levels !

It is interesting to consider our investment of the ratepayers' money in this area given the likely middle term restructuring of the Wellington water business.

5)   DAP p.18 + 20 – Economic Development Strategy ($127,000) – we note the “advancement of a Citywide and Broadband communications and Digital Strategy” – but where are the details for ordinary ratepayers needing ‘broadband’?  Does the excessive contribution that Council has made to “Smartlinkz3” not help ratepayers?

Yes this is a good question. I have been asking it for years. I occasionally obtain a quote from Smartlinkz3 for the provision of wireless to my house. It was last time at three times the cost of Telecom for the same level of service.

The Smartlinkz3 business of the Council is set up wrongly. The company managing director (ceo) is our representative on the board. It is no wonder we never become a priority. He is much more pressured by the Hutt Valley. All that saved Smartlikz3, in my humble opinion, was the advent of central government money for broadband. They have been given a grant and now we wait to see the results. Do not expect much. As for a return on the investment of ratepayers' money - forget it.

Recently Samtlinkz3 insiders indicated they were about to make a dramatic announcement. I have yet to see it. Presumably they have let the fibre optic cable contracts for Porirua City. We shall see.

6)  DAP p.21 + 24 – City Centre Skate Park  we believe that the $200k odd “saved” from the relocation decision could easily have been transferred to the Renewals of Public Toilets project, which is a much needed and worthy project.  Some public toilets are a disgrace to the City !.

The two issues are separate. Budgets are not to be done this way. I am just pleased we are not digging up the skate park. Putting things down and digging them up is not something that appeals to my Scots ancestry. There is a budget for the toilet business and the best should be made of it. It is a management matter and council management would do well to listen to, and involve, the community.

7)   DAP p.21 + 24  – Youth Development Activities – ($110,000) – this is good example of  central government attempting to remove support from its youth development programme. This new project should not be undertaken and a protest delivered to our Porirua MP.

There was much fuss made by some councillors about the terrible central government agency that provided the first contract. Officers loved it. However, the fact is there was a contract we entered into and it had an end date. There will probably be another contract, but we will have to wait and see. In the meantime we have to maintain the item in the budget to keep the new staff in place and the forward momentum.

8)   DAP p.21 + 24 -  Contribution to Upgrade (Porirua) Railway Station ($100,000) -  For this new project we need more than “co-ordinate inputs from the organisations involved”.  We need to see definite agreement from the other four organisations.  PCC ratepayers already pay a very large proportion of their  GWRC rates under the heading of  “Regional Transport”.

Yes, and what is more our contribution is likely to increase now the government has become involved in the running of the rail business again. The annual co-operation agreement we have with GW is not worth the paper it is written on. Platitudes abound, but ask them for details of their income stream from the wind farms in our City and you get zip. Nor was the City Council properly involved in the alterations to the regional park management plans. These alterations radically changed the purpose of the regional parks, and to our determent and financial cost.

9)  DAP p.21 + 24 -  Speed Limit Review of Whitford Brown etc – ($90,000) – this new project has arisen from a very untimely death.  It basically raises the question of why the southern entrance to the Aotea Block has not been completed as promised. Whitford Brown Ave was designed to cope only with traffic from Ascot Park and beyond. Further, surely the speed limit review can be organised much quicker than proposed.  TransitNZ has temporary speed limits organised overnight!

There are several points here. 1. Projects regarding Whitford Brown traffic have been proposed in many draft AP exercises and always lost out. It takes a death (and some popularist campaigning) for priority to be given. 2. The Aotea Block traffic situation is a disaster. The second entrance to the Aotea Block is no longer available to us under the original arrangement. The original arrangement was a shared cost venture with the developer and the Council. Notice how the developer has his profits and we have the headache. All this goes back to the strategic development plan which I spoke against for virtually a year - fine words, abstract nouns (as I called them repeatedly at the time) would never a contract make. Porirua ratepayers are going to have to pay millions for this error. 3. The statute makes it a bit awkward for councils to alter speed limits. However, the best approach in my opinion is for the councllor's to vote the speed limit they want and to set the officers the task of putting it in place. We did this on another road and it worked fine. Officers prefer that we trot along according to the logic of the law - but that means nothing much will happen practically for about two years. The chairperson of the City Services Committee needs to work on this.

