This summary of the agenda for the Oct 29th Raglan Community Board agenda has been prepared by John Lawson, Secretary of Whāingaroa Environmental Defence Inc., 51 Cliff St, Raglan 07 825 7866 email johnragla@gmail.com
The next Raglan Community Board meeting is the first meeting of the Board since the recent election. It is on Wed 29 October at 1.30pm in the Supper Room, Raglan Town Hall. You can raise issues directly with Board members email/phone.
John has given a terse summary of the agenda and provided commentary on issues with the Raglan bus service:
The next Community Board meeting is Wed 29 October at 1.30pm. The agenda only covers issues such as appointing a chair and deputy and agreeing to meet next at 1.30 on Wed 26 Nov, when the times and dates for the rest of the year will be set (every other Waikato district community board meets at 6.30pm).
Buses
In September I wrote, “WRC went out for public consultation for the proposed bus networks WRC received 1,218 responses; 576 for Hamilton, 348 for Thames-Coromandel and Hauraki, 178 for Raglan . . . WRC staff are still analysing the feedback.”
On 19 Sep WRC published their analysis (click ‘Continue reading’ at the bottom of the page for each section). The consultation ended on 13 July, but there’s no explanation why the analysis took so long and came after WRC approved the contracts as originally proposed, except that the cut in the buses between Raglan and Hamilton East has been put back to about 2030.
WRC’s interpretation of the results seems to favour other routes more than the Raglan bus. For example, 56.3% of us said we’ll use the buses less if they don’t go to Hamilton East. 60.4% (102) of us said we’d use weekend buses more if they were more frequent. WRC’s analysis was, “The current demand does not necessarily signal an earlier implementation of an increase in frequency and so it is proposed that the weekend service enhancement remains in the long term.” By contrast, extension of Te Aroha buses to the north end of town goes ahead, with only 23.1% (31) in support.
Raglan is planned to have 12,500 in 2070 but have half the buses of Morrinsville (10,246 by 2065), even though Morrinsville currently has fewer passengers, despite currently being about double the size of Raglan. WRC say the difference, “reflects a combination of factors including strategic growth priorities, urban planning frameworks, patronage potential, and funding alignment. . . Raglan, while projected to grow and attract high visitor numbers, is outside the Metro Spatial Plan area, and therefore has different service level targets. This does not mean Raglan is less important—rather, it reflects a different planning context. The current and future service levels for Raglan are designed to respond to its unique profile, and we continue to explore opportunities to improve service where feasible.”
Because of the inconsistencies, I asked WRC to put the analysis to the new council. They said, “While the full consultation report was not included within the reports presented to the 28 August meeting, findings were considered within the recommendations put to council and approved by them on the day. The new council will have opportunities to review and refine plans as part of future decision-making processes, especially as services evolve and funding becomes available.”
Should WED follow it up any further? If so, how? For example, should the Ombudsman be asked to consider if it’s maladministration to ask WRC to make decisions on contracts, without giving councillors the full information?
Ngā mihi
John (he/him).