There is only one week to go before submissions close in the Local Government Commission’s (LGC) consultation on a Golden Bay Local Board.
As the community weighs up the pros and cons of a change in local government structure, it essentially boils down to a simple question: Are potential improvements in local decision-making and budgetary spending worth paying for?
The answer, however, is complex, as a lack of clear information on costs and benefits makes a rational analysis problematic. As in many policy decisions, the intangible and/or long-term benefits have to be weighed against short-term tangible financial costs.
Despite the difficulty, the arguments can be explored by examining each of the three options listed on the LGC’s submission form:

1. Support the retention of existing arrangements, ie community boards (not local boards), in Golden Bay and Motueka.
   This would maintain the status quo, allowing TDC to retain a high degree of control over Golden Bay’s decision-making and spending. But there could be some loosening of the reins; the council’s submission to the LGC (available on TDC website), states additional responsibilities could be granted: “The existing community board is empowered with a number of decision-making responsibilities, and these are always open for expansion where legislation allows.”
   Golden Bay ward councillors Celia Butler and Chris Hill, along with community board member Grant Knowles, have all stated publicly that the community board could do a lot more, but despite these sentiments, and despite a recommendation from the LGC in 2007, there has been little meaningful expansion of the community board’s portfolio of responsibilities since its inception.
   When TDC has agreed to extend community involvement, Golden Bay Local Board Working Group secretary Tony Lawton says it’s rarely been about making decisions.
   “I was involved with a request to TDC for delegation of Port Tarakohe to be managed by our community in conjunction with the community board in 2014. TDC’s response was to set up another advisory board for the port. Advice isn’t decision-making. Delegations only work if there is an excellent relationship between the community and council, and the budget to perform the delegations is also delegated.”
   It’s clear from its submission that TDC would be happy to retain the current community board, stating: “The council believes there currently is an appropriate balance between local decision-making and district-wide decision-making, especially given the way in which activities are funded.”
2. Support the option of a Golden Bay Local Board
   One of the key differences between a community board and a local board is that delegations made to the former can be withdrawn by council on a whim, whereas allocations made to the latter can only be reversed if both parties agree. The democratic advantages of a local board, listed by the LGC in its consultation document, include better local decision-making, improved local governance and effective response to the opportunities, needs and circumstances of Golden Bay.
   The anticipated benefits need to be balanced against the costs of operating a local board. Estimates vary considerably, but costs will depend on the breadth and depth of responsibilities transferred to a local board, which in turn represent the benefits of the new body.
   Golden Bay ratepayers are currently charged a targeted rate of approximately $20pa per property to fund their community board. Based on a report by Philip Jones and Associates, the LGC estimates the additional annual costs of supporting a local board would be as follows: $42,284 for board member remuneration, $240,000 for a dedicated support officer (including overheads), plus $190,000 in indirect costs. The LGC calculates this would add approximately $75pa to Golden Bay’s targeted rate.
   TDC believes it would require 4.5 full-time equivalent members of staff to provide support – a lead team member, a customer support officer, a senior and part-time advisor and a PA/community liaison officer.
   Rather than looking at the additional costs of supporting a local board in Golden Bay, the council’s costings are based on the total $900,000pa operating costs of Auckland’s local boards such as that in Waiheke Island – a community that shares may similarities with Golden Bay. Depending on how the costs are apportioned between the general and targeted rate, TDC estimates that the annual cost per Golden Bay property would be $283.18, or $40.11 if spread across the district.
