I refer to the editor's note attached to my letter to the editor on 24-Dec-2010.
The comment is apparently from some nameless soul at Council? It would seem that there are two sets of rules here, a member of the public submitting a letter to the editor must provide a name, and other details, these in part are printed with the letter. However it would seem that this does not apply to Council staff who not only remain nameless but also get to preview the letter prior to being published? Surely this is a breach of Privacy. However it is resulted in meaningful comment and 'fact” being presented I could at least understand why.
The Council scribed comments only attempt to make slanderous remarks and innuendo but fail completely to provide any evidence or information whatsoever!
In fact the reason for the low level of response is because Council has no facts to disprove what has been stated in my letter (tip of the iceberg).
I would very much look forward full participation in any meeting with Council and / or staff provided it is conducted in a 'open and transparent” manner and also that all relevant information has been provided beforehand to all in attendance.
I stand by my 24-Dec-2010 letter and information there-in. The tapes that the editor's note refer to are not available online because they were 'secret” or behind closed door meetings. So let's see what information Council can muster to prove otherwise. If the tapes do indeed exist then let's have the unedited version online ASAP without fabricating an excuse of 'commercial sensitivity” when spending ratepayers money to excess. Should they have difficulty locating the tape then perhaps Crosby/Faulkner could ask former Cr Evans if he still has a recording available.
Ian Stevenson, Tauranga.