LETTERS & EMAILS

LETTERS & EMAILS BELLIGERENT COUNCIL Thank you for the coverage of the destruction of the Western Springs Native Forest (front cover June 2021). In my opinion Ponsonby News let the Auckland Council off lightly and I call for our community to do more to hold Council and its CEO accountable for the “wanton destruction” of this much-loved community asset. Many healthy trees have been felled and the native understory destroyed by Council hellbent on achieving their own goal without bringing our reasonable community with them.

To the small number of community members who have been active on our behalf, thank you. Dealing with a belligerent Council must have been soul destroying. We stand with you. Sharon Jones, Concerned Member of the Community

AGAINST THE LAWS OF PHYSICS, GRAVITY AND LOGIC The ‘Native Bush Regeneration Plan’ for Western Springs Stage 1 will be completed when the ‘track’ is returned to a ‘significant ecological area’, topsoil reinstated, the walking track is opened to public and all fences are removed as the health and safety risk has gone.

The methodology changed from leaving felled trunks, therefore averting a fire hazard, to chipping the live pines full of toxic resins creating an ecological disaster. (Dead pines form grey, compostable mulch.) It has turned a gorgeous bush full of birdlife into a barren scene from Mars, the Red Planet.

Auckland Council estimate the native bush damage at 35%, attributed to the “care and precision” of the contractor, Treescape. That would be laughable, if it wasn’t so tragic.

“The intention is to remove all of the chipped material from site, however a small residual may be left in situ”, say Auckland Council. “At this stage estimated to be completed at the end of June, weather and unforeseen events pending.” Whilst chipping wasn’t part of the initial contract they say, “There is no new contract and the removal of chip from site was factored into the initial contract with Treescape.” That’s unusual for a contractor to do extra work without remuneration!

Stage 2 begins 9am on 18 July - Public Planting.

As natives grow slowly, let’s plant BIG trees, two to five metres tall to give the forest a head start, and create a sustainable bird habit in our lifetime.

The overall park plan includes improving water quality of the lake. Geese were removed, fish have been culled and volunteers planted grasses around the lake edge on 12 June. Whilst this may stop bread being thrown into the lake, this blocks children seeing birds with their chicks. We grow environmentally aware adults by interaction. Luckily, the ‘iconic double hump’ still gives close encounters with endangered eel.

Waitemata Local Board voted for a design without questioning the one metre lowering of the lake for riparian planting would turn the lake back into a ‘puddle’! Instead, floating islands of riparian planting would create more bird habitat, I argued. Auckland Council Parks changed that to only lower one side of the Lake! So now the surface of the lake wouldn’t be horizontal. That would be against the laws of physics, gravity and logic. Surprise! Surprise! It has been abandoned and riparian planting proposed only where easily accessible!

We get what we vote for. Board members and Council employees, who either have no specific knowledge required for their roles or don’t do the research required, end up badly briefing projects.

Protect Te Wai-orea - Water of Eels, Western Springs Lakeside Park. Gael Baldock, Community Advocate, appellant to the Environment Court on Western Springs Forest BREAKING NEWS - Auckland Council have erected a temporary mesh fence in a day to be replaced with a solid wooden fence to block the lake view from residents, who have endured this destruction and Council’s lack of communication and respect. This decision is unnecessarily, vindictive and offensive, in my opinion.

CRISIS OF DEMOCRACY I refer to the recent review into Wellbeing at Auckland Council, commissioned by the Chief Executive, Jim Stabback. It was silent on the emotional harm and distress caused to our communities when there is a lack of authentic engagement.

The review might explain the current problems on the Western Springs Forest Community Liaison Group. It seems a small number of very senior staff feel empowered by the wellbeing review not to engage with the community by asserting health and safety. If a particular project becomes too much for a senior Council staff member, there needs to be a mechanism for them to step aside from the project, not simply disengage from the community they are there to serve.

Overall, the Wellbeing review seems one-sided. Where are the views of our communities, the people we are elected to serve?

I repeatedly hear from constituents that it is stressful engaging with Council. What are the views of elected representatives and the public whom the report uncritically asserts are aggressive and anti-social? Why haven’t they been part of this review? This seems a real failing of this review.

We have a crisis of democracy here in Auckland. We have people all over our city, people who have never protested before now, camping in parks, being arrested standing up for fair process and quality community consultation. They are almost broken and I don’t see a council that cares.

To what extent has Council been aggressive and anti-social towards residents and rate-payers? To what extent has Council’s behaviour caused the behaviour that they then say is aggressive and anti-social?

Who is looking at the wellbeing of residents and ratepayers when they come to us with a genuine and authentic commitment for doing what is right by their communities - people who put hundreds of unpaid hours into community service, into holding us and Council to account? They come before us because they care deeply about their community issues.

My observation is that if these people, who have the best intentions, take a position that is opposite to what Council or the Board want to achieve, they get tied in knots with a lack of quality information carefully disguised as a thoughtful response. We do this until our community gives up advocating for what is right for their communities, or until we break them.

Who gets to draw the line when the public, or in my case an elected member, want accurate information and transparent decision making, but when a small but senior pocket of staff avoid this by saying the requests are affecting their wellbeing?

This approach, I fear, will shut down dialogue between Council officials and the public. It will heighten the often unfortunate adversarial stance between the Council and communities, eventhough the Council is supposed to be part of a democratic exercise. If democracy is to thrive, Council leadership, starting with the Mayor and the CEO, must be authentic and inclusive. Sarah Trotman, Waitemata Local Board Member

continued p26