Tag: Len Brown

Really – With The Surveys?

· 2 Comments ·

Seems the Centre Right are Lacking Again?

 

This keeps cropping up today thanks to Councillor Cameron Brewer:

Polls cost millions

Len Brown‘s Auckland Council has spent more than $5.1 million on pollsters and surveys in the past three years.

A council spokesman said about 60 per cent of the spending was required under law, mainly for annual planning and reporting.

 

But councillor Cameron Brewer said spending on pollsters was “out of control”.

 

Brewer said: “Think of the improvements a local park or playground could’ve enjoyed with this money. Instead it’s all gone into lining the pockets of private pollsters.”

The figures were released to Brewer under the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act.

 

“It’s time to stop the spinning and get back to delivering core council services for ratepayers,” he said. He suspected the polling was being done for “purely political reasons”.

 

A further $212,237 has been spent on around 15,827 panellists that the council use to “have their say on a wide range of council issues, activities and plans”.

…

You can read the rest over at the Herald site.

 

Seriously though is this all Cameron and candidate for mayorship Palino really think about at the moment?

While conducting polls is a vexed issue (and rightfully so), the People’s Panel to which I participate in is a straight forward exercise.

You sign up and periodically you get to fill out an electronic survey that comes into your email box. Where ever you can access the emails you can do the survey. And that means some days I might be filling one out at a lunch break in Town Hall. Most are short (although I did get a long one on parks and recreation) and relate to CORE service issues Council provide and the Right Wing blather on about.

The surveys I have done from the People’s Panel have included:

  • The Proposed Takanini Library (survey commissioned by the Local Board)
  • Parks and Recreation
  • Unitary Plan (had a few of those and a reason I was invited to the Civic Forums on the Unitary Plan)
  • Public Transport
  • The CBD

I seriously don’t see what the problem is with the People’s Panel (which do release summaries after the said survey). The surveys are designed to be quick, efficient and “portable” for when Council, the Local Boards, or even Auckland Transport are scoping out opinions.

Yes Desley (of Orakei) we can go to the Local Boards and the Local Boards can come to us. But, that can be slow and cumbersome when one needs a quick fire quantitative survey done on something. Heck even the Papakura Local Board engaged in a People’s Panel survey on the proposed Library.

I would assume my Local Board would then hold face to face or submission sessions on the Library if the survey results were in favour of the proposal.

 

So the People’s Panel has its use and I don’t mind giving my opinions to the Council in that format when they want to answer something particular. It can sure beat writing 105 page submissions and long blog posts to boot.

But, in their drive for “savings” and “core services” it would seem Brewer and Palino would cut off an actual “core service” – by denying an easy medium for Council to (you know Cameron seeming you go on about it) engage with the local or wider community.

Oh and if you wonder about the gauge of opinions, well I know the Panel would be diverse if my comments and Facebook friend Scott’s are anything to go by. Some days we would agree other days the Centre Left and Centre Right arguments (me being the “young Tory) will come out. And by looking at the Civic Forums the mix was reasonably balanced except on the geographic front where South Auckland was lacking in numbers BADLY!

 

Come on guys find better ways in getting our rates bill down – while not hobbling an engagement arm Council and running distractions on lack of hard policy…

Taking a look at Three Mayoral Candidates

· 1 Comment ·

They are vying for your vote after all

 

With social media full of campaigning updates, and TEDx Talks currently being held in the CBD as I write this (well yesterday) I thought I might give another glance at three of our mayoral candidates vying for our vote: incumbent Mayor Len Brown, the Rev. Usefili Unasa, and  John Palino.

After a quick search through the Main Stream Media I note things have gone rather silent since both Len and John launched their campaigns around mid July. I have noted the respect candidate’s websites and Palino dropping a bit into Scoop that the MSM have not picked up on…

Lets take a look a screen shot of Brown and Palino’s respective websites (note I run a 27″ widescreen)

Len Brown

Browns internet front page

 

 

Palino

Palinos webpage front

 

 

You can visit the two’s respective sites by clicking on the links above for your viewing pleasure.

