The public consultation process for the Tauranga Historic Village management plan is being fast tracked to speed the offer of new leases for tenants.
Many village tenants are on month-to-month leases.
Longer term leases will not only enable the tenants to better plan their futures, but will also guarantee a better income flow for council.
Village tenants and interested parties attended the Tauranga City Council's strategy and policy committee meeting on Tuesday to see the management plan adopted for public consultation.
They also saw that everything is not as cut and dried as it appeared, and that control issues are not settled.
Dean Riley, the council's business services group manager, raised the leasing issue, asking if he could issue extended leases in the interim while the village plan goes through the Ten Year Plan public consultation process.
The council stopped longer term leases a year ago when the steering group began deliberations on the village's longer term strategy.
Tenants are anxious to sign longer term leases, says Dean.
Councillors refused on the grounds that if the village was going to be run on an Airport Authority model, then the leasing decisions are properly the place of the advisory group mentioned in the management plan.
When Larry Baldock put the question directly to him, Dean said the council's business services group was intending to continue running the village.
The steering group chaired by Murray Guy recommends the village be retained as an activity of council with an advisory group supporting the activity.
Councillors voted to put the draft strategy out for public consultation, ahead of the Ten Year Plan process. They also voted that the village will run without ratepayer support.
9 comments
Village has had it's share
Posted on 13-12-2011 15:57 | By Gee Really
Ratepayers have paid more than enough for the village over the years. Fair enough maybe, but now its time for it to pay its own way. No need to make a profit because its mostly for community groups, but it shouldn't need ratepayer subsidy either. But the key thing about the Village is that all those who rave about how great it is actually get down there and make it feel alive.
All we hear is planning ....
Posted on 13-12-2011 16:10 | By Tony
Seems we spend a hell of a lot of time planning and getting all our ducks in a row while moving forward ............Nothing keeps happening ....Just more planning To many planners in this town and not enough doers
Strange priorities ...
Posted on 13-12-2011 23:51 | By Murray.Guy
Fact. The Historic Village provides a home and support to literally hundreds of our residents on a daily basis. The Historic Village provides opportunities for the elderly to gather and share in arts and crafts, the vulnerable to share in life skill programs. The Historic Village is in itself a unique visitor and recreation experience. Yet apparently it's a crime against the ratepayer should one dollar contribute to the provision of those services, those benefits - so says the majority of Elected members at the behest of Crs Faulkner and Curach. No such cry when it's the provision a 'big screen for Rugby', or $5 million for grass and a cycleway on the Strand waterfront, $500,000 for a board-walk on Pilot Bay to benefit the joggers and cruise ship passengers ... and on and on. At today's meeting attempts were made to hijack the process, to undermine the value of the Village, the value of those who have volunteered their time to better ensure a positive future for the Historic Village.
Sell it before it becomes another Hot pools or Bay Park
Posted on 13-12-2011 23:53 | By Openknee8ted
If there is TCC involvement it will cost ratepayers a fortune. Sell it pay off debt. The council is far to inept to be a land lord.
It must be good to be perfect Cr Guy
Posted on 14-12-2011 09:16 | By Gee Really
But in your comments you don't mention that you opposed the ratepayer giving a loan to the jazz Festival. As Chair of the committee can you tell us how much ratepayer$ have gone into the village over the last 20 years. And exactly what was this so-called hijack? You were the chairman the story says. How many rates dollars do you want to sink into the Village?
why
Posted on 14-12-2011 09:34 | By tonyb1
Why have a public consultation process when the council will just do what they want, and if they feel the public may not agree with cost etc they will cover it up and hide it
HIJACKED MEETINGS
Posted on 14-12-2011 17:45 | By SCOTT NUFFIN4U
Would not be the first time that has ever happened ... Master Crosby, Balldock and others run a muck at the Jazz sub-committee and handed out a donation (a loan that will never be paid back) of $120,000 when that could not be done on Councils own rules. So it does not matter what consultation happens, not needed or whatever other reason if they decide they want to do it then they just do it, who cares about the rules, right, wrong it is just: "I WANT, I WANT ..."
I don't think 'Gee Really' likes me ...
Posted on 14-12-2011 20:45 | By Murray.Guy
Yes, I opposed the Jazz Festival getting $120,000 of Ratepayer funding, made up of a $30,000 gift and a $90,000.00 GAL (guarantee against loss)paid in advance as Council policy was not adhered to! No idea what that has to do with the Historic Village? The Steering group I chaired had the task of investigating the future options for the Historic Village, unrelated to past or future funding. We did include a recommendation that the Historic Village be operationally self-supporting. For me, 100% self funding is not critical as I very much appreciate the value of the Village to many of all ages, from all walks of life. Cr. Faulkner spoke at length of issues that no-one else knew of, and he could not quantify (as it was 2nd and 3rd hand), which had little if any relevance to the Historic Village proposed strategy that is to be considered by the community.
Self Sustaining Village
Posted on 15-12-2011 16:47 | By Sam Green
"Gee Really" is letting fallacy get in the way of facts. In the past, the Village may have used ratepayer funds, partcularly when it operated as a museum (some years ago now). It lost money when it was run by an independant trust (Compass) and was handed back to Council in the red. The Village, run by Council for the past 6 or so years is now self sustaining - it operates on its rents - so NO RATEPAYER FUNDS. It also operates on a great deal of goodwill from the large number of tenants down here - no one is asking for a ratepayer subsidy and, in fact, the strategy sets out that the Vilage should remain "self sustaining". Don't get caught up with the lies perpetrated by unscrupulous people with hidden agendas. The plan was developed by volunteers from the community - it is sensible and proactive. Read it.
Leave a Comment
You must be logged in to make a comment.