   Philip Jones, an experienced consultant the LGC ranks highly and has used before, explains the apparent discrepancy.
   “I was asked by the LGC, ‘What is the additional cost in terms of the service transition from council to a local board, not the total costs?’ The council will already have been incorporating some costs. There are services being delivered to Waiheke by the local board that would not happen with TDC.”
   Whichever way the calculations are performed, a local board is almost certain to cost more – at least in the short term. But Tony believes that medium-to-long-term efficiency gains, increased community-based decision-making, and targeted use of local budgets could reduce council expenses and improve service delivery. “TDC recently spent $500,000 on legal costs on two Golden Bay issues, and there could be savings from reduced travel costs and time for council staff. The Commission is right to say that these regional benefits should be offset against the increased governance cost of a local board.”
   Ignoring any potential democratic benefits, TDC maintains a negative stance towards the local board proposal, stating in its submission: “On the basis of what the LGC has presented, we are unconvinced that a compelling case for a local board has been presented given the likely cost implications to the Tasman community generally and Golden Bay in particular.”
3. Support the option of a Golden Bay local board and a local board or boards elsewhere in Tasman District
   This would involve a significant loss of central control and a distribution of budgets to the wards, and according to its submission, is TDC’s worst-case scenario. “Should the Commission decide on a local board, the Council’s least preferred option is five local boards across the District due to increased costs, increased inconsistency of policy and service levels across the community and cuts across communities of interest.”
   The current system of governance across the district, however, is far from consistent. In addition to the community boards operating in Golden Bay and Motueka, there are numerous community associations covering many of the district’s smaller communities, including Brightwater, Dovedale, Mapua, Marahau, Moutere Hills, Motueka Valley, Murchison, Rotoiti, Tapawera, Tasman, Torrent Bay and Wakefield. Although they have different titles—associations, councils, and committees—they all exist to support and advocate for residents in their local communities and make submissions to council on a range of issues of concern for the local community.
   Tony suggests this fragmented, ad hoc network could be harmonised if four or five local boards were set up across the district. This would establish a system of consistent representation, allow delegation of responsibilities—and budgets—to local communities, and offer scope for reduction of overhead support costs, as in Auckland’s centralised services model for its 21 local boards. He argues that reallocation of TDC’s $4.5m annual central governance budget to cover some local board governance costs “would potentially allow for a lower cost-per-ratepayer (around $60 per annum) to achieve the benefits of community-level decision-making, both here and for communities over the Hill”.
   TDC doesn’t consider this possibility in its submission, stating only that, “costs and staff resources would be considerably higher with additional local boards to service”.
   The scenario of a system of local boards is about to become less likely if TDC has its way; in its submission, council asks the LGC to set the threshold to progress new requests at 10 per cent of the entire district’s electors, not just of the ward in question.
   Making a submission:
   The LGC commissioners have made it very clear that they will consider the quality of the arguments in the submissions when they make their decision. Tony says the commissioners have deliberately avoided taking a prescriptive approach but instead “are looking for considered input from the community to ensure any changes they decide to make are community-driven and in conjunction with the Commission”.
   The Golden Bay community now has until next Friday to weigh up the additional costs of governance against the potential benefits of more control of its own affairs.
   Submissions can be made online at the LGC website, or via email or post to the LGC.
   Submissions close on Friday 14 August.
   Article and photo: Jo Richards.

