Waikanae River swimming place gets booby-trapped with hundreds of thumb-tacks

This video was posted on the Waikanae Community Info FB page and the story was taken up by Joel Maxwell. We also think it likely that stupid schoolchildren are responsible.

Waikanae River thumbtacks

A “bloody disgusting” attack on swimmers north of Wellington has seen a river booby-trapped with hundreds of thumb tacks.

The tacks were found in a swimming hole and scattered across about 10 square meters of riverbank along the Waikanae River on the Kāpiti Coast.

Waikanae man Dwayne Joy said he was on his way to the swimming hole about 4pm on Monday when he discovered the tacks along the walking path on the rocky banks.

The tacks in the water were about a metre or two away from the main jumping spot into the swimming hole.

There were several hundred on the ground, and it took about 10 minutes to pick them all up, Joy said.

He saw about 15 to 20 in the water, but it was too difficult to get them out. It was likely they would get washed downstream into gaps between smaller rocks, Joy said.

Full article on the Stuff website

Cr David Scott case postponed until February

This was scheduled for tomorrow.  We gather that this call over has resulted from a request by the council, possibly because they are all going to be in another part of Wellington considering Dougherty’s replacement on Friday.

Yet another delay in disposing of this ridiculous complaint is frustrating for David Scott, but the way it is.

councilors to select Dougherty’s replacement on Friday

Best_SolutionThis Friday the KCDC councilors are being bussed into the offices of Jackson Stone recruitment consultants in Wellington to choose the successful applicant from a short list of four.

Only a committee of six councilors saw the CVs of all the applicants and choose this shortlist. Needless to say, David Scott wasn’t one of them.  He thinks Mark Benton of Paraparaumu-Raumati wasn’t either.  Guy Burns has told us that Benton is very interested in council efficiency, which in Guru’s eyes would make him unsuitable.

The Council sets key priorities for social investment funding

Media release from the KCDC

The Kāpiti Coast District Council is adopting a new approach to the way it supports not-for-profit organisations to deliver social services that meet the needs of the Kāpiti Coast community.

From next year, not-for-profit organisations offering social services in the Kāpiti district can apply for contestable funding to support initiatives or programs that contribute to the Council’s new social investment priorities; supporting connected and safe communities and improving the overall capability of Kapiti’s community and social sector.

The Council adopted these priorities at its final meeting for the year last week, following engagement with the community sector and recommendations from a nine-member Social Investment Advisory Group comprising of representatives from the social sector and councilors.

Deputy Mayor Janet Holborow, one of four councilors on the advisory group, says the priorities clearly set out the outcomes the Council is looking to achieve from its social investment program.

“It’s been very valuable to have the benefit of working with people who have extensive experience in the social investment area.

“Using the experience of these people, Council has charted a new strategic direction. This will ensure that we get the most out of funds available and align our funding with the community priorities,” Councillor Holborow says.

The Council has provided workshops and training focused on capability building for the sector in the lead up to the setting of the final priorities. These will continue to be offered to the whole sector and will include topics ranging from how to source sustainable funding, to ways of working collaboratively to achieve social outcomes.

The contestable process will start late next January with new contracts in place from July 2018.

Funding available for emergency transport and beach lifeguard services will sit outside of the social investment funding process.

In case you’re wondering what “Social investment funding” means, there is this piece on the Treasury website which begins:

Social investment means using information and technology to better understand the people who need public services and what works, and then adjusting services accordingly.  What is learnt through this process informs the next set of investment decisions.

Much of the focus is on early investment to achieve better long-term results for people and helping them to become more independent.  This reduces the number of New Zealanders relying on social services and the overall costs for taxpayers.

Full article

the forces of Mammon win — Kapiti now has Easter Sunday trading

Prophet Guru

In one of his local newspaper columns, Mayor Guru decried the worship of Mammon — but he abstained in the council vote

A week is a long time in politics. Last week Kapiti Mayor K Gurunathan was sounding like some Old Testament prophet of doom and a week later the message seems to have softened considerably.

The issue came into sharp focus when Kapiti Mayor Gurunathan announced on Thursday that Council had voted to allow Easter Sunday trading.

Last week the mayor said the must-have mania called shopping is an addictive ritual and the shopping malls are the new temples erected to the god of Mammon – a religion based not on need but desire. On that basis he said it can be argued that those who support Easter Sunday trading are foisting their religious beliefs on others.

read the rest on the KC News site



Update on the Waikato family poisoned by wild boar meat, and the anomalies surrounding the official diagnosis

From the No to 1080 in NZ Facebook page (posted today): The International Society for Infectious Diseases asked on 18 November for clarification because this is unlikely to be botulism. A number of medical professionals have contacted us within NZ and stated that this family cannot have contracted botulism because of the timing of […]

via Update on the Waikato family poisoned by wild boar meat, and the anomalies surrounding the official diagnosis — Rangitikei Enviromental Health Watch

significance of the High Court rejection of the CRU appeal on the Environment Court’s coastal hazards ruling

As has been reported elsewhere, in a quick decison, the High Court dismissed the Coastal Ratepayers United (CRU) appeal on the Environment Court’s ruling on the council’s Coastal Hazards provisions and upheld the Environment Court’s decisions from earlier this year in which CRU got some of what it wanted, but not all.

The Environment Court rejected CRU’s contention that Council should have publicly notified the coastal hazard provisions of the 1999 Operative District Plan for submission and hearing, given its intention that they remain in place until new provisions could be developed.

Appeals on these types of rulings can only be made on points of law, and as observed in the earlier post, the arguments presented were so turgid that even we had difficulty following them.

It was apparent from the judge’s remarks and body language at the hearing that he didn’t think much of what the CRU’s appointed advocate, Mr Mitchell, had to say in his 90 minute monologue.

At the start of the hearing, the judge said that the parties were not as far apart as it might appear in the trenches — which didn’t bode well for CRU.

Mayor Guru understandably was pleased the council successfully defended a legal challenge for a change, or in his words “the court has provided clarity on this matter.” The council “will now focus its efforts on developing fit-for-purpose coastal hazard provisions based on revised coastal hazard assessments.”

“New coastal hazard provisions will be developed through a collaborative process involving the Kāpiti Coast community and a wide range of stakeholders, and will be informed by regional working groups and national guidance and policy which is currently under development,” says Guru.

The coastal hazard provisions of the Council’s 1999 Operative District Plan will continue to apply until new provisions are developed, publicly notified, and adopted through a plan change.

However, CRU fears residents will lose their rights to protest and says residents still deserve a fair say.

Chair Paul Dunmore says the issue was the process that KCDC has been using to develop its new District Plan.

At an earlier stage, the Environment Court had ruled that what KCDC had done was unlawful in part. In response KCDC made last-minute changes to its proposed plan.

The High Court has declined to go further than the Environment Court had done.

CRU’s view is that this frees KCDC to develop future coastal hazard rules which will be constrained by various policies that have now gone into the new plan.

“We fear that residents will be prevented from challenging those policies or arguing for better coastal protections,” says Mr Dunmore.

“Hundreds of submissions by residents against the original plan were discarded by KCDC. These submitters will have to start again and will not be allowed to challenge any aspects of the plan that KCDC chooses not to reopen, even if they limit the right to protect one’s own property against coastal hazards.”

“The High Court decision is disappointing, because the process remains unfair and the KCDC juggernaut can now proceed as planned. But Courts cannot rule on what is fair, only on what is lawful.

“CRU will participate in the future process for developing coastal hazard rules, as far as we are allowed to.”

CRU Contact: Paul Dunmore (Chairer) 902 3126;  CRU@dunmore.nz  www.cru.org.nz