Council needs to stop its spending on dumb things

What a waste — $360,000 for “research” into the Peak Track.. Who earns this money. Even at $1000 per hour that is nine weeks’ work.

Let’s say three people working on the “research”, that’s three full weeks at $1000/hour. At $200/hour it would be 45 weeks’ work for one person, 15 weeks for three people.

Who is conning the council and who is so dumb on our council to pay this? Stop ripping us ratepayers off and stop spending “our money” on dumb things.

Time the council starting thinking about how money is spent, not just dishing it out. Come on Mayor Hazelhurst — how can you explain this one? I bet you won’t reply! MMarsh

Hastings

Misleading financials

Congratulations on the six NCC councillors publicly stating they are now supporting the retention and expansion of the Onekawa pool complex as opposed to a new complex in Prebensen Drive.

It is simply shocking that one reason given by Cr Wise was that, in her opinion, the financial information in particular was quite misleading.

The question then has to be asked — are the parties responsible for providing and supporting the misleading financial information going to be held to account?

The NCC has had an appalling record of relying on misleading financial information for a number of multimillion dollar projects which have cost the ratepayers dearly in write offs, abandonment or on going losses.

These include the MTG, the deco buses, the velodrome project, the aquarium (and now its extension) and now the controversial pool project.

Let us hope that next year we have the opportunity to elect a new, younger council who will question all financial information provided before embarking on hare-brained vanity projects at the expense of our decrepit water infrastructure.

Shaun Bates

Napier

Other opinions on port

Of the 13 opinions on the Port of Napier proposal published in HB Today between November 29 and December 7, those of the two regional councillors have already been heavily publicised. Other views were as follows.

First, on the council’s questionnaire, Duncan Priest noted there was only a 4.9 per cent response rate. I said my sympathies were with those who weren’t responding, and Philip M. Ward said an awful lot of people saw it as a waste of time, because the council wasn’t listening and would do what it liked.

On the proposed new wharf, Trevor Le Lievre said there was no business plan, risk analysis or projected return on equity. Graham Chaplow said it may not be needed and debate was needed on a range of options. I said the real question was whether it was a sound business decision; Ross Allan said all four options will lead to a merger with Port of Tauranga, and could be funded from cash flow, Fred Robinson said there was no business case, Otto Mengelaut said the port needs to align itself with the national shipping strategy, Bruce Bissett said there was no business case or independent review.

On the general approach, Haub Maas said there was no need to sell, Walter Breustadt asked why couldn’t the council be more transparent and T. Allen said more information must be shared before expansion is considered.

To summarise — a long way from being a vote of confidence!

I’d like to think at least some of the councillors may be listening to our views.