Back to battlestations (5 Apr, 2018)

Have your say on today's Aardvark Daily column

Back to battlestations (5 Apr, 2018)

Postby aardvark_admin » Thu Apr 05, 2018 9:50 am

This column is archived at: https://aardvark.co.nz/daily/2018/0405.shtml

What is wrong with our Mayor?

Why has she unilaterally, and without consultation with either her councilors or the public, revoked a general permission to fly drones in our parks?

Is it because there were complaints from the public?

No.

Is it because there were incidents or accidents involving such activities?

No.

Could it be simply because I highlighted some of the "not so good" things that this council has been doing of late and revealed some "inconvenient facts"?

And does a mayor even have the power to nullify assurances given in good faith by councilors?

Finally... the big question... what will happen to the Mayor's public support when her council prosecutes some 8-year-old kid for having some harmless fun in a park with their small flying toy?

We deserve better governance and a more honest mayor -- don't you think?
aardvark_admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 2954
Joined: Wed May 07, 2014 2:10 pm

Re: Back to battlestations (5 Apr, 2018)

Postby Malcolm » Thu Apr 05, 2018 10:46 am

Before you engage in any acts of public disobedience you should probably check with a lawyer that you have all of your definitions and understanding of the laws/processes the same as the court's interpretations. It is very often someone takes their understanding of proceedings from an American TV show only to find out that things don't work that way in the real world.
Also you should probably start by using the LGOIMA to get the advice and correspondence the Mayor has on changing this drone rule to see where it came from.
Malcolm
 
Posts: 250
Joined: Thu May 08, 2014 9:43 am

Re: Back to battlestations (5 Apr, 2018)

Postby aardvark_admin » Thu Apr 05, 2018 10:52 am

I've done my homework. Yes, I may be prosecuted and convicted... but in doing so, the Mayor's duplicity in this matter will be highlighted, as will her contempt for the processes that are supposed to be used to effect such actions. I'm happy to pay a fine if it means exposing the petulance and contempt for the basic tenets of democracy that are taking place here.

Of course, let's not forget the hypocrisy of a mayor who claims to be working to promote and improve the image of council, only to drag it through the mud by way of her actions which appear to be driven by nothing other than a personal issue.
aardvark_admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 2954
Joined: Wed May 07, 2014 2:10 pm

Re: Back to battlestations (5 Apr, 2018)

Postby goosemoose » Thu Apr 05, 2018 11:07 am

If I'm getting this right the mayor decided all by herself to change this bylaw/regulation. They just can't do that can they? I note she also used the word policy. You can have policy coming out the yin-yang but policy ain't law. You can't arrest some one for a breach of policy. As I understand it :?
goosemoose
 
Posts: 525
Joined: Thu May 08, 2014 1:05 pm

Re: Back to battlestations (5 Apr, 2018)

Postby aardvark_admin » Thu Apr 05, 2018 12:01 pm

It's actually a it more convoluted than that.

When the new bylaw was passed, the stated intention of the council was that people be allowed to fly their drones in the parks without fear of prosecution. The bylaw deferred to the "drone policy" which, at that time, prohibited the flying of drones so councilors agreed that there would be no prosecutions under this policy and that freedom from prosecution would be in effect until a new policy was drafted up and passed into effect by the council.

Now the mayor has, without consultation and without warning, simply told us that the old policy is in effect and people will be prosecuted.

The councilors who agreed to the policy are not best-pleased that the mayor has made this statement since it is a violation of the assurances that were put in place by them.
aardvark_admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 2954
Joined: Wed May 07, 2014 2:10 pm

Re: Back to battlestations (5 Apr, 2018)

Postby Malcolm » Thu Apr 05, 2018 12:47 pm

aardvark_admin wrote:Now the mayor has, without consultation and without warning, simply told us that the old policy is in effect and people will be prosecuted.

The councilors who agreed to the policy are not best-pleased that the mayor has made this statement since it is a violation of the assurances that were put in place by them.


All the more reason to use the LGOIMA to request the correspondence and advice the Mayor received when making this decision,
Malcolm
 
Posts: 250
Joined: Thu May 08, 2014 9:43 am

Re: Back to battlestations (5 Apr, 2018)

Postby aardvark_admin » Thu Apr 05, 2018 12:57 pm

Yes, an LGOIMA request has been filed with the council and a CC sent to the local media. I'm about to roll out the big guns on this issue and if the Mayor wants to make herself a target, so be it.
aardvark_admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 2954
Joined: Wed May 07, 2014 2:10 pm

Re: Back to battlestations (5 Apr, 2018)

Postby Perry » Fri Apr 06, 2018 9:13 am

The worst part of all this is the waste of resources. I.E. People's time, energy and money.

Having been down this track, I know how galling it is to know that I'm paying to fight the issue, as well as paying Rates to pay the council to fight me. (Or the community, or whatever) The mantra / motto seems to be:
Don't worry - it's OK.
The Ratepayers can pay.
Perry
 
Posts: 412
Joined: Thu May 08, 2014 9:31 pm


Return to Today's column

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests