I am incredibly disappointed at the attitude of the Tauranga City Council regarding the laughable offer made to the Bella Vista families -- especially when it's clear to many in the community that the council has allegedly acted very poorly.
The council has, in my view, no moral high ground nor can it claim any kind of victimhood or innocence in this matter.
At the recent long-term plan process many councillors said the $25m plus about $5m per year running costs that was being asked of ratepayers for the proposed museum was small change in context of annual budgets.
So if that was the case why is the council now trying to shirk its moral obligations and be frugal?
Council offer a farce
I attended the public meeting of Bella Vista home owners this week. It now appears to me that the council offer to the affected home owners was nothing more than a farce.
The offer required all 21 owners to agree to the offer within 7 days. To get agreement from 21 separate parties on such a matter in this time would always be difficult and, in this case two of the parties were already pursuing a separate approach making it near impossible.
The offer was therefore in my view nothing more than a farce.
Come on council, get real and do something constructive to help these people.
Disappointment over swings
Although I live overseas now, I have a house in Tauranga and visit my parents in Pahoia regularly. The highlight of this visit for my three boys was always the beautiful, large, swings down at the Pahoia reserve.
On my recent visit in April we were gutted to find that they had been replaced with some pathetic small alternative swings, and I had trouble to explain to my 7 and 10 year olds why someone would do this and take away such enjoyment from children.
I am aware of the unstoppable movement of health and safety and know that this letter will achieve nothing, but I just wanted to express my disappointment with this new and ever increasingly restrictive form of regulation.
Not even a couple of large swings on a quiet reserve were able to be spared.
Your editorial last Saturday, which I note was anonymous, continues the vitriolic outpouring against police Deputy Commissioner Wally Haumaha.
All this guy seemed to do was serve in the Rotorua police in the 1980s and 1990s and he later told the Operation Austin inquiry that Brad Shipton and Bob Schollum were good people. That was his view of his colleagues at the time. Why can't that be simply accepted?
What your newspaper does not highlight was that after Shipton left the police he had a business in Tauranga in the drink and food industry and was elected to the Tauranga City Council.
If Haumaha is going to be pilloried why shouldn't all those people who voted for Shipton be identified and pilloried in the same way? I did not vote for him.
We need to bear in mind that Shipton and his co-accused were found not guilty of any offences against Louise Nicholas. Another inquiry is a total waste of taxpayer money.
It's time that you newspapers and the Human Rights Commission supported Haumaha getting on with his own life nearly 30 years later.
Stop the litter
I walked the 1.5km of our local road and collected the rubbish on the side of it on Thursday.
I do this regularly and today I collected: 1 cardboard outer for soft drinks, 1 aluminium can, 1 beer bottle, 1 takeaway coffee cup and lid, a piece of polythene pipe, two kiwifruit ties, 1 eftpos receipt, 1 fax sheet with name and numbers on, 1 paper label, and 8 pieces of plastic.
This road is used for a busy club, several orchards, farms, several businesses, and living. There are culverts and drains and these empty into a river.
When did it become okay to use our roads for dumping rubbish?
Why are our oceans in a bad shape?
Who is responsible for cleaning up our roads and waterways?
Please can I ask the people of our "clean green country?" to avoid littering, and our environment people to come up with some answers. Small efforts do count in the bigger picture.