This column gained a whole lot of new readers this week (well – a few anyway) as some of my elected colleagues came out of the closet and said they would be reading my column this week to see if I had reported the goings on at the Projects and Services Committee meeting last Monday, in particular the Baycourt Fly Tower OSH issue.

This matter goes back a couple of years when staff brought forward a proposal to spend $1.7 million on replacing the counterweight systems above the stage at Baycourt. This is the complicated system that provides the raising and lowering of stage sets and backgrounds. There was an OSH issue we were told, so a group of elected members climbed up into the belfry to have a look. The nub of the problem was/is removing and replacing the weights in cages that counter balance the screen sets.

A few fallen
Over Baycourt's 27 years operation, a few of these weights have occasionally fallen but never hit anyone. There are other less expensive methods of compliance and these were investigated – by staff – who clearly were hanging out for the $1.7 million Rolls Royce version. Two months ago at a Monitoring Committee meeting a consultant dropped a clanger that OSH issues could be addressed for around $50,000.

Conflict of interest
At Monday's meeting staff presented yet another consultant promoting the el flasho remedy while the staff member explained what his interpretation was of what the previous consultant had really meant at the time.
I know what I heard from that consultant and so did some of my colleagues and it wasn't what staff told us. In the interim, fellow councillor Hayden Evans had come up with his own design as a solution.
Hayden then moved that his design be accepted at a cost of around $30,000. Someone pointed out he had a conflict of interested which Hayden denied.
As chairman I was asked to rule on this conflict which I declined to do. Conflict of interest is the individual member's judgement. As no one seconded Hayden's motion it lapsed.
So Wayne Moultrie moved a combination of Hayden's system and another proposal. Hayden tried to second this but his conflict still existed so someone else seconded it and Hayden, finally conceding conflict, left the chamber – leaving 10 elected members. After some discussion the motion was put and was locked – 5-5 with my vote FOR Wayne's motion – a $60,000 or so solution.

Chairman's dilemma
Now my dilemma as chairman. Long has been the convention that a chairman's casting vote be used to maintain the status quo. The casting vote is not intended to be a weapon of personal opinion but a mechanism to break deadlocks and provide orderly governance.
So with heavy heart and much anguish I declared the motion lost, thereby voting against myself and creating much mirth afterwards amongst my fellow elected members.
I'm most unhappy about how this saga unfolded and even though the estimate is down from the $1.7 million to $954,600 and all OSH issues are addressed it's hard to reconcile this amount of money with the OSH benefits.

Lopsided tree report
On another unhappy saga an appalling piece of ‘investigative' journalism by the Bay Times on the Kotuku Place tree. In this lopsided report they revealed that the insurance policy of the resident whose spouting had blocked and ceiling flooded had been reinstated once $3,500 worth of leaf guard had been installed. They even sought comment from ex councillor Mary Dillon, protector of all Tauranga's trees. Not one jot of comment or concern for the complainants and victims of this tree.
The debris blocks neighbours drains, roots are lifting footpaths and intruding on the adjoining property. This is a classic example of a tree right out of hand being preserved for everyone's pleasure – who don't have to suffer its effects.
This is about people or trees first and in my book it's people first. The main people affected are elderly and frail.
Earlier this week I had a phone call from a welfare agency employed to care for this couple asking if Council was aware of the situation this tree had created. I said that they should write confirming the distress and danger being created to the November 11 council meeting where the tree's survival will get yet another hearing, despite a decision being made three weeks ago to get rid of it.

No sea lettuce
At an onsite meeting with a resident and staff down by the Matua foreshore walkway I noticed that we haven't had sea lettuce this year in any quantity and what a difference it makes. It's easy to forget what a mess and unpleasant situation sea lettuce creates.

Voluntary rates
Last week's comment from an Art Gallery Trustee raised the matter of the static Voluntary Rates Account. It hasn't had any new donations probably due to the lack of promotion but perhaps we can use this publicity to kick off another round of enthusiasm where those who want, need and deserve all manner of social, cultural and leisure amenities can contribute voluntarily without resorting to compulsory rating of the rest of the ratepayers to fund their personal pleasures. I'm not holding my breath.
I note comment in the paper about Council/ratepayers funding to flagship events being reduced. The report is inaccurate and comments about a leaked letter were a mystery. This scheme was designed to get events bankrolled and underway and then left to get on with it on their own feet. It was never intended to be a permanent ratepayer breast feed and we will be reviewing its future function and purpose. It is after all, ratepayers' money that is being doled out here.

Bill Faulkner