The post Local board submissions due appeared first on The GB Weekly.

On Monday morning, the Local Government Commission (LGC) officially opened the first phase of public consultation on the option of a Golden Bay local board. At the same time, the Commission published its consultation document – posting a copy on the LGC website and sending out hard copies to all Tasman District mailboxes.
The 14-page document explains what a local board is, the positive reasons for establishing one, what it might do, and what it might cost, including who would pay for it. The contents will form the basis of what could prove to be a crucial community conversation about the future governance of Golden Bay. That discussion begins in earnest next week with public meetings being held in Takaka and Collingwood.
The document explains, in some detail, the pros and cons of establishing a local board in Golden Bay, but the argument really boils down to whether Tasman District Council and Golden Bay ratepayers are prepared to pay for improved local democracy, better local decision-making and more responsive governance.
The Golden Bay Local Board Working Group (GBLBWG), who applied to the LGC in 2018 to investigate the establishment of a local board, are following developments closely. Working Group secretary and spokesman Tony Lawton says the group’s first reaction was that the document “represents a good basis for the upcoming discussions with the Golden Bay community about community-level democracy”.
He hopes that public debate will improve on what he says is already a good proposal. “Even as it stands, it would represent a significant improvement in local government decision-making for this remote and wonderful community. However, we see a number of opportunities to deliver even greater benefits to the Golden Bay community.”
One of the key advantages of a local board is its increased autonomy achieved by reallocating non-regulatory functions and responsibilities from council to the community. While the Commission recommends that a local board is made responsible for many of Golden Bay’s community assets, it proposes only an advocacy role for others – specifically commercial assets such as Port Tarakohe, Takaka Aerodrome and the two campgrounds. Tony says a local board should have, at minimum, a shared responsibility for these facilities rather than a “remote” advisory role. “We believe integration of these assets into a Golden Bay Local Board’s Three-Year Plan is vital for ensuring efficient, sustainable development whilst respecting the Bay’s unique and special culture and environment.”
Regarding regulatory responsibilities, the GBLBWG is concerned that success of the LGC’s proposed collaborative approach with Tasman District Council, will be heavily dependent on the latter’s goodwill.
Tony believes it would be more efficient to delegate decision-making for certain areas of regulation to a local board. “The Working Group identified in its application specific areas of local regulation where a more tailored approach to suit our unique community requirements could have significant benefits for the community, like housing regulation and seawall protection – benefits it would be a shame not to achieve.”
The wider scope of responsibilities accrued by a local board compared to a community board means that governance and support costs will increase, and this is likely to be a key issue for the Golden Bay community. Under current legislation, TDC will determine the targeted rates for these costs, something that Tony is concerned about. “The Commission has made an excellent start with the work it has done in establishing what these costs should be, but we believe only direct pressure from Wellington will ensure TDC charge our community in a fair and equitable manner.”
The Commission has estimated a targeted rate of around $15 per annum for each Golden Bay household to cover increased governance costs related to the five elected members of the local board.
In addition, the Commission recommends the appointment of one additional council staff member to provide the local board with direct support, at an estimated annual cost of $240,000, which could take the total increase in annual rates to $75. However, Tony points out there is a strong argument for spreading the burden across the district. “We see merit in the argument that as many of these responsibilities are transferred from TDC’s Richmond base, with its 300-odd staff, rather than incremental services, there is scope to absorb more of the direct costs in the general rate.”
Tony stresses the importance of finding a financial solution that is acceptable to all parties. “The benefits are clear; it would be a shame for the issue of funding governance and support costs to prevent the Golden Bay community from achieving them.”
The Commission recommends that any additional indirect decision support costs should be born by council, something that is endorsed by the Working Group. “Given that these costs are based in Richmond, and that TDC has the ability to reduce costs relating to Golden Bay local board support by offsetting reduction in its Richmond bureaucracy for the transferred responsibilities, there should be little argument with the Commission that these costs be funded from the general rate.”
Interested parties will be able to discuss these issues, and many other aspects of the local board, until the initial consultation ends on 14 August. During this period the LGC welcomes submissions which can be made via its website, by completing the form provided in the consultation document, or by writing directly to the Commission.
In September submitters will have the opportunity to present their arguments in person at one or more hearings, after which the LGC will consider all inputs and, if necessary, hold discussions with interested parties “to clarify the scope of any particular allocation or delegation of decision-making responsibility, or the particular mechanisms for representing local interests in governing body decision-making”.
Although a final decision is expected in November, there will be plenty of work to do before October next year when the election for a new board is scheduled to take place. If all goes according to plan, the new local board would come into existence on 1 November 2021.
In the meantime, Tony is anticipating a positive discussion about the local board and urges all parties to participate. “We look forward to having the Commission engage with our community, and the other communities in the Tasman district, to establish the public view on this proposal, and hope TDC take this as a fantastic opportunity to work with our community, and its other communities, to significantly enhance community-level engagement in local government.”
Public meetings:
Rec Centre, Takaka on Thursday, 16 July at 7pm.
Collingwood Fire Station on Friday, 17 July at 10am.
For more information:
Local Government Commission at: www.lgc.govt.nz
GB Local Board Working Group at: www.gblocalboard.co.nz

The post Local board debate about to begin appeared first on The GB Weekly.

The post Property market “active” appeared first on The GB Weekly.

Community sports have been cleared for kick off. Following the Government’s relaxation of public gathering restrictions, training can begin in earnest from today, but there are still a few hurdles to be overcome.

The Ministry of Health requires procedures to be established to ensure hygiene and the ability to contact trace, while some codes need to have an approved health and safety plan as specified by their governing bodies.

Under normal circumstances the local leagues and regional competitions would be well underway by now, but this year’s long delay means that when the games begin – estimated to be around the end of June – there are likely to be reduced fixture lists and/or a number of short-sided games. In some cases, clubs may decide to abandon the 2020 season altogether.

The reopening of Takaka’s Rec Park Centre is crucial to the restart for many sports and manager Sara Chapman says clubs are eager to resume. “Everyone is adapting so that physical activity and social camaraderie is not forsaken in 2020.”

The Centre is following Ministry of Health guidelines, says Sara. “Every group member club will need to follow our contact tracing system and sign up to Rec Park Centre health and hygiene protocols. Abbie Langford, recreation coordinator, is working with each club.”