While I have not discovered a website for Rev Unasa yet but I had dug up this little nugget from All About Auckland that runs interviews and feeds on Auckland Council affairs. You Tube is where All About Auckland (run by Kane Glass) is uploading videos on Council affairs can be found here http://www.youtube.com/user/aboutakl/about

 

So the question I leave to readers, rather than have me frame the commentary or put words in people’s mouths is what do you think? More to the point what are your issues for the elections in October (by postal ballot).

Leave your comments below in the comment box. Note to first time commenters, your comments are held in moderation until I approve them. Once your first comment is approved then you are free to comment in real-time – until I revoke that privilege (usually because you broke a rule of the site).

 

While my mind is at it I also ask a tougher question. 2016 – the next round of Local Elections. It is known a campaign for a Council (or even Central Government) seat starts at the previous campaign and must be sustained for the term of the upcoming Council before we hit the polls again in three years time (from now). So what would you be not only looking for in the 2013-2016 term of Council, but for those vying in 2016.

It is a more cryptic or thought-provoking way into looking at the long-term towards the City as a whole.

 

The comment box is open below

 

Mood of the Boardroom on Len

·

Businesses Quite Warm to Len

People still also don’t see a viable alternative candidate

 

The prominent Mood of the Boardroom exercise was conducted this week in Auckland. What had me interested the most was the fact that most businesses were quite warm to our current Mayor Len Brown and won’t mind him pulling a second term with the mayoral chains.

From the NZ Herald

CEOs cautiously back Brown bid

By Bill Bennett

 

Although a clear majority of business leaders say Len Brown deserves a second term as Auckland mayor, that doesn’t mean he has unqualified support.

 

Sixty per cent of CEO respondents to the Herald survey said Brown should return to the Auckland mayoral chambers. Only 16 per cent are against Brown getting a second term.

 

Brown had a landslide victory in the first Auckland-wide mayoral election in 2010 beating John Banks and Colin Craig. Within minutes of being elected, Brown spoke of his ambition to make Auckland the world’s “most liveable city”.

 

His platform was dominated by a promise to improve public transport in three main areas: build an inner city rail loop, extend the railway to the airport and, eventually, to the North Shore. He also promised to defend public ownership of assets and create a more compact city.

 

Earlier this month Brown made the airport rail link a focus of his re-election campaign.

 

His rivals for the election, due in October, include American-born businessman and former TV host John Palino who plans to shift the epicentre of the city south to Manukau and activist John Minto who will stand for the Mana Party.

 

The lack of a credible alternative mayor is noted

…

With the “lack of credible alternative mayor” piece; meh I give up going on about that now. Seems the elections are forgone in the mayoral department this time around.

As for everything else it seems our businesses are warm (but not flash hot) towards Len. While you can read individual comments in the said article from where I sit, it should mean then further stability for the next three years in and with Auckland Council. Sure there is still heaps to do – the Unitary Plan being a major one but, it is not like businesses are frothing at the mouthing wanting to burn someone at the stake. On the flip side though Council does need to improve things with business if we (Auckland) wish to continue to be an attractive city for residents and businesses alike.

 

In regards to the Unitary Plan and our businesses

Still from the same article

Len’s Unitary Plan a work in progress

Brown’s Unitary Plan aims to shape the city as it adds a million extra residents over the next 30 years. An important part of this will be to intensify housing – a move proving controversial with residents in many suburbs.

 

There’s uncertainty in the boardroom about the plan, with more than a third saying they are unsure whether it will deliver growth. A small majority, 52 per cent think the plan will enable economic growth, with only 10 per cent saying it will not. While 59 per cent of CEOs think the plan makes the right provisions for future population growth, close to a half worry it will not decrease business compliance costs.

 

Forty per cent of respondents think the plan will enable investment, but a little under a half are uncertain about this.