10)  DAP  p.21 + 24  - Norrie Street Promenade – ($161,000) -  this new project appears to be one that comes under the orbit of the Sports and Events Centre.  Is this a way of keeping under the cost of $17.5 million ?  What is precisely wrong with the present footpath?

The Arena is an incredibly ugly thing that looks like a biscuit tin. There are desperate moves being made to find ways to make it look better. Thinking about its appearance in the first place would have been a good idea. It will be disguised by plantings and other things. It will be used as the wall for an outdoor picture theatre and stage. All of which will help to disguise the biscuit tin. There will be a series of projects over the $17.5 million. I think it is the chair of the strategy committee who is responsible.

11)  DAP p.28 + 29 – District Plan Rolling Review – (was $27,000 but now absorbed in to the general operational budget).  This Review was approved in 2004 and consists of reviewing the rural, suburban and heritage sections of the Plan. This has been of great concern to Northern Ward residents for the past two years. Council has requested -“officers provide a list that shows the target dates on which specific alterations to the District Plan will be publicly notified”.  This has not been done with any reference to the Suburban District Plan.

This is indeed a worry. Ask Euon to explain it, he is responsible. The original design of the rolling reviews has been in part lost because the review date in the statute is upon us. Now we are having rolling reviews AND a major statutory review. That is the best I can figure out on the basis of what has been provided.

12)  DAP p.28 + 30 -  Information Management ($65,000)  - another new project. Where are the details of allocation to justify another staff member?

What is even more of a challenge is counting the staff members. We must now include the contractors.

13)  DAP p.28 + 30 -  Preparation of 2009-2019  LTCCP – ($152,000) -  these LTCCP’s are needed to be prepared every three years and we assume  should be done as part of normal tasks by the staff.  Where are the details for staffing and the necessity for this amount? This should not be a “new” project.

Well spotted. I did not notice this. More contractors. We have totally lost the focus of the committees. The committee meetings do nothing much and then there are extra meetings added to do things like the Annual Plan. The main task of the strategy committee is to do the planning - and that within the framework of the normal meetings. More and more meetings are being called and the agendas are once again expanding.

14)  DAP p.28 + 31 - Business Development Resource – (expected credit of $380,000)
Part of our residential rating goes into supporting Business Porirua and the Regional Strategy which should be participating in a function of this kind.  It is difficult to figure out the expectation of “self-funding” and where the money comes from.  Of all the new projects, this one is of great concern , as more than $100,000 could be spent by ratepayers during the first year of operation.  Overall it is a“pie-in-the -sky” proposal.

Your increased regional rates are your compensation for this move. The cut that Porirua City obtains from the regional strategy remains to be seen. I thought the arguments put forward, by Ken Douglas and others were quite powerful. Personally, I am a skeptic from way back, but they may be right. All boats might rise together they say, but I always find my boat has a hole in it as the tide comes in.

There is a great deal of work to be done regarding business development strategy IN PORIRUA. We are drifting along with no focus or coordination. Business Porirua is weak and made weaker by the regional initiatives. I remember in the mayoral campaign meeting they organised there were only three people who attended from their membership.

The council needs to show inspired leadership in this area. I have been thinking about several possibilities, but only Jenny and the real estate agents could implement anything and hence it is unlikely anything is going to happen.

15)  DAP p.28 + 31 – Software Application and Support –($382,000) – this could mean more staffing – more rates.  Software applications seem to be never ending if previous DAP’s are anything to go by.  If the costs are allocated “cross-corporately” again it should be explained how and where this is done.

Unfortunately, computing costs big bucks and we have to pay. How we know we are getting value for money is another question. I would have liked to see an audit in this area, but the officers seem to have given up consulting the councillors on the programme of specific audits.

16)   INCREASE  IN  PCC  STAFF  -  It seems clear in analysing the projects listed above that a large increase in staffing is in the offing – probably in the vicinity of eight new staff members. This is a major link in increasing rates for the future and not justified in any way.

This is the first time in over 15 years that I have not been able to tell people how many staff are employed by PCC. Once I conduced by fax a survey of all the councils in NZ and brought out comparisons on staff numbers, using various denominators including council income, population, etc.

17)  GENERAL  STAFFING  - Porirua residents should be informed about the utilisation of staffing considering that we are the main payers.  We are entitled to know about the number of staff employed by the Council which is probably well above 300.  We know little about the number of consultants that are being used, and what proportion they are in the overall picture. It is apparent that a number of very capable ex-staff working for other organisations are being used by Council.

In one way the number of staff employed should not worry us. We vote sums of money and it is the task of the chief executive to get the job done. However, people feel that rates are exorbitant and that there are many people doing jobs that do not seem to be vital. They also feel an uneasy ness about council, they say they are not to be trusted, and so on. The answer really is for the council leadership to ensure that we are getting value for money and to convince the public of this. Jenny and the real estate agents were sent on a media relations course and so perhaps we are to see an advance in credibility.

18)  “NEW  PROJECTS”  -  A number of the new projects noted and listed above from  (2) to (15) should be removed from the 2008/09 DAP, which would mean a significant reduction in Council spending.  If we take $380,000 as an equivalent to 1% of rates input then a significant project reduction of DAP suggestions could easily reduce the rates take from 4.5 % to 3% or less.  This could be reasonable acceptable to ratepayers.

Always a discussion of percentages tells but a part of the story. In our city what counts as one percent is a far greater sum of money than in other cities. We need to alter our approach to budgeting so that we bring rates down and get better value for money.

19)  THE  DAP  BOOKLET  ITSELF  -  This needs some comment.  The present issue contains 146 pages, the number of which is enough to put most readers off for a start. There is much general data about performance measures – pretty boring stuff.  Why do we need – what Council wants to achieve? – is the Council reaching its goals? – activity summaries – on-going services – etc etc.   These topics are not the place in a DAP.  They could well be posted from time to time in notices sent out with rate demands during the year with requests for feedback and comment.

It is ironic that the plan to simplify and compact the booklets was associated with a new approach to budgeting which included better communications. We have the reduction within the books but not the additional new communications techniques. Council leadership needs to address this.

20)  ADMINISTRATION COSTS -  Throughout the DAP document little is said about running costs  (i.e.personel costs, direct expenses etc.) except in a general way. These administration costs should be allocated within each DAP proposal and other basic projects. As an example we have concern about the rising rate of council staffing and consulting fees.
As a percentage of “Direct Expenses” over  “Total Operating Revenue”
The figure for 2005/2006 was 55%   -   (PCC Annual Report 2006/07)
                 for 2006/2007  was 61%   -       “          “          “            “
                 for 2007/2008  was  69%  -   (PCC Draft DAP  2008/09  -  p.117)
          and for  2008/2009  is    74%           “          “      “            “              “
This steady rise is alarming for the future. Council should consider the magnitude of these increasing  costs and  control them as a way of limiting rates increases.

21)  SUMMARY  -  This DAP for 2008/09 is an ill-formed document that does not give a clear indication to Porirua ratepayers of exactly where and how the money is spent.
Staffing and consultants fees are increasing year by year and little concern is taken about keeping rates rises under a inflation-based level.  There is greater need to explain to the general public in clear and simple terms the Draft Annual Plan accounts. 
 eg;  for Cultural Services – Arts & Heritage, Library Services, and Cemetery & Crematorium only gives the total expenses and revenue for the 3 items.
And under Leisure Services  - Financial Summary – is it possible to ascertain how the swimming pools are doing financially?

I will comment on the after shot, even if it is meant to be sardonic: I also have become concerned that we have all lost touch with the cost of the capital and operational budgets for the large items. It is all very well to have the information for "culturally appropriate aquatic recreational facilities" but a swimming pool is still a swimming pool and it is a sensible question to ask how much it costs.

MANA SERVICE LANE - PRA report

The contractors have finished and the one way lane behind the Post Office building has now been reversed to go north. However, none of the other measures discussed in a meeting with PCC’s Geoff Marshall seem to have been implemented i.e. painted footpath along side of Sandbar and in front of townhouses, connected to walkway behind PO etc. No news about discussions with ON Track re widening lane and entry to station for pedestrians from footpath along Harcourts. It was suggested that questions about these matters should be included in a submission on the Draft Annual Plan.