She says that shared areas will be cleaned between different user sessions and some new arrangements have been put in place. “The Centre has been divided into four sectors and Laura Webster, hospitality coordinator, has set up cleaning kits at each sector for the clubs to take care to clean equipment and high-touch surfaces such as door handles and light switches.”

Feedback so far indicates a phased return to the Centre, says Sara. “Recreational sport will begin with badminton and pickleball. Takaka Squash Club is waiting to restart. Takaka Basketball and Golden Bay Netball may initiate a short season for local play.”

Co-president of Golden Bay Netball Lorna Pomeroy said the Rec Centre had a “good policy” and she was “hopeful and optimistic”  about what she accepts will be a shortened season.

Takaka Squash Club is planning to pick up where it left off before lockdown, once all the safety and traceability procedures are in place. “ We’re going to be back next month. We have a league running so will just have to change the  match dates,” explains club president Paul McConnon.

Of the outdoor sports, hockey may resume depending on demand, according to club president John Byrne. “If people are keen, we could start but we’d be looking at a short season.”

Both Takaka and Collingwood rugby clubs are working out their own procedures for complying with the MoH rules and assessing the viability of their squads.

Takaka coach Anthony Tait says once the paperwork is agreed with Tasman Rugby, they will begin training. “The seniors should get going next week, and the juniors the week after.”

While Anthony is fairly confident that Takaka will have sufficient players throughout the “unusual season”, Collingwood coach Graeme Miller is concerned about the loss of players from August onwards. “We have quite a few farmers who will be involved with calving.” Nevertheless, Graeme is eager to see the black and gold back on the paddock. “We’ll start training next week and hope to start competition around 20 June.”

Moving onto the round-ball game, Golden Bay Football Club is in rude health with eight competing teams keen to play in the Nelson Bays league. They won’t have to wait long, according to club president Adge Tucker. “We’re due to start on 13 June.” Before training begins next week, however, the club’s health and safety protocols have to be aligned with the code’s guidelines. “We have to ensure compliance with what Nelson Bays Football and national football have put out.”
The winter of 2020 may see an unusual sporting season in Golden Bay, but most clubs appear to be determined to make the best of it. When Anthony Tait says of the effort to ensure his sport continues; “If it keeps rugby going, it’s worth it,” he is expressing the thoughts of many of the Bay’s sportsmen and women.
Article and Photo: Jo Richards.

The post Let the sport commence appeared first on The GB Weekly.

On Monday, Golden Bay students seemed very happy as they returned to the classroom after nearly two months of home-based learning. They were just some of the country’s 800,000 returning students who included the year 1 intake, who are effectively starting over, to year 13 NCEA students who are on the final stretch of their school careers.
Collingwood Area School
At Collingwood Area School, cars and buses began to arrive shortly after 8.15am discharging students of all ages at the school gates. It might have been a chilly five degrees, but the welcome was warm, with teachers and students greeting one another in the playground. Several older students took the opportunity to get in some early morning basketball practice and, as the clock ticked on, the distinctive happy noise of a school playground filled the Collingwood air.
At the end of the school day, principal Hugh Gully reflected on the re-start. “We had a very good turnout – about 95 per cent.”
He noted that students were clearly pleased to get back to school. “They were very happy to see their buddies. I wandered around at lunchtime and they were sitting around in circles just catching up. It was good to hear lots of laughter from the kids – and the teachers.
“I spoke to a few kids who have had a nice time during lockdown, a really special time with their families, doing a load of interesting things.”
Hugh said that while not all senior students had engaged fully with their NCEA studies during lockdown, they would be able to catch up. “They will have lots of one-on-one sessions with teachers to help them get credits they need. If they haven’t engaged, today is the time to get on with it.”
Summing up, Hugh said he was very happy with how things had gone. “It’s been a really, really good day.”
Golden Bay High School
Ninety-two percent of the school roll returned on Monday, arriving in droves. They were greeted by the senior management team before being directed to the handwashing facilities and on to their form classes. The rules under Level 2 were laid out, and teachers and students reconnected with each other and with face-to-face learning.
The senior students expressed relief about being back, as did their teachers; in fact, most students said they were happy to be back. The year 9s returned to creative mode in Resistance Materials Technology following a health-and-safety briefing from teacher Ben Knoef.
Student Hazel Molloy commented, “I enjoyed learning from home, but it is great to be back with my friends,” while Kyla Lusty said, “It feels really weird.”
These sentiments were echoed by many fellow students.
The focus on day one was on settling back into school and assessing where students were with their learning. Adjusting to the conditions set out for health-and-safety under Level 2 will continue throughout the rest of the week.
Extra staff were rostered on during breaks, as this is when social distancing is likely to prove most challenging. This is an area that will continue to be closely monitored.
Takaka Primary School
Principal Jenny Bennett said it was happy Monday at Takaka Primary. “We had a fantastic first day back with a settled start involving lots of reconnecting through play, creative activities and games. Students and families were met at their ‘name gate’ as they’ve quickly become known, and parents and caregivers were able to either say goodbye at the gate, or if there were nerves involved, walk them in.
“We were pleased with a 94 per cent attendance and thank our community for placing their trust in our school, for their patience, understanding, and care, which has been demonstrated towards school staff and has really kept us all buoyed.”
Jenny said the energy around the school was “buzzing and joyful”, particularly during break times when the shrieks of delight echoed around the school. “Teachers were involved in leaf fights and sports games; we think they were just as excited to be back.”
While things went well, Jenny recognises the ongoing need to adapt. “We are continually checking and improving our processes to reduce risk and ensure a gentle return, as we know theory and practice can be slightly different.”
Jenny said that it wasn’t only returning students that showed up on Monday. “We are delighted to have welcomed many new students – from ages 5-10 – and their families to TPS. Many enrolled into our online programmes before arriving, so it’s been fantastic to meet them in person and see how well they’ve settled in.”
Motupipi Primary School
There was a general air of excitement among children and staff at Motupipi School as children returned from their lengthy isolation on Monday morning.
Guidelines set by both Ministries of Health and Education required anyone entering the grounds to be registered for contact tracing, so most parents said their farewells outside, some a little anxious to not be escorting their children in.
“It’s harder on some of them than on the kids,” said principal Lisa Malones.
All arrivals were personally greeted by Lisa with genuine joy and enthusiasm as she ushered students through the gate. “I’m just so excited to see them all back,” she said.
The feeling was reiterated by teacher Jodie Grant.
“It feels so vibrant; the kids feel positive and happy to see each other and to be together, and I feel the same,” she said, but admitted that adjusting to all the sudden energy for some might take time.
The school is launching into its programme where it left off, but is fully prepared for the new safety approach. While enforcing social distancing with children is difficult, Lisa says they will be exhibiting safety first and common-sense rules by hand washing with soap and water “before and after everything”, and using hand sanitiser appropriately.
Central Takaka School
Things were buzzing at Central Takaka School on Monday, according to principal Steve McLean. “The students and staff were all very happy to be back and enjoyed reconnecting. Lots of online learning devices plus library and reading books were returned and then cleaned before being put back into circulation.”
Steve said staff, students and parents all followed Level 2 protocols, including using a designated drop off/pick up point, filling out contact tracing forms and using all the new handwashing and sanitising stations. “It has been a real team effort from the staff and Board of Trustees throughout the lockdown and in preparation for re-opening under Level 2.”
The major focus for the first week back is on physical and emotional wellbeing, explained Steve. “This includes only slowly easing back into the usual routines to allow time for restoring the social connections and comfort levels of student to help them adjust to life back at school. The most important message we are promoting is to be kind to each other.”
Article and photo: Jo Richards.

The post Many happy returns appeared first on The GB Weekly.

The major stakeholders in the Te Waikoropupū Springs Water Conservation Order (WCO) process all appear to have significant issues with the recommendations published by the Environment Protection Authority (EPA)’s special tribunal.
The tribunal’s Draft Order was released in March this year, almost two years after the tribunal held an extensive hearing in Takaka.
A total of 10 parties, representing all points of the ideological compass, have lodged proceedings with the Environment Court and will now prepare for an inquiry.
The EPA’s role in the Water Conservation Order process was to provide administrative and secretariat support to the Special Tribunal. It does not have a role in the Environment Court inquiry.
The latest development will add another potentially lengthy chapter to the WCO saga, which officially began with an application to the Ministry for the Environment in 2014.
The dissatisfied supporters and objectors of the WCO application who recently lodged proceedings include organisations and individuals from the farming sector, environmental advocacy, aquaculture, power generation, local government, and the applicants themselves (see Box 1).

