Editor's Opinion - Mahurangi

March 14, 2012

Rates and charges need scrutiny

Who should pay for central Auckland’s transport upgrade and how? Those are two of the big questions communities across Auckland are being asked in the current Long Term Plan (LTP) and accompanying transport discussion document. Currently, the bulk of transport funding comes from government collected fuel taxes, road user charges on diesel vehicles and vehicle registration, as well as from Council rates and borrowing. But Council estimates that in addition to the $50 billion that will be spent over the next 30 years on Auckland’s transport, another $10 to $15 billion will be needed over the same period to fund additional projects such as the inner city rail link. So, as well as what we already pay, we’re being asked to consider 10 options for raising additional revenue. These include increasing general rates, tax increment funding (a tax on the increase in property value brought about by a project), further road tolling, higher car parking charges, visitor taxes and an airport departure tax. If Rodney residents feel that levelling any of these charges on northern ratepayers is unreasonable or unfair, then now is the time to have your say. The transport discussion document is relatively easy to follow and can be found on the Council website.

It’s just unfortunate that the same clarity is not represented in the Long Term Plan, which comes in four volumes and weighs in at more than 550 pages. The Regional Land Transport Programme is a further 75-pages. Both documents contain important information on how our rates will be spent over the next three to 10 years, including Local Board priorities, but good luck if you expect to read these documents and finish with a clear understanding of what is and is not proposed for Rodney. The Local Board budget is reasonably straightforward, but relates only to the limited spending at the board’s disposal. Big ticket items in the water supply and sewerage, transport and environment budgets focus on huge regional projects with little or no information on small district schemes or projects. This information must be in the bowels of Council’s finance department somewhere, but we certainly couldn’t find it.

Generally speaking, however, the LTP demonstrates that this Council firmly believes in the user-pays system. While the rate rise seems modest at 3.6 percent (in the first year), animal registrations, building work and resource consents are all set to increase significantly. We will also pay more to access advice from Council officers. The odd exception is public swimming pools, which the Mayor wants to remain free. Pity we don’t have one in the north.

These documents aren’t easy reading, particularly because they are primarily available only on the internet, but Rodney residents would do well to grit their teeth and tackle them now. It will be no use complaining down the track. Comment on all these documents closes on March 23.

February 15, 2012

Sir Humphrey alive and well in Rodney

It is disappointing to see the Rodney Local Board assuming some of the bad habits of its predecessor Rodney District Council. In particular, the tactic of discussing matters of public interest in ‘workshops’ where the public and media are excluded. Under the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987, councils can go ‘into committee’ to discuss sensitive matters which may perhaps have commercial or staffing implications, and this is entirely appropriate. The chair states the reasons for the need for confidentiality in the open meeting and the decision is made public when the open meeting resumes.

However, a workshop has no such legislative requirements and it appears, can be used on a whim. The latest example is the discussion on January 31 of the Local Board Agreement with Auckland Council’s governing body and, in particular, a $1.2 million shortfall in funding for Rodney projects. The item was listed in an open agenda at a publicly advertised meeting. But when it came up for discussion, the board chairman moved that it be dealt with in a workshop and the media, represented by Mahurangi Matters, was asked to leave.

The board had no business holding this discussion behind closed doors. They are elected by ratepayers and serve the community, and their discussion about expenditure of public money is of the utmost interest. Only through public scrutiny can we feel confident that the discussion was robust, fair and well-informed, and all possibilities and options explored. Decisions made in secret without scrutiny lack accountability and can lead to complacency and public contempt.

We have since learned that the decision to deal with the item in a workshop was made on the recommendation of staff. Understandably, the board has been relying heavily on the experience of its support staff since being elected in November 2010. For the majority of board members, this is their first experience of politics on the other side of the table and staff has been invaluable in guiding them through these early months. But, perhaps it is time to remind the board that it serves residents and ratepayers of Rodney, not the public relations machine of Council, and it is to the residents and ratepayers they owe loyalty and transparency.

The Rodney board, and we could include Council Controlled Organisations such as Watercare here as well, needs to determine what level of engagement it wants to foster with its communities. Does the board have the confidence to allow open and honest examination of how it is doing business, or will it continue to use ‘workshops’ to avoid scrutiny? A wrong decision could be costly in more ways than one.

August 3, 2011

Park ‘n’ ride decision sensible

The announcement that Auckland Transport is shelving plans to build a Clayton’s park ‘n’ ride in Silverdale in favour a 500 space facility with signalised intersection, pedestrian crossing and new bus station, is good news for Warkworth and Hibiscus Coast commuters. Although it means further delays of possibly up to a year, the proposed 100 car parking facility, designed to meet Rugby World Cup demands, was never going to work. In the end it would have been a waste of ratepayers money and would have left most drivers frustrated.

Usage of the Albany park ‘n’ ride exceeded expectations almost from day one and has already been increased to 550 spaces with further expansion planned. The criticism that is levelled at it most frequently is that “it’s always full”. So it is good to see Auckland Transport learning a lesson from this experience. The real question is will 500 spaces be enough?

The NZ Transport Agency says there are 16,500 vehicles travelling between Warkworth and Puhoi every day – how many of these are commuting to jobs in Auckland is unclear. But the park ‘n’ ride will also service the estimated 7000 daily commuters coming off the Whangaparaoa Peninsula so you don’t have to be a mathematician to work out that 500 carparks will soon be utilised. A well serviced park ‘n’ ride could make carpooling a practical and convenient option for some, and it could also mean a bus service from Warkworth, maybe event Wellsford, could be viable.

Whatever the outcomes are, the message for Auckland Transport is clear – don’t let this project slip any further behind. Petrol is getting more expensive by the day and people in the north are entitled to some public transport options.

Related story: Park ‘n’ ride misses World Cup deadline

March 2, 2011

Continuity in question

With three meetings under its belt, the role of the Rodney Local Board is evolving into something of a talkfest. The public forums, which should be over in no more than 30 to 40 minutes, are being allowed to drift on interminably. At last month’s meeting in Warkworth, the session went for well over two hours. Little wonder that Rodney Cr Penny Webster has been making herself scarce, attending briefly only one meeting so far.

That is not to say that the issues being raised are not important – the Mahurangi Action Plan, restoration of the Warkworth Town Hall, a multi-purpose sports facility for Warkworth and the Te Hana Te Ao Marama Marae and Cultural Village are just some of the worthy projects being highlighted. However, the reality is that board members can do little more than ask a few pertinent questions, nod sagely and then refer the item to Auckland Council.

Organisations, which had previous dealings with Rodney Council, are understandably keen to ensure that they don’t lose ground under the new Council arrangements. They want some reassurance that the countless hours (mostly volunteer) they have already invested in their projects will be recognised and backed. However, there have also been individual presentations by people who represent only their own points of view with no mandate from a recognised group or organisation.

It is still unclear how board members will assess or prioritise public forum issues, without access to the traditional pool of Council engineers, town planners, financial advisors, public health officers and environmental specialists who would normally provide some overall evaluation of issues and look at the financial implications. There is also little evidence that board members are being given any background on these projects, and the considerable time and effort that Rodney Council staff invested in the “transition” process does not appear to be filtering down to board level.

One wonders if board members are being expected to do this leg work themselves? If so, their job is not one to be envied.