ROBERT COMMENTS

The key to this is the opportunity to winden the road. This was a realistic propositon according to council officers who were in discussions with the appropriate authorites. I am sure this project will be pushed along by those who live there and have a stong interest it the outcome, so I will leave them to it and wish them well.
r

PLIMMERTON SUBWAY OPENING

The official opening of the new $300,000 subway at Plimmerton Railway Station will take place at 11am on Saturday 24 May. Porirua City Mayor Jenny Brash will be joined by local residents, councillors from PCC and Greater Wellington Regional Council and representatives from Ngati Toa iwi, On Track and Toll NZ.

WESTERN CORRIDOR/TG - pra report

The Land Transport Committee is meeting on 9 April. According to Graham Taylor work on the TG project is tracking to programme. Work on estimates and other preliminaries will however not be finalised until July 2008.

mana esplanade and related - pra report

The PRA, Russell and Judi, had an informal meeting with Rod James from Hyde Consulting. He stated that PCC had suggested he draw up an ‘issues paper’ to allow further consultation. However he had advised against this. He mentioned his recommendations would suggest: amongst other things:-

 To have normal ‘clearways’ instead of T2 lanes as the latter only added to the confusion and the lane monitors created unnecessary expense.

 To have electronic ‘red light’ monitors on the traffic lights which apart from identifying red light runners would allow data to be gathered re traffic patterns

 Traffic lights and a pedestrian crossing at Marina View. (Transit still not keen on that.)

 Change the wording on the relevant VMS signs to state – “Left hand lane parking and cycling (only)” to get traffic used to stay in the right hand lane. He intended to meet with Marina View residents and businesses after the Review had come out.

ROBERT COMMENTS

Nick will be chairing a meeting to resolve the issues about Mana Esplanade once those involved have availed themselves of an opportunty to become familiar with the report commissioned by Transit and the PCC.
r

youth advisory group - the look good, but will they do anything?

power of prayer

You may have noticed the new regulations for silt control. Nothing effective there. [We know how to establish effective silt control but do not have the courage needed.]

The main method of silt control in Porirua City is prayer.

First, the developer prays that it does not rain.

Then the developer prays that the mud running down the hill is not noticed.

Then the developer prays that any complainant is dismissed as a nutter by the Council.

Then the developer prays that the inspector is helpful (the developer will use the word "reasonable").

Then the developer prays that his inaction does not precipitate legal action.

Finally, the developer prays that he finishes the job and defuses the issue before any legal action comes to fruition.

So far as I know, having been 15 years on the Council, prayer always works.

r

april fools

Incredible the letters to the editor about the April Fools Day joke. The whole thing was about but one thing: Nick was raising his profile. Deliberately and cleverly. Notice how he also promoted his friends. He used the same technique used by his colleague Chris Gollins some years ago. The joke had nothing to do with humour. Nor did it have anything to do with Whitby. It was a very well executed move: in real estate and as a councllor you need to promote yourself. Nick is very skilled. Credit where credit is due. Part of his skill is that he gets everyone writing about him and his joke, and that is exactly what they did. He made them all work for him.

Incidentally, it is not actually in the Council's power to change names, there is a thing called the Geographic Board (established by Act of Parliament in 1946 if I remember rightly).
r
May 7, 2008

conflicts of interest

I am aware that there is considerable discussion in the community about conflicts of interest at Council.
r
May 6, 2008

wra focus - legal case

Dear Mayor Jenny Brash,

Duck Creek Esplanade Reserves

On Friday last, representing WRA as an interested party, I attended the Environment Court hearing of the WCE v PCC case seeking clarification of the method of measurement of rivers in relation to Duck Creek and determining the banks for esplanade reserves.

As you know Robin Gunston has taken over as WRA Chairperson but committee members are heading up certain specific issues. I am responsible for coordinating on Duck Creek, amongst other matters. It is in that capacity I write to you.

I believe the PCC case put by Peter Winchester and the council’s experts was compelling, although it was difficult to be sure of the position that the Judge and two commissioners may take.

My reason for writing is really related to some statements made by Peter Winchester and others during the hearing suggesting limiting the amount of reserve and I seek your assurance that, while they may represent initial opinions of some officers, they do not represent Council’s policy. Those statements had no bearing on the actual determination being sort from the Court and I made no comment at the time but I was inwardly concerned.