Box 1:
List of parties that have lodged proceedings with the Environment Court.
NZ King Salmon
Trustpower
Save our Springs – Kevin Moran
Robert and Cherrie Chubb
A P Reilly
Upper Takaka Irrigators
David Scotland and Sally-Anne Neal
Federated Farmers
Ngāti Tama Ki Te Waipounamu Trust and Andrew Yuill
Tasman District Council

Farmers and farmers’ organisations generally base their objections on the tribunal’s acceptance of Friends of Golden Bay (FOGB) water quality monitoring data, the integrity of the nutrient modelling, the proposed NO3-N limit of 0.44 mg/l, and the lack of economic impact analysis on primary and secondary industries. Future options to increase fertiliser application, stocking density and water abstraction for irrigation schemes could be severely limited should the WCO be implemented in its current form.
Tasman District Council’s objections overlapped significantly with those advanced by farming sector interests, stating at one point in its submission: “The Special Tribunal erred in accepting the evidence of Dr Mead [FOGB], which recommended NO3-N of 0.44 mg/l be included in the Draft Order as a limit…because the evidence established the limit had already been exceeded.”
TDC also objected to the classification of the springs’ spiritual values as “outstanding” and highlighted perceived inconsistencies in the Draft Order document.
On the other side of the fence, Kevin Moran, on behalf of Save our Springs (SOS), argued, amongst other things, that there should be no provision for any increase in water abstraction by farmers, stating. “Any future increase goes against the intent of the WCO to protect Te Waikoropupū Springs.”
WCO joint applicants Ngāti Tama Ki Te Waipounamu Trust and Andrew Yuill echoed the position taken by SOS, stating that, due to the springs’ outstanding qualities, no further abstraction should be allocated from the aquifer or the springs, and that “ecosystem health” should be added to the list of outstanding qualities. They also called for iwi to be consulted on any planning issues related to the waters in the catchment.
There is currently no information concerning the venue or the timing of the Environment Court inquiry but it is likely to be held in Golden Bay. When it does convene, the Court will receive and hear submissions before making a recommendation to the Minister for the Environment about whether the special tribunal’s report should be accepted or rejected.
With such entrenched and seemingly diametrically opposed positions taken by the 10 parties, it’s difficult to see how any consensus will emerge from the Environment Court proceedings.
Join in the conversation:
Tell us what you think, share your ideas, leave a comment. We’ll summarise feedback in next week’s issue.
Article: Jo Richards.

The post Springs WCO heads to Environment Court appeared first on The GB Weekly.

