Porirua City Councillor Robert Shaw

towers again and again

-----Original Message-----
From: Victoria Jakobs @ The Fundraising Foundation [mailto:victoria@tff.co.nz]
Sent: Thursday, 9 July 2009 5:13 p.m.
To: 'litea.mufasa@xtra.co.nz'; 'denyslatham@paradise.net.nz'; 'hemi.matenga@xtra.co.nz'; 'taima1@xtra.co.nz'; 'timothy.manu@gmail.com'; 'marilyn.ken@xtra.co.nz'; 'henrysmith@xtra.co.nz'; 'liz@kellyhygiene.co.nz'; 'suedow@paradise.net.nz'; 'euon.murrell@tommysmana.co.nz'; 'nick@leggett.co.nz'; 'robert@porirua.net'; 'tmsheppard@gmail.com'
Cc: Jenny Brash; mana.electorate@xtra.co.nz; Roger Blakeley; Peter Bailey; 'Graeme'
Subject: Another cellphone tower in titahi bay? No consultation? Again????????????????

To our elected representatives

I have just received a call from City Life Newspaper asking for comment about the installation of a cellphone tower at 47 Thornley St, Titahi Bay.

Where do I start?

Whilst we were happily involved in discussion with Telecom about their tower – after a huge community protest -  council deemed that NZ Comms targeted mail drop to 80 households was ok? I’ve just spoken to a home owner on Thornley St, who knew nothing about this tower.

Where are our local ward councillers? Why are you not respecting the overwhelming view of Titahi Bay residents that we want a stake in our community’s future?

Frankly, I had hoped to move on. I personally have invested hundreds of hours at the expense of my family to try and ensure that our community is a safe and pleasant one. I am saddened, disappointed and surprised to find that for the third time we have found ourselves let down.

In disappointment

Victoria Jakobs

For your reference

http://www.pcc.govt.nz/pages/Home/News---Events/Newsletters/Council-Update

RESOURCE CONSENT FOR A NEW TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITY

Resource consent has recently been granted to Two Degrees Mobile Limited (previously

New Zealand Communications Ltd) for a new telecommunications facility in Titahi Bay, Porirua. The proposal is for a 15m tall structure and associated cabinets.

The application site that has been selected is 47 Thornley Street (also known as Whitireia Park), and is land owned by Radio New Zealand Ltd and the Radio Network Ltd. The site is designated for radio communications facilities, and several radio masts currently occupythe site.

Two Degrees Mobile Limited agreed with the Council that they would go through a

consultation process before applying for resource consent. This process included public meetings and newspaper advertisements, as well as a targeted mail drop to 80 households in the surrounding area. This consultation process was discussed and accepted at the City Services Committee meeting held on 27 November 2008, and the Council agreed that applications could be processed by Council officers. Council officers have found this consultation process to be satisfactory.

As a result of this targeted mail drop, three submissions were received. One supported the proposed new facility, and two (from the same household) opposed it. A site visit was carried out by Council officers as part of assessing this application, and it was determined that the potential adverse visual effects of the facility would be no more than minor. This is due to the significant separation distance of the proposed facility to any nearby residences, and the surrounding physical environment comprising tall trees and existing radio communications facilities. In addition, the application proposed several mitigating factors, such as painting the mast and all equipment a matt, forest green colour, and carrying out landscape planting as part of the development.

In addition to this, it is noted that a report from a radiofrequency engineer was submitted with this resource consent application, and concludes that the effects and cumulative effects of the new telecommunications facility are well within the New Zealand Standard.

RESOURCE CONSENTS GRANTED WEEK ENDING 19 JUNE 2009

RC Number Street Name Description

RC5530 Durham Street Relocate dwelling exceeds front yard rule and site coverage

RC5524 Thornley Street Telecommunications facility

RC5533 State Highway 1 Rural farm shed

rates increases

Take care when you use this information which is derived from an informal survey of councils.The numbers refer to the general rate, and do not necessarily include special targeted rates such as those for transport, water, and even in some places tourism. However, they indicate the basic direction for the leading tax struck by local government.
r

auckland challenge

ROBERT COMMENTS:

Many people like the Auckland report. What is more some see it as a way ahead for Wellington. If you take a mechanistic view of local governement, you believe it is mainly about the delivery of services, then you want to streamline things and make them efficient. The other side of the debate is the development of democracy, the involvement of families in their community, and ensuring everyone feels a sense of belonging in their community. There is a serious challenge to democracy itself at the moment. One part of it comes from the example of Maori decision-making which seems to work well but is not democratic. More on this later.
r
March 29, 2009

LOCAL GOVERNMENT NEW ZEALAND RESPONDS TO THE AUCKLAND REPORT:

“We share the concerns expressed by the Government about the loss of local democracy and community representation in Auckland,” President of Local Government New Zealand  Lawrence Yule said on the release of the Report of the Royal Commission into Auckland Governance.

“We commend the Hon. Peter Salmon and the Royal Commission for its comprehensive report. However, we are very concerned about the loss of local democracy, the loss of community boards and the lack of detail on any significant savings.

“We agree that this work is a matter of urgency, given the last 18 months of uncertainty for staff and elected members. However, it is too important to get wrong. The Government must consider these recommendations and their implications thoroughly.

“Any new solution must be better than the current arrangements. Auckland citizens must be confident that the new structures will provide strong representation, be responsive to their expectations and provide a role model for local government. It is now up to the people of Auckland to tell the Government what they think of these recommendations.”

Mr Yule said the report was in response to a unique set of governance issues in our largest metropolitan area.

“The Government must consider if this is the best approach for Auckland before we consider if this proposed solution could, or should, be applied to other parts of New Zealand.

“Once the Government finalises its intentions, it has to ensure a successful implementation and transition from the current arrangements. This will not be an easy task and without risk, given the high expectations on the outcome. We have offered to assist the Government on any transitional arrangements,” said Mr Yule.

ENDS

environmental protection agency to over-ride district plans - another layer of decision-making to avoid the first

As our government says:

"As a transitional measure, this package of reforms proposes to establish the Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) as a statutory office.

Pre-election policy announcements also signalled an intention to create an EPA to achieve national environmental goals. One of the functions for a new EPA is to centralise some regulatory roles which are best exercised on a nationwide basis.

The roles, functions and powers of the EPA will, for the time being, be exercised by the Secretary for the Environment. The Secretary will be able to delegate these functions to his or her employees within the Ministry for the Environment, to allow the administrative work to be carried out by a dedicated unit. The creation of the EPA as an independent statutory office gives the necessary degree of separation from the Ministry for the Environment’s core business." \\\\\\\

minister against the environment (nick smith)

Do you believe that people should have a say in their community and be secure in their environment? If you do then you have to accept that there needs to be a mechanism to (a) set out local rules and (b) operate those rules. The first requirement is satisfied by District Plans, and a few other plans like the coastal plans. The second requirement relates to the procedures set out by the Resource Management Act. Always there will be conflict about these things in operation because people have different interests.

Now the plan of the Minister for the Environment is to cut into the system in the name of improved efficiency. You have to be very naive to think that the result of his proposals will better quality decisions. The Bill is named to be innocuous, but analysis will show it to be otherwise.

The problems in Porirua City with RMA decisions are derived from committees that go against officer advice without good reason. Well that was the most recent spectacular case. Also, because we are so slow to develop the DP all sorts of poor developments are allowed. Developers have discovered it is best to go for a plan change to facilitate their projects and the council is quite incapable of holding the line in these circumstances.

Minister's comments on his The Resource Management (Simplify & Streamline) Amendment Bill

Changes to the Resource Management Act will simplify and streamline processes
without compromising environmental protections, Environment Minister Nick Smith
says.
“The costs, uncertainty and delays of the current Act are adversely affecting New
Zealand jobs, infrastructure, and productivity and causing economic frustrations for
homeowners, small businesses and farmers. The reforms we are introducing in
phase one will address these significant issues.”
Key elements of the reform package are:
• Removing frivolous, vexatious and anti-competitive objections
• Streamlining processes for projects of national significance
• Creating an Environmental Protection Authority
• Improving plan development and plan change processes
• Improving resource consent processes
• Streamlining decision making
• Improving workability and compliance
• Improving national instruments
“The Government is taking an innovative approach to major projects by increasing
the input from local councils into a streamlined Board of Inquiry process. This
recognises that major projects have both an important local and national dimension.
“These reforms have required a delicate rebalancing between the rights of people to
participate in resource consent decision making, and to appeal decisions, and the
need for efficient decision making."

superb performance by derek fox

Derek Fox sometimes performs well and sometimes he does not. In the Te Papa debate on the Maori seats he was right on form. In a play based upon fundamenatal principles of justice he made the case for the Maori seats, against a Canterbury University law professor.

Professor Phillip Joseph

Professor Joseph's arguments were logical and sounded reasonable. The problem was that the fox runs for his dinner and the rabbit runs for his life. In this debate the Fox was the rabbit.

I was reminded that the best Maori have ever done in local government elections is to achieve 2% of the seats on councils. This when Maori are almost 20% of the population. Listen via http://www.radionz.co.nz/audio

Derek is now working for the Maori Party and still manages his media company.
r
February 8, 2009

4 million people should write her a reference

"The government is supporting former Prime Minister Helen Clark's bid for a top job at the United Nations. Miss Clark is a candidate to take charge of the UN Development Programme, according to this morning's Sunday Star Times. She would have control of the largest budget of any UN agency. - Newstalk ZB 08-Feb-2009"

ROBERT COMMENTS

All New Zealanders will wish Ms Clark well in her bid for this position. Her skills and insights have served New Zealand well and now they are to be available in another vital policy role.
r

the auckland solution

8:16AM Monday March 31, 2008

"The Herald expects the report of the Royal Commission on Auckland Governance will recommend a bold shake-up of local government, including radical proposals for an executive mayor along the lines of London and the creation of a super city council. The super city will stretch 140km from Pukekohe in the south to Wellsford in the north. With 1.4 million people, it will be the largest city under one council in Australasia."

ROBERT COMMNETS

The most important thing to know about local government in New Zealand is that every place is different. That means the aspirations and requirements of the people there are different. The vast majority of the 1.4 million people in the Auckland region expect no more from their council than low rates, basic services, sports grounds and a free library. Local government is not a part of the their lives.Nor is community. Most cannot name their neighbours let alone those around them. In these circumstances running Auckland like a machine is sensible. It does not mean Auckland is a good place to live. This is why Stephen Hart's survey is so important. Those who will benefit most by the big city model are not those who live in Auckland. Eight years ago I made a study of the City of Westminster. We could learn much from them given all this talk about a Lord Mayor for Auckland!
r
February 8, 2009

stephen hart's survey is the most important of all

5:00PM Friday Jan 30, 2009

Dunedin has been ranked the top place to live in New Zealand. And the news hasn't been good for the northern centres.

A survey by the ASB Bank ranked Dunedin - the country's eighth-largest city - as the best city community ahead of Rodney District, north of Auckland, and Wellington. On the bottom of the ranking was Waitakere City although it was a close run with adjacent Auckland. The survey looked at several aspects which made people feel comfortable and happy living in the area. They included:

* The sense of community in local neighbourhood;

* Feeling of trust;

* Availability of support;

* Frequency of feeling lonely or isolated;

* Contact with neighbours;

* Culturally rich and diverse arts scene;

* Sense of pride in the way their city looks and feels;

* Rating of graffiti, vandalism and litter as a problem;

Stephen Hart, the author of the report, said Dunedin was a clear winner after finishing in the top four rankings in seven of the eight categories.

He said all towns and cities "have their own sense of community or a collective sense of belonging, pride, culture and co-operation that stems from the people. "Some cities seem to have a friendly, trusting atmosphere about them that lifts their residents and makes them proud of where they live," he said. "Others have a colder formality and distance that affects how locals mix and socialise together."

The survey did not cover every city in New Zealand but included 56 per cent of the population and used data from the current Quality of Life Survey which examined peoples' perceptions of their own wellbeing. The rankings from one to 12 were:

* Dunedin 650 points

* Rodney District 555 points

* Wellington 545 points

* Porirua 455 points

* Hutt City 440 points

* Tauranga 390 points

* Christchurch 375 points

* Hamilton 310 points

* North Shore 295 points

* Manukau 195 points

* Auckland 125 points

* Waitakere 120 points
- NZPA

as the porirua city council seeks to save us from the recession by spending ratepayers' money

ROBERT COMMENTS

It is becoming increasingly obvious that the Porirua City Council plans to use the recession as an argument to do what it has always done - take increasingly more money from ratepayers every year. Unless ratepayers revolt this will be the outcome of current deliberations on the ten-year budget.

In the meantime, Telecom continues with no notion at all of corporate social responsibility. They are going to cost our country more jobs in the quest to boost their own income. My comments on a media statement located on Share Chat are in yellow below.

By Jonathan Underhill
Wednesday 4th February 2009
Telecom, the biggest company on the NZX 50 Index by market value, will shift a further 250 call centre jobs to the Philippines to help reduce costs. The move, over about 18 months, will bring staff in Manila to 700, with 1,600 jobs remaining in New Zealand, the company said in a statement.

