Hamilton Job Losses should be fought against

  The announcement two weeks ago by AgResearch of a restructuring proposal which will lead to 180 science-related jobs being lost from Hamilton's Ruakura campus has bought deafening silence from the leaders of the city.

  By contrast, Dunedin's Mayor and Council, supported by its University, business leaders and surrounding Councils, is working hard to try and reverse the 85-job cut proposed down there, and is very proactively calling the Government to account on the issue.

  Six days ago, I requested that Hamilton City Council's CEO and Mayor place the item on the Agenda of today's Council meeting for discussion – hoping to spark some fight amongst Councillors who were privately telling me the job losses were "terrible."

  The CEO, who is also Deputy Chair of the AgResearch Board, forwarded my request to a mid-level Council manager, who has no authority to place items on Council agendas. 

  The Mayor did not answer me, until I renewed my request to her at the start of this week. She told me she felt "no need to have AgResearch on the agenda", but that Councillors could have a private "team discussion about it if they want."

  It does the CEO and Mayor no credit at all that they have refused to provide a forum for discussion of these job losses, which will seriously affect the food and agriculture-related research hubs that have been developed in Hamilton.

  Comments in the media by the Mayor and some Councillors have confused the issue. They feel we should not be discussing the CEO's membership of the AgResearch Board and any conflict of interest he might have – fair enough, but are they also saying we should not be discussing the loss of 180 jobs from one of our key industries? I hope not. 

  The question of Mr Harris' involvement on the AgResearch Board is something only he can legally decide, and is not part of our call for the special meeting.

  I have made my own personal view clear – I believe the position of the CEO on the AgResearch Board is untenable. When someone is paid the amount he is to lead the City Council, then that is where first loyalties lie. We cannot force Mr Harris to step down from a position that is clearly in conflict with his Council role – only he can decide that.

  To their credits, some members of the city community have called for the 180 jobs to be retained in Hamilton; business leader Sir William Gallagher, former Mayor Bob Simcock, Waikato University Agribusiness Professor Jacqueline Rowarth and new Council candidate Anjum Rahman have all publicly stated this view in the last few days.

  But deafening silence from the Council.

Standing for Mayor of Hamilton

As a experienced Councillor, I've  never in the past had a desire to stand for Mayor – I've been happy to work for the City in areas like transport, community affairs and recreation, where I had good knowledge & background.


  

  But the current regime in Council has discarded the experience of Councillors, and tried to turn the organisation into an pale imitation of a corporate outfit, with huge management salaries, and a so-called governance board that rubberstamps management decisions.

Hamilton is growing fast – and it needs a Mayor who will stand up for it, not one who will quibble about the small points, but effectively let lawyers and managers decide how to run the Council.

  We have become an organisation that knows the price of everything, but the value of nothing.

  We must think of our children and grandchildren – Hamilton needs:

·      more playgrounds and recreation facilities for young people

·      fairer treatment for Council staff

·      fairer wages and salaries

·    much better transport systems

·      better deals for arts, heritage and the environment

·      no water metering 

·      no sale of vital community assets

  I am fiercely independent, and will back the ‘little person’ when they need support.

  Residents and ratepayers deserve more than the lawyers’ bare minimum of consultation on important issues – I will see this happens. Ruakura and Templeview developments are good in the long run, but residents' rights should not be ridden roughshod over to get there. Heritage concerns need much better consultation with the whole community. Elected members must have a much better handle

  Council must also be financially efficient – this doesn’t mean acting like a large corporate – it means representing the community. Your elected members are put there to do a job - I will see that they all have jobs to do, not just monthly meetings to rubberstamp managers’ decisions.

  We must reconsider rate rises above the level of cost increases we face – we have learnt from past mistakes, and are controlling spending and debt – more of this gain needs to be felt by ratepayers. There are still many opportunities to think of the future and develop and support community infrastructure.

Are Engineers & NZTA collaborating to 'gold-plate' roading projects?

Today a constituent complained to me about the $4.5M cost of removing a roundabout in front to Hamilton's 'The Base' and replacing it with a full traffic-signalled intersection. His complaint is quite justified, and I replied....

   In this case, both myself and one or two other Councillors suggested 'ramp metering' on the current roundabout, rather than the full, expensive signalised intersection. However, our traffic engineers, in their wisdom, have agreed with    NZTA's traffic engineers (who have masses of experience and never cock anything up) that the only solution is the gold-plated one.

