But no we go re litigate everything else.
What should have been a 45 minute debate turned into a 2:30 hour joke that only proves: that again the Governing Body did screw up a debate and continue on its history path of being ineffectual as a collective. Which is a damned shame as we do have some fine and smart individual Councillors in there. Those individual Councillors I will again confer to soon on their good efforts yesterday.
For the rest though you had one very simple job to do: Vote for Option 2 (2018 start date on the main project) – which passed in the end 14-6 (so Super Majority levels), and debate on how we are to fund our contribution.
So what did they do? Try re-litigate four years of previous debate in the name of pushing your own failed barrow.
I will put in a presser on those who had one job but failed followed by the reply I gave soon after on their failure:
Media release – Auckland Councillors Denise Krum, Cameron Brewer and Linda Cooper – Tuesday, 9 December 2014:
Move to work with Govt on their 2020 start date for City Rail Link lost
Auckland Councillors Denise Krum, Cameron Brewer and Linda Cooper say they’re disappointed a more prudent City Rail Link amendment put by Ms Krum and seconded by Mr Brewer was resoundingly lost today by 17 votes to three.
The council met today to dial back their recently proposed project start date of 2015/16 to instead starting the main works from 2018/19 following concerns raised by the Auditor-General. This overall revised approach was in the end supported 14 votes to six.
The three councillors support Auckland Council doing the enabling works over the next three years, but pushed to work with the Government on their preferred start date of 2020 for the main works and potentially bringing it forward if the Government stumped up the money.
Denise Krum: “I’m very disappointed this amendment didn’t attract support. It backs the project, proceeds with the enabling works, strives for an earlier start date, and tries to squeeze more money out of Government. It ticks all the boxes but sadly it was lost. This amendment was a genuine attempt to provide greater protection to Auckland ratepayers, while positively and realistically advancing the project. We now run the risk of appearing to mislead ratepayers on assumptions we simply shouldn’t be making.
Cameron Brewer: “The Auditor General has long pushed for greater certainty and more information around this massive project, but 2018/19 at best remains a complete stab in the dark but that’s what council will now formally consult on as its preferred option. Putting 2020 in the draft Long Term Plan would have been more appropriate given that’s the only absolute guarantee council has from Wellington. Starting from 2015/16 and putting in $854m for the next three years alone was always outrageous, the Auditor General dismissed it, yet it will still appear as an option in the public consultation which is completely inappropriate given it could never be delivered. But the Mayor is seemingly using it to rally the troops.
Linda Cooper: “2020 was a much more prudent approach. We should be working with Wellington, and not use the Long Term Plan as a political bargaining tool. It was never intended to be that. Rather it should accurately reflect the best information we have at the time, and in this instance 2020 is all we have from Government. Until they change their mind we should work with them and that date in good faith. Anything else is pure speculation and I just don’t want the Auditor General to come back to council again. However if the Government was to agree to an earlier start, I would be on board in a heartbeat.”
The lost Krum/Brewer amendment below:
That the Governing Body:
a) approve the financial data for the Long-Term Plan 2015-2025 being updated to reflect the City Rail Link Option 4 scenario of:
i. council proceeding with investigation and design, land purchases and enablement works for the next three years (total $400 million)
ii. construction on main works commencing in 2020/21, commensurate with government funding, and after a binding funding agreement has been concluded.
b) support continued negotiations with government to achieve an earlier start date for main works construction and a minimum 50% contribution by government to the entire cost of the City Rail Link project, including the cost of investigation and design, land purchases and enablement works to be incurred by Auckland Council over the next three years of the Long-Term Plan 2015-2025
c) delegate authority for these negotiations to both the political and executive level.
Ends
————-
My reply:
Your amendment lost 17-3 which was at Absolute Majority Levels to which the main resolution passed 14-6 or at Super Majority Levels.
That in itself is telling.
It is also telling that the amendment you lot sorted after was the incorrect amendment and patronising to the Ratepayer as well.
This would have been your better amendment:
Recommendation: Pass a Notice of Motion on Tuesday that would allow no preference in funding options as “suggested” by the Council. But rather allow the ratepayers to pick an option of their own choice or creation (or even a do nothing) and the Governing Body to consider them all then put in place for the LTP in July next year.
That NoM I just put up above if passed would have allowed via the Long Term Plan consultation round next year the public to fully decide on when to start the City Rail Link and how WE are going to fund it rather than have Council superimpose fixed starting dates and fixed funding mechanisms against the Ratepayer that we might not want through denial of our own choices.
The Government has committed to the 2020 provision with a very high chance of an earlier start. Your sole duty today and I mean sole duty was to hand over the decision via collaboration and empowerment to the citizens on what start date we might want and how we might want to fund the Auckland 50%
But hey I was asking too much for the bulk of the Governing Body for today
………
One job Councillors, you had just one job.
I did give my thanks to those individual Councillors who didn’t re-litigate four years of previous debate and tried to keep the debate to the actual business at hand as mentioned at the top. For the rest of you 2016 won’t be coming fast enough!
Yes I am deeply annoyed.
And yes I am mulling my own options for a bid in 2016
UPDATE
The Minutes from the Extraordinary Governing Body Meeting yesterday
Talking Southern Auckland 