The trend is what counts. More and more jobs are going overseas. One wonders what the response is going to be from John Key now that he is busy investing taxpayer funds to prevent this very action.

Regarding the 250, this is about the total number employed full time by the Porirua City Council.

The decision to move more call centre workers to a lower-cost country comes as Telecom is facing more rivalry for phone calls in New Zealand, as customers migrate to mobile services from landlines and costs rise to meet government edicts on competition.

That is a good idea, blame the government for your lack of loyalty to New Zealand.

Spokesman Mark Watts said Telecom may limit redundancies because attrition at call centres is "fairly high" and there is room for some workers to be redeployed.

"May"?? what about a firm commitment to the country? Also the welcome high attrition rate is due to people not having adequate incentive to do the work. In changed times people will be forced to accept poor working conditions.

Figures tomorrow are expected to show the jobless rate climbed to 4.7% in the fourth quarter from 4.2% three months earlier as the slowing economy spurs companies to reduce their workforce and limit new hires.

And it might be added that our tax money and our rates money is to be used to ameliorates the effects of the global recession. Telecom charges on regardless.

dompost story about non-issues

Kiwibank proposal sprung on council

MATT CALMAN  -  DomPost -  Tuesday, 27 January 2009

PORIRUA'S deputy mayor believes her council was blind­sided by a proposal to jump into bed with Kiwibank after the idea was sprung on councillors last month.
    Kiwibank and six North Island councils have been talking for more than a year about installing Kiwibank franchises in council service centres and libraries, with profits filtered back to the community through an umbrella trust.
    However, Porirua city councillors were told of the scheme only during a council meeting on Decem­ber 10 at which the public were excluded.
    Deputy Mayor Litea Ah Hoi said councillor Ken Doug­las "lost his toe rag" at
fellow councillors when one questioned whether he had a conflict of interest and others questioned the proposal.
    Ms Ah Hoi believed Mr Douglas should not have taken part in the discussion because he is the New Zealand Post board deputy chairman.
    The Dominion Post under­stands Mr Douglas had known about the proposal before the meeting and been involved in promoting it.
    He said he was the one who made the councill aware of his "interest" at the meeting but it was not a conflict of interest because there was no pecuniary advantage for him.
    It was accepted that he take part in discussions by all the councillors, chief executive, mayor and deputy mayor. "There's no issue at all."
    Mr Douglas said Kiwibank had its own board, which was effectively independent of NZ Post.
    Kiwibank has branches in more than 300 Post Shops and is considering the council scheme to extend its reach to areas without bank branches.
    Council chief executive Roger Blakeley said the councils would set up pilot branches to test the scheme's viability and announce sites next month.
    An elected councillor could head the um­brella trust.
    Reaction to the franchising scheme is divided.
    Councillor Nick Leggett said the council should not be getting into banking. He was concerned it would be forced to buy failed or unprofitable franchises, es­pecially in poorer areas.
    Councillor Robert Shaw said the idea was simply to rent out underused council space to make money for the city, something councils had been doing for years, which could "ease the burden on rate­payers".
    A council report on the pro­posal was leaked to media last week. On Friday Mr Blakeley sent an email to councillors asking them not to talk to the media.

facts always spoil a good story

ROBERT COMMENTS

Sorry the bank story is so dull. But reality is that councils have facilities and they sometimes rent them out to make some money. In this case there is capacity in service centres which are open to the public. This space can be rented out, in the same way that councils rent out tennis courts, meeting rooms, art space, and venues for child care. The whole purpose of the exercise is to gain a return on a community asset and thus reduce the burden on ratepayers. Evidently, the space available is attractive to KiwiBank. Good, we must charge them a high rental!
r
January 26, 2009

council's plan to become banks

can you help?

Someone is trying to read some disks that were made with the machine below. It is a Panasonic Personal Word Processor which was great twenty years ago. It is thought to be a KX-W1505 or similar. Unfortunately, it was used to write someone's war experiences. Evidently, there is no way these disks can be read by any current computer. If you know of anyone who might have one of these machines, please email robert@porirua.net. Your assistance would be gratefully appreciated.

message from plimmerton residents' assocation

Plimmerton Promenade Update -

a)Celebrating the next stage.

Many thanks to all those hardy members of the community, those people who have given endlessly of their time and expertise to date, Her Worship the Mayor, Councillors Leggett, Latham and Sheppard  and Council officers who braved the elements this morning to officially open  our Plimmerton "Hyde Park Piazza" – (well almost…!) and then enjoy a delicious morning tea at the Pavilion.

It has been very exciting to see the developments take shape and we very much appreciate the work of Downer EDI who carried out the work around the feet of those desperate for their coffee. They did a great job .

 But wait there's more………..The shop frontages are still to get a new coat of paint (only the 4 Square will remain yellow) and hopefully there will be a wee tidy up of the delivery area as well.

There are many more promenade developments as detailed on the original concept plans in the pipeline and, as a community, people have been very patient. However every little step takes time so please bear with us for a while longer.

We are going to need a lot more of your support.

b) Street Furniture

You told us the street furniture was drab and ubiquitous, some of it quite embarrassing for such a beautiful area. You asked for consistency of design and something which reflected our special environment.  We took your concerns on board and with a part of the infrastructure now in place, we can go the next step to address this .

For those like myself, worried about the spring in my ageing knee joints, be assured there will be an option to the wonderful low level macrocarpa benches.There is more seating to come!

This week we were delighted to meet on site with the Head of Industrial Design at Massey University, Lyn Garrett , one of his Department lecturers, Chris Jackson as well as Council Officers. When Term 1 starts, 22 unsuspecting 3rd year design students will be carrying out a real life project from design through to production. They will be tasked with designing our street furniture as part of their final year degree course!

In conjunction with Council Officers, we have set them an environmental challenge as the Plimmerton promenade is a rugged landscape for any street furniture. One thing is for sure – it will be unique to Plimmerton and the successful designer will be awarded a $1000.00 scholarship on your behalf, from the Plimmerton Residents' Association.

 The lecturers have suggested setting up a website as things progress and we will keep you informed as this happens. As a result of this exciting initiative it is unlikely our new seats will be designed, fabricated and in place until the end of 2009. Keep your fingers crossed.

c) Your part - sponsorship

To all those who have patiently waited and generously offered to sponsor a seat , thank you for your amazing patience. We will be in contact with you personally in January. In this regard we would love a lot more sponsorship for the seats and rubbish bins, as well as some new picnic tables. The new seats will be positioned at many spots from SH1 through to Hongoeka. We would like to offer the opportunity to sponsor some furniture to everyone.

If for instance you would like to consider sponsoring a family seat, would like to dedicate a seat specifically, have a team or organization seat, if you have a business or even know of a business which would like to sponsor a seat or rubbish bin or table, please let us know . (Helen 233 9495, Carolyn 233 6385 or Pip 233 8591)

At this stage we have suggested a budget parameter to the designers of around $1500.00 per seat. All sponsored furniture would bear a plaque reflecting the generosity of each benefactor.

d) 2009

Although there will be some planting in the pocket parks along the foreshore , 2009 will largely be a design rather than an implementation year for Plimmerton. There is much planning still to do at the entrance into Steyne Avenue , the fence by the railway line,  the railway crossing itself , the bridge over the Taupo stream and the promenade around the foreshore from the Fire Station . It sounds easy but we have learnt that Nike's "just do it" doesn't seem to work for us. It is a step at a time but we strongly believe it will happen.

d) Art Trail

Now that we have at least some of the infrastructure in place, we can turn our thoughts to some "icing on our Plimmerton cake." The original concept as suggested by you at our 23 street meetings in 2004 was for some public art along the foreshore to add vibrance and interest for all the many people who walk, cycle, picnic, swim, fish or simply sit.

We know we have some amazing talented artists in the community and we are looking for ideas and offers of help in this regard – what about wind/stone/wood sculptures, pavement or wall mosaics, carvings, tiles, etc etc

An initial theme which has been suggested to guide our thinking is "Plimmerton-The place where we belong."

What do you visualize? Can you offer skills, ideas, materials, time, talent, enthusiasm?

Please let us know ALL your positive, innovative, creative  and supportive thoughts.

And finally….

From the start our goal was to make a genuine effort to reflect what people in this community told us they wanted. Our Village Strategy has guided all the developments to date so far. The journey has been quite a long one (2001 was the beginning with the Isthmus study) but with the support of people in the community we would like to start planning the next steps .

Please keep in contact via the database which acts as a collection point for all communication and have a wonderful Xmas and New Year. The global situation is increasingly dire but we are all hugely fortunate to live where we do, in a priceless environment and with each other for neighbours!!

Let's make the goal for 2009 to make Plimmerton – the Place where we all belong.

resident satisfaction survey

There has been a dramatic fall in the number of people recording as satisfied with the services of the Council (NRB Survey). The library is given as one of the services to suffer this decline in user satisfaction. I am inclined to question the data. I cannot find any reasons why people would suddenly be less satisfied with the library.
r
November 13, 2008

budgeting questions

I have sent 38 specific questions to the chief executive regarding LTCCP budgeting. The process used by the council is inadequate, but there is nothing that I can do about that. See earlier blogs where an alternative has been developed at length.

The Council needs to decide its strategic direction: spend less, spend the same, spend more. At the moment we are a de facto "spend more". Officers spending proposals swarm in to the councillors who are unable to resist them and who have some additions of their own. We will never get the budget under control unless we separate strategy from detail. Governance and management are totally blurred at the moment in the council.

My views on council strategy were sent around some months ago when we began the process, however, they appear to have had no impact at all. I like that old German saying: as you begin so shall you continue. Council has again begun the process in the wrong way and they will not be able to recover it.
r
November 13, 2008

update: who indicates what

Two meetings have been held, chaired by the mayor and Cr Leggett. I have received reports about the poor quality of these sessions, particular the first that the mayor chaired. There was no adequate time keeping by the chair and the chair felt everyone needed her view on everything. I was not there and only report what was said to me. Hopefully someone else can comment in a more positive way.
r
November 13, 2008

Cr sheppard consults

From: Tim Sheppard <tmsheppard@gmail.com>
Date: 2008/11/10
Subject: Progress report on draft long-term plan FYI
To:

Dear Res Assn friends

You might be interested to learn of Council progress in putting together a new draft community-council long-term plan (which will go out for wide public consultation in the new year). In the last week a number of officers and councillors have spent considerable time debating some "first principles", including a provisional agreement on funding levels and on some ranking priorities for expenditure within those levels. As always there are tough decisions to be taken in working out what can sensibly be afforded and what proposals must be rejected. (And of course your elected councillors are responsible - and accountable to you - for these decisions.)

I'd warmly welcome any feedback from you on any of these matters please.


Financial issues

First we had to agree on some financial fundamentals, recognising first our legal obligations and the need to budget "prudently". We are required to aim for a budget surplus (but for Porirua this remains a medium-term goal). The Auditor-General has raised concerns about our being the only council in the country not to have a depreciation fund, so we're going to have to start phasing one in (a big challenge). We need to have "inter-generational equity". And of course we must do our best to ensure that our rates are "affordable".

As you know Porirua's rates are among the highest in NZ on a per household basis (even though our expenditure is among the lowest on a per capita basis). Most (but not all) councillors are no happier than the general public at this problematic state of affairs. We think the current property valuation rating for local government is inequitable and we made a strong submission to Government last year on this - but to no avail. So we have no option but to continue with our unfair property rates, even though we're also striving to diversify our revenue beyond rates.

So what is "affordable"? Many people claim council rate increases should be capped at the CPI level. I'm not personally persuaded by this but acknowledge the popularity of this claim. Actually it blithely accepts the current level of rates, while I'd rather see if we could reduce them! And frankly I see little logical relevance between the inflation of consumer prices and that of council prices (eg PCC's large expenditure on plastic piping, energy and labour costs bears no relationship to household spending on food and clothing). Further, if we look just at the price inflation on current expenditure we would not be able to make any forward progress in terms of facilities and services.

But despite my personal views Council as a whole is determined not only to contain costs as much as reasonably possible but also to make a binding public commitment linking rates "permanently" to the CPI. The only exception that is going to be made is an extra allowance for the new depreciation fund the A-G is requiring us to provide (and which should, in due course, help fund asset replacements and renewals). To put this more clearly we're proposing to make a long-term commitment to rate increases being capped to the CPI plus an allowance for the phased depreciation of water services. (Note the exceptional allowance for depreciation would apply only to water services - our underground pipes are probably our biggest asset - and depreciation for all other assets would need to be contained within any CPI increase.)

I'm sorry to tell you that, even with a slowly phasing allowance for depreciation, this might add approx 2 - 2.5% to annual rates increases on top of the CPI. Ouch! (But please don't shoot this messenger! If you don't like me keeping you informed of bad news as well as good I'll be like most other councillors and not bother to tell you about anything! And do recall that Council is legally obliged to do as the Audtior-General has advised us...)


Proposed expenditure

So from the above agreement we can calculate our funding envelope and make provisional agreements on expenditure priorities. Let me assure you it's no easy job trying to make ends meet! A tremendous number of very important proposed projects must be rejected.

