A battle of wits? (9 Jun, 2022)

[aardvark_admin]

This column is archived at: https://aardvark.co.nz/daily/2022/0609.shtml

How can anyone accept as "good management", actions or inaction that turns what was (by their own words) "a valuable council asset" into something that is now deemed "abandoned" and "written off" in just 10 short years?

This is truly indicative of the fact that this council has neither the resources nor the ability to manage things such as the local airfield.

Indeed, in the 20 years since I moved to Tokoroa, the local airfield has gone from a busy little rural airfield to a deserted strip of tarmac that sees ten times as much drone and model aircraft activity as manned aviation.

The worst thing is that this is a council that doesn't even know enough to choose good consultants to help them and which steadfastly refuses to take advice from experts within the community who have offered to give freely of their time, efforts, knowledge and experience.

There is an election in October so today our local councilors really need to show that they have the best interests of stake-holders (ie: ratepayers) in mind when they make some crucial decisions over the airfield tower and the airfield itself.

I shall do my best to hold their feet to the flames.

Film at eleven

[Perry]

Be sure not to miss the next enthralling episode of . . . SWDComical Capers.

[aardvark_admin]

I'm back...

Realising that they were on a hiding to nothing.. the CE of the council withdrew the report prior to the meeting.

I still had my say but you will not believe the response I got -- on second thoughts, you probably will.

I also had the new CE of the council try to stop me from recording -- alleging that I needed the permission of those I was recording when the "public" forum was being held. She seemed to find it hard to understand that there is no expectation of privacy in a *public* place and since this was a *public* forum, it qualified as a public place.

Then, to top it all off, the mayor declared that the issues raised in the *public* forum would be discussed in *public excluded*.

I tried to find the word "transparency" in the SWDC's dictionary but the whole page seems to have been torn out.

[joeseph]

Perhaps readers are tired of hearing about this matter

Hell, no - far too often councils just push thru with their own agenda. Give 'em heaps.

[GSVNoFixedAbode]

...
Then, to top it all off, the mayor declared that the issues raised in the *public* forum would be discussed in *public excluded*.

A lot of NZ councils now stream their public meetings live on YT, so I definitely think your new CE needs to take a refresher on what the meaning of 'public meeting' is. As for taking the discussions into a non-public session, that usually requires a specific reason, usually related to commercially-sensitive contract matters. Dirty laundry and pants-down situations shouldn't qualify. Perhaps a mention of the OIA (which means they would have to formally justify the decision to be non-public) is called for?

Anyway, good luck!

[aardvark_admin]

The justification our council gives for conducting so much business in "public excluded" is that allows "free and frank" discussion of the matters at hand.

Why that can't be done in public I have no idea.

[aardvark_admin]

In the latest outburst of petulance and churlish behaviour, the SWDC has blocked me from viewing their Facebook page.

I find this rather odd because:

1. they have refused to even acknowledge my emails which have requests for a response
2. now they block my ability to interact via Facebook

This is in clear violation of their own Code of Conduct which clearly states:

Given that the performance of the Council requires the trust and respect of individual citizens,
Members will:

- interact with Members of the public in a fair, respectful, equitable and honest manner;
- be available to listen and respond openly and honestly to community concerns;
- consider all points of view or interests when participating in debate and making decisions;
- treat Members of the public in a courteous manner; and
- act in a way that upholds the reputation of the local authority.

Any failure by Members to act in the manner described above represents a breach of this Code.

It's very clear that the SWDC is in "la la la la la" - fingers in ears mode.

I have now requested that the CE of the council issues a CoC violation against the entire council and that they are censured under the provisions of that CoC. If this does not happen then it speaks to an even greater level of disfunction than even I thought possible.

[phill]

you have to love mission statements
they always sound so good