Keith Melville

On Friday, a few friends and I were discussing Whakatāne District Council plans for the downtown area, the harbour, and the wharf when we decided to seek some clarity on the issues involved by joining Mayor Nandor Tanczos at his regular ratepayer coffee session at Robert Harris.

But instead of clarity and transparency, I left the meeting feeling the replies received were vague, frustratingly uncertain and unhelpful.

Considering the enormity and the importance of what the council is planning for Whakatāne in the downtown area – the demolition of the wharf buildings and the relocation of the Whakatāne Sport Fishing Club, and a $7 million demolition and redevelopment of the of the buildings and properties at the junction of The Strand East and Quay Street, I thought the mayor would have been better prepared, and informed, and his replies more definite.

I noted he often relied on help provided by the council’s communications adviser.

I have always thought Mr Tanczos to be a good communicator, but I don’t blame him entirely for the confusion arising and lack of clarity. There was a lot of background noise, which made hearing the discussion difficult even though I was sitting next to him.

Furthermore, I couldn’t help but think we were speaking and listening to the wrong person.

Mr Tanczos and our elected representatives seem almost an afterthought these days even though they have the legal authority to tackle the council’s finances and determine its budget. I get the impression they are treated more as a front for those who act as the real source of power – the staff and particularly the chief executive.

They have full legal authority to determine the council’s operational matters.

To me the effectiveness of our lame duck elected representatives is at the centre of the issue.

Their authority has been diminished through changes to the Local Government Act by Helen Clark’s Labour Government in the early 2000s and further weakened by continual electoral uncertainty and the lack of experience. On top of that we have an entrenched bureaucracy, which knows how to work the system.

Having said that, myself and many others would appreciate a full explanation on the need for the fishing club’s relocation, for the demolition of the wharf buildings, the council’s lack of support for its tenants at the wharf including Gibbos, and why the floodwall cannot stay on its current location.

And why is the council planning such a costly redevelopment at the intersection of Quay Street and The Strand East when I think ratepayers desperately need a break from all the costs they have shouldered in recent years?