You may know PCC has four "strategic focus areas" :-

1. Investing in infrastructure for the future (sewage; potable water; stormwater; solid waste; roading & transport)
2. Protecting our landscape & harbour (harbour & catchment management; District Plan rolling review; recreation & heritage)
3. A vibrant city centre for residents, business & visitors (City Centre revitalisation; economic development strategy)
4. Active & connected communities (village plans; safer communities & graffiti; festivals...)

I've made no secret that my Council focus is on core services and infrastructure (and so I spend little time thinking about things like Sister Cities and "creative communities"). So please excuse me if I report here just on the big ticket items coming under asset management and the like.

In 2006 Council made provision for better asset management plans and these have shown that our previous blithe but ignorant assumption that our city should not need to allow for any expensive asset replacements for at least 15 years was totally wrong. As an important example, many of our water pipes already need replacement (as those who live near the mains pipe in Moana Rd that has burst ten times in the last 18 months can well appreciate!). So we were presented with a long list of important asset renewals totalling $85 million over the next 10 years! Impossible. To keep within our funding envelope we had to reduce this to $47 million - a helluva cut.

(NB: the $ figures given here are for 10 years and do not correspond to direct rates funding - for example, much roading expenditure is subsidised by central govt and most projects would be loan funded for intergenerational equity. We're also actively seeking opportunities for extra central govt funding for "accelerated investment in infrastructure".)

Looking first at the backlog of (potable) water mains renewal, we were advised this would cost $12M over the next 10 years. After much deliberation we have provisionally agreed to fund $8.5M for this - and to get even that restricted compromise amount we have had to stop all increase in stormwater capacity for the decade. As a local example of this cutback there is now no allowance for new stormwater catchments from Duck Creek, nor Pauatahanui/Judgeford (nor for various other locations).

Similarly we have had to cut out proposed (potable) water supply projects for Pauatahanui and Motukaraka Point (and a major one for Elsdon/Titahi Bay).

I am very unhappy at this, so if you have a magic wand please can I borrow it?

Moving onto wastewater (sewage), we are relatively better placed since some of the expenditure comes within the joint venture we have with Wellington City Council at the Titahi Bay treatment plant and that has separate accounts which are healthy enough to fund some critical work there without any recourse to rates. But of course Porirua is solely responsible for our own sewer reticulation and pump stations and we have provisionally allocated $4.8M to some essential renewals here.

Nevertheless we could not find money for two related wastewater projects which I consider to be of special importance. The existing wastewater pipeline from Paremata to the city centre pump station is overloaded to the point where raw sewage overflows onto SH1 are occurring and discharge into the harbour is highly probable. In my view we really need a $2.8M rehab of this cross harbour link. And we also need extra sewage storage tanks at Tangare Drive ($750,000) to smooth out the flow of sewage during peak periods: currently when incoming sewage exceeds the treatment station's capacity it simply bypasses the plant and goes straight into the harbour. These are issues of public health; environmental management and legal obligation (we are at least in breach of the RMA and our resource consent conditions).

The argument given for the deferral of these projects was that, with luck, the peak demand on our wastewater system could reduce significantly if we could reduce the degree of stormwater infiltration into our wastewater system. This is known to be a specific problem in parts of Whitby and along Mana Esplanade where some stormwater links go into the sewers, thus causing overloads and overflows.

What do you think of that?

Now from water services to roading and transport. Even excluding Transmission Gully on-roads this will cost $20M over the decade (but there will be significant subsidies from central govt). Most expenditure will be on regular road maintenance but the total also includes footpath renewals, retaining walls (plus Moana Rd and Titahi Bay Rd seawalls), minor safety repairs (Whitford Brown; Pukerua Bay and Grays Rd), a replacement Airlie Rd bridge, repair & repainting of Pukerua Bay footbridge, streetlighting etc etc.

The only problem I have with the reduced roading program is that no allowance has been made for a replacement Flighty's Rd bridge. While the old bridge remains sound, a new one will be required if Transit upgrades the intersection of SH58, Flighty's and Murphy Rds.

A tough line has also been taken with the proposed renewal program of leisure assets: walkways/cycleways; playgrounds; parks & reserves; sportsfields & courts; boat ramps & jetties. Essentially what we're proposing in this sector is that Council will only part-fund any renewals, with community funding to be sought for the balance of the costs involved. This will transfer prime responsibility to the key users and project proponents: they will need to advocate more widely for funding support instead of simply expecting Council (ie the public at large) to pay for everything. You will recall that we have a contract with a commercial fund-raiser (they succeeded in securing more than $3M for the new Te Rauparaha Arena) and they are expected to make up much of the shortfall.

What do you think of that?

Proposed new sports & leisure projects which have been rejected include one to expand the capacity of Trust Porirua Park (to 6,000 seats and all-weather ground); another for an all-weather athletics track (at Elsdon Park or Trust Porirua Park), and a third for a multi-purpose youth centre. These are all considered to be luxuries which need to be driven by community proponents.

Other items which cannot be included within the budget envelope are a proposed emergency operations centre; a performing arts centre; city marketing strategy; youth development staffing; Porirua visitor strategy; resident satisfaction survey; boardwalk from Wi Neera Drive to Onepoto etc etc. Please note that not all of these latter items have been shot dead in the water: some will be given further deliberation - so if you have any thoughts on any of them please let me know.


I hope this email is usefully informative, even if not too joyous, and as I said I'd welcome your thoughts on it all please. I'm also happy for you to forward it to others who might be interested. Constructive feedback would be especially useful!

Thanks and regards

Tim

--
Cllr Tim Sheppard
78 Cluny Road
Plimmerton
233.6373
(021) 203.8999

who indicates what

I feel for the officers in our leaderless council. They are doing what the mayor and committee chairs should be doing: talking to the public and leading the intellectual debate.

Missing.

Unfortunately, when you ask these people to lead discussions it is rather obvious what the conclusions will be. If you want to see the contrast, just consider the outcomes if church leaders had been predominant. Incidentally, Rod Oram is a great speaker.
r
November 9, 2008

Forum 1   - Thursday 23rd October 2008
Points of Difference: building on success, defining who we are as a City and how we look to the future.
Speakers: Rod Oram, Sue Veart, Euan Dempsey.

Forum 2 – Thursday 30th October 2008
Economic Vitality: Growing the economy and attracting visitors.
Speakers: Don Campbell, Roger Blakeley, Darcy Nicholas, Matt Trln

Forum 3 – Thursday 13th November 2008
Family Friendly City: Nurturing our social and cultural well-being.
Speakers: Matiu Rei, Ole Maiava, Helen Chipper, Kay Paget and team.

cr tim questions me

Robert

Even if other colleagues have said nothing to date on this matter I do hope you realise that many of us share Euon's disappointment at your lack of involvement in Council matters.

You have chosen not to serve on any of the "optional" committees of Council;

This is correct. I realized I had a heavy workload this year and have managed it by not taking on peripheral committee work, my commitment to the betterment of our city is not diminished.

you decline to represent Council on any external agencies;

This is not correct. In the past I was Council's representative on the most important external agency. I refer to the Regional Land Transport Strategy Committee. This committee is set up by Act of Parliament to set priorities regarding public and private transport. I was first appointed to membership by Greater Wellington, and then by our City Council. I enjoyed the work and the politics. In particular there was a great partnership between myself and some of our City Council officials. Together we advanced many important decisions. I also established the drill of making full reports (which I wrote myself) back to our Council. All this upset Jenny and she did deals with councillors to gain the numbers to force me out of the position. She now is our representative and the main output from the committee so far as Porirua City is concerned is bulletins about Jenny's absurd carping over the Mayor of Wellington whom she sees as an enemy.

you have never come to any public "councillor clinics"

Correct. I support the notion of clinics (although I would change their form somewhat), but the work is well covered by others who enjoy that sort of thing. I indicated to Euon that if there is a time when others cannot attend the northern clinic, to let me know.

and I don't think you have attended a single Council workshop this triennium.

That is correct. The workshops are educational forums and given the large number of new councillors they are introductory. They give councillors a chance to consider issues and prepare themselves for the debate at committee. I am quite sufficiently served by the briefing papers for meetings and ask questions of officers by email if I have a question.

While you may think that you "know it all" already because of your many years on Council, your interventions at full Council meetings often show that you are not up to the play on current matters.

I am sorry if i give that impression, for I certainly do not feel that I know it all.

As usual you didn't come to last Wednesday's workshop, nor Thursday's Council meeting. Your absence from Friday's crucial workshop developing the next long-term plan was utterly predictable but still very disappointing.

In advance of the meeting I set out what I saw as the most critical challenge that confronts us. See blog item below "Time for council to tighten its belt". This same ideas have been sent in various forms to newspapers. As Tim indicates below, the meeting was a re-run of these meetings every time they occur. No decisions are made, and the officers entrench a view.

And of course you didn't make the effort to attend this morning's formal naming ceremony at Te Rauparaha Arena either. I think you let the side down.

I do not attend the ceremonial events unless there is a special reason, for example I attended the laying of the foundation stone for this complex, but do not feel the need to repeatedly "celebrate" things.

Much more interesting is Tim's comment "you let the side down". This raises critical matters about whether there is a "side" or a "team" and these matters relate to the most critical thing of all: what is a council, how does it effectively function, and what are the responsibilities that different people hold.

Our council is dysfunctional. As a sweeping generalization, people do not know what they should be doing, and they have little interest in making the place work. They have more interest in playing politics and advancing themselves. In the magazine Local Government I published an article entitled "How to be a councillor". The critical people are the mayor and the chairs of the two committees. I expect to be challenged on this so will not say more for the moment.

With all your local government experience I am sure you could easily contribute and help us more.

One would think so, but experience suggests otherwise. Tim to his credit understands the council is in deep trouble. However, look at the way that we selected our leadership. Liz Kelly said at the time that it was vital that we put the best people in each post ion. She was shouted down for this and accused of supporting Ken and myself for personal reasons. Now it is that leadership that must lead. Given that it is incredibly difficult to engage them in meaningful dialog it is unlikely that we are ever going to have them alter their ways. This is something else I expect to be asked about further.

If you had bothered to come to yesterday's workshop you would appreciate just how hard it now is to make ends meet (exacerbated in part by the new need to fund depreciation).

It was not a question of "bother" it is a question of need. I already know how hard it is to make ends meet. Indeed, the same situation confronts us right now that confronted us three years ago when we did the last LTCCP. Read back through the blog and you will see my answer to the problem. It is to change the way we budget. The process of budgeting is such that there is no strategic direction set.

We are having to omit from our next long-term plan many extremely important infra structural investments.

Yes, agreed.

Just as an example I am personally appalled that, at least at this stage in the planning process, we have no allowance for the rehabilitation of the cross-harbour sewage pipe and the construction of some sewage storage tanks by the Titahi Bay treatment plant - both extremely important projects to prevent the current scandalous overflow of raw sewage into the harbour and across SH1. While the problem could be mitigated somewhat by remedial work to reduce the infiltration of stormwater into the wastewater system, there remain very important public heath, environmental and legal issues. But it seems we simply cannot afford to deal with the problem fully.

Tim is quite correct. We are constantly bringing forward the wrong priorities. The other large scale problem is that we make decisions that build up costs for the ratepayers in the future.

The approach to budgeting that does this accommodates the officers well and they are not likely to change it. The responses to the situation will go down well worn tracks. Yet the method has been proven again and again not to work. Government tried to fix some of this by legislation but that is unlikely to work. There will soon be a big push to disestablish councils, including our own, as John Key's conservative government seeks things to do. One large part of the justification for our amalgamation with Wellington is that we take more from our ratepayers than any other city in New Zealand.

In circumstances such as these I simply cannot accord a high priority to your concerns about Eskdale Rd (even though I am concerned by any road accident). The reality is that we have many older parts of the city which are far worse off in terms of inadequate and aged water services, sub-standard roads and absence of footpaths. Newer suburbs, including Papakowhai, enjoy far better core services from Council. My priority will always be to bring the others up to scratch before addressing issues such as yours.

Tim is right to focus on the larger structural needs - particularly in the context of the ten year budget. However, the Kahu Rd / Eskdale / Papakowhai problem will require amelioration. As indicated in my reply to Euon Murrell, the action is now underway as a part of the traffic management function of Council, funded by existing money. There will always have to be money spend on traffic management and my play was for a priority for this existing money.

Regards

Tim

There is much that could be said to develop the lines of thought being raised here. I will wait to see what others say and then respond.
r
November 9, 2008

why i am frustrated with our council (see also comment below)

Let me tell you why I am so frustrated with our Council. As I write this there are two police cars and three police officers outside my house on Eskdale road tending to a road accident. It is 8.15 am on a Tuesday. Three weeks ago, not 50 meters away there was another accident, although the police were not called.

It is obvious that Eskdale Road cannot cope with the traffic. Equally, it is obvious that the situation is going to get worse not better. This is because houses and units of great density are being built in the area.

So why am I frustrated? Because Council has been told about this problem for at least five years. They have done nothing about it, either in the form of realistic planning or in the form of engineering. Instead - against the advice of officers - the councillors approved a further subdivision.

Where are the councillors who made these decisions? I can tell you they are not anywhere near Eskdale Road. They do not give a thought to the mess they have made.

Council does not listen. I mean really listen, with insight and understanding. They make foolish decisions for foolish reasons, which are often driven by personal motives. The accidents in Eskdale Road are largely the result of the work of your councillors.

You want to know what the councillors do worry about. Read the blog, the mayoral race, the fight with Wellington City over a confusion, and their own travel at the ratepayers' expense. One of them leaves on a "free" trip to China this very week. He is not worried about the people standing on Eskdale Road.

In the time it has taken me to write this a fire engine and an ambulance have arrived.
r
October 14, 2008

EUON REPLIES (Robert's comments in yellow)

Robert

Your comments re Eskdale Rd amuse me In the 4 years that I have been on council Not once have you mention at any committee meeting that I have attended the so called problem that you refer to.

It has been said many times at council meetings, blog readers will have seen comments on this topic, and there was a letter to the Kapi Mana News in which I quoted an officer's views on the problem. (Part of the problem was addressed through new Kahu Road road markings.)

Again I find your remarks about council and your fellow Councillors not only insulting but ironic as is your signature in The Whitby News brief laughable  “proud to serve your Community”

Euon often says he finds things insulting and leaves it to others to sort out what he specifically means. I did not name any councillors. Regarding Whitby, all I can say is that I am very proud of our city and my being a part of it.

In your Blog you make comment about my trip to China with the reference that I don’t, care  If only your readers knew the The real facts  

The most important fact about the policy is that we are now back to the good old days of sending councillors on trips around the world for no good reason. I have never accepted such a trip (they have been offered to me twice) and always opposed wasting the ratepayers' money.

 In my opinion it is you that play lip service to your role as a councillor I will give you credit that you are an expert in conveying perception when we all know  “The Reality”

Look forward to you bringing up Eskdale at the next City Services Meeting if you can be bothered that is

This is not necessary, because an officer has taken up the issue in the blog and work is being done to gain a professional assessment of traffic management needs in the area.

Euon Murrell AREINZ  Dip RE  JP
Tommys Real Estate Ltd MREINZ
Mana Office
Mobile: 0274 458 191
DDI: 04 233-0690
Office: 04 233 0690
Fax : 04 233 0691
euon.murrell@tommysmana.co.nz

apology to sue

Councillor Sue Dow, with some force, tells me that I should not have made the comment about her being the councillor who has traveled further and longer than all others at the ratepayers' expense. I admit it: my statistics were very dated. I have not asked the chief executive for an update on councillor trips but would expect Sue to no longer be at the top of the list.

Former traveler Dow

Whist on the topic of Sue Dow, she is making good contributions to council debates. I seem to disagree with them more often than not, but they are sensible things and she gains good support from others around the table.
r

the spca view on jumbo (from their CEO)

Robert

Thank you for your email.

The Society's policy is to oppose the use of animals in the circus, however as there is only one remaining circus left in the country now, with very limited numbers of animals performing our campaigning on this issue has now subsided.

With regards to Jumbo he is a well loved elephant and very well treated with limited duties in the circus - his day in this arena are not likely to continue for much longer

Hope that helps

BOB

-----Original Message-----
From: ROBERT SHAW [mailto:robert@porirua.net]
Sent: Sunday, 12 October 2008 2:44 p.m.
To: Bob Kerridge
Subject: elephant

Dear Bob
Might I please ask if the SPCA is concerned about the treatment of Jumbo the elephant that has recently appeared in Porirua City as a part of a circus. I have read your animal policy and wonder if your organization
has ever made an assessment of the situation regarding Jumbo. I am a member of a city council and people have raised the matter with me. There are a considerable number of local people concerned, rightly or wrongly. I visited the animal but cannot make an informed assessment.
Further, are you aware of any approaches other councils in New Zealand have taken regarding the performance of elephants? The present situation is on our land and in the agreement established we never thought to consider animal issues. Your thoughts would be appreciated.
Robert Shaw
Porirua City Councillor

spca policy

Performing Animals

The SPCA is opposed to the use of animals in any form of entertainment where the animal is subject to ridicule, is made to perform activities outside its normal patterns of behaviour, or where such performance may cause distress or suffering.  These include exhibitions, circuses, rodeos, endurance riding events and traveling menageries.

ROBERT COMMENTS

I was sent this policy. The treatment of Jumbo that I observed did not comply with this standard. As one example: The elephant is well outside its normal pattern of behaviour being kept in a small box. It is appreciated that work was done to improve the box, allegedly the new box cost $3000,000. There have been news reports about it in the Sunday Star Times. One wonders why the SPCA is not involved.
r
October 12, 2008

large moral issue - elephants

ROBERT COMMENTS

I was invited to be present at the protest about the elephant on Council land as a part of a circus. The elephant has a small mobile house and was obviously stressed when I saw him. Whether this was from his overall circumstances or the pending performance I do not know.

I was unable to obtain a photograph of the elephant because he had retreated into his dark box and was swaying. I can show you the width of his box.

I met protesters from Paremata, Titahi Bay, and Cannons Creek. Some were elderly and some were young. Here is their banner on Titahi Bay Road:

In an effort to remove the protesters the circus management warned the protesters off (well two of them anyway) and claimed that they had control over the whole of the council property as they had leased it all. I do not think any of those involved realized I had a particular interest in events.

Then the police arrived in the form of two constables, male and female. They spoke to everyone and an arrangement was made whereby the protesters would hand out leaflets some distance from the circus structures. That was a good common sense arrangement.

The issue of who has a right to be on a leased council park probably can only be resolved by looking at the lease. Even then it might not be obvious. As no one seemed to have a copy of the lease there was no actual basis on which the police could have acted.

There is an issue for local government here. Your council is responsible for public land in the same way that you are responsible for your property. If someone is cruel to an animal on your property you will act. Just as I would. On this basis, local government cannot turn a blind eye to the situation.

Now whether or not the elephant, known as Jumbo, is being improperly or cruelly treated is a question for those who know about elephants. What I do know for certain is that there are a significant number of Porirua City residents concerned about the Council's action in allowing this use of a public park. For this reason the Council is responsible.

Other council's have taken a position. I understand Wellington does not allow any circus with animals at all, although Hutt City does. Wellington City invests in a circus trust that manages human performers. Also, the Auckland City Council is another that does not allow any circus with animals. Whether these rules have anything to do with issues about animals, I do not know.

I checked out the situation with Council officers, and can confirm that the Council issued a right to occupy council land and a building consent for the "big top". In neither of these cases was there any consideration given to animals. The use of the Council property on Tithahi Bay Road for events such as this is quite common.

I intend to explore the means by which we can address our responsibility. In the meantime your views are most welcome. Information on the actions of other councils might assist us.
r
October 11, 2008

damage control arrives, see item below

UPDATE

Following enquires by Cr Ken Douglas, the Deputy Mayor says she gave her personal view and did not think the reporter would make use of it. I am not sure why the deputy mayor thinks reporters ring her for a chat.
r
October 13, 2008

ROBERT COMMENTS

The media statement below came about because Deputy Mayor Litea Ah Hoy has minimal understanding of sensitivities and issues. She does like to fight, and any opportunity to fight is taken. Hence, there she is on the front page of the Dom Post, fighting a fight that does not need to be fought.

We might ask: if the two councils are working so actively and closely on the Pauatahanui issues, why is it that the deputy mayor has not heard of this?

That said, remember it was Jenny who wanted her as deputy mayor in a political deal with the Labour Party. The one simple rule with council appointments is to select the person best able to do the job. It is rather obvious that Jenny has never seen the importance of this. Please do not think it is a trivial matter. We pay good money in rates for a very poor return, and things just slowly spiral downwards. Our council needs a good routing.
r
October 11, 2008

MEDIA STATEMENT
Transmission Gully/ SH 58 interchange: cooperation not conflict

The Draft Porirua Development Framework sets out long term land use management on a key highway for the region. The Framework is currently open for public comment.

Wellington and Porirua City Councils are engaging in “productive dialogue” over the Draft Porirua Development Framework which identifies the Pauatahanui/Judgeford area as possibly being suitable for long-term industrial/business development, confirms the Mayors of Wellington and Porirua cities.

The Wellington Regional Strategy, developed by the region's nine councils, identifies Pauatahanui as a “change area” due to its proximity to the proposed Transmission Gully Motorway and State Highway 58 interchange. It states that it is likely to come under development pressure and makes sense for local authorities in the Wellington region to work together.

Wellington Mayor Kerry Prendergast and Porirua Mayor Jenny Brash say the cities are working together to curb developments that might negatively impact on other commercial centres in the region.

In its draft Development Framework, Porirua City Council has taken a very long term view (50 years+) of how to control development in this area.

Ms Prendergast says: “Wellington City Council’s submission is our chance to provide feedback on that Framework. The submission simply reinforces my Council’s position on development in the Pauatahanui area. We are engaging in productive dialogue with Porirua on this.”

“The position that Wellington City took in April 2006 in accepting the Hearings subcommittee’s recommendation that Transmission Gully should proceed was that we needed assurances from other councils such as Porirua that they would implement land use controls to minimise urban sprawl along the Transmission Gully route.

“Our submission is therefore consistent with our position on this and with the WRS. It is about Porirua understanding what our concerns are.”

Ms Brash says the intent of the draft framework was to receive feedback.

"Both Councils agree on the need to carefully manage future development opportunities in the Pauatahanui/SH58 area that will arise from the future Transmission Gully interchange.
"Transmission Gully motorway as the future State Highway One is essential to the long term economic viability of the lower North Island but its impacts on urban form and economic development in the Wellington region must be anticipated, planned for, and well managed. 

"This cannot be done by one Council alone, so it's important we listen to all points of view to gain a shared understanding and consensus," says Ms Brash.

confusions

Cr Ah Hoy has a backlash over her speaking out against the Wellington City Council over plans for Pauatahanui. The WCC were confused over what was said by PCC. Cr Ah Hoy fires back at WCC with emotion and more mis-information

Now the mayors are involved in a pat down operation to sideline Ah Hoy and convince readers of the Dom Post that all is well. As if anyone cares.

In the meantime, you have your chance to participate in the officers' forum on the future of Porirua City. Four meetings are arranged all featuring officers, with the mayor and councillors cut out. Long ago we were asked for input on the speakers, so we cannot say it is new. It is, however, a bit blatant.
r
October 10, 2008

mayoral race

Jenny Brash has told several people she will not stand for election again (not myself). Already, you see people working towards the job. The battle will probably be between Nick Leggett (Independent) and Litea Ah Hoy (Labour). There will be the usual raft of minor aspirants and some outsiders. The only prediction we can make right now is that the outsiders will not win. Remember this is not first-past-the-post.
r
October 10, 2008

wind farm wars

Preserve Pauatahanui Incorporated: Media Release

8 October 2008

Greater Wellington Regional Council Misleads Ratepayers

Greater Wellington Regional Council’s (GWRC) recent announcements regarding wind farm development in Belmont Regional Park and changes to its contract with RES (NZ) Limited for the development of the Puketiro Wind Farm are misleading and irresponsible (DomPost 30 September 2008 and GWRC’s website) according to local action group, Preserve Pauatahanui Incorporated.

Despite newspaper headlines proclaiming otherwise, the five year moratorium on the development of a wind farm in Belmont Regional Park is a recommendation only and has not been formally resolved.

Discussion on the recommendation was deferred at its meeting on 29 September due to a range of complexities covering multiple land ownership, legal issues regarding council’s ability to dispose of the land for a wind farm, and the cumulative effects of wind farms on the Wellington landscape.

GWRC’s long term intention is clearly to develop a wind farm on this site when it is able to do so.

With respect to Puketiro, GWRC entered into a contract with RES (NZ) Limited late in 2006 to develop a wind farm on the site above Pauatahanui which included Battle Hill Farm Forest Park, despite its officials having legal advice against the use of public reserves for commercial purposes.

Local groups and residents contended that the inclusion of turbines and access through the Battle Hill Park was illegal under the operative Park Management Plan.
Furthermore, officials of GWRC subsequently agreed an amendment to the management plan which gave preference to activities associated with wind farming over all other activities in the Park and perverted the unbiased consultation required of this process.

This is now the subject of a Judicial Review in the High Court sought by Pauatahanui Futures Society Incorporated against GWRC and RES (NZ) Limited

For GWRC to suggest that the changes they have made to remove three turbines proposed in Battle Hill resulted from a boundary error is complete nonsense. GWRC’s outline of the proposed wind farm footprint has always included Battle Hill and earlier maps showing proposed location of turbines have up to five turbines on Battle Hill Land.

Preserve Pauatahanui Incorporated is extremely concerned, as should all ratepayers be, that GWRC has so blatantly disregarded its legal obligations, and has attempted to whitewash the issues at both Belmont and Puketiro in their latest public statements.

This council needs to be called to account for its actions.

For Further Information:

Contact Diane Strugnell,
Secretary
Preserve Pauatahanui Incorporated
PH: 04-5283891
Cell PH: 027-2401463

time for council to tighten its belt

Whilst the world gasps at financial and economic developments, the Porirua City Council continues in its profligate ways.

The Council has yet to discover that business is down in Porirua City, that unemployment is set to surge, and that inflation is hitting households hard.

