Extraordinary Council Meeting

At our last council meeting of the year we debated The Square redevelopment yet again. It seems that this is an issue which will dominate this term of council. The Mayor stated that it is “an unnecessary luxury which the city cannot afford”. This was certainly my feeling when I first stood for council. However, the proposals put forward last night ignored the fact that the Stage 2 works had been previously approved, relitigated, and approved again numerous times. Also ignored was the fact that the current rates include the Stage 2 works. The recommendation to not proceed with the proposed kowhai grove and lime chip paths was unnecessary as the designers, landscapers, stakeholders (including the Police) and safety experts had already agreed that pohutukawa and grass was more suitable in this location. The type of pohutukawa under investigation is one of the new hybrids, a cross between pohutukawa and rata, which lends itself to limbing up.
One other issue which was debated last night was that of leaving the fountain where it is. It has been planned right from the inception of the City Heart project that the fountain would be relocated to the Ladies Rest quadrant. I was completely opposed to that idea and argued strongly for it to be retained in its present location. However, there are two issues with this.
Firstly, the fountain is to be restored to its original design. The current fountain is really two fountains and is very different to the original which is a very delicate structure with drinking fountains (including one for dogs!). As the fountain has to be dismantled and taken away for restoration by expert stonemasons there is no cost saving in putting it back into the new Events Quadrant.
Secondly, with the establishment of the events quadrant there is a very real risk of damage to the fountain during concerts. People climb all over it now, despite the rose gardens around it. It is irresponsible to place the restored fountain in a vulnerable position.

In the two years I have been on council I have sought comments from people about the fountain. Its relocation was a hot issue during the roadshows and most people indicated they didn’t want it moved. One of the issues which was raised time and time again was that of incompatibility with the Art Deco design of the Ladies Rest. Some photographers raised concerns about trying to get photos of one without the other. I took all these concerns to the City Heart Steering Group meetings. (I was not a member of this group but, like all councillors, had the right to attend meetings and speak to the members and designers). I collected a list of all the comments made to me during my “talk with your councillor” sessions and submitted that as a memo to the Steering Group. The designers have taken these comments on board and have adjusted their designs accordingly.

So, while I would have preferred the fountain to remain where it is, I recognise that the proposed new location is a more suitable place for it to be. With the seating and gardens the Ladies Rest quadrant is set to be a very peaceful, attractive place in The Square.

We could not leave the fountain untouched as it has sustained damage over the years and must be repaired if we are to protect our heritage. Many residents said they wanted to see it working again. The cost of doing this work is the same regardless of where it is put after restoration. The motion on the table last night would not have resulted in any cost savings, so I voted against it.

At last night’s meeting each councillor was presented with a certificate congratulating us on surviving the 2004 Workshop Series.
Councillor Anne Podd said she had counted the hours we spent in workshops since the beginning of November and came to a total of 100 hours! Add in committee and council meetings, briefings and the workshops we had in October, and you start to get an idea of the workload.
Now, its easy to think I am raising the issue of workload for personal reasons - this is not the case. (Though I readily admit to frustration over having to spend time going over and over the same material). My concern is two-fold: cost, and the effect on staff.
When councillors spend time in workshops, so do staff. However, while some councillors may choose to refresh their memories and do some preparation before workshops, the staff involved spend many hours in preparation and creating presentations. While they are doing this they are not able to get on and do the other work they are charged with. There are internal costs associated with this and, should their work continue to be directed towards responding to councillor queries, we are likely to have to employ more staff just to keep the operating side of council running. Some of the same staff have to attend committee and council meetings. Last night, for example, we had staff present who had already worked a full day and were then required to be at the council meeting until it finished around 11.30pm.
If this workload continues, as it seems likely to do, we will be faced with either losing key staff or having to hire more. Guess who pays?
When we relitigate issues time and time again, we often have external consultants involved. This comes at a cost. I hate to think how much it costs for the Wellington designers and project managers to attend the endless debates on City Heart. Again, guess who pays?
Councillors are tired, staff are exhausted, and when decisions are being made at 11pm at night, or later, after full working days then there is a very real risk that those decisions are being made in haste simply because people need to get home and rest.

At the end of the day, while I may be the one speaking out about the workload, this is an issue that impacts on everyone. The risk of unsound decision-making is high, the risk of losing staff is high, and the costs keep mounting. Who pays? You, me and every other ratepayer in this city.