I read with interest Cr Evans' statements regarding Baypark and Tauranga City Council's denial of access to documents. Apparently he has two letters which confirm that he was denied access to Baypark rates information. TCC firmly denied through Elizabeth Hughes (Head of Communications), that all Councillors were given full opportunity to access of all documents.
I see that in Elizabeth Hughes letter this week, that Cr Evans has been denied access to rate information, others also have had the same problem as reported in past weeks.
I have a legal research background and looking at council's policies, eligibility for council rate remission can be done in a limited number of ways:
Not For Profit as per clause 4.5
- As Baypark may qualify for some sporting activities but it was a privately owned company, fails.
- There is no exception availed for an educational facility.
- So there is no policy that qualifies council to permit any rate remission.
Perhaps Mayor Stuart Crosby thinks that racing expensive saloon cars are 'non-for-profit” educational and sporting? So why is there a discount given? The losses of Baypark would only be higher if the correct rates were paid?
Miss Hughes' states that no documents have been lost whereas Cr Evans states he has a letter from the CEO saying they have been destroyed, they both can't be right!
I would like to see Cr Evans' letter published then ask Miss Hughes to explain after that happens. Either the CEO or Miss Hughes is telling the truth, who is it?
Andrea Hoyle, Bethlehem.

Council's response:
Thank you for the questions you raise.
The first is about rates remissions at Baypark. The land under Baypark is owned by the Council. And therefore the Council is, and has been, the ‘ratepayer'. Bob Clarkson's company was a sub-lessee of that land. The rates remission policy applies to the land - just as it does for any land that is classified as ‘recreational' or ‘for sporting purposes'.
The Baypark facility qualifies under sections 4.5 (‘land used primarily for the promotion of sport') and 4.6 (sewage/wastewater exemption) of the adopted rates remission policy adopted by the elected members. Individual remissions are applied by staff under delegated authority (this is also outlined in the Policy).
The second question is about Cr Evans understanding of a letter discussing documents being destroyed. This relates to a duplicate set of documents that was provided for elected members to read as part of the proposal to acquire Baypark.
Once the decision was taken the duplicate sets were taken back from elected members (to preserve confidentiality). One set has been retained on file and is available for elected members to review.
Elizabeth Hughes, Tauranga City Council.