Families are already being hit. I hear more about problems with electricity bills, gas bills, cost of food, and of course petrol, bus and train costs. It is relevant to notice how few of your councillors themselves support families. Most are retired or unmarried.

Businesses are down. The real estate businesses have collapsed, lawyers, truckers, hire firms, and others involved in the downstream of house sales face a downturn. It has all begun. Retail businesses forecast dramatic drops in revenue. Our smaller developers who depend on the banks and investors for ready money are already hitting stop signs.

Instead of working to reduce costs, and downsize for hard economic times, the Council expands on all fronts. It can do this because it has the power of taxation. Councils are not subject to market forces like the rest of us. They have no trouble passing on increased costs. The power of taxation is an horrendous power. So we see a new entrance and counter for "customers" who are actually ratepayers. We see a new logo, and staff numbers are entrenched at all time highs.

Our council has the highest level of rates of any council in New Zealand. We drifted there in the time of the current mayor.

In the economic woes of the 1980s and 1990s the local government sector did well. They continued to expand when other businesses fell by about 15%. We are about to see history repeat itself.

What should the Council's long term plan say? It should say that the Council will align itself with the community, suffer some downturn, and aim to reduce rates by 15% over the next ten years.
r
October 9, 2008

PS Readers views on this are most welcome.

brian supports nick on bamiyan

I do not support 'friendly city status' for Bamiyan. Although support may not cost a lot , a few thousand here and a few thousand there mounts up. It could even be an excuse to take on another staff member which should be discouraged.

There is plenty of opportunity and our duty for social support for our own people without going overseas. Would the Bamiyans be seriously deprived if we did not adopt 'friendly city status' or would they be sustantially advantaged if we did?

Council should not be going into anything without costs/benefit being determined. That is really the basis for responsible financial managment..
Bryan Helm

kelly on the big shake

Morena Roger

Did you see the show on TV3 last night about the effects of a earthquake in our region?

Anyway well I was watching it I was thinking about how well PCC is prepared and your foresight to employ a full time staff for Emergency Management and preparation a couple of years ago.

Do you think it would be useful and timely to do something to remind councilors of our responsibilities and perhaps the new ones might like to look over the facilities we have in place in the case that there is a civil emergency?
kia ora
Liz

smartlinx3

Kapi Mana News readers will know that I have been concerned about the inadequacy of information supplied to councillors on our one investment in a company.

Following the Kapi Mana story and my further request the PCC chief executive located for me the accounts for the company from two years ago and I am to read them in his office. Evidently this is the latest set of accounts provided to PCC. The ceo points out that these accounts were attached to a report that went to council and he provided me with a copy of that report. Hence, I am happy to report that my statement that we have "never" had the accounts is not strictly correct.

Once I have read those accounts, I will be seek the more recent accounts. I cannot tell you what is in them because they are considered commerecially confidential.

I can repeat what has been published in newspapers. Our Council invested in the company on the basis that they would provide new infrastructure into our City. Specifically, fibre optic cable would be established in places that it would not otherwise be established. In the jargon, the ratepayers' money was to be used to overcome a market failure.

Accordling, I am concerend that the company leases facilities from others when our concern is the establishment of new facilities. I also worry when they provide wireless interent in competition with other companies.
r
October 8, 2008

asset values

The new vested assets of the Council for the present financial year are valued to $5.5 million. This is an adjustment from the forecast figure of $1.25 million.

You may not think this is very exciting news, but it follows:

2004/05 $12 million

2005/06 $18 million

2006/07 $9 million.

These increases in the value of assets helps the council's overall financial situation to look much better. They also show that ratepayers' funds are going into valuable things like land, water and waste infrastructure, and roads.
r
October 8, 2008

your councillors are hard at work - throwing abuse at each other

ROBERT COMMENTS

There is a long history of dispute between Litea and Liz. The present excitement began when Ken met with Jenny and Roger yesterday, I am told to complain about Litea's language and to ask that Jenny works with Litea. (I did not put all the material about the Family Court and violence on the blog.) The result was Jenny foolishly sent the email you can see below. I replied to point out that Jenny could not really assert mayoral authority and quote the code of conduct at Liz when the dispute between Litea and Liz derives from Jenny breaking the code of conduct. Evidently, it is all my fault.
r
October 8, 2008

litea

euon

Euon's new real estate company is at

http://tommysmana.co.nz

Robert

I really do not want to wade into this but I have to say you are starting to annoy me big time You sit in the background taking pot shots at everyone including staff.Your Blog all that does is create mischief you go to the press when it will make you look good never mind that you distort the facts\But the reality of it all YOU DO STUFF ALL .You never attend Workshops have not once fronted up to a LTTCP Roadshow Public meeting or Councillor Clinic

Your continued inferences about Real Estate Agents is offensive

It is in my view that it is time for you to take your council responsibilities seriously you owe it to the people who voted for you and to your fellow Councillors    However  having said that I will not hold my Breath

PS I look forward to reading this on your Blog

Euon

nick

liz to jenny and jenny's email

As usual Jenny your comments are selective, however if you can't controll your Deputy don't make sweeping comments that include me. Can I remind you that the Local Government Act defines your role only as the Chair of the Council, your rights are the same as all councillors ,you have one vote. There seems to be some sort of perception that (perhaps you are driving) that you are a leader and your suggestion to meet with you as some sort of facillatator (I assume that is what you are implying) implies this further. Let me assure you Jenny, YOU are not my leader. Whilst I have respect for the position you hold your behaviour and skills in chairing meetings is in my opinion what leads to the utter confusion in our meetings. Respect is earned and what is obvious is that over the years you have gained that within our City the votes spell that out very clearly. I wonder if the result would be the same if the general public really understood what goes on. Please refrain from further suggesting in any way that you would like to influence my behaviour. You get on with your job and I will try to do mind other then that there is no relationship.

Just for the record I have no problem with Councillor A Hoi but it is very obvious from her comments she has one with me. You two are buddies if you want to play "mummy" do it with her.

Have a good day and I'll see you tonight ... or will I have rocks and boulders thrown at me??

KIA KAHA
Liz Kelly

----- Original Message ----- From: "Jenny Brash" <JBrash@pcc.govt.nz>
To: "Cr Litea Ah Hoi (Deputy Mayor)" <litea.mufasa@xtra.co.nz>; "Cr Liz Kelly" <liz@kellyhygiene.co.nz>
Cc: "Cr Tim Sheppard" <tmsheppard@gmail.com>; "Cr Denys Latham" <denyslatham@paradise.net.nz>; "Cr Euon Murrell - Home" <murrells@xtra.co.nz>; "Cr Hemi Matenga" <hemi.matenga@xtra.co.nz>; "Cr Henry Smith" <henrysmith@xtra.co.nz>; "Cr Ken Douglas" <marilyn.ken@xtra.co.nz>; <nick@leggett.co.nz>; "Cr Robert Shaw" <robert@porirua.net>; "Cr Sue Dow" <suedow@paradise.net.nz>; <taima@healthlinks.org.nz>; "Cr Tim Manu" <tim.manu@xtra.co.nz>; "Cr Nick Leggett" <nick.leggett@colliers.co.nz>; "Cr Euon Murrell (work)" <euon.murrell@tommysmana.co.nz>
Sent: Wednesday, October 08, 2008 10:52 AM
Subject: RE: Elected Members Training Needs Survey

Liz and Litea
Please stop these abusive e-mails to each other. The language does not reflect well on you both as experienced Councillors and does not present a good example to new Councillors. Please remember you signed up to the values of respect and supporting each other at Margrain in October 2007. I am happy to meet with you both to sort out any differences you may still have. Jenny
-----Original Message-----
From: Litea Ah Hoi [mailto:litea.mufasa@xtra.co.nz]
Sent: Tuesday, 7 October 2008 8:12 p.m.
To: Cr Liz Kelly; Allie Dunn; Jenny Brash; Cr Tim Sheppard; Cr Denys Latham; Cr Euon Murrell - Home; Cr Hemi Matenga; Cr Henry Smith; Cr Ken Douglas; nick@leggett.co.nz; Cr Robert Shaw; Cr Sue Dow; taima@healthlinks.org.nz; Cr Tim Manu; Cr Nick Leggett; Cr Euon Murrell (work)
Subject: Re: Elected Members Training Needs Survey

Tena koe Liz
I've passed 101, i'm seeking to do 102 and 103.

The family court ruling in my case was from my late father and his judgement other than God's is the only one i adhere to.  Not any man/women on this earth will make a difference to my thinking let alone image as to whether i change.

Sorry that my house is made of wood and cost's under 150k, i'm sure your house is made of glass and worth more, but as a pacific islander, i'm really good at throwing stones, actually rocks or boulders are more of a preference, and i think i have a pretty good aim, particularly if the target is a good one, i like to aim straight for the bullseye.

Hope that helps you if your interested in attending the course. Litea Ah Hoi
----- Original Message -----
From: "Liz Kelly" <liz@kellyhygiene.co.nz>
To: "Litea Ah Hoi" <litea.mufasa@xtra.co.nz>; "Allie Dunn" <ADUNN@pcc.govt.nz>; "Jenny Brash" <JBrash@pcc.govt.nz>; "Cr Tim Sheppard" <tmsheppard@gmail.com>; "Cr Denys Latham" <denyslatham@paradise.net.nz>; "Cr Euon Murrell - Home" <murrells@xtra.co.nz>; "Cr Hemi Matenga" <hemi.matenga@xtra.co.nz>; "Cr Henry Smith" <henrysmith@xtra.co.nz>; "Cr Ken Douglas" <marilyn.ken@xtra.co.nz>; <nick@leggett.co.nz>; "Cr Robert Shaw" <robert@porirua.net>; "Cr Sue Dow" <suedow@paradise.net.nz>; <taima@healthlinks.org.nz>; "Cr Tim Manu" <tim.manu@xtra.co.nz>; "Cr Nick Leggett" <nick.leggett@colliers.co.nz>; "Cr Euon Murrell (work)" <euon.murrell@tommysmana.co.nz>
Sent: Tuesday, October 07, 2008 6:24 PM
Subject: Re: Elected Members Training Needs Survey

camborne radiation

outcome of council meeting on radiation

the worry

Rightly or wrongly, people are going to worry about radiation from masts. They will ask Telecom (for example) about their plans before they buy a new house, and they will be given no definitive answer. People with concerns, particularly those with young children, will sell their houses if devices appear, and they will move elsewhere. You think I exagerate? Let me tell you that I chaired the hearings committee meetings of Greater Wellington on the issue of the fluoridation of the Wellington water supply. I know how genuine people are in the concerns they hold about health matters. I do not share their concerns, but I do respect their right to define wellbeing as they wish and to be supported in that by their council. In the case of fluoride, we provided an alternative water supply without Fl and that operates today at Petone. In the case of cell tower radiation, there is no escape. Do not expect this issue to go away.
r

update on national environmental standard - it is obvious that there will be appeals against the new regulations

Hi

Thanks again for getting involved in the Celltower issue. It was great having you on the Select Committee, and it felt like there was a good level of interest from your colleagues.

I understand from Pavan that he is trying to schedule another session for the Select Committee to hear from Telecom and MfE. I will try to put some thoughts on their written responses together before that hearing.

I’m just working through a batch of OIA responses from MfE. The attached document is really interesting as it is page one an email from Sally Gilbert of Min Health to MfE and others on the Telecommunications Reference Group expressing a series of concerns about the proposed NES (I’ll send page 2 shortly as my scanner can only do one at a time). Many of these are similar to the concerns that we have identified in the last few weeks.

For example, like us, MOH was questioning the MfE analysis and the advantages of an NES for EMR emissions. Sally also questions Dr David Black’s analysis.

It is also interesting to note that of the 14 people on the Telecommunications Reference group, 5 were from Telcos, 2 were from Min of Economic development, 4 represented MfE, Min Health had one and the others were local government reps. There was not a single community rep.  This would not be so serious if MfE was trying to implement the purposes of the RMA, however its very serious when it is off on a policy frolic of its own.

Back in November 2005 Min Health said that the cost benefit analysis needed be done as the next step. I agree that it should have been done then.

Instead the proposed NES went through the whole public consultation process and a series of cabinet sign offs without a cost benefit analysis. The mandatory s32 cost benefit analysis was completed only a couple of weeks ago.

The s32 cost benefit analysis that was eventually done is seriously defective as it asks and answers the wrong question. It incorrectly looks at the costs and benefits in relation to promoting the policy of rolling out more celltowers and the government’s digital strategy. The correct question was the costs and benefits in relation to the sustainable management purposes of the RMA.

This is just a hint of the many serious problems with the proposed NES. We will formally challenge it if we have to, however it would be preferable if the Select Committee could take a proactive role and reel it back into something more sensible and balanced that has regard to the needs of communities not just Telcos.

I’m happy to provide any supporting information or explanation that may help.

NB: Since last week I have had contact from groups in Christchurch and Churton Park, Wellington about unwanted celltowers.

Sue Grey
Ph 03 5450878

ROBERT COMMENTS

I intend to move two amendments regarding this matter at the full meeting of the Porirua City Council on Wednesday, at 5.30 pm.