…

 

Okay a tepid response towards the Unitary Plan from business which would be the same as the rest of the city – most likely. Better though than an openly hostile reaction against the Unitary Plan which would not do for stability within the city. So on this alone there is still plenty of work to do before the Unitary Plan goes out to final notification (decided in August).

 

One final note from the Herald article

A sizable majority, 63 per cent, support the idea of limiting Auckland’s growth with projects such as a rapid rail link to Hamilton.

Ah no! This is a liberal democracy not Mao’s China or Stalin’s Soviet Union so no population cap measures. As I have mentioned before Auckland has critical mass and will perpetually grow from within itself owing to that mass. People have been flocking away from the provinces to the big city since the Industrial Revolution in England. Cities are just power magnets of economic opportunities that will always attract people. It is just something we need to adapt to best we can.

And so the final summary figures on the Mood of the Boardroom with the Mayor

How they rate Len

• 60 per cent of CEO respondents say Brown should return to the Auckland mayoral chambers.

• 3.2 out of five report card mark on his first term; 52 per cent of respondents think the unitary plan will enable economic growth, and

•59 per cent think the plan makes the right provisions for future population growth

 

Not too bad for our first mayor of the Super City and its first three years

 

Related articles

 

First Critique of a Candidate

·

It Pays to do One’s Homework when “One” is Paying Attention

 

And yes I (and others as Twitter lights up) am paying attention at the moment thanks to Orsman’s Tweet yesterday on Palino and Transport.

And so Orsman has written his piece about mayoral candidate John Palino and his transport “ambitions” for Auckland. The back part was good as anyone with half a brain attached would know that the current Integrated Transport Program Mayor Len Brown pigeon holed Auckland and Auckland Transport into is an utter joke. How can someone spend $65 billion with a $12 billion funding gap on transport solutions that make congestion worse in 20-30 years? Not very intelligent stuff here – especially as Car Capital City Detroit just went bankrupt this morning.

As for the rest of the article? Well it might either show bad advice or plain laziness to go suss the situation out proper before dropping a comment in the NZ Herald.

The Herald article is somewhat a scatter gun here so I will try to make top and tail of it best I can.

From the NZ Herald

Candidate favours park-and-ride

By Bernard Orsman @BernardOrsman

John Palino wants to take pressure off transport network and make it easier for commuters to leave cars

Building park-and-ride facilities is the first transport priority for Auckland mayoral candidate John Palino, whose long-term solution is to build satellite centres where people can live, work and play.

 

Speaking ahead of his campaign launch tomorrow, Mr Palino told the Heraldthat Auckland must make the most out of rail electrification, saying park-and-ride facilities are the quickest, cheapest and most practical way to relieve pressure on the city’s transport network.

…

 

As I am debating with ATB’s resident socialist Patrick Reynolds, Park and Rides do have their uses. Typically in the outlying stations such as Papakura and Pukekohe where the stations serve a dispersed rural and urban population. While feeder buses and active transport can serve up to a 1.6km radius from the said station, the Park and Ride can serve a catchment 10x the distance which is what rural based commuters would do. So Park and Rides can have their uses.

As for cheapest method mentioned by Palino – err okay?

From the article again

“Let’s stop trying to get people out of their cars completely when it doesn’t suit them, and just make it easier for them to take public transport.

 

“I will subsidise parking where cost-benefit analysis shows park-and-rides provide a positive impact on the transport network.”

 

He said park-and-ride facilities might have to be multi-storey and cost between $20,000 and $40,000 per space.

…

That is some expensive parking. I would be inclined to charge Park and Ride users $2-$4 a day and have an option where you could use your AT-HOP card to “tag in and out” of the PnR.

As for making easier to get to the train station; AT is already ahead in that game as they prepare for the first time feeder buses into major stations and bus interchanges. Some new interchanges like Otahuhu are on the cards as well. So it will be easier to get public transport once the new interchanges and feeders are fully working.