   Interestingly, a number of people, including Councillors, raised the need for a signalised intersection here right back near the start of The Base – however the collected wisdom of the traffic engineers said this was not necessary at the time (when it would have been both cheaper and more affordable). 

   On our Council, with its current structures (including the disbanding the Transport & Infrastructure Committees), we do not usually have the expertise or focus to convince the majority of Councillors that the engineers are not necessarily right. An added complication is that on a number of occasions, NZTA has said to us – so our staff report – that their subsidy for roading works (I was going to say 'transport works' but remembered roads are the only part of transport NZTA funds nowdays) is only available if HCC agrees to go with the gold-plated solution. The general line from NZTA is "Have we got a deal for you!" or something similar.

   Needless to say, Councillors who are not so familiar with transport issues (which is most of us now, under the current structure) feel stuck between a rock and a hard place, and end up agreeing to go with NZTA and our traffic engineers, with what they consider to be the only deal on the table.

   You might be interested to know that it is not just The Base intersection where we are contemplating spending megabucks to achieve a gold-plated roading solution, when something lesser would do, at least for some time:

• Extension of Wairere Drive south from Ruakura Rd to Cobham Drive – 3 or more years ahead of schedule: for 12 years Council has had a policy that we don't support completing the ring road (this is the last section) until the Hamilton Bypass on the Expressway is completed – because we don't want Wairere Drive, an internal city road designed for city traffic – to be used as a de factor state highway for through traffic (like Avalon Drive was for many years). Our staff tell us that NZTA is refusing to guarantee the normal subsidy for this stretch of the road unless we start it immediately the section through to Ruakura Rd is completed (next year) - this is at least 3 years ahead of schedule.
• 4-laning of Wairere Drive from River Rd to Resolution Drive – this may become necessary when Resolution Drive is hooked up to the Expressway via exit and entry ramps near Horsham Downs (and a significant increase in traffic entering the city from the north happens). But this work (which Council may have to pay towards) is not in our 10 year plan for construction at all, yet staff are planning to expand Wairere Drive in this area next year, and have told me that NZTA have agreed to provide their subsidy for other parts of Wairere Drive only on the basis that this work is part of the deal. With the new traffic lights being installed at River Rd/Wairere Dr intersection, it is not necessary at this stage to expand the road east of there.

But then who am I to question the engineers?

Why your elected reps NEED to be in the kitchen!

Wairere Dr soon to look like
this, say HCC engineers

   The latest demonstration of the need for elected Hamilton City Councilllors to get involved in the details of important projects occurred last week, when engineering staff told us that they not only disagreed with using the new lanes on Wairere Drive/Pukete Rd, during peak times, as bus or 'transit' lanes (where users must have at least 2 people in the vehicle), but that they had NEVER raised this with NZTA, who are subsidising the work.

   Councillors had asked management for over 2 years to ensure they had a timely discussion on this matter – well before the contract was even let for the current work, but are now being told by HCC engineers that the job has nearly finished and the road is about to open, with no work being done of the bus or transit lane proposal.

   The irony is that HCC has a transport strategy - Access Hamilton - that previous Councils consulted heavily over, and that NZTA claims is 'best practice' in NZ - that calls for more bus priority measures on our roads - and generally a better deal for public and active transport.

   HCC management continues to assure us that engineers are not determining Council policies, and that elected members really do have the chance to make decisions on key transport issues – but their response inevitably calls into question who is actually running the show.

   Without the Transport Committee, that most larger Councils have (and HCC used to have) overseeing the implementation of our policies, including high-level designs for this particular project, the engineers and their NZTA funders are indulging in a road-building orgy that works against Council's own transport strategy, and will help doom the city to worse congestion in the future. 

   I have no issue with Council democratically deciding on a course of action that may not be what I personally think should happen – however I have a massive problem with staff not putting a key issue before the elected wing – when it has been asked to do so.

   I also have a massive problem with staff implying, as they have done this time, that matters are already decided and cannot be unwound – being presented with fait accomplis does not lead to good governance.

   Its time to get back into the kitchen!