1) That the Council appeals the telecommunications NES.

2) The work be undertaken urgently to amend the District Plan regarding telecommunications towers and facilities.

This will be about the fourth time that I have moved something like 2). Let us hope the mayor and councillors now support it.
r
September 16, 2008

incredible revelations on the health aspects of cell towers

how to appeal regulations

Cr Tim Sheppard helpfully points out that there is a way in Parliament's Standing Orders to appeal regulations. It does not take much immagination to see that many of these provisions apply in the present telco regulations. There is an issue as to whether the telco Act should override the RMA.

Tim with masts

The HOR Standing Order follows:

315 Drawing attention to a regulation
(1) In examining a regulation, the committee considers whether it ought to be drawn to the special attention of the House on one or more of the grounds set out in paragraph (2).

(2) The grounds are, that the regulation—

(a) is not in accordance with the general objects and intentions of the statute under which it is made:

(b) trespasses unduly on personal rights and liberties:

(c) appears to make some unusual or unexpected use of the powers conferred by the statute under which it is made:

(d) unduly makes the rights and liberties of persons dependent upon administrative decisions which are not subject to review on their merits by a judicial or other independent tribunal:

(e) excludes the jurisdiction of the courts without explicit authorisation in the enabling statute:

(f) contains matter more appropriate for parliamentary enactment:

(g) is retrospective where this is not expressly authorised by the empowering statute:

 (h) was not made in compliance with particular notice and consultation procedures prescribed by statute:

(i) for any other reason concerning its form or purport, calls for elucidation.

full text of new regs

Here is the new regulation>

Select Committee hearing report by lawyer Sue Grey to be posted shortly.

ROBERT COMMENTS

I am a radio amateur and I now plan to string an antenna between three lampposts on Eskdale Road. I always wanted to have good beam antenna for the lower frequencies.

Amateur radio has an important role in civil defence preparations and I feel obliged to strengthen my infrastructure in the national interest. I will enjoy being a network operator in accordance with section 5.

I will not make any private profits from my community service.

I will of course compete for lampposts with Vodafone. However, as they are based in Berkshire England and my family have for six generations contributed to building the infrastructure of our country, I feel I have the moral high ground. I hereby claim the lampposts on the high ground.
r
September 12, 2008

new telco regulations & robert's media release

The national environmental standards for telecommunications facilities were gazetted on 11 September 2008 and will come into force on 9 October 2008.

In essence, the standards  say:

The regulations will substitute existing district plan rules on the subject material. A plan change is not required to substitute that part of a district plan affected by the regulations. 

Activities that do not qualify as permitted activities under the regulations will continue to be managed by local councils through the existing rules in their district plans under the Resource Management Act 1991.

The Ministry for the Environment will be running a series of workshops to help councils and the telecommunications industry understand and implement the new regulations.  A user’s guide is also being developed and will be available shortly.

ROBERT'S MEDIA RELEASE

FOR IMMEDIATE USE

Telcos 1 : Communities 0

The national environmental standards for telecommunications facilities were gazetted on 11 September 2008 and will come into force on 9 October 2008.

Already the standards are controversial.

Porirua City Councillor Robert Shaw said central government has "denied communities their right to be involved in decisions that they find important".

"This cuts right across the covenant of local government in New Zealand.

"We expect communities to work together and cooperate with government agencies.

"But now, large companies such as Telecom and Vodafone are elevated above such lowly concerns.

"Companies that are accountable to their shareholders have taken on the powers previously held by elected local councils.

"There is no practicable appeal available to people who object to the decisions of these companies.

"That rights to our streets can be given by Government to a company like Vodafone which has its headquarters in the UK is quite staggering.

"This regulation transfers valuable rights to companies and follows a pathetic underfunded, eight week consultation. They only received 85 submissions from the whole country and vested interest groups dominated the submissions.

"The Government hides behind such piffle as the alleged need for 'a  nationally consistent planning framework'.

"Fact is, the companies all compete with each other, are profit driven, and show little willingness co-locate facilities or minimise their impact on communities.

"Before you rewrite the District Plans of all the councils in the country you should at least put your plan in front of Parliament.  Instead, the Government chose to establish regulations through a decision of Cabinet.

"New Zealanders work best when they are are treated in a fair way, involved in decisions, and can pull together. We have a magnificent capacity to cooperate and reach practical compromises. I am at a loss to know why the Government does not trust people and wants to impose threats, stress and tension on communities and households.

There is more on this decision on Cr Shaw's local government web site www.porirua.net

For further information, Porirua City Councillor Robert Shaw  04  233 0252

astronomy book

cell towers - pope street

Hi Robert,

I have been following the publicity regarding additional Telecom cellphone sites in Porirua. I was actively involved a few years ago when Vodafone installed an additional 6x towers.

Can i just summarise the situation:

1. The quoted power output of the Vodafone towers was not the peak output, but the average output over 24 hours. In the early hours of the morning, the output is close to zero. The actual peak output was 4-5 times higher, and close to the World Health Organisation's concern levels. The peak output should be disclosed, and any increase should require further public / PCC approvals.

2. Vodafone's consultation process was a joke. I think u attended both meetings. A question asked at both was what difference will consultation make to your plans? Answer from Vodafone. None.

3. Telecom and Vodafone are using 60's legislation relevant to power and telegraph poles to insist on their right to install new towers on road reserve / berms. This is why some of them are disguised as street lights. There is a height limit related to cable crossing roads and land contours, which is also now being exploited as many towers are well above the height of standard telegraph poles. Where services are reticulated underground, the legislation does not apply, but this hasn't stopped the telcos bamboozling councils. No council has had the balls to challenge the telcos.

4. Telcos also have no automatic right to erect cellphone towers on any other land, including their own. To erect the towers at the top of Pope Street on PCC land, the approach was let us erect one each (of very high power) on council reserve, or we will opt for 2-3 each on the street. And PCC has the backbone of a jelly fish and said OK. Even when both companies erected a 2nd tower on the same site, on condition the redundant towers (obsolete technology) were removed, they ignored the requirement, and have now deployed additional equipment on the old towers.
Regards, Andrew

national very active in mana

ROBERT COMMENTS

select committee - cell towers

-----Original Message----- From: Pavan Sharma [mailto:Pavan.Sharma@parliament.govt.nz] Sent: Friday, 5 September 2008 4:27 p.m.
To: Sue Grey
Subject: RE: Petition 2005/179 of Sarah Allen and 3100 others for Atawhai Playcentre, Brightsparks Preschool and Ban the Tower Inc

Hi Sue,

To confirm arrangements for next Thursday's hearing. This item of business is on the agenda from 10am to 11am. The meeting will take place in Select Committee Room 6, Parliament House, which is on the ground floor. Please advise by Wednesday 12pm the names and designations of the people from your group who will be appearing before the committee. If you have any further queries, do let me know. I'm not in the office on Monday however. If you need to speak to someone then, please call my colleague Simolo Manase on 817 9687.

Kind regards, Pavan

recent trip

Several have asked about my trip to the UK.

Ruth and I spent 10 days in London where she had a conference and I spent much time at as a reader at the British Library. From there to Oxford where I presented a paper on management, hence on by hire car to Glasgow University to catch up with those I met during my sabbatical 6 years ago (this relates to the work on democracy and citzienship). Visited Ruth's relations in delightful rural villages and then home out of Heathrow. We have a complaint about Air NZ seats. As Johnie Johnson used to say "we went second class because there was no third". The whole trip took just under a month. England in the summertime has much to commend it, when it is not raining.

And then there was Newton:

Newton's room as professor of mathematics at Trinity College is above the tree slightly to the right. It is still occupied by staff, although modified somewhat. I was delighted with the Wren Library at Trinity. To see the original work of Wittgenstein and Newton was inspiring.

One highlight of the trip was my pursuit of Isaac Newton. This in London, Trinity College Cambridge, and at Woolsthorpe Manor which is his birthplace and the site of his critical work in 1666. Went on a fruitless search for this mother's grave.

The window of Newton's room at Woolsthorpe Manor. (Needless to say I am now on a diet.)

Ruth and I were given a private tour of the Manor and we were so excited we donated £40 to their garden fund (£20 each). Expect the flowers to bloom at the front of the Manor. I am writing an analysis of some of Newton's work on optics from a Heideggerian perspective. Consequently, in my mind the flowers are a research expense. Pity the auditors would not see them this way.

r
09-Sep-2008

impartiality of health advisors

Hi Stuart

Thanks for that and for getting involved.

There are literally hundreds if not thousands of published papers about the dangers of EMR- from cellphone's and cell towers. However Telecom and co seem to discount every single one of them for various spurious reasons in favour of research they have funded themselves.

We have a really odd system here in NZ where a group called the “Government Interagency Advisory Committee on the Health Effects of Non-Ionising Radiation” is a the “gatekeeper” for the government’s view. I would have expected such an advisory group to be a team of qualified experts, preferably with various relevant interdisciplinary skills and no vested interests.

However it is largely made up of Telecom, Vodafone and other vested interest reps- most of whom have no relevant health expertise at all. The only medical doctor on that committee is Dr David Black. He is an “honorary senior lecturer” (whatever that is) at Auckland Med school who apparently hasn’t actually lectured for years since his course ceased.

He seems to spend most of his time working for Telecom, Vodafone and their equivalents in Australia who cant find local experts who are prepared to say the type of things that Dr Black says.

Auckland Med School has set up NIHI (National Institute of Health Innovation) – which got $7m from the government which it matched with private funding. Top of its list of private funders is Vodafone. One of the main projects of the Auckland Med school/NIHI team is the NZ part of the Interphone study – which was supposed to be finished in 2004 but we are still waiting for the results.

Its all so incestuous and the public interest seems to be so tainted by private funding that I’m no longer confident about what can be relied on and what cannot.

The rest of the committee is largely made up of Ministry of Economic Development reps – who by MED’s own admission have no relevant skill at all except to represent the interests of development, plus a few lightweights who seem to do what they are told.

In summary our health seems to be managed by economic interests. The government interagency committee minutes (which I have), record views along the lines that its better not to consult about new celltowers as this upsets communities!!!!

They conveniently seem to ignore the fact that it’s the celltower being thrust on us that upsets us, not the consultation. We have a hearing before the Local Govt and Environment Select Committee this Thursday (providing Parliament is not in urgency) and one of the things we are asking for it a more balanced advisory committee with people who are suitably qualified and represent community interests as well as Telcos.

I have written so many letters to the relevant Ministers but all they ever do is come back with inane replies based on what the Health Committee says. I don’t think the Ministers understand the issues at all themselves. I cant see much hope of change unless we get interested new Ministers and/or a more balanced advisory committee.

I love the look of your qualifications. Your input both for your local situation and nationally would be fantastic. We’ve now got a group of people with some excellent skills who have done a huge amount to try to get some balance into this issue. It includes people who made submission on the proposed NES (National Environmental Standards ) for Telecommunications and communities who have faced unwanted celltowers.

I’ve tried to get everyone as coordinated as possible so we can get some synergy- and maximum impact for our time.

So far its all been ad hoc and fitted around all our other commitments. I’ve been working ridiculous hours on this assuming its just a case of getting the right information to the right people. However there seems to be some very willful blindness in high places and if we want to get a permanent NZ wide solution we need to use our resources as effectively as we possibly can. If anyone is interested in putting together a national group- so we can be as effective as possible, share ideas and try to avoid reinventing the wheel then please let me know.

Your thoughts would be much appreciated.

Sue Grey LLB(Hons), BSc

Somme House Plimmerton

I am asked about the history of Somme House at Plimmerton. Below is an extract from a Council report.

The land on which Somme House is situated was once part of George Troup’s estate which extended up Cluny Road and included Motuhara, Moana and Airlie Roads.

In 1910 the land was subdivided and sections sold off over the subsequent years. On 17 May 1915 Troup sold Lot 79 to Robert Hird Hustler, a painter from Johnsonville. Hustler took a mortgage out on the land on 28 February 1916, probably to build the house. On 23 April 1918 the land was sold to Juanita Heather Sylvia Craw of Linton, a spinster.

According to Porirua City Council records the house was designed by one Archie McMahon as a beach house. The house was named to commemorate the New Zealand soldiers killed in the Battle of the Somme in World War I.

Juanita Craw may have had a brother Eric Hector Dunstan Craw who was a bombardier in the First World War and was killed in the Battle of the Somme on 25 September 1916. Eric Craw also came from Linton. Various owners have come and gone since that time.

waiheke - cell towers

Hi Robert

  Sue Grey from Nelson gave me your name.  Thank you for being prepared to be known for your stance against the installations.

  Vodafone has consent to erect an installation on the roof of the local Bowling Club, right in the middle of the suburb of Surfdale.  Several things are wrong with the consent:

1.                   The consent was non-notifiable because it was only noise 39 decibels and the height of the mast 9.7m that was considered discretionary.  Mervyn Chetty, Auckland City Council Environmental Health Officer, signed off the health issues, negligible exposure was his findings.

2.                   The Bowling Club is a community club yet did not seek input from the residents.  They have since signed to have a 12m Telecom tower to be installed on their property as well.  This is in front of the ACC planners now.