Mr Todd, representing WCE, stated that Council intended taking 5m and 15m esplanade reserve from the banks as a “land grab”. I hope no such intent to limit esplanade reserve to those amounts has been conveyed to WCE and I wish to confirm that this council policy represent the minimum amounts required for the management of Duck Creek. It presumably has no bearing on the amount taken, as of public legal right, to fulfil the other stated reasons in the RMA for esplanade reserves. The Act actually states it shall be 20m unless there are reasons for taking less. It is assumed those reasons must be good and in the interests of the community and the environment. Giving up such a public right to maximise the profit for the developer would not presumably be a valid reason.

A comment made by Peter Winchester and later by Stuart Kinnear was that Council was not intending to seek the full esplanade reserve because of the cost involved (or words similar). I must ask if this is Council’s policy or is an emerging position. If it is, then we wish to discuss matter with you. It is not appropriate that the public’s legal right to reserves should be given away without consultation.

We have always taken the position that we would be flexible about reserve areas providing WCE is prepared to negotiate in good faith. On that basis WCE and PCC might agree to a lesser width of reserve in one area if a greater width was provided elsewhere so that the total reserve area remained unchanged. On that basis we might establish that 20m from each bank equates to 4ha per kilometre of river. Over the 3km length of Duck Creek this is about 12ha. This is esplanade reserve taken for the purposes stated within the Act and does not include road reserve or drainage control ponds or facilities. Neither would it include the river itself as defined by the banks at MAF levels that would also become publicly (council) owned. It could reasonably include land required to provide east/west pedestrian linkages. None of the above would absolve WCE from paying reserve contributions.

Officers are about to start discussion and negotiations with WCE. I assume they have no authority at this stage to negotiate away rights to reserve land but rather to discuss how that reserve land might be distributed to the advantage of both sides.

This should be made clear to WCE. If they are not prepared to negotiate on that basis, the council should merely follow the RMA provisions and take the 20m from each bank as specified. That is not a tenable position for WCE as it would make sensible development of the remaining area difficult and expensive. It is therefore in their interest to reach a fair and reasonable settlement (fair to the community) for a comprehensive development plan that leaves a green backbone to Whitby as intended in the original Whitby Plan. This is not a “hard ball” position but realistic in view of WCE’s continuing disregard for the residents of Whitby and Porirua and history of unwillingness to negotiate as demonstrated by their attitude following the charette.

Any park that is created from the esplanade reserves acquired would be a huge asset to the whole of our city and the region. We wish the council well in trying to get WCE to see reason and obtain the best outcome for our city.

I would appreciate your response to the specific matters raised above.

Yours sincerely

Jim Dearsly

comment sent to me - someone might usefully reply

If you have been wondering why our local iwi haven’t publicly voiced an opinion over the Pautahanui wind farm proposal, it’s probably because they have one planned for themselves. Published by Porirua City Council as part of the plan Change 7 (Windfarms) submissions, the Ngati Toa people through The Hongoeka Development Trust have at ‘considerable expense’ identified and researched a block of their land between Plimmerton and Pukerua Bay for a wind farm development. Accordingly they are ‘totally opposed’ to Porirua City Council’s attempt through this plan change to put some controls in place so that that natural environment and coastal views that we currently enjoy are not jeopardised by these commercial developments. Ngati Toa’s support of windfarms would seem at odds with Maori culture and their role as guardians of New Zealand’s natural heritage, and in doing so could find themselves caste in a role they are so frequently critical of.

ROBERT COMMENTS

This was unsigned. It does give a pont-of-view, but I have no view on it as yet.
r
May 6, 2008

wra submisision on draft annual plan

PO Box 58134
Whitby
Porirua 5245

Dear Sir/Madam

Submission Annual Plan 2008/9

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the Annual Plan. WRA continues to support any moves by Council to reduce the rates burden on household ratepayers and to improve the long term sustainability of our Village and the City.

We support the following additional activities of the Plan:

We do not support any of the other areas of proposed additional expenditure , especially any that leads to more people being employed, in order to have long term sustainability staff numbers need to be reducing drastically over the next 10 years or the rates burden will get dependent on such personnel numbers and their associated costs.

We do not believe there is sufficient detailed information to make a call on investments in ICT, if further information in the form of a robust business case(s) were to be submitted to us we have experienced ICT business owners and consultants on our team to examine it further.

We wish to see the following projects adopted in this Plan:

We will, as always be carefully watching the Council’s response to this. As a Committee we also put many precious, unpaid hours into the evaluation of these plans in the vainglorious hope that the wisdom of many will one day prevail !