Minister should think more carefully on asset sales

   Local Government Minister David Carter needs to think carefully before advocating sweeping asset sales by local councils, as he seems to be doing at the moment. The lessons of Rogernomics and Ruthanasia have not been learnt by Governments that think you can balance the ledger with one-off asset sales.
   When the Lange 'Labour' Govt flogged off KiwRail for a pittance (after campaigning in 1984 to save it - yeah, right!), it clearly didn't have a clue about the downstream costs of doing so - line closures, price rises, job losses, station closures and, eventually very expensive Government bailouts and buy-backs.
   Here in Hamilton, the 1990's City Council corporatised its power company, losing effective control for 99 years, and condemning its community to years of sharply rising power price rises. it was only narrowly prevented from completely flogging it off, with community trustees being forced to raise megabucks to buy out foreign corporate raiders.
   Selling airport shares can sound attractive at first glance, but if you think an airport is a strategic asset that a community or region needs for reasons like economic development, tourism, convenience of local residents, etc. then you would need to make sure any purchaser was willing to forego market returns on investment in order to keep the strategic asset as a going and affordable concern. Of course there are some purely commercial assets that Councils can, and probably should, sell - in Hamilton's case, it is time that the Novotel/Ibis Hotels shares are sold - the investment has done its job of ensuring sufficient quality visitor accomodation is available, the market conditions are reasonable, so lets sell that one, and use SOME of the proceeds to pay off debt, while ensuring vital social and community services continue.
   But don't sell pensioner housing, and community recreation facilities like the YMCA, unless you can be guaranteed their new owners will stay in the game for which those assets were intended. And if you do, make damn sure the proceeds of social asset sales like these are re-invested for the purposes they were originally intended!
   Finally, its all very well for Mr Carter to say the V8s was an event Hamilton CC shouldn't have funded (isn't 20/20 hindsight a wonderful thing?), and that the Ellerslie Flower Show in Christchurch is a "good" event for a Council to run - if he checked all the facts, he would know HCC tried to 'purchase' the Flower Show when Auckland decided to can it, only to be outbid by Christchurch City. Had Hamilton put up the $1-2 million Christchurch CC forked out, we might have had the 'good' event and Christchurch might have been left with the V8s - to add to their CEO's salary!

Council community services lack creative thinking

   Listening to submitters today opposing the sale of Hamilton City Counil's pensioner housing units, I was struck by the contrast between the way the local government system, including our own, creatively and strategically supports the funding and development of corporate projects and big sporting and other events, while being strangely quiet and un-strategic when support is needed for important community services and even amateur sport services targeting our youth. 
   Council management, egged on often by Council leadership, regularly come up with creative concepts for spending relatively vast amounts on infrastructure needed for industrial and commercial developments, or funding packages for events like world cups of professional sport or stadia and theatres servicing the high-end needs - but when faced with keeping a local pool open, a few pensioner flats upgraded, community centres open, or sports centres for schoolkids available; the creative juices of local government management and leadership, not to mention much of the corporate community, inexplicably dry up. 
   There is a crying need for professional and political leaderships within local govt to get into the game - in these trying economic times - of advocating for social and community needs to be met, and proposing creative funding and development packages that will address those needs. 
   We cannot rely on central govt - of any stripe - to meet these needs; at best they can help local communities meet these needs, but their one size fits all approach is unlikely to cut the mustard in most communities.

Nameless, Faceless council attacker outed - hides behind son's name

   The so-called Concerned Citizen website and billboard campaign against Hamilton City Councillors has been revealed as the brainchild of one Ray Stark, Founder and Executive Chairman of 'TalkingTech Ltd', an international IT, Communications, debt collection & local government services company.
   Stark used the name and address of his son, and fellow company executive Phil Stark, to front the website. 
   In 1998 Stark was involved with Gary Mallett (former ACT President) and other ACT members in a campaign to get members elected to the Council on the so-called City Vision ticket - TalkingTech's groundbreaking automatic phone messaging service was used to call thousands of Hamilton voters to canvas for their votes, helping get 4 members of the team, including Mallett, elected.
   Stark has also been involved with a Hamilton church, but it is not known why he commenced this secretive campaign, or attempted to hide behind his son's name.
   It is expected that he has plans to run a similar secret squirrel campaign against elected councillors in other cities.
   It is ironic that the TalkingTech website sells itself as providing services for local government:
"Use our COLLECTIONS solution to provide your customers with a friendly reminder that they have an outstanding balance due on their council tax or housing rent account.  We can provide automated payment options for your customers (for example, payment fines) and even facilitate continuous credit / debit card set up."
    Expect such technology to be used in the lead-up to the 2013 council elections for the benefit of those who Stark supports.