3.                   The lady right next door to the club is recovering from beast cancer and only found out about the installation when workmen in white, unmarked, vans turned up to survey the site.  She is very distressed.

Our Councillor is Denise Roche, a first time councilor, also the Greens candidate for the upcoming elections.  Her email is cr.roche@aucklandcity.govt.nz do you think there is any value in you contacting her directly?  I forwarded Sue’s email, and attachments, onto her.  Your name and email address as well as Sue Kedgely’s details were in the email so if you do contact her she will know who you are.  

Our campaign to date is focussing on:  

1.                   Trying to get the Bowling Club members to groundswell against their committee and get the permission for Vodafone and Telecom removed.  Unfortunately the committee think they have done nothing wrong and aren’t about to admit they may have made an error in judgement.

2.                   Trying to get the ACC to re-open the consent so we can lodge submissions.  We have written to David Rankin, CEO, and the Mayor’s office as well as the planning team in a hope to get a chance to have a say.

3.                   Asking the Ombudsmen’s office and Judith Tizard’s office and the Waiheke Community Board to bring pressure on the ACC to re-open the consent.

  However we are not getting very far so Sue’s words of advice and support were very appreciated.

  Any assistance will be greatly appreciated.

  Regards

  Andrew Crawford

10 Surfdale Road

Waiheke

09 372 8234

telecom has crisis of confidence whilst they ugly-up porirua city

By Jonathan Underhill
Friday 5th September 2008

Telecom Corp., the biggest company on the NZX 50 Index, deferred its dividend reinvestment plan while it considers whether to accelerate investments on faster broadband services.

The company last month said it was evaluating whether to speed the roll-out of its $300 million broadband mobile phone network. Investors who had opted to reinvest the fourth-quarter dividend will receive a cash payment instead, the company said in a statement.

"Telecom considers it is not prudent to proceed with the issue of shares under its dividend reinvestment plan for the upcoming quarterly dividend, or undertake the associated on-market share buyback of Telecom ordinary shares," the company said. "This is a strategically important and material decision."

Telecom is racing rival Vodafone Group which is offering a nationwide broadband network. Vodafone has a larger share of the nation's mobile phone market.

Shares of Telecom fell about 1% to NZ$3.09, near a 15-year low.

www.businesswire.co.nz

ROBERT COMMENTS

Porirua City Council leadership is apparently totally unable to understand that for Telecom the network roll out is a business venture. It is not the provision of a social service. We should not offer up our City to them as if they were Catholic Social Services. They are here to make money from our residents, and the Council's responsibility is to realistically charge for the use of valuable public assets.

We did not invent capitalism. We are however amidst capitalism. Thus, we must play that game or suffer the financial consequences. It is little wonder that Porirua City ratepayers pay more than any other ratepayers in the country. This is the price we pay for blind Council leadership.
r
September 6, 2008

telecom profits

Telecom forecasts lower annual earnings next year. This year they made $713 million. Fear not, the Porirua City ratepayers will continue to subsidsie Telecom shareholders.
r

serious detachment from reality

No one in the Porirua City Council has noticed New Zealand's changed financial situation. Our households are being hit with higher costs all round, and jobs are about to be lost. Still Council plans for the revitalization of the city center (costing millions) and digital investment. Expect increasing complaints about rates. Council is in expansion mode when it should be in contraction mode.

In the 1990s recessions, councils were the only sector that did not contract. The power of taxation works every time. The ability to tax is a woeful power and carries a heavy responsibility. Few in our council have noticed this.

Witness the rush to give $350,000 to rugby. Many saw this as about loyalty to rugby - a sort of test of manhood. Cr Ah Hoy, to her credit, did not. Virtually no-one, including council officers, saw it as being about our responsibility to ratepayers. The motion that was considered, if passed, would have agreed to pay the money. This in spite of the fact that in public it was being said that this would be subject to consultation. Whether this was their inability to read or a deliberate ploy we will never know. It might have been a fall-back position as the heat went on. My view is that they simply do not pay enough attention to the meaning of words.

The latest parade of dreaming and drifting is in the presentation to the conference of local government managers. This is remarkable because the council apparently claims some credit for e-learning. Well, it mentions it in the context of Porirua stories. It arrived in Porirua 7-years-ago, I learn. Funny, I thought it arrived in the rest of the world well over 15-year-ago, and that fad is now over. I have published papers on e-learning in science, and designed and built a significant facility to teach all NZ secondary school students astronomy online. This proved its worth with schools around New Zealand and was destroyed this year by the Board of the Carter Observatory. The Carter Observatory is now being run by the Wellington City Council.
r
September 6, 2008

rates hurt

North Point industrial area ratepayers are complaining about a rates increases of 57% in one year. I feel for them in the recession.

Evidently, they did not notice the valuations for their properties when it could be challenged, and they did not read the rates assessment at the time when that could be challenged. Now - after the actual bill arrives - they are to visit the mayor to ask for relief. They will receive a cup of tea.
r
September 6, 2008

history repeats itself - telecoms

The Porirua Council decided to do nothing about the influx of new telecommunications towers and facilities into our City. When confronted with a motion (moved by myself) to have work done on the District Plan and the new regulations, they decided they would rather not. Just as in 2005!!!

They voted against the public being notified of proposals as of right.

They voted against controls on the height and placement of towers.

They voted against requirements that the telcos share sites.

They voted against making the telcos declare their network plans for the city before any single towers are built.

What did they vote for you might ask: they voted to keep the chief executive rushing around in small circles trying to negotiate deals in secret after communities complain.

The chief executive needs to focus all his attention on the real challenges that fact the Council.At the moment we have three companies involved in tower constructions in our City. Presumably, the chief will simply work longer hours as more companies appear.

r
September 5, 2008

thursday's committee meeting

MORE CELLPHONE TOWERS COMING

TO PROTECT YOUR HOUSEHOLD WE NEED YOUR PRESENCE ON THURSDAY 4 SEPTEMBER

We need you to attend a meeting at Porirua City Council on Thursday 4th September from 9:00am to 10:00am to help ensure you DON’T have a cell phone tower put outside your house or your local school without consultation.

After an abysmal attempt by Telecom to put a cell phone tower in Titahi Bay, without consultation, the community has managed to halt the construction and force them to consult with us.

We have been given a chance to speak at Porirua City Councils next Strategy, Finance and Regulatory Committee Meeting concerning cell phone towers in our City and need at least 200 people there.

With your presence we hope to force Porirua City Councillors to change the District Plan so that the lack of consultation cannot occur again by Telecom or any other telecommunications company.

By a stroke of luck New Zealand Telecommunications (a new cell phone company) will be speaking at this meeting prior to us – here is your chance to get an insight into their plans as they want to construct 1,300 cell phone towers nationwide some of which will be in your suburb.

Act now or you could have a cell phone tower/antenna outside your house by October. Details for the meetings are: Date: Thursday 4th September Time: 9:00am to 10:00am Venue: Council Chambers, Level 2, Porirua City Council

IT’S TIME TO STAND UP FOR “THE BAY” BRING YOURSELVES, YOUR FRIENDS AND YOUR NEIGHBOURS YOU CAN MAKE A DIFFERENCE

This flyer has been created and distributed by concerned residents. For further information please contact Helen Bennett via e-mail helen.bennett1@gmail.com

whitby newsbrief - info issues at council

I was asked to write something for the Whitby NewsBrief. Here it is:

What on earth is going on?

How can any citizen keep up with what happens at Council? How can you participate in the decisions of your Council? We should all ask ourselves these questions in a serious way. The mantra from councils around the country is that there are "current issues" that they can list on their web sites and from there you can read about the issues and make submissions in writing.

If you have a degree in public policy and time on your hands, you probably could make submissions as requested. But, for most people the task of regular participation as prescribed by the Council is impossible.

The first battle everyone fights with their Council is very basic: what on earth is going on? It is actually a challenge for the elected people to answer this question. All the briefings and the papers provided - some how or other - just do not provide the level of understanding that people seek.

A brave councillor recently (one of the new ones), admitted that he could not follow what was happening at meetings. He asked, would it be possible to have the motions and amendments displayed on a screen as they were debated. At least that way we might know what we are voting for or against, even if we do not understand it very well.

This idea is an old idea around our Council. It has been rejected at least four times when I have raised it. The last time I raised it was when I became a chairperson of a committee for a brief spell. Overseas, and in many NZ councils it is common practice. The usual approach is to have the committee secretary's laptop connected to a data show.

Two other techniques that use technology are often used to convey information to citizens. The first and most effective is to broadcast all council meetings on the interment. I investigated these systems when I was in Illinois some years ago. It is common practice there in councils much smaller than our own. This system puts the heat on the councillors. What they say is recorded for all to see at a later date. More important than this however is the fact that it contributes to better decisions being made. What really counts in your council  is the quality of the decisions made.

Another simple way to improve communicates is to use a system that allows people to see how their councillors vote. This is used in our neighboring council, Wellington. The idea is that councillors vote each time by pushing a button and the vote displays in lights on a board. Apart from helping us know what is going on, this will give the councillors an incentive to keep up with the meetings. Nothing interests a councillor more than seeing their name flash in lights.

Robert Shaw
Porirua City Councillor
Proud to represent Whitby for over 15 years.

cell phone tower problems in hutt city

road standards - bikes

1 September 2008

The Chief Executive
Porirua City Council
PO Box PORIRUA 5240

Dear Sir

With summer approaching I expect the Council will soon start its road maintenance and resealing programme.

I commute by bicycle daily from Papakowhai through to Wellington. The road surface from Porirua City proper along Keneperu Drive to wherever the Porirua and Wellington City Councils responsibilities for road maintenance meet, is not great. The section from the Porirua Hospital entrance near Moore Wilsons through to about the Pukitero Centre is particularly rough because very large road chip has been used to form the road surface. When the Council next reseals the main arterial routes into and out of the City, would it please consider using asphaltic concrete or a smaller size road chip.

I appreciate that there is an additional marginal cost for doing so, but there are good reasons for doings so:

* a road bike normally has tyre pressure at 120 – 160lbs, some go over 200lbs. A puncture from a sharp stone or other material can be dangerous when a tyre explodes at that pressure.

* While a family recreational rider might travel at 12-20kph, a person commuting to and from the city will generally want to ride at between 30 – 40kph. The roughness of the stone chip used on Keneperu drive near Bowlland and Kapiti Mana School reduces the speed of commuting cyclists by between 5-10kpm.

* The stone chip tends to come loose on corners – see corner near Bowlland, and works its way to the side of the road used by cyclists. When a road bike which has roughly only 1 cm of rubber on the road at any time, comes in contact with loose road metal it is dangerous and especially dangerous on corners.

* I assume Porirua City Council supports the regional initiative to encourage alternate forms of commuting to and from work rather than by car. A good quality road surface, particularly on main arterial routes shows good support of that initiative.

Last, if the council could also sweep the roads on regular basis, say 4 monthly that also would be appreciated. The road has not been swept all year.

Yours sincerely
Peter Brocklehurst

re-run of blog on cell towers - 2005

MARK WHALEY'S COMPLAINT - CELL TOWERS IN THE SUBURBS - IT IS NOT JUST THE PUTTING RIGHT THAT COUNTS

Mark Whaley, citizen of Titahi Bay, asked the Prime Minister about the establishment and operation of a cell tower in Titahi Bay. The Hon David Benson-Pope, Minister for the Environment, wrote back (3 November, 2005) saying that the Porirua Council had complied with the law.

He does not mention that the Porirua Council actually wrote the law that pertains. The Minister's reply is hardly likely to satisfy Mr Whaley.

Looking into his question, we can see that he really wants to know how it can be that a company can intrude in a suburb, create concerns about safety, and produce a monstrosity for us all to view.

The problem is the District Plan does not protect the residents. Cell towers are "permitted" activities in our suburbs, and that means that they can be hoisted up into the air without warning. The Council is doing well in its amelioration, but altering the rules must be a top priority also. The consultation now being undertaken on cell tower policy is just about cell towers on Council owned land - we need to fix the rules as well and at this moment no progress has been made on that project at all. Mr Whaley might like to ask the Minister for the Environment some other questions: what provisions do the District Plans of our Councils throughout the country have regarding cell towers in suburban areas? Might the Minister suggest how we can better manage issues of aesthetics?
r
Saturday, December 3, 2005

ROBERT COMMENTS

Robert is quite right. The lack of leadership and focus in the Council has meant that absolutely nothing has been done to change the District Plan and hence several communities now face the forecast problem.
r
August 31, 2008

PS I promise not to write a comment about my own comment again!

rugby motion

For those who have asked me, this is the motion the council carried on our funding the rugby.

That the Chief Executive be requested to continue discussions with his Chief Executive colleagues across the region to develop a reworked plan for Porirua support for the Wellington regional bid for the Rugby World Cup 2011. Consideration of infrastructure funding in the 2011 Long Term Council Community Plan and non ratepayer sources of funding, to be brought to Council in due course.
CARRIED

information issues

The move by the ceo to have the Councillors' Bulletin made public was strongly opposed by the mayor (email to all, etc). I can remember asking Mr Seddon, the former ceo, to make the Bulletin available to all, but with no success. Now Dr B offers it in an effort to improve communications within the city.