We do not have the time to be heard on these submissions on this occasion as the Village Plan takes our top priority at present.

Please feel free to contact me if you wish to know more.

Yours sincerely

Robin Gunston
Chair.

visit to learn about wind farms

Porirua City Council and Greater Wellington Regional Council

Combined Site Visit to Manawatu Wind Farms

Friday 2nd May 2008

Trip Itinerary
(Approx. Times)

8:00 am           Mana Coach Services Bus Departs from Greater Wellington Regional Council, Wakefield Street, Wellington

8:45 am           Bus departs from Porirua City Council, Hagley Street, Porirua

11:15 am         Arrive in Ashurst for Morning Tea (Morning Tea provided)

11:45 am         Depart from Ashurst for Te Apiti wind farm - meet with Mike Goldsworthy (Meridian Asset Manager for Te Apiti), at 12:00 for a talk about the Te Apiti wind farm

12:30 pm         Lunch at Herb Farm Café, Grove Road, Ashurst (Lunch provided)

1:30 pm           Presentation from Virginia Shaw (Principal Planner: Palmerston North City Council) and Tom Shannon (Ashurst farmer) on experiences with regulatory processes for Manawatu wind farms (at the Herb Farm Café)

2:00 pm           Depart for Tararua wind farm (Trust Power 3 site)

2:15 pm           Discussion with Colin Farrington (Vestas Manager at Tararua), on the turbines operating at Trust Power 3 site, and a brief tour of Trust Power 3 site with Afternoon Tea (provided)

3:30 pm           Depart for Porirua City Council

5:30 pm           Arrive back in Porirua

6:00 pm           Arrive back at Greater Wellington Regional Council

Information handouts will be provided on the day.

Please direct any enquiries to:

Peter Matich
Senior Policy Analyst (Environment)
Porirua City Council
(04) 237 1498

how to fix the proposed dp rules

Wind Farm Policy

I am asked what I would regard as important provisions in the District Plan for wind farms.

Here are five suggestions, and I would appreciate discussion about them and alternative ideas:

1) Any wind farm should have its own rates differential. Otherwise wind farms will pay to the Council the same rates as are paid by rural landowners. This would be grossly unfair on everyone because the effects of a wind farm on the community, and the services they use, will be far greater than those of farming operations. As different wind farms will have different degrees of ongoing dis-benefits for the community, and different levels of profit for their owners, some sort of policy formula will need to be established.

2) The development levy for any wind farm applicant must take into account the wide range of impacts of the turbines and associated works. It is the development levy that is going to off-set the cost to ratepayers of road works, and the loss of amenity value. It would not be adequate to apply the same development levies that apply to the developers of subdivisions.

3) Any wind farm application should trigger an independent social impact report.

4) In the case where the wind farm is on public land, some of the royalties should be returned to the territorial authority. At present the plan is that the regional council benefits from the income, but the dis- benefits all fall upon the Porirua City ratepayers. It is possible this mechanism will need to be established outside the District Plan, although it would be better if it could be a part of a single comprehensive set of rules.

5) When Council amends the District Plan there needs to be a specific definition of areas where wind farms will not be allowed. This could be placed in the District Plan under the new "Wind Farms" heading or it could be a part of the new first chapter that is being written for the District Plan and which we currently know as the Porirua Development Framework project.

Robert Shaw
Porirua City Councillor

wind farm issues

The level of misleading information is of concern to myself and council officers. Watch for corrective measures in newspapers.
r
April 19, 2008

april fool

Interesting to note that when Nick Leggett plants an April Fools joke with the support of the editor of the Kapi Mana News, quite a few people are unable to tell the difference between himself and his jokes.

Personally, I saw the funny side because I did not for a moment believe it. All the councillors who appeared did so with their permission. There were even letters to the papers saying that people agreed with Sue Dow. However, there were many people seriously upset by the joke, and some considered it indicative of something within the Council. Perhaps Nick will have a comment, now the dust has settled some.
r
April 19, 2008

maori party statement about porirua

ROBERT COMMENTS

This statement is an address to the Porirua Maori Providers Association;
Maraeroa Marae Health Clinic
He aha nga moemoea? He aha nga wawata?