Nameless, Faceless Cowards

   A group of nameless, faceless cowards with heaps of cash - that's how I describe the perpetrators of the expensive billboard on Mill St, Hamilton - attacking the councillors and calling themselves 'Concerned Citizens'.
   As politicians, you have to be prepared to put up with some pretty vitriolic, and often personal, attacks - but the ones that are beyond the pale are those - like this so-called 'concerned citizens' crowd, that spend money attacking you, but haven't the guts to put their names out there and stand up for their views!
   The pinched (probably illegally) our Council photos without permission, and - looking at their expensive website as well - are using them as part of a personal attack on all Hamilton City Councillors.
   Its not as big as the Banksie/Dotcom saga, but is actually more sneaky and cowardly. 
   I say to the perpetrators - have the courage of your convictions; come clean, fess up - be prepared to debate the issues with me and other Councillors in public. Stop hiding under those anonymous skirts!
   Various crowds have been suggested as the instigators: David Braithwaite, Property Council, Margaret Evans, Citizens & Ratepayers - which of you is it?

Council's Floodgate debacle - can we learn some lessons?

   Of 28,000 letters sent to Hamilton ratepayers warning their property was a 'flood risk', it seems that well over half were in reality incorrect and should never have been sent; and all lacked the detail needed to substantiate the Council claims. As a result of the letters, hundreds if not thousands of ratepayers have been worried and upset unnecessarily. To add insult to injury, another 450 letters were sent only 5 days later warning ratepayers in the eastern suburbs that their properties were 'affected' by nearby high voltage powerlines and would have new restrictions placed on them - again without details. Neither of these letters were seen by elected members in advance.

   Why have these debacles occurred? And what have we learnt from them?

   Hamilton City Council's elected members have been focussing so much on a 'pure' governance model taken from the pages of the corporate structure handbook, that we have forgotten that we live in a real world where staff and management do not know everything, but where Councillors and Mayors are elected for their knowledge of the real world, and their experience (which in many cases is greater than that of staff, in my humble opinion).

   We no longer have specialist Council committees dealing with Transport, Infrastructure, Planning, Parks & Gardens, etc, but have gone to the corporate model of 'Strategy & Planning', 'Operations & Performance' and 'Finance & Project Monitoring' - all fine-sounding titles, but all in reality meaning elected Councillors are kept miles away from the details of Council's operations until far too late.

   We over-reacted after the V8's fiasco by chucking the baby out with the bathwater. We always had a Finance Committee, but it hadn't been given complete information, and hadn't sought it until too late. We have set up an Audit & Risk Committee now which is a useful 'check & balance' tool, but again not something that will automatically spot key missing components until well down the track.

   In a Council like ours, with high management turnover, the collected institutional knowledge of Councillors is  greater than that of management, and of many staff in key positions - but is frequently undervalued by the current 'leadership'.

   Some Councillors are suggesting that by giving the new CEO and his management all the day to day power we have taken our eyes off the ball, leaving elected members 'at the mercy of someone's incompetence' as one put it to me.

   Staff have technical training and some (but not complete) technical knowledge - that does NOT translate automatically into them getting everything right, and there is no amount you can pay them to guarantee 'completely right'. We should not put them in the position of being assumed to be always right - so the sooner we reinstate the checks and balances of the previous governance structure, the better - in my opinion. The sooner the whole Council starts acting like a partnership - staff and elected members, each with their own complementary roles - also the better.

   Part of the solution is to return to more specialist oversight of key operational areas of Council - where the big bucks are being spent, and the big problems could occur - we need a Transport/Infrastructure Committee, a Community Services Committee - and we especially need a Planning Committee where District Plans, and Structure Planning for new areas get the attention they deserve from those elected to be responsible. These will complement the current necessary Finance and Audit & Risk Committees, which should be retained.

What will it be like in 20 years if we do nothing?

  After 3 weeks in England, it is blindingly obvious that every local and regional (County) Council is asking itself the question: ‘what will our cities and towns be like in 20 years if we just do ‘business as usual’ and don’t seriously address the growing car problem?’

  Not one of the ones I’ve seen has taken the ‘build more roads’ option – the political colour of the local and national administrations seems to make liitle difference, except round the edges. I’ve seen Tory, Labour, Liberal Democrat and even one Green city administration – they are all working hard on public transport and cycling & walking solutions to ensure their communities are liveable in the future.

