A difference of opinion in the chamber

Straight from city council
A personal view,
by Councillor Steve Morris

Last week I watched a yacht crash into a pier. As the vessel came in backwards at speed there was a commotion on deck with the skipper yelling to the person on the throttle “Forward! Forward!” After the crunch, the skipper, in a moment of true leadership, said “I meant the other forward!” Like that yacht, sometimes councils can have their own momentum and it's up to your elected representatives to give the order to stop.

Last week could have seen a higher rates and debt increase but for a couple of close votes. While councillors are working together well and debating respectfully it has become apparent that there are two starkly different perspectives about spending.

This difference became clear when debating a new i-Site at Mount Maunganui and a last-minute motion to increase our risk reserve by $1m. The i-Site budget was cut from $4m to $2.5m by a narrow vote of 6-5. Those for the reduction cited non-council buildings of great design that cost much less to build. Those against said $2.5m would buy a ‘shoebox' in comparison to the $4m design.

The $1m further rates increase was also defeated 6-5. Those for the increase said that Tauranga's rates are lower than Christchurch's and that the public are happy for council to take more of their money to create a ‘vibrant' city. Those against said it was too easy for council to always take more money and we need to make cost savings instead. Next week, what did get funded in the budget?


response required please Steve

Posted on 22-06-2017 15:11 | By Captain Sensible

Steve, you campaigned as a fighter of unnecessary council expenditure, so could you tell us why you expect us ratepayers to pay for your meals. I have asked many times so how about a response please.


Posted on 22-06-2017 14:28 | By Capt_Kaveman

Well said and Gail is suppose to be the top dog on that dept but where is she

Limit the funding for TBOP

Posted on 22-06-2017 07:50 | By Babs

A very clear NO to additional funding for the Mount iSite. $2.5mil is more than enough for a reasonable facility. TBOP closed the old iSite because they wanted to run their own port side business and profit with cash in by dealing behind closed gates with the cruise ship passengers. Now that this has not proved to be profitable enough they throw the need for a mega iSite back on the ratepayer. Let TBOP raise a bank loan for the extra, and fund the loan repayments from their funding like any other business. Its called accountability and financial management - something TBOP do not seem to know or care about.


Posted on 21-06-2017 21:33 | By Capt_Kaveman

Were ripped off last year over floods levies so rates this year should be O

Come on Steve, please answer

Posted on 21-06-2017 09:34 | By Captain Sensible

Steve, are you eating your meals at our expense? Are our rates used to pay for your meals? It is a simple question that requires a simple answer.

Who pays for your meals Steve?

Posted on 17-06-2017 15:15 | By Captain Sensible

Steve, I have asked you 4 times now; who pays for councillors meals? The councillors themselves...or the ratepayers? Come on, please give us an answer.

Post a Comment

You must be logged in to make a comment.