If investigation cleared council, then what went wrong?


CCRU were invited to be interviewed for the mentioned Audit (see article below) on the basis that it would contribute to setting the terms of reference for an independent review. The review is an action we support.

The Skelton audit is concentrated on a specific window of the IHP process, not the complete process or the resulting outcome post 'decision 53'.

As stated in the article, something happened that lead to this process not producing what could have been reasonably expected by the community, resulting in a fix being required via the section 71 process.

Something went wrong. It would be useful to find out why and learn from it.

Feb 05 2019:

https://i.stuff.co.nz/national/110377164/investigation-clears-council-staff-of-tampering-with-chch-planning-blueprint

It's interesting to read some of the comments after the Stuff article, and gives a window into how some people in the the community view this process. It was a shame the comments section closed so quickly.

Views from the community...

Jesse Pinkman

Madam Mayor perhaps you should consider the past environment that the community board was operating in and the culture that exists amongst your council employees. I have had dealings with the staff that inhabit the CCC building department over the past 18 years. From simple procedures and accommodating staff in the beginning........ to overcomplicated, tedious procedures and ill informed, unsuitably trained and at times arrogant and obnoxious staff. There is very little, if any joy when dealing with that department. So Madam Mayor, you get your guys to shoot the messengers for not following protocol. It doesn't change the fact that the attitude that eminates from Hereford St generates frustration, suspicion and angst. It does so amongst, if not a vast majority, then most certainly a large minority of your constituents and as seen here, a councillor and community board members.

jo2lo

It makes no difference if Karlen Edwards is disappointed by the actions of community board members. Edwards did not elect or appoint these members. The opposite is true, the CEO works for the councillors as its only employee. As such it would behove Edwards to listen to the dissatisfaction of councillors and community board members. It is they who are elected to represent ratepayers, and community board members should be respected by the CEO, not be "disappointed" by their actions. The next step Edwards should consider is resigning if she disagrees with her employers.

Featured Posts
Recent Posts
Archive
Search By Tags

© 2021 CCRU Incorporated    

  • Facebook Social Icon
 Get access to our growing information base. Join CCRU today.
Join CCRU to help coastal residents be heard and receive fair treatment in
coastal hazard planning processes.
By joining CCRU you can choose to volunteer some time, make a donation, or simply be kept up to date on future issues, events and seminars. It's FREE.