   One transport innovation that has the Brits justifiably enthusiastic is the newly opened ‘Cambridgeshire Guided Busway’ – the longest such in the world, with a total length of over 32kms. In an area similar in size and population to the central Waikato, the Conservative Party-led equivalent of the regional Council has developed a dedicated bus network, partly on old railway lines, linking 2 outlying commuter towns and 2 new development areas (one not yet built) to the old centre of Cambridge, the well-known University town with a 90,000 population.

  The buses travel up to 90kmh out of the city, but just use the normal bus routes and bus lanes inside Cambridge. In every respect bar the small mechanical guide wheels they are normal new buses similar to the Hamilton Orbiters (except for a couple of double-deckers, but in the first month recorded a 92% increase in passenger numbers over the last month of the routes they replaced.

  Well-used shared cycle/walkways parallel the guided busway out of the towns, linking also to a nationally important wetland area that was previously run down and almost inaccessible to the public.

Who'd live in London?

  Obviously, 9 million people - but after a hectic day with 4 appointments, not me! The train (very expensive) in from Bath was 40 mins late, the tube (underground) was massively overcrowded, dirty and hot - and closed on the line I needed to use (electrical fault), leaving me and thousands of others exiting at the wrong stop. And the train out was standing room only for hundreds of us as for the first 40 minutes.

  But, surprisingly, the taxi was cheap, and the driver friendly & fair, and the 'Cycle Superhighways' and 'Boris Bikes' (named after London's Tory Mayor Boris Johnson) were also cheap and easy to use - although I was very thankful I had a local cyclist 'guiding' me on the 4km ride we needed to make through the traffic. There are about 500 official bike docking stations, and over 6,000 hire bikes in the city, along with tens of thousands of other private bikes chained to bike racks, railings, posts and trees throughout the commercial area - sometimes I thought I was in Copenhagen!

  I also visited the central traffic control room, where about 2,000 traffic cameras, dozens of operators, traffic police, utility and emergency service co-ordinators managed all the city's traffic - actually (and very efficiently) managing to keep it from grinding to a halt - one of the operators I met was a kiwi, so that was probably why!

  All in all, however, competing with literally millions every day for footpath, road, and train space is definitely not your average kiwi's cup of tea. The fact that the London transport authorities have managed to get such a good (and growing) cycle network and infrastructure in place in the last few years is a testament to inspired political leadership, excellent staff management and clearly some community realisation that cars in such a crowded place are simply unworkable.

Buses & Bollards

  Visited two quite different towns - Crawley (pop. 100,000), a new town south of London developed post-War initially to take population overspill, and now the gateway to and service centre for Gatwick Airport; and Bournemouth (pop. 160,000), on the south coast settled as a tourist centre in Victorian times with 20,000 hotel beds.
  Both towns (can't be called cities because neither have 'royal warrants') are well-connected to London and other regional centres by passenger rail, and have bus services that would put any medium NZ city to shame.
  However, what I was looking at was the impressive 'Fastway' Bus Rapid Transit system in Crawley, linking all major areas in that town, the major emplyment focus of Gatwick and the smaller nearby centre of Horley (20,000). 'Guided' buses run on a combination of separated bus tracks, standard bus lanes and ordinary sections of road, coupled with bus-only priority measures at most intersections - meaning buses are pretty much the fastest and most reliable means of transport in the area, and sharply reduce the need for parking provision - especially the congested Gatwick airport precinct.
  In Bournemouth, the innovations I viewed were the 20mph (30kph) speed zones and the associated traffic calming measures in residential streets [see photo of kid-shaped bollard decked out in the local school uniform]. In order top slow traffic down and reduce the attractiveness of some wider streets as 'rat runs' physical choking of the street to one lane only is built in - very effectively.

First impressions - after 3 days 'On the Road'

Visits to Winchester, Brighton and Portsmouth in my 1st three days in the UK have shown a few common threads.... [Pic: on-street cycle parking in central Brighton]

  1/. how much more safety-conscious in the cities people are here - all three have extensive areas of 20mph (=30kph) road speed zones in residential and central city commercial districts - something that is clearly widely bought into by the travelling public, with almost zero enforcement needed. Portsmouth - with 94% of the city covered by these slow speed zones - has recently turned off all their speed cameras, while the police are at the same time saying they don't have the resources to police the lower limits - BUT there is still no obvious speeding problem, and average speeds have dropped;
  2/. how the 1980s and 1990s privatisation of public transport has led to really high fares and an almost complete inability by local councils and communities to have any control over bus, rail and tram services, and their pricing. Already I'm hearing a common thread of complaints by staff and elected members in councils here about how difficult it is to plan for future land use and transport needs;

  3/. how much more cycling, and cycle facility provision, there is here - while the weather and traffic volumes are noticeably worse - I'll have to find out the secret of this!

