Number check
Recently the future of regional councils has been raised and my immediate thoughts were that is only part of the question so I decided to find out just how the Waikato Regional Council is structured. The answers shocked me but the biggest surprise was the number of elected representatives our rates support.
Waikato Regional Council building. Photo: BCD Group
As far as I can tell there are 12 separate local authorities stretching from Tūrangi to the top of the Coromandel Peninsula. The WRC website suggests the population of the area is near 350,000 with Hamilton City nearly 50 per cent of that total.
Looking at the websites of the 12 councils I could identify 147 elected mayors and councillors and over 90 community board members. That is a total of nearly 290.
Certainly, pay scales in district councils are not high but that in itself raises more questions. Would it be fair to suggest that many of those we elect may lack the skills needed or could they be fairly described as part time hobbyists? Peanuts and monkeys?
That may not be so amongst the staff employed, however. I shudder to think what the total wage and salary bill might be across the 12 Councils, but I do recall that a few years ago a daily newspaper did that research and published some very revealing facts.
My answer to the question is we are seriously over governed, and our rates support far too many elected officials and well-paid employees. Things need to change!
Murray Reid
Matamata
Council policies
Roger Gordon – 2025
We read in The News about Roger Gordon (pity he is not standing for mayor) questioning the reason behind a property owner subdividing their property and putting a new road in. The owner wanted that road named after him but, no, council said it was their policy that new roads had to have Māori names. We now also hear that it is council policy to replace rather than repair or restore. Is it council staff who formulate these council policies and if that is correct, who monitors these decisions? Our elected members of council? If not then why not?
Obviously these policies, and I am only quoting two as an example but there must be more, are not going to meet the approval of all ratepayers. One would think that there is enough intelligence to work out if something could be restored and last equally as long as a new replacement and at a far cheaper price. To have a blanket policy to replace and therefore spend a considerable amount more of ratepayer money simply does not make sense.
Darryl Nix
Te Awamutu
- Editor’s note: The council does have “naming rights” for new roads but does not restrict those names to Māori only.
Ambulance issues
Hato Hone St John Ambulance Cambridge area committee chair Jim Goddin cleans one of the town’s ambulances, an ongoing gift from Wash Cambridge. Photo: Mary Anne Gill
I am deeply concerned that while much attention is being given to a planned new and bigger Cambridge St John Ambulance station, the real issue is being ignored. What good is a bigger, new building when, in reality, Cambridge often has only one fully operational ambulance — and at times, none?
With our town’s population growing rapidly and our community ageing, the urgent need is not bricks and mortar but more fully paid, fully staffed ambulances. A modern four-bay station sounds impressive, however the current station already has three bays, and remains underfunded and understaffed. Bigger is not better when there are no crews to fill it.
The Cambridge community deserves to know the truth: our local ambulance service is stretched dangerously thin and relies strongly on volunteer officers. Response times are already under pressure, and this directly impacts the safety and wellbeing of Waipā residents.
Council may argue ambulance services fall outside its remit, but inadequate coverage is a community safety issue — and therefore very much council’s concern.
With a mayoral election approaching, I believe it must remain at the forefront of local discussion until meaningful improvements are achieved.
Julie Lee, Cambridge
Quarry decision
Newcombe Rd Quarry opponents
I read with concern the decision to approve an application for a sand quarry to go ahead on Newcombe Road, Cambridge. Having read the document through, with particular attention to the views of submitters, I see the effect the quarry will have on the roundabout at the exit from the low-level (Fergusson) bridge is not considered.
Submitters – the large majority of whom were opposed to the application, had their concerns dismissed in the commission’s summary when it was stated “the traffic effects are acceptable and will represent a minor level of additional effect on the local road network”.
Less than minor were the words of Mr Hall, the applicant’s counsel. They were referring to the suggestions that the volume of truck movements would increase congestion. They argued that safety concerns for cyclists and pedestrians were manageable, the town’s tourist character would not be affected, and air pollution would not be major. These concerns do not consider the effect on the bridge situation.
Fergusson Bridge – Lower Level Bridge – Cambridge. Photo: Mary Anne Gill.
The Fergusson Bridge already carries a high volume of traffic. It is the main road in and out of Cambridge for Leamington residents and a main route for large traffic from Te Awamutu. This volume is set to increase because of the increase in population and traffic coming from events at Lake Karāpiro.
When the high-level bridge is no longer capable of full use that volume will increase exponentially. Trucks coming past the golf course will have right of way at the roundabout so traffic from Shakespeare Street will build to an unacceptable level throughout the day. It is already congested at times, reaching beyond the Cook Street roundabout.
I am aware that the decision has been made but thought residents of Cambridge needed to be informed about this risk to our town.
Dorothy Gaunt
Cambridge
Letters to Editor. Photo: Pixabay