The address is by Tariana Turia Member of Parliament for Te Tai Hauauru
Friday 11 April 2008; 10am

It is nice to know Mrs Turia reads the Porirua Wellington Web Blog so carefully. Members of Parliament from the National and Labour parties are also regular readers.

Here is Mrs Turia's statement from the Maori Party web site.
r
April 18, 2008

TARIANA TURIA:

Last December, TV3’s Campbell Live featured a Maori family from the Creek.

The camera zoomed in on the whanau jamming on the back lawn, washing line full, everyone singing, content, happy.

Was it a dream? A fluke? A one-off miracle?

Was it indeed possible that mainstream media could take the cameras to Cannons Creek and show a story of love, of faith, of passion?

The focus of the interview was young Paiheretia Aperahama –finalist in the North City Shooting Star Talent Quest, and at eleven years of age, the youngest talent to ever reach the semi-finals of Maorioke – Maori TV’s popular karaoke competition show.

In another interview, Mum Dianne, talked about her son, saying

"there’s such joy in the House when he’s humming away. This is just a wonderful opportunity for a child to catch a wave as it comes".

The story about the young Te Kura Maori o Porirua celebrity made an impact on many levels.

Of course, the sheer talent and musicality of the boy they nicknamed ‘Maori Jackson’ was impressive, but so too, was the pride of his parents in the strength that all of their children possessed in te reo Maori, in tikanga Morehu.

It was such a wonderful contrast to usual bad news tales, to watch a story about an everyday whanau, who were passionate about music, who were devoted to their spiritual growth.

I am greatly inspired by Paiheretia and the opportunities he took up, to catch the wave of well-being.

What could the wave of well-being look like for Porirua?

For Maraeroa, for Horoauta, for Takapuwahia?

For the whanau supported by Te Whare Tiaki Wahine Refuge?

For Ngati Toa? Nga Tangata whenua o te taurahere?

Far be it from me, from Ngati Apa, Tuwharetoa, Whanganui and Nga Rauru, to come into your rohe and define your solutions.

I want to be listening to your voices, to hear your views on the bright ideas that you have about things we must do as a political party, to support your mahi– and just as importantly to support this community.

I have always been impressed by the passion so many of your people hold for Porirua – there are just so many wonderful advocates here whom I have learnt so much from – and I thank you for your incredible generosity in sharing with me.

But if I could focus on one thing – it would be the connection that you all celebrate through your association with PaMPA – the Porirua Maori Providers Association.

As social justice advocates I know you are frequently hamstrung by the hand that feeds you – the contracts that stipulate what you must do and when.

So often your funding is tied to addressing the deficits, targeting the problems with no regard for anything positive that may happen along the way.

We in the Maori Party stand for a commitment to a vision of a fair and just community.

How do you grow your community? What can you do to bring out the best of all of your people? What will your organization do to keep the community spirit high?

This is a community with a strong and intense history.

A history in which the Crown has accepted responsibility for the way it had acted in breach of the Treaty of Waitangi, by kidnapping Te Rauparaha and forcing Te Rangihaeata into permanent exile.

It is a tortured history in which the Crown has failed to ensure that Ngati Toa were left with sufficient land holdings, leaving them in a state of virtual landlessness.

The Waitangi Tribunal has found that the Crown failed to protect the customary interests of Ngäti Toa, and that it took steps to undermine the rangatiratanga of Ngati Toa.

On top of a concentrated policy of military action and coercion, Ngati Toa has taken steps to submit a Waitangi claim, to pursue full restoration of the mana and the dignity belonging to the people.

But there have been other events and circumstances which have shaped the landscape.

The name of Porirua, for many New Zealanders, has been associated with the Porirua Lunatic Asylum which at its peak, cared for some 2000 people.

There is the lasting legacy of the influx of state houses which were constructed from the early 1950s on, but which have been grossly neglected by the state in the decades which followed.

I have been appalled at the way in which whole streets of houses continue to remain in various states of disrepair; housing conditions which have impacted adversely on the health of your community.

There is the fusion of tangata whenua with the pride of the Pacific, as the pressure of the labour market has brought the peoples of Polynesia to Porirua.

There are the effects of the urbanisation of our people, as Todd Motors and other industries have drawn us here.

Porirua is associated also with a particular gang culture.