  4/. How proud staff and Councillors have been about their transport initiatives, and how keen they have been to discuss them, and show them to me.

Hong Kong & Zurich transport report

  Two vastly different cities on the way to the UK, but a day spent in each showed some similarities in the area of modern transport planning..... [Pic: double-decker buses, and trams (!) in Hong Kong]

  Hong Kong (6M population) & Zurich (a bit over 1M, similar to Auckland) both had modern, frequent, quick and reasonably cheap rail links between the airport and their CBDs, and other major centres - both also used effective new light rail links within the airport to shuttle people around between terminals, arrival halls & baggage claims, etc. The effect of these services kept traffic and resulting congestion on the roads in and around the airport within manageable levels - Auckland could learn a lot from them [Heathrow in London had similar services & it appears Auckland may be the odd one out!]
  In terms of large city CBD planning, both also had extensive underground walkways (especially Hong Kong) linking transport services with shopping areas, and in Hong Kong's case enabling these areas to have multiple usage, freeing up a surprising amount of above-ground land for aesthetically pleasing parks, gardens & piazzas. 
  There was a clear effort to ensure major transport systems did not detract too much from the quality of residents' and visitors' city experiences  - again more lessons for Auckland and perhaps the rest of us.
  Zurich also had an excellent 'Zurich Card' - for about NZ$30/day, transfers between the airport & downtown, all local travel on buses, trams, trains, ferries and the tourist cable-car were covered, as well as providing free entry to the city's 35-odd museums, and discounts at various restaurants and retail outlets - something all NZ cities could usefully copy!
  Both cities also had pretty good transport information displays, signage and electronic ticket self-service systems - both at stops, major stations and in other public areas - even a newbie like me was finding his way around without help within an hour or so of arriving in each place.

On the Road - first of a series of columns from Europe

Dave Macpherson is the recipient of a 2011 Winston Churchill Memorial Fellowship – for as study trip to the UK & The Netherlands looking at what New Zealand can learn from practical examples of good public transport systems and cycling and pedestrian facilities in medium and smaller cities and towns.

  Last month Cambridgeshire County in England saw the opening of a ‘guided busway’ network between the central city of Cambridge and the ‘necklace’ of smaller towns surrounding it – an area similar in population and structure to the central Waikato.

  The network is the newest and most advanced example in the UK of a Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) system, where public transport links significant employment centres with suburbs and towns that the staff live in. Bus routes are typically separate from the main roads, or (when part of them) have dedicated bus lanes, and bus priority measures at intersections.

  In a couple of weeks I’ll be experiencing the Cambridge BRT first hand, and seeing what we can learn from both the successes and delays and cost overruns they experienced!

Brighton and Hove, on England’s South Coast, won national awards for its network of ‘home zones’ where residential and suburban streets have 20mph (30kph) speed limits, and ‘shared space’  road corridor designs that encourage pedestrian and cyclist priority use of the streets, and cars – while not ‘second class citizens’ – have to negotiate roads with care and consideration for more vulnerable users.

  In the Netherlands, I’ll be looking at the same type of place, in towns like Haren, Houten and Drachten (where the ‘shared space’ concept was born), and at the amazing network of cycling facilities that country has built up.

Some of these have been in place for 30-40 years, and have helped the Dutch develop, and accept as part of their everyday life, a whole new culture around safer use of roads, and acceptance of walking and cycling as healthier, cheaper and very often quicker means of transport.

  In Hamilton and the wider Waikato, we’ve been trialling 40kph zones outside schools, and better methods of slowing traffic in suburban streets than the old ‘hump in the middle of the road’. Until two years ago, we also had nation-leading growth in bus usage, but which has stagnated or even gone backwards recently.

  If we want to continue to be leading lights in New Zealand of transport innovation, including safer roads for all users, it is important that we learn from best practice wherever it happens – I hope my study trip will bring back a lot we can learn from.

Community organisation wins the day!

  I've attended two great events in the last two days that show the great value in communities organising for things they want or need......
  On Thursday 14th October, the Mardon Rd community successfully stopped plans for yet another suburban liquor store being plonked (so to speak) in their midst. As a successful community protest march was starting up, news came in that the public opposition to the liquor licence had caused the applicants to withdraw their application to the City Council.
  Over 1200 submissions in opposition had already been organised, and will still be delivered to the Council to reinforce a very widespread community view that there are far too many local booze shops, and that they are far too accessible for communities already suffering from the effects of a booze culture.
  Today (Friday 15th Oct) I was at the opening of the 4km Horsham Downs to Hamilton cycling/walking track - not something that either Waikato District or Hamilton City Councils had installed FOR the community, BUT a facility that the local Horsham Downs community had itself planned, fundraised and organised for, with work and materials provided by the local community.
  Hundreds of primary schoolkids from both Horsham Downs and Te Totara Primary schools attended, and showed their support for both the project (a winner of the inaugural Celia Wade-Brown active transport award) and for the Cancer Society, which the opening was fundraising for.
  Congratulations to both communities - motre power to your arms!

Hamilton - in with the New, and the Old!

  City Council & Regional Council (Environment Waikato) election results from Hamilton yesterday showed that voters were a little grumpy - but not very!
  Whether candidates did well or not had more to do with how good/expensive a campaign they ran, coupled with their name recognition in the city, and a decline in support for the negative Hennebry 'Rates Control' group.
  Obviously, new Mayor Julie Hardaker did well to come from a long way behind and take the prize on the day - she campaigned very well, with very good timing and very good targetting of messages and voters. She was seen to be an energetic campaigner and - for those wanting change, or grumpy with rates, etc. - a much more sensible choice than the negative Hennebry group.
  Apart from Glenda Saunders, all sitting City Councillors were returned (albeit some narrowly), with the 'new' Councillors being returning previous Councillors Martin Gallagher and Ewan Wilson - both of whom ran good, and expensive, campaigns in the West Ward to capture the two 'vacant' seats left by the departures of  Kay Gregory and Joe Di Maio.
  Margaret Forsyth was the only new  'Rates Control' candidate elected - clearly her personal name recognition from sporting circles played a much larger role in her successful East Ward campaign than did the 'Rates Control' tag. In the West Ward, the best performing candidates were Ronnie Philips and Tania Hennebry - both personally well-known for their radio and WEL Energy Trust work, while the other less well-known candidates in the Hennebry grouping were miles behind. Even team 'leader' Roger Hennebry suffered a drop in support in both the Mayoral and East Ward votes.
  On EW, Lois Livingstone made it back easily as a Hamilton rep, and Paula Southgate topped the poll - both a big turnaround from the 'Rates Control' capture in 2007. The Hennebry faction vote dropped significantly and one of their 3 Councillors lost her seat.
  Conversely, in rural areas where the negativeness of 'Rates Control' was less well-recognised, this team did well, with the exception of the South Waikato, where the hard-working Norm Barker staved off a joint attack from 'Rates Control' and Federated Farmers. This leaves EW in an interesting position, with 6 'Rates Control' members and 6 more positive independents - it is predicted by this column that some of the more realistic 'Rates Control' rural Councillors will be attracted to a more centrist position and be willing to work with an independent majority.
  A clear majority of supporters for the passenger rail link between Waikato and Auckland were elected on both Councils (new Waikato District Mayor Alan Sanson has also signed the 'pledge), so it will be interesting to see how that one pans out.
  Clearly the ongoing issues with the CBD - the physical upgrade, and how more businesses and life can be attracted, etc. - will need to be a focus for the City Council in the near future.
  One lesson for Hamilton is perhaps that 'teams' or 'tickets' don't work and aren't viewed as open and inclusive by many of the public. Another is that public bodies need to take the public with them more - hearts & minds stuff - when they are getting into big or new projects, and need to make sure they practice what they preach when they talk about responsibility and accountability.

Rimmington & Rates Control interview dreams & come out with "facts"!

  In an astounding claim in the Waikato Times today, former Mare Russ ('Russ-Russ') Rimmington claimed he had met Roger and Jane Hennebry on "fight against the Hamilton Casino" - a claim that is impossible, unless he had invented a time travel machine.

  While Rimmington (nicknamed 'Russ-Russ' after flirting with the idea of importing pandas from China at the cost to ratepayers of several million dollars) did indeed himself jump on the 1998 anti-casino bandwagon after he saw the huge public opposition being organised against it, Roger & Jane were never seen in that campaign.

  As the publicity officer, and a founding member of the Casino Opposition Action Committee, I never even met the pair until mid-2001, when Roger decided he could save the city by being elected to Council, and by which time the Casino was already a reality.

  Of course, Russ-Russ has often been economical with the facts, or conveniently overlooked the inconvenient ones; in fact the very same Hennebrys that he is now so enamoured of were great supporters of his nemesis, the chaotic Mayor David Braithwaite, after Braithwaite dumped Rimmington in the 2001 elections.

  Whether Russ-Russ sticks with the Rates Control group if he is elected to EW is also another matter - as was put to him a couple of months ago, he is likely to quickly distance himself from that negative mob if his dream of a Chairmanship at EW requires the support of the majority of more normal members.

  Ah well, we all know politics makes strange bedfellows, and while talking about beds, it would be nice if the Times checked they were getting facts, not dreams, in their interviews!

Greypower apologists for 'Rates Control'?

  A letter appeared in today's Waikato Times pointing out that the 'non-political' local Greypower organisation was actually very political - in favour of the negative whingers and moaners in the 'Rates Control' group. I've written to the Times with my own views on this....

  B M Crawforth’s letter (23 September) criticising the “non-aligned” Hamilton Greypower for its blatant support for the political group ‘Rates Control’ strikes a chord.

  Recently that group held what purported to be a public ‘election meeting’ (6^th September) to which it did not invite any candidates other than “Rates Control” ones.

  A few other candidates heard about this meeting one day in advance and were able to attend, but most others did not.

  As someone who helped organise six meetings in the West Ward – to which every single city council candidate was invited and given equal opportunity to speak – I am appalled at the lack of democracy of Greypower and their ‘Rates Control’ mates.

  If that is an example of the open-ness and transparency these groups carry on about, then heaven help the city if these backroom types actually get elected.

  Fortunately, that is a very unlikely occurrence.

  Unfortunately for a once proud and independent organisation, Greypower’s credibility has gone down the tubes, and it will be some time before they recover it.

For the record, I have been predicting for some time that this Rates Control crowd will only get between one and three Councillors elected to Hamilton City Council, and will lose Environment Waikato seats. I have also long predicted that their 'leader' (now there's a misnomer if ever there was one), Roger Hennebry, will come 3rd in the Mayoral race - as another, unkind, Councillor said "Rates Control's biggest problem is their leader!"

Eastgate legal opinion vindicates community stand

  A high-powered legal opinion received by the Hamilton City Council has shown staff should NOT have issued a 'Certificate of Compliance' (resource consent) for the Eastgate development on the corner of Clyde and Grey Sts in Hamilton East.
  The opinion - by Paul Cavanagh QC - also states that a 'consent notice' preventing access by the Eastgate developers onto the busy Grey St should not have been removed by Council staff.
  Both actions by Council planning staff - supported by well-paid lawyers - were strongly opposed by the Hamilton East Community Trust, who were at a total financial disadvantage throughout the battle, with both the millionaire applicant, and the Council opposing them at every stage. HECT's 'expert' witnesses in the end refused to attend the Environment Court on behalf of HECT, when HECT ran out of cash to pay their appearance costs, thuse severely damaging the community's case. Both Council and the Ministry of the Environment had earlier refused to fund any of the community's legal costs.
  The opinion is a complete vindication of the community's stand, as represented by the HECT.
  This whole case is a sad and unfortunate indictment of the way in which a number of planning consent issues have been handled in Council (and probably not just in Hamilton). Developers - with every advantage of funds, experience, access to decision-makers, and familiarity with the legal/planning fraternity - are often on a different (and vastly superior) playing field to the community.
  Councils and their staff must change the way they look at planning consent issues when there is a strongly-expressed community viewpoint - they may not be required to take into account the community's interests, but if they are doing their jobs they damn well ought to, in my humble opinion!
  Recent concerns expressed by the Templeview community over the proposed demolition of Church College buildings by the US-based Church hierarchy were another case in point. It was extremely difficult to get Council staff to agree to seriously consult with the local community over these plans.
  The fact that two Hamilton City Councillors had to pay towards the legal costs of the HECT, just to ensure a genuinely independent legal opinion was accessed, is not good enough - I hope everyone has learnt a lesson from this.