Few people will remember that the Bulletin started as a result of my advocacy. The original concept was to alert councillors to issues. Instead it quickly came to be a "good news" briefing. I want to know about problems not successes. We have plenty of people congratulating others.

Where the bulletin goes is not anyone's business but the ceos. It is entirely his publication, the law says he is in charge of Official Information (which it is), and he can send it where he likes. I look forward to an electronic version being sent to residents' associations and other interested individuals.

One of the major problems with our Council is no one knows what is going on. Hence, a weekly bulletin of serious material would be really useful for interested residents and ratepayers. Had this been done then no one could have complained that they were not made aware of the Telecom tower proposals in January when the Council approved them. The towers were mentioned in the Bulletin, but evidently nothing of this was conveyed to anyone by the councillors.
r
August 30, 2008

why we have no money to amend the district plan

A small unit within the Council does the work on the District Plan. They have been rather busy, but not dealing with towers or the protection of households. The major effort has been a futile attempt to make new policy in the middle of a neighbours' dispute. I refer to Duck Creek.

Blog readers will know that I asked for the cost of this work, and subsequently there was an OIA request from one of the interested parties. That OIA request produced some data which was more than I had managed in a couple of months of effort (see below for the data).

The cost of some consultants work on Duck Creek to 27 May 2008 is $240,466.92. This figure will rise as there are still bills outstanding. Before I went overseas I asked for the other costs to be estimated. These included officer time (probably the largest single item), printing, publication, advertising, the hire of facilities, and so on. Since the 27 May there have been further substantial legal costs. My own estimate is that ratepayers would have paid something over half a million dollars. I have not seen the resulting figures, produced whilst I was overseas, but have been told they are around somewhere. For all this money there has not been one blade of grass saved or one drop of water diverted. Nor has there been one new policy established. It is an outcome of the lack of leadership and insight at Council.

This work with Duck Creek has diverted attention from the rest of the District Plan. The Chairperson of the responsible committee has some serious work to do in relation to priority setting. When I was a chairperson I made a bid for two new officers for the unit but that was turned down by elected councillors.

For over seven years I have been talking about District Plan reform priorities. Wonder if they will ever be sorted. Remember this is ratepayers' money that should be diverted to advance the interests of home owners.

All this goes on whist Jenny Brash sits on her hands and the chairpersons look dazed. They all have an offer of a right of reply!
r
August 30, 2008

robert's submission to the select committee

LOCAL GOVERNMENT AND ENVIRONMENT SELECT COMMITTEE

RE: PETITION SARAH ALLEN AND 3100 OTHERS RE CELLPHONE TOWERS IN COMMUNITIES

My name is Robert Keith Shaw and I am a Porirua City Councillor. I write this personal statement in relation to cell towers and the petition you are considering.

The Porirua City Council has attempted to assist community groups as they deal with the excitement of new towers, first with Vodafone and then with Telecom.

It was the Council’s hope that the companies would begin a consultation with communities themselves and work with the Council to establish networks with the minimum impact. To facilitate this the Council was prepared to make some public land available as a way of ensuring the towers were away from private property.

Regardless of whether there are, or there are not, health risks, residents do not want the towers in their communities. This is a reasonable point-of-view and needs to be addressed if we wish to build strong communities to support families.

The Titahi Bay tower incident with Telecom was extremely disappointing for those of us who sought a managed process for towers. The company was forced to delay construction whilst they talked to the community. However, it was all too late as the required consents had been earlier issued.

One of the most unsatisfactory aspects of the Titahi Bay incident was that the company did not reveal its work on a further five towers in Porirua City. All of these were proceeding in secret.  Had the company been genuine in its approach to the Council and the community they would have been open about their plans. Instead, they stonewalled.

It is clear that we cannot rely on the vast number of teleco companies to all be reasonable and to engage in proper process.  It is also clear that circumstances vary greatly throughout the country and what is satisfactory in one area is not so in another.

It has not been possible to establish co-location of facilities in our city. Everyone agrees in theory, but the competitive aspects of the business ascend in practice.

Fortunately, the RMA provides a process to determine structures in communities. Each Council should have in its District Plan requirements appropriate to its situation. Applications for towers should be decided in relation to the each unique situation.

Finally, it is not appropriate to use regulations established by Order in Council in a situation where there is wide public debate and the issues are very personal for households. Parliament is the proper venue for any decisions on new rules. There is no need for new rules at all however, assuming the Council’s hurry up and develop their District Plans.

Robert Shaw BSc BA MPhi(Hons) MPubPol
23 August , 2008

43 Eskdale Road
Papakowhai
PORIRUA CITY

Telephone 04  233 0252

progress with telecom - ceo is working hard on this

plan for villages money - for discussion

ROBERT COMMENTS:

This draft for discussion has been issued by the Council. It has several problems. The first is that we have yet to properly sort out the rules for this moment. In its base conception it is to be "bottom up" decision making, but in fact it is the councillors who are being asked to decide the schedule, and hence it is "top down" like everything else! There has been a rather pathetic review of the programme, which showed absolutely no insight into the purpose of the policy.

In the draft below you will see a mix of "business as usual" projects (ie those that should be funded from other budgets - eg lighting. (WHAT ON EARTH HAS HAPPEND TO THE COUNCIL'S BUDGET FOR LIGHTING??) and community priorities. One major problem is that some suburbs have been quick to become involved and others have not. Whtiby is the the dramatic negative example. They have missed out on distributions of over $2 million so far and the residents association continues to stand as a "one issue" organisation, in spite of a burst of interest and activity in relation to the villages money just before the election. On the positive side of this Takapuwhaia has established itself as a village, compare this with Elsdon, and they are doing okay.

Another major problem is the amount of money now going to policy research and not to practical asset development. That was never the intention. More officers need to be employed I guess.

It has now become established that this money - intended for asset development according to the local residents' wishes - can in fact be used for policy analysis and a bus service (I need to check if this happened). How can anyone cope with a Council that jumps around like that?
r

Council's document:

THE 2007/08 PROGRAMME

A programme of works was prepared for 2007/08.  In some areas this was indicative only as discussions with residents were still in progress.  Costings were also indicative as much of the project work was still to be designed and closely costed.

Eastern Porirua

Plimmerton

Pukerua Bay

Takapuwahia

Titahi Bay

In addition $150,000 of minor safety works were planned for Titahi Bay

*In the half year budget review $120,000 was reallocated from other budgets to Titahi Bay for shopping centre improvements.

Whitby & Pauatahanui
$5000 each earmarked for community planning assistance to each Resident Association

misleading picture

This picture is the one that went to Cabinet when they approved the new telecoms regulations policy in February 2008. Lovely green background and innocuous location. There is not a house, nor a child, in sight. Nor does it indicate the radiation.

Be aware that the new regulations do not relate to new towers and that our Council needs to amend the District Plan to provide for towers. The easiest way is to make all new towers a notified resource consent.

telecoms policy agreed by cabinet in February this year - extract from cabinet paper

Appendix A – Proposed National Environmental Standards for
Telecommunications

Pursuant to s43B of the Resource Management Act 1991, no rule or resource
consent shall be more stringent than the national environmental standards for
telecommunications facilities.
1. Radiofrequency field exposures from wireless telecommunications
infrastructure

Permitted activity
An activity by a telecommunications operator that generates radiofrequency
fields is a permitted activity provided the following conditions are met.
1. Exposures to the radiofrequency fields generated by the activity (in
conjunction, where applicable, with exposures to radiofrequency fields
from existing transmitters in the vicinity) comply with NZS2772.1: 1999
Radio-frequency Fields Part 1: Maximum Exposure Levels 3 kHz – 300
GHz (“the New Zealand Standard”).
2. Prior to commencing any activity that generates radiofrequency fields, the
following are sent to and reviewed by the relevant Council:
a. written notice of the location of the facility or proposed facility; and
b. a report prepared by a radio engineer/technician or physical
scientist containing a prediction of whether the New Zealand
Standard will be complied with.
3. If the report provided to the Council under condition 2(b) predicts that
exposures will reach 25 percent of the exposure limit set for the general
public in the New Zealand Standard, then, within three months of
radiofrequency emissions commencing, a report from an appropriately
qualified person/organisation (for example a Radiofrequency engineer)
certifying compliance with the New Zealand Standard, based on
measurements at the site will be provided to the Council.
16

2. Telecommunications equipment cabinets within road reserves
Telecommunication cabinets in road reserves shall be permitted activities
subject to the following restrictions:
Limitations on cabinet size and location
(Above ground level)
Adjacent area
type
Maximum height: 1.8m
Maximum footprint of any single cabinet: 1.4m2
Maximum footprint occupied by all cabinets:1.8m2
Maximum number of network utility cabinets exceeding
900mm in height in any location: one6
Minimum separation distance from any existing utility
cabinet exceeding 900mm in height: 30m
(except where specific provision by way of dedicated
areas has been made for utilities infrastructure within
the road reserve)

Residential
Maximum height: 2m
Maximum footprint: 2.0m2
Minimum separation distance from any existing utility
cabinet exceeding 900mm in height: 30m
(except where specific provision by way of dedicated
areas has been made for utilities infrastructure within
the road reserve)

Non-residential
All cabinets permitted by this standard shall comply with:
· Any specific performance standards contained in a plan or design
guide (that forms part of a district plan) relating to design or external
appearance of utility cabinets in the road reserve.
The relevant district plan rules shall prevail over this standard in the following
circumstances:
· Where the cabinet is located in an area, or adjacent to a site, to which the
district plan applies rules protecting historic heritage, or visual amenity
values7, for example:
o Within view shafts identified in district plans (covered above)
o Commercial areas i.e. CBD, shopping precincts (covered above)
· where any excavation work to install the cabinet needs to be undertaken
within the drip line or branch spread of any tree or vegetation.
· where the cabinet is proposed to be located on the seaward side of the
road centre-line, and the road abuts the Coastal Marine Area
· where any above ground power supply is not contained within the cabinet
[FOOTNOTES; 6 Cabinets in new subdivisions are often located in areas allocated for utilities, for example dedicated
areas of road reserve are provided. In these cases it would be considered a reasonable condition of a
Road Opening Notice that the cabinets be located within those areas.
7 Areas identified as historic, historic heritage, cultural sites or open space]

Other considerations:
Cabinet means either an individual cabinet, or a cluster of cabinets. Provided
that in the case of a cluster, these cabinets are interdependent on each other
to provide a service, and that the spacing between adjacent cabinets is no
more than 500mm, and that the total dimensions of all cabinets (excluding the
space between the cabinets) does not exceed the maximum height and area
restrictions set out in this standard.

An additional cabinet can be abutted to an existing cabinet, so long as the
combined size or foot print of the cabinets does not exceed the maximum
specified in this standard.

Issues to do with location of structures to ensure they do not create a safety
hazard, including frangibility of structures are addressed by road controlling
authorities through the provisions of the Telecommunications Act 2001. The
development of a national code of practice for utilities access to the road
corridor and the development of a consistent set of reasonable conditions that
can be required by road controlling authorities will provide clarity and national
consistency.

media statement on porirua city tower plans - telecom

FOR IMMEDIATE USE

Council and Telecom fail to reveal 5 more towers

Unknown to its residents, the Porirua Council gave Telecom the go-ahead for six cell towers. There are also two further approvals pending.

Councillor Robert Shaw said he was appalled that the public has not been told about all the towers. "Five approvals only came to light when I asked about other sites because of the public outrage about the Titahi Bay proposal" .

"Telecom put the Titahi Bay tower on hold because of public opposition, but they did not tell the public about the other towers". The sites approved are: Titahi Bay; Bedford Street next to the Freedom Church; Waitangirua, adjacent to the shops; Broken Hill Road; Kenepuru Drive; and Colonial Knob.

Resource consents applied for are a new towers in Pukerua Bay above Rawhiti Road and at Moonshine Road. Cr Shaw said Telecom's plans for the whole city need to be considered together. "It is vital that our Council establishes rules in its District Plan to manage the serious conflicts that now appear between telecommunications companies and residents."

The whole purpose of local government is to resolve such issues in neighbourhoods, Cr Shaw added.

For more information Councillor Robert Shaw, telephone 233 0252

tim before he was convicted

MEDIA RELEASE

19th July 2008

Tim Manu Councillor Porirua City Council Having spent the last two weeks overseas due to the sudden death of his grandmother, Cr Manu returned home last Friday 11th and was greeted by what he has interpreted as a personal attack by the media.

An article in the Dominion Post and Kapi Mana provided inaccurate and misleading information in that Cr Manu allegedly 'smashed windows' during an argument. In an effort to leave the abusive situation, Cr Manu found himself locked outside while his belongings ie. clothes, car keys, wallet and cell phone were in the house.

"With no other option available to me I decided to break the door window in order to retrieve my belongings, so that I could leave the situation, with the intention of taking full responsibility ie. writing a letter of apology to the landlord and paying for the window, which in fact was completed two days after." "I am confused and feel personally attacked that the media brought this to light 3 months after it happened, as I never requested a name suppression in the first place, nor did I ever make a police statement."

"Above all, it is important to obtain background information before a story is substantiated."

END

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: