Thread: The results are in

As the election had already was underway when the infraction to regulations was found out it was not possible to stop them, so the
new council will take effect as planned. The council is taking legal advice about a legitimate vote not haven taken place to reduce the number by the current council.
And that has been my point all the way along, that correct procedure had not happened.you cant blame the manager for the councillors mistake when they all saw the meetings minutes in draft and all said was true and correct, then they all saw the agenda for the next meeting beforehand and none of them saw the missing agenda item, (all this agreed and confirmed at the meeting by the council) so there it is. and yes I did meet Sam, he introduced himself to me at the end of the meeting a sum of about a dozen words were spoken.

excellent the lack of process and consultation has always been my bugbear to.
i still fail to see what diff putting it on the june agenda would have made other than to rubber stamp a already done deal.
its not like anyone could have changed the vote or the public could have made them consult.
keep us in the loop as to any developments especialy if they do the right thing and go back to thier licence buyers first.
thank god some common sence may prevail.

The council is taking legal advice about a legitimate vote not haven taken place to reduce the number by the current council.

the only thing to worry about now is if the process was illegal does that make the election so.

interesting fact, the vote taken in April can only be called "informal" I believe the word was used by the council last night as that vote was done in General business so is not part of an agenda and was used by them to gauge "support" to move to a agenda item in June. But no such vote took place in June, then the problem was picked up by the Office Manager after election process had started. and was not picked up by others as the minutes were not on the web yet. and as it was clearly pointed out a person who cant make a meeting should by all reason be able to rely on the meeting minutes to be accurate and try.
decision made last night that they will not be consulting licence holders any further and new council to take over this month.

So where does it all stand now
1. no legitimate vote taken to reduce to 8 councillors
2. National office told vote took place on the 8th April to move to 8 councillors
3. Advise is being sought by the council to determine where they stand "legally"

interesting fact, the vote taken in April can only be called "informal" I believe the word was used by the council last night as that vote was done in General business so is not part of an agenda and was used by them to gauge "support" to move to a agenda item in June

so the requests for info to hq the very next day were off the managers own bat and him not doing his job??

From what I can make out they agreed to it as a non agenda item but to formalize it needed to raise it and vote on it at the next meeting and have it on that meeting's agenda.

is that normal practise mike?
but then to call it a unanimous vote in favour from the aprill meeting??

decision made last night that they will not be consulting licence holders any further and new council to take over this month.

what any further than none
so they did some consultation or no??

We are not talking about inexperienced hicks we are talking about multi term councillors with a number having NZCouncil experience and chairman experience.]

yea i found the poor country boy in the big city a bit hard to swallow given mr d in the next sentence says he was away filming for a month and is a noted ballistic expert.

Originally Posted by gsp follower

yea i found the poor country boy in the big city a bit hard to swallow given mr d in the next sentence says he was away filming for a month and is a noted ballistic expert.

Genuine mistakes can be made no less by anyone at anytime. I think F&G did what it had to but made some serious concessions to the integrity and fundamental purpose of elections. I am personally not surprised that process can be circumvented with such ease and such lack of regard for it's constituents- but many more people have had their eyes opened.

Just 550 people voted in HB (32%) of eligible voters. Imagine if everyone was automatically eligible to vote and region hoping wasn't allowed. Would any election give F&G a mandate to represent us?

Just 550 people voted in HB (32%) of eligible voters. Imagine if everyone was automatically eligible to vote and region hoping wasn't allowed. Would any election give F&G a mandate to represent us?

imagine there no countries imagine theres no wars IMAGINE
are you suggestig a bit of reverse region hopping as opposed to what was rumoured to have happened in aw and eastern last election tim?

It was really pleasing to see the professional staff from Eastern Region giving scientific advice and helping the council through its decision making processes.

ouch that must be cringe worthy
any eastern councillers present

Would any election give F&G a mandate to represent us?

possibly yes but candidate profile would still be a big part to.

If this becomes a contentious issue outside disgruntled candidates who didn’t get elected, we may well ask the licence holders via the email database what their thoughts are regarding whether its necessary to have a new election, as it’s their money that will be getting spent

meow.jesus dont strain yourselvesshame you didnt think this was a good idea before you made the decision and voted on it.

Originally Posted by gsp follower

are you suggestig a bit of reverse region hoping like what was rumoured to have happened in aw and eastern last election tim?

I'm not suggesting anything, but lets look at the figures. There's about 4,100 license sales in HB but I'll knock 400 off and work with 3700 eligible voters. Only 45% of these people bothered to register. This elections vote return represented 32% of those that expressed an interest or just 14% of license holders in the region. Not much of a mandate.