 

“If we are ever to have the city rail project, we’re going to have to get the patronage required to justify spending ratepayer money,” he said.

 

That line suggests someone has not either done their homework or is in fact being lazy in obtaining the required information. How hard is it to send and email, make a phone call and have a coffee with people in the actual know behind the CRL and growth targets – the people being AT themselves. Oh and not reading the Prime Minister’s speech properly does not help either as he did lay down the challenge.

FFS doing my own reading and coffee sessions with those in the know I discovered that to bring the CRL forward all AT really need to do is show strong growth above a set percentage year in year out towards 2020. If Auckland Transport can do this then we might just see the first dirt sod turned around the 2017-18 mark.

And yes AT are putting in some strong initiatives from 2014 to make that growth happen to the point I can display confidence in them doing it.

 

And for this from Palino:

• Long term, build new satellite centres.

That is already on its way via the Unitary Plan through the Metropolitan Centres and twin Satellite Towns of Pukekohe and Warkworth. Although in saying that some polishing needs to occur first there before the Unitary Plan becomes operative.

As for Manukau, advances continued to be made there quietly behind the scenes as Auckland’s first Super Metropolitan Centre is drafted then brought into existence.

 

Coverage of the Local Government Elections 2013 will continue as development happen.

 

Related articles

 

Pre-Election Reports from the Council

·

The State of Council before the Elections

 

Auckland Council as per the Local Government Act has released its very first Pre-Election report for your consumption.

From Council

First pre-election report released
 

Auckland Council has today issued its very first pre-election report.

A new requirement of all councils under the Local Government Act from this year, the pre-election report is prepared by the local authority’s chief executive and must be politically independent.

“The purpose of a pre-election report under the Act is for councils to provide information to promote public discussion about the issues a council faces ahead of the local body elections, so voters can make more informed choices,” says Doug McKay, Auckland Council Chief Executive.

The Auckland Council Pre-Election Report 2013, prepared to meet the requirements of the Act, includes financial results for the three financial years immediately preceding the date of the election and latest projections for the three years immediately after.

The report includes a forecasted result for 2012/2013 year; given the final audited financial results for this period will not be reported to council until September 2013.

The report is prepared on a group basis, including council-controlled organisations, and covers operating expenditure, major projects and capital expenditure, debt projections and rates projections for 2014-2017.

—-ends—-

 

You can read the Report HERE (opens in new tab)

 

Election coverage will continue here on Talking Auckland as it happens.

 

Happens When you Pigeon Hole a Debate

·

Why the CBG Failed at a cost of $1.5m of your money

 

[Note: CBG figure moved from $1.1m to $1.5m]

I already posted today on my consensus of No Confidence against the Consensus Building Group’s Final report based on a failed Integrated Transport Program. You can see that commentary here: No Consensus in Funding the Integrated Transport Program

In that commentary I did mention how the Mayor through the Auckland Plan and his brief to the CBG pigeon holed the debate into looking at basically one option: TAX! Whether that be an increase in rates (which is a property tax), petrol tax or road pricing (crude congestion charging). Left out were asset sell downs, a lottery, departure and bed taxes, and a regional sales tax.

Problem? The Government as widely expected blasted down what the Consensus Building Group “came to” with the opposition effectively doing the same although for different reasons (Julie Ann Genter’s piece for example).

In saying that the Government rather than looking at a regional fuel tax as part of suite of options, it has decided on a nation-wide petrol tax increase as a sole option which besides many other things will rightfully annoy the rest of the country!

 

By the looks of things as well the Government could “hint” at Council moving on its existing asset base to help pay for some the transport projects. But, again we have a problem. We have no idea on how the city truly feels towards the asset question nor the to lotteries (and other options) because the Mayor denied our democratic right to have an effective say via a submission – if the CBG were allowed to look at such a scope.

The Mayor’s ideology is to me irrelevant and can be kept at home. What I want is vision dosed with pragmatism and all options on the table for OUR consideration free of the mayor’s ideology.

One thing would have been for certain; if via the submissions to the CBG we overwhelmingly rejected the assets question then it could have been further ammo against Brownlee. However, we will never know that answer thanks again to the piegon holing by the Mayor.

And so we are stuck with really no options at all to the point it is the Worst of All worlds. Effective taxed out of existence…

Vancouver looks mighty fine at the moment…

Note: Answering a question from another article; The Consensus Building Group was stacked with effective lobbyists rather than professional consultants, civil engineers and Geographers (who look at the Physical and Human environments and consequences of our actions)

 

TALKING AUCKLAND

Talking Auckland: Blog of TotaRim Consultancy Limited

TotaRim Consultancy
Bringing Well Managed Progress to Auckland and in support of a #movingauckland

Auckland: 2013 – YOUR CITY, YOUR CALL

Related articles

 

So Which Form of Mediocrity Would You Like Today?

· 9 Comments ·

Not Really Options for Transport as Purported by The Mayor

 

So with Mayor incumbent Len Brown kicking off his campaign the issue of transport got dragged up straight away. In other words how to pay for the 2012 Integrated Transport Plan that has caused a lot of teeth gnashing from all sides of the coin.

From The NZ Herald

Auckland drivers face off-ramp toll

By Mathew Dearnaley

 

Drivers may be tolled at Auckland motorway exit ramps to ease pressure on ratepayers over a $12 billion transport funding gap, according to a high-level report due out today.

 

The report, from a 17-member think-tank appointed by Mayor Len Brown, will give Auckland Council and the Government a clear timetable for when new revenue sources will be needed to raise an extra $400 million for each of 30 years.

 

The money will be for projects such as the City Rail Link and new roads, including another Waitemata Harbour crossing.

 

The plan is expected to include increases to fuel taxes and rates and possible charges for motorists to use existing roads from 2020, rather than just tolls now allowed on new government highways.

…

Well as already noted those going right through the city won’t be pinged so long as they stay on the motorway. As for the rest of us? The Great South Road and Mill Road sound better alternatives from Papakura to Manukau or Otahuhu that using State Highway one.

My point? This proposing on slugging the off ramps rather than certain points along the motorway and having an effective mass transit alternative is a case of the cart before the horse syndrome.

To make matters worse in Len pigeon holing the transport funding debate some options were eliminated from the scope in the feedback session by the Consensus Building Group (yeah an Oxymoron right there):

From the Herald again

That paper ruled out about 20 options such as assets sales, a regional sales tax and a lottery before leaving Aucklanders with a stark choice between hefty rates rises combined with fuel tax rises in one corner, and a combination of enhanced traditional funding sources and road charges in the other.

 

Although the Government is opposed to charging drivers to use existing motorways, it is understood the report will suggest tolls at the off-ramps to local roads, given that those are half-funded by ratepayers.

 

Long-distance travellers would be free to drive through the city without being charged, as long as they stayed on the motorways.

…

 

What was wrong having a good debate about those options in red? Probably not compatible with the Mayor’s ideology so he shuts them out of the debate entirely and pigeon hole’s into the more unsustainable options I could think of.

 

Least our transport workhorse (one of two) Councillor Mike Lee hits the nail on the head:

Council transport chairman Mike Lee said he believed Aucklanders were “more than paying their way” and he didn’t think trying to find more cash from them “is on right now”.

 

So a rejig of the transport priorities and funding allocations might be needed here first folks. Not much of chance that happening while the Local Government Elections now formally under way…

 

Related articles

 

C&R Cluster?

·

Is it a split or just jockeying

 

I had heard Communities and Residents (C&R)(the Auckland Local Government Centre Right main ticket) were not very well but seeing Orsman’s piece this morning AND hearing what Councillor George Wood pulled (good on him) has me wondering.

How bad are things for the Centre Right in the coming Local Government elections with the formal campaign period (12 weeks before October 12) effectively under way.

From the NZ Herald and our favourite reporter Bernard Orsman

C&R splits as members eye election spots

Deputy leader quits centre-right ticket, leader in quarrel over ward running mate

 

George Wood has set up a new ticket on the North shore to contest October's local body elections. Photo / Natalie Slade

 Photo / Natalie Slade / NZ Herald
George Wood has set up a new ticket on the North shore to contest October’s local body elections. Photo / Natalie Slade

The deputy leader of Communities and Residents, George Wood, has abandoned the centre-right ticket and set up a new ticket on the North Shore to contest October’s local body elections.

 

And in the Albert-Eden-Roskill ward C&R leader and councillor Christine Fletcher has indicated she does not want C&R’s Mark Thomas as her running mate for two seats on council.

 

Mr Wood told the Herald he was still a C&R member but running for the two North Shore seats with Devonport-Takapuna Local Board member Joseph Bergin under the banner Fair Deal, For Shore.

 

Mr Wood, a 66-year-old former North Shore Mayor, said he and Mr Bergin, 21, who is not a member of C&R, wanted to focus on the high rates burden for North Shore residents.

 

In Albert-Eden-Roskill, a plan by Orakei Local Board member Mr Thomas to stand with Mrs Fletcher has not gone down well.

 

Before leaving for the United States last Friday, Mrs Fletcher said on Facebook that she hoped an Albert-Eden-Roskill team member would be her running mate, “hopefully an enthusiastic Nigel Turnbull campaigning beside me

…

You can read more over at the Herald

 

The last thing the Centre Right need with a very galvanised Mayor (after the massive transport announcement), the Centre Left incumbents at the moment pretty safe in their seats (this includes Penny Hulse and Richard Northey who will face stiff opposition from Centre Right candidates) and Len Brown on a odds of taking the Mayorship at around 85% currently.

Do I personally think there is going to be any massive change in the Governing Body make up post October 12 this year? Apart from maybe a couple of changes owing to retirements (and I stand corrected Councillor Fletcher is NOT retiring) the make up won’t change much. This means status quo from the last three years continuing for the next three years.

Is this a good thing? On the finances side no it is not. But, both sides can have equal blame laid at their feet for a less than desirable Long Term Plan followed by tacking on projects like money for a church and the White Water Rafting project.

With the Unitary Plan and Transport issues at hand, stability in the Mayoral and Governing Body make up would be a good thing as these two mega projects grind their way through the political processes.

With concessions being gained in the Unitary Plan for all moderate sides of the debate (if Councillor Northey, Auckland 2040 and myself (and there will be countless others) can pull off Unitary Plan concessions in benefit for the city while showing 😀 faces then something must be going right), the last thing the city needs is destabilisation of the Unitary Plan process. Something that candidate Ms Krum who is contesting Northey’s seat could very well do after her Shilling exercise at her launch. Heck even ATB picked up on it and was not flattering towards her at that point in time.

As the Deputy Mayor said last week, we don’t need re-litigation of the Unitary Plan which Councillor Brewer effectively did last week. That did seriously annoy a lot people and even had three media outlets effectively bagging him for it. Based on Ms Krum’s first campaign release (first impressions count and that one was the worst I have seen thus far in the campaign) all we would see is an increase in re-litigation on the Unitary Plan over the next three years that gets the city NO WHERE!

Also any increased destabilisation in the Unitary Plan while concessions are being gained (and powerful economists are in general support of the Unitary Plan ( Get real with city plan ) could be lost. That would annoy the wider city to no great amount due to petty politicking! Oh this is a challenge to Ms Krum to lay out her comprehensive alternative to the Unitary Plan rather quickly. A guest post can be set aside for her if need be. 

 

As the Mayor formally launches his campaign for re-election in Sunday the race will be on for the chains and the council ward seats. Effectively here come the theatrics folks – groan!

 

Related articles