Council changes election rules

Council candidate Murray Guy says council staff are interfering with the electoral process and wasting ratepayer funds with a new rules interpretation over election campaign signs.

The five Mount Maunganui/Papamoa ward candidates are permitted to place their election signs now, but Murray insists there's been changes at city hall since he was last there in October 2013.


Murray Guy, who is about to dust off his signs ahead of next month's election.

The good old days, where candidates were given blanket approval to put up election signs as long as they were consistent with council policy, are gone.

Now, every sign has to have its location approved. Candidates are required to complete forms which identify the quantity and specific location of any sign and all signs have to be approved by the city council transportation and parking department.

The old system didn't impose additional costs of the ratepayer, because the monitoring staff that ensured the candidate signs obeyed the rules were already employed by the council.

Five candidates in a ward election aren't going to tax staff resources, but Murray's concerned that processing the signage rights of the 50 or more candidates in local body elections, including district health board and regional council hopefuls, will cost ratepayers.

The five candidates can use Google Earth and put yellow dots on the locations they wish to use before sending it to council, says Murray.

'The staff say they won't even go out and have a look to see where people are putting them,” he says. ”There's just no benefit.

'What they have done now is open the door to inadvertently disadvantage candidates.”

'The only rationale staff have provided me by email is to comply with the policy. Well the old system did comply. It sounds to me like bureaucracy trying to create rules for the sake of it.”

'Will they put the same requirements on the TECT elections? Well, they will have to, and there's also central government,” says Murray.

'I suspect there's been a staff change and they have just decided to put their stamp on things.”

Tauranga City Council manager legal and governance Kirsty Downey-McGuire says The Street Use and Public Places Bylaw 2013 contains provisions relating to the erection of signage on public land.

The Bylaw requires approval to be obtained from council for the siting of election signs on or in a public place. The Bylaw also requires those signs comply with council's policy, which includes the requirement that no sign be displayed in a public place without written council permission.

A process has been created to ensure the council is consistent in applying the bylaw, that elections signs do not present a risk to public safety, that the council remains impartial in the process and that public places are managed for the well-being of the public.

The TCC Candidate Handbook has had changes made since the October 2013 local body elections concerning election signs.

This decision was made by staff from council's bylaws, parking, transportation, legal and monitoring teams.

Voting papers for the election will be posted early next week and should arrive in the 31,409 electors' mailboxes next Tuesday or Wednesday.

The postal ballot closes at noon on February 17, with the result expected to be known later the same day.

You may also like....

9 comments

murray

Posted on 21-01-2015 09:31 | By monty1212

Here we go again. Murray trying to get a bit of free publicity. This act was passed to stop all those idiotic candidates from putting up their signs all over the place and in doing so distracting drivers as well as annoying most of us! Go ahead and take it back to square one Murray!


jobs have to be created,

Posted on 21-01-2015 11:18 | By Jimmy Ehu

Murray, you should know how it works, "shuffling paper", takes many a Council Employee, and they think they have an issue with mould!!!!!.


Monty1212, there is NO ACT

Posted on 21-01-2015 11:58 | By Murray.Guy

Monty1212, I understand what has triggered your response, for many the signs are unsightly, the target of vandals etc. This 'new' staff initiated requirement is NOT the result of any new policy or ACT. Elected members were unaware. Staff member Brian Jupp of 25 years is no longer our monitoring and enforcement officer, applying his professional skills with common-sense (and at no additional cost to ratepayers). We have a 'new broom'. This requirement to apply to staff will NOT in any way, shape or form, change the concerns of the public in regards the numbers of signs and their appearance. Previously, to avoid unnecessary duplication and to better ensure TCC staff were keep away from direct election involvement as much as possible, Council gave blanket approval to all candidates and their compliance was monitored by Brian Jupp.


Well said Murray

Posted on 21-01-2015 12:14 | By The Tomahawk Kid

The moaning and whingeing about council wasting money is deafening, yet when somebody tries to put a stop to it you moan and whinge even louder. We need LESS council interference in our lives not MORE. Council should be restricted to CORE services and nothing else. What Murray says is correct - Stop demanding the council get involved in things they have no right meddling in and give them less possibilities of stuffing things up and wasting other peoples money. All most of them are doing is trying to find things to justify their existence - most of the time because idiots keep demanding they do so.


.

Posted on 21-01-2015 12:46 | By maccachic

Easy ban signs altogether they just look trashy


Is ex Cr Guy desperate for publicity?

Posted on 21-01-2015 14:23 | By Councillorwatch

Maybe Murray Guy will need an awful lot of signs to persuade the Mount Papamoa electors that someone who doesn't even live in the Ward is the right person to represent them? Not that I'd vote for anyone who blots the landscape with their signs anyway. But rules are rules and as long as they apply to everyone, fair enough. As for wasting money, I remember that the Council Murray Guy was on bought a Speedway business and "loaned" $5 million to Baypark??? That's the sort of waste I'd be criticising if I was standing to be a councillor. Good luck to those candidates who live in the Mount Papamoa ward.


ASKING QUESTIONS

Posted on 21-01-2015 18:07 | By Colleen Spiro

When people, particularly Murray questions the Councils in theway they spend money.....YOU say he wants publicity....God help it that we have Councillors who pee in each others pockets and allow ad hoc, willy nilly spending of OUR Money...and Councillor Watch....give it a rest about Bay Park.....Why don't you change the record...we have heard it before...


councillor watch

Posted on 21-01-2015 22:14 | By FunandGames

i hope you are not a candidate. Your comprehension of information received is limited. Your repeated harping on about Bay Park has been answered many times, clearly it's just a bit beyond you.


@ kiaora2u 2

Posted on 21-01-2015 23:57 | By Councillorwatch

Apologies if I annoy you for asking the tough questions. I'll give up on Baypark when I see a straight answer from ex Cr Guy about the way he voted on two issues. One being the $5 million to Baypark and the other being the purchase (by ratepayers?) of a Speedway business. You see I think that is ad hoc, willy nilly and wasteful spending of our money and I want to know whether he voted for it. A fair enough question I'd have thought. Sort of makes money wasted on checking everyone sticks to the rules on election signs look small compared to the money spent on Baypark and the speedway???. Mounties and Papamoans need all the facts they can get when deciding who will be their ward councillor. Will it be a local candidate who lives in the ward, or what some call a carpetbagger?


Leave a Comment


You must be logged in to make a comment.