I encourage everyone to make a submission on the proposed Local Elections 'signs” policy and submissions close on the 5 August 2011.
As there is no requirement to pay a permit cost, to be able to put up Local Body election signs, the entire cost of monitoring and policing the policy is therefore borne by ratepayers.
If a permit fee was required this would at least cover, in part, the cost of Council monitoring staff's time and associated travel costs in answering the many residents complaints regarding these signs but as no fee is payable the total cost is met by ratepayers through their rates.
As the current Council is stating that they have a strong desire to reduce costs incurred by ratepayers it seems illogical that they would vote any other way other than to agree to adopt the new elections signs policy and that is that they, in future, be banned on public property.
Mike Baker, Bethlehem.


1 comment
No cost saving ...
Posted on 23-07-2011 15:58 | By Murray.Guy
Sorry Mike, reads fine in theory but it's NOT reality! Mayor Crosby's ban on 'affordable electioneering' will not see one dollar in savings to the ratepayer. No extra staff are employed and monitoring will still take place, regardless of where the election signs are located. This proposal seeks to reduce opportunities for first time candidates and enhance those in the pockets of our local business and community organizations. One more knife in the heart of democracy in our city!
Leave a Comment
You must be logged in to make a comment.