I was reading a biography from Hone Davis in Robert Shaw’s web-blog. Hone recalled his childhood days, remembering

The gangs used to walk as a whole gang along the street. They were all leathered out, the boys and the girls. When I went to Corinna School, in 1970, we had to affiliate to a gang so we were safe in the field during lunchtime and playtime. Otherwise you ran the risk of getting caught in the middle.

So for my father's generation and for mine, there's been that kind of culture present in Porirua. But I've heard some really good things lately about fathers getting out of the gangs and trying to keep their kids out.

This quick browse through the history and experiences of this place, by its very nature can only skim the surface of the depth of association and links that you as individuals, as members of whanau, hapu and iwi hold.

We have a whakatauki which reminds of the need for caution as we plan to set sail for the horizons, to aspire to our future.

Titiro ki muri kia whakatika a mua

Those who ignore the lessons of the past

are doomed to repeat them.

The pursuit of wellbeing for our people in this rohe, must encompass reconciliation and healing, the restoration of spirit.

It is about facing our histories, understanding the savage impact of land alienation, of discrimination and racism, of military violence, the psychiatric abuse of power, the tensions and dynamics involved in creating communities without town planners and city architects devoting any space to cultural respect.

It’s about facing this past – not ignoring it – understanding therefore how important the process of cultural revitalisation and restoration is to the journey onwards.

What should be our moemoea, our wawata for the wellbeing of tangata whenua?

The panui for this hui today, summed it all up –

He aha te mea nui? Ko koe ko au, ko au ko koe.

Maaku e ki, he tangata, he tangata, he tangata.

For the women and children in the care of Te Whare Tiaki Wahine, it is about reconnecting with those who can best restore their whanau with a strong sense of identity, the safety and protection of those who care.

For Te Kowhao, Te Roopu Pokai Taaniwhaniwha, it’s about reconnecting and linking in to kaupapa, to tikanga, as the foundation for spiritual and mental health.

For Te Roopu Awhina it may be about drawing on the wisdom of whakawhanaungatanga as a vital resource for social service developments in Porirua.

There’s the progress that Streets Ahead 237 has made with the support of the Maraeroa Marae health clinic, in supporting youth at risk.

You’re probably very familiar with the work that Fa’amatuainu Wayne Poutoa and his team are doing, the work that got him recognised with a ‘World of Difference’ Award.

I liked what he had to say, about why he had committed his life to supporting young people – many of these rangatahi who have been influenced adversely by the impact of marijuana, alcohol, methamphetamine (P), violence.

For us it’s also largely about connecting people to their culture, which is currently replaced by the American lifestyles and rap music and all that kind of rubbish.

We connect our people back and say, ‘You’re an extension of your ancestors’ journey and therefore you have a legacy to fulfil’ – when we bring you to the marae under an indigenous umbrella, you’re able to understand ‘Who am I? Where do I fit?’ and therefore you become complete.

That’s a key component in helping people come out of gang life into better things.

You are an extension of your ancestors journey. You have a legacy to fulfill.

What better encouragement could there be than to make that ultimate connection with our tupuna, our kaupapa, the dreams and aspirations our ancestors had for the generations to follow.

Paiheretia feels the value of te reo Maori, of tikanga Morehu, in every aspect of his life. It is the cloak that keeps him warm against the winds of change; it is the korowai that gives him confidence to make it in the world.

The wellbeing of tangata whenua is worth working for.

It is worth putting the effort in to create a time of renewal and hope for the future.

It is worth making the commitment to celebrate our continual growth as a nation, a nation of cultural diversity and richness where our unity is underpinned by the expression of tangata whenua-tanga, Te käkano i ruia mai i Rangiätea.

It is worth doing what we can to maintain a clean natural environment for all New Zealanders to benefit from.

It is worth seeing the world with our unique perspective, restoring the philosophies, practices and world views encompassed within the tangata whenua reality.

I think that Paiheretia knew all of that, when he chose to sing on Maorioke, the classic love song, I’ll be there.

And perhaps that is the most significant challenge yet, we’ll be there with a love so strong, we’ll be there to face the future together, we’ll be there to share the collective responsibility of caring for each other.

Why Oppose Wadlow Wind Farm?

This is thirteen turbines of 75 meters height. Some of them are within two kilometers of a village.

Because: