Community boards look for work

Ruapehu Bulletin, Volume 7, Issue 337, 29 May 1990, Page 3

Community boards look for work

Ruapehu Community Boards are in danger of becoming underemployed and Ruapehu District councillors are to meet every month and a half from next month.

The Ruapehu District Council passed a range of resolutions on council and community boards, their salaries and meeting frequency last Friday after a discussion and report reception on the role of community boards and the council. From next month the

council and regulatory committee will meet on a six weekly cycle and community board members will be paid no salaries above their meeting allowances. Board chairpersons will be paid a salary of $2500 except when they are also district councillors, when the

salary will be set at $5500. The district council general manager also recommended that council provide meeting allowances and administrative support for up to eight meetings per financial year for each community board or ward committee. This matter has been referred back to the community boards and ward committee for comment be-

fore a decision is to be made. General Manager Cliff Houston said in his report on the cycle of meetings and remuneration that he believed the council was over the hump in terms of policy input and that a six weekly cycle of meetings would suffice in setting policy and maintaining an interface between council, management and operations.

In discussing the matter the council heard that community boards were calling for more duties to be delegated to them, though Mr Houston said in his report that a review of past council agendas would show that there were few items that could have been productively referred to community boards. Mayor Garrick Workman said he had

found that other district councils were in the same situation with community boards still finding their role. Councillor Ellen Gould said community boards should not be asking for work, but should be taking the initiative and finding work themselves. "There's an awful lot to be done in small communities," she said. "So get in there if you see a need in your community. Someone will soon tell you if you're stepping into the wrong areas." Councillor Cosford objected to most of the recommendations, saying less meetings and not paying board members salaries was a threat to the future of democracy. He said reducing the funding for community boards was a disincentive to community boards. "I believe they (community boards) are being used as sacrificial lambs in the demise of democracy in local government," said Mr Cosford. Mr Houston said if there is extra work at any time that extraordinary meetings can be scheduled. He said a more spacious meeting

cycle would not only cost the council less but would free council officers from and endless meeting Cycle so they can spend time refining operational efficiency. At the end of the discussion Mr Houston ticked off community boards for raising unagendad items for discussion in their meetings. He said they were airing issues without the proper preparation of council officer reports and that such practice did not help the council in the long term. He gave as a hypothetical example the siting of a rubbish dump. If it is discussed in a meeting before planning reports, environmental reports and the like can be prepared, unnecessary discussion and alarm can be raised. Mr Houston said he felt some general business was being raised to justify holding a meeting and that this was an area of concern to him. On the matter of remuneration Cr Cosford suggested all councillors and board members should be paid some salary but if cost was an issue, a figure of, say, 60 percent be applied across the board.