Community board decision deferred

Ruapehu Bulletin, Volume 9, Issue 404, 17 September 1991, Page 9

Community board decision deferred

The Ruapehu District Council held a 2-hour 'workshop session' to discuss the future of community boards when they met last Friday in Taumarunui. A decision about the future of community boards has to be made by Council who were presented with four options in a paper prepared by RDC general manager, Cliff Houston, for their consideration. 1 The options were: Abolish all community boards; retain one community board for W aimarino/Waiouru; restructure into northern and southem community boards; retain the status quo. Mr Houston presented a table of population figures within the Ruapehu District showing a general decline in the five years between 1986 and 1991. The figures and percentages are as follows: Ohura Ward - 2120/2110 (0%); Taumarunui - 8065/7510 (-7%); National Park - 1605/1706 (+6%); Waimarino - 4182/3929 (-6%); Waiouru - 3489/2807 (- 20%). With a total of 39 elected members (15 RDC councillors and 24 community board members) making a ratio of one elected member to every 463 people in the district (compared with 1:1,000 in larger districts), Mr Houston posed the question: "Are we over-represented?" He invited councillors to consider the long term prognosis for community boards ... are they regarded as a transitory phase between the old and new systems of local gov-

ernment and could not the essential functions of boards be handled more effectively and economically on a nonstatutory basis? "Are the community boards the most effective means of interface with the public?", he asked. The cost of democracy In opening the workshop session discussion RDC mayor Garrick Workman said councillors were being asked to consider the cost of democracy. Councillor Bob Vine spoke in support of community boards saying that they had been set up to ensure a community of interests be represented and retained at grass roots level. Councillor Doug Bennett also saw a longterm future for community boards saying that not only did they provide a channel of communication both "up and down" but they also provided a training ground for local people to become involved and familiar with local government procedures at council level. Councillor Weston Kirton said that the present system of community boards should be give a chance to work. Councillor Don Lawson said that close-knit community interests would be destroyed if community boards were abolished altogether. Thinking laterally Councillor Margie Snow asked fellow councillors to consider a possible alternative. "I'm not advocating that community boards should be dissolved,"

she said, "but, thinking laterally, would it not be possible for councillors to make more time available to hold 'clinics' on a regular basis so that councillors would be in direct contact with the public?" "Community boards do not have much power to make decisions and implement changes at the moment while we, sitting round the table at a RDC meeting do, so if we put ourselves forward a little more and make ourselves available, the public would have direct access to us". Councillor Eddie Turley said that it has become much more difficult in recent years for community boards to implement changes whereas previously (under the old Local Government Act) community committees often used to act on local issues without reference back to Council "because we were in direct contact with members of the community at all times." Mayor Workman confirmed that community committees had provided a very useful service to the more isolated rural communities in the past. Councillor Bill Peach suggested the setting up of two community boards, one in the north and one in the south with the area north of National Park forming the boundary between the two boards. Councillor Ellen Gould said she would support Councillor Peach's proposal because (as a member of the Waimarino Commu-

nity Board) she sees an "increasing and urgent need" for a single community board in the south. The current community boards should be given "a wider arena" in which to operate because, until now they have not had an opportunity to consider the wider interests of the district without feeling they might be sacrificing their own narrower local community interests, she said. After hearing from Mr Houston that each community board could have a maximum of 12 members - four councillors and eight elected from the community, Councillor Graeme Cosford asked if there was any reason why other councillors could not attend meetings of community boards in an unofficial capacity. "I'm concerned all councillors from each region would want to sit on those (two proposed) community boards but (under the existing rules) this would not be possible," he said. "The only way around that would be to make the north and south (community) boards sub-committees of the Council and for them to liaise with the community committees." Councillor Gould questioned why councillors have to be members of community boards in order to attend meetings... "could they not just sit in on the wings to observe and advise?" Councillor Bill Penny said he did not like the term "split" in the proposal to divide the Ruapehu District into a

north and south community board. "The important thing is to ensure communication is retained throughout the district and whatever structure the council decided on for the future of a community board it must be something the ratepayers would be comfortable about." "I do not believe they are happy with the current situation," he said. However Councillor Eddie Turley warned that making further changes at this stage might be interpreted the wrong way. "My fear is that public reaction will be: My god, here we go again... they (the Council) haven't been able to make the present system work so now they're going to try something else!" "There was merit in the proposed changes but there was also merit in going along with the system already in place and trying to make it work", he said. However in a show of hands only five councillors voted to continue with the status quo and leave the community board structure unchanged. At the request of Councillor Cosford, Mr Houston agreed to prepare a report outlining the possible consequences of the proposed alternatives in terms of costings, representation etc. so that these factors can be considered by the existing community boards and the public before a final decision is made by Council.