Council wound up its deliberations on this year's annual plan (for 1 July 2010 to 30 June 2011) in just two days.
With only one contentious item emerging (a public toilet at The Lakes – more on that later) this year's annual plan process was far and away the best yet.

This was because the lolly scramble for ratepayer's money of yesteryear has been stopped as staff administer the plan in a professional manner. Years ago the format seemed to be – 'put it up and see what happens”. This clogged the system with many applications for ratepayer money for the needy and not so needy, which were never going to fit in any arena of ratepayer responsibility, but caused much waste of time and resource.
Many of these applications are now covered by the likes of TECT and BayTrust, pokie charities etc. That's why the likes of Acorn are so important to our community's future – funding for worthwhile charity not ratepayer responsibility.

Debate all process
The library issue was laid to rest as expected. No extra charges and a small increase in book stock. Democracy in action as elected members responded to submissions from you. Contrary to a Bay Times headline, ‘Council backs down…' there was no backing down to do. The proposed annual plan is self explanatory. Like running a household, there are plans that, being just that, plans, get altered, adjusted, added to and deleted.
In summary, it seemed to your council (the vote was unanimous) that as a community the majority are happy to continue to pay an upfront amount in their rates to fund the library service. Council needs to find other mechanisms to help stave off rates that are not sustainable and from this exercise it was concluded the library is not in that space.

Filling in the holes
We received an excellent and very professional explanation of the government's proposed leaky homes package from staff member Terry Wynyard.
In summary, Tauranga will opt in for the time being as the detail is worked out, but with no ongoing commitment.
I expressed concern that like so many issues that have gone before, government is quite capable of leading us into it and then abandoning us to the wolves. Thanks to past councils' foresight in putting building permit issues out to the private sector, our known exposure is currently 15 leaky homes, some of which are insured with a $10,000 excess, others a $50,000 excess and a few uninsured as the insurance company bailed out as the problems developed.
Council/ratepayers are always there and always have money as a legal viewpoint. Average claims so far are $212,000, of which we were told, $60,000-80,000 could be legal fees. The point is to introduce ‘no fault' – remove legal arguments and put that money into repairs. That will be okay if it happens, but there will need to be controls on pricing of repairs to prevent that money being transposed into profit margins.
I'm also suspicious of governments 25 per cent contribution. I mean after they have scored 15 per cent GST, PAYE, tax on profit, it could be cost neutral to them while council will have to pass it all on to ratepayers who are also taxpayers. We will go to the next stage of discussion – nothing has been approved – on a vote of 8-3 with Hayden Evans, Catherine Stewart and Murray Guy dissenting.

Pricey public notices
In other matters from the annual plan, on my motion, council deleted a proposal to collect $500,000 from you in anticipation of potential future liability for leaky homes. If it eventuates, then liability could be paid for by way of loan. I don't think it's prudent to take this money from ratepayers now – if liability is not found, I know you'll never see it back in your pocket.
$384,892 Fergusson Park walkway is set back to 2012 annual plan.
Communications budget of $1.5 million got a once over. There is a rort going on, we were told, over the cost of public notice charges in the print media. Route K for instance requires its business be advertised in two daily papers, including the Herald. This is patent nonsense – council receives one detailed submission each year from Perry Harlen, who probably knows more about Route K than the people who required the notice to be published, and to anyone else who requires the info it's readily available without costing about $7000 a shot. Some elected members were surprised to learn that sometimes council's official communications were editorial written to look like a news story. The $1.5 million includes advertising costs, seven staff and costs of Our City Views, radio and other promotional material.

Don't go getting super!
Urban design department was discussed. I think that this has the potential to be a six headed monster as it changes from what elected members have been promised to be educational and advisory – to mandatory.
Already examples have been cited where urban design has recommended details down to ceiling colour so it will look acceptable from the street when looking in through the window!
This sort of thing could sneak in though the current district plan review.

Seven councils in the Bay have formed an allegiance (BOPLASS) to implement cost savings through shared services like insurances, procurement, a single data rating base and it seems to be working. Certainly a much more practical approach than the now soaring costs of a super city concept as is happening to Auckland.
Southern Pipeline approaches my prediction of several years ago of $150 million with a cost review to $118.7 million up from $106 million.
Tenders are going out shortly for the Maleme Street to Memorial Park stage and I'll be ecstatic to be proved wrong when tenders come in. How it's to cross the harbour is still up in the air so to speak as negotiations continue with On Track to use the rail bridge.
At present, estimates are based on a submarine crossing. More next week on the annual plan.
Oh, the Lakes Toilet – I nearly forgot. In my view, public toilets are up there with water in the real reason why councils exist.
There is clear evidence that many people visit The Lakes. The closest public toilet is Greerton, yet despite my best efforts, my colleagues could not muster a majority to obtain the amenity. We tried five options and all failed – a first in my experience. It got down to a Portaloo, serviced twice a week at an annual cost of $3300 – unbelievable that that could even be considered and thankfully that too failed. So it will now wait until next year. I hope all those potential users can also wait a year!