The move to Alert Level 3 has seen many of the Bay’s retail outlets reopen, but it’s far from business as usual, with limited hours and contactless trading the order of the day. Nevertheless, in addition to their caffeine pick-me-up, shoppers can now bag plenty of other local goodies.
After being partially grounded for five weeks, Choco Loco’s hand-made chocolates are literally flying out the window.
“We had to think really carefully about how to safely open and deliver to people,” says co-owner Kath Craw. “We even thought of things like catapults as a way of serving up.”
Then along came a winning design from cabinet maker Aly Turner. “We played around with the idea of a pizza paddle,” says Kath. “Since we had a long counter out the back I thought we could swivel it out, but due to lock down I couldn’t get any parts; the only things I could put my hands on were three old caster wheels, a bolt and a bit of bent ply. It’s completely ecologically sound and sustainable; it’s even oiled with cooking oil.
“A thing of beauty,” laughs co-owner Gay Hamilton. “It swings around with the payment machine on it – you’ve got to keep your distance in case somebody gets swiped. We put things in a bag and they just need to waft their card over the machine, pick up their bag and drive.”
Just across the road, Wildflower ethnic clothing store and its children’s supplies shop, Grasshopper, are both open weekdays for click and collect. Owner Lori Godden explained that customers can shop online, click “pickup” for shipping options, then collect their parcel from outside Wildflower’s front door. Meanwhile staff are working inside, as they stocktake and change the clothing range from summer to winter-wear in preparation for reopening under Level 2.
“The websites are quite handy with lockdown,” said Lori. “I think it might be the new norm for a while. We have done heaps of orders, a huge surge of internet orders for Wildflower.”
Lori has spent the lockdown period contemplating ways to make her business better, thinking how she might improve her business model and become more essential.
“The local support is great. Grasshopper is such a boutique, specialty shop to have in such a small town, and it’s the locals who keep it going. Without the local support we wouldn’t exist.”
Mariposa clothing and Soul footwear owner Tracey Brignole has operated her stores online for 10 years. Currently they have a 30 per cent storewide discount. “It’s a pretty desperate attempt to get cashflow going,” says Tracey, adding that while online sales are up, it’s not enough to make up for the high street stores being closed, which is why she has extended the discount until the end of Level 3.
“As there was no shipping during Level 4, we’re trying to catch up now and do all we can to hold firm,” explained Tracey. Her team have found it tricky working in the warehouse, organising stock while maintaining physical distance, but they are managing. The click-and-collect service allows locals to pick up parcels from outside the Junction Street warehouse.
During the last two weeks of March, sales were down by 80 per cent across the Nelson and Takaka stores – six in total – with Dragonfly, Soul and Mariposa in Takaka and Nelson. A total of 18 staff work for the company. “April is usually busy; it’s our Nelson store’s biggest month of the year for Soul,” says Tracey. “Now it’s down to nothing, zero trade.”
She wonders if things will be any better under Level 2. “Will people come out or not? The reality is we may have to downsize. Winter is challenging at the best of times. Or, we may have to open one day a week less. It’s going to be a juggle to get through.”
Currently Tracey has one staff member per store working to change seasonal stock, in readiness for opening again under Alert Level 2. “It’s really hard to make a plan when there are so many unknowns,” she says. But she is adamant they are staying optimistic and will find a way through.
Next door to Soul, Takaka’s newest food outlet O’Sha, is offering a comprehensive a Thai menu via its website.
Customers who phone in their orders will be informed approximately how long their order is going to take. They will then receive a text message when the order is ready for pick up – from a table at the shop front. Online instructions clearly explain the protocol around safe distancing and payment.
At the other end of the street, The Curry Leaf’s owner Andrew Bulters says that things initially went well under Level 3. “The first three days were great. It was busier than I thought it would be, until the bad weather, then that nailed it.”
The business received the Government’s wage subsidy which helps, but he says he may close an hour earlier over the next week or so, as they have found things slow down significantly after 7pm.
Out of town, Tarn and David Hix who took over the Pohara Store on 1 November last year, have found things pretty hard going since missing out on their “bonanza” Easter weekend. “It’s been up and down… We are grateful we have been able to stay open, really,” says David.
Under current restrictions, they can have up to four people in the shop at a time, which David says is working “quite well”.
Being new to the business means they are still bringing in new stock and adjusting prices in line with other convenience stores. Dave says the feedback from locals has been very supportive, with people appreciating the variety in store, including fresh vegetables sourced from Raeward and fresh fish. “We’d like to say a big thank you to our customers.”
Join in the conversation:
Go to: https://gbweekly.co.nz/top-stories/ and leave a comment. Tell us what you think, share your ideas. We’ll summarise feedback in next week’s issue.
Article: Ronnie Short and Anita Peters
Photo: Anita Peters

The post Contactless trade a challenge appeared first on The GB Weekly.

There’s a growing realisation around the world that, after the coronavirus crisis, things may never be the same again.
And that’s a good thing, according to those who have long argued for a more sustainable way of life, and who see the pandemic threat as an opportunity to change the way we live.
At the global scale, a group of experts at the World Economic Forum have already highlighted the need for a radical reassessment.
“Covid-19 reflects a broader trend: more planetary crises are coming. If we muddle through each new crisis while maintaining the same economic model that got us here, future shocks will eventually exceed the capacity of governments, financial institutions, and corporate crisis managers to respond. Indeed, the coronacrisis has already done so.”
One of those leading the charge in New Zealand is Wellington-based policy researcher Dr Mike Joy who, along with four colleagues has started Better Futures Forum (BFF) – an organisation with a mission “to create broad momentum for a transition towards a more resilient Aotearoa”.
Speaking to The GB Weekly last week about his initiative, Dr Joy said the country must forge a new future. “We can’t go back to what we had. This is the turning point; we have to change.”
He stressed the importance of demonstrating widespread public support for the movement. “We have to give them [the Government] the mandate; we have to make sure that we get some action.” He strongly argues for a community-driven approach. “Following the conventional process of putting in submissions gets you nowhere; the way to get the mandate is to get this stuff out to the public and get them to push the politicians to make the change.”
The early signs of public engagement are encouraging; since the BFF launched its website on 13 April, Dr Joy said they had been overwhelmed by the response. “We’ve had heaps of support from within new Zealand.”
He considers Golden Bay is ahead of the curve and would be a natural fit with the initiative. “It feels to me like it’s a place that has already implemented some of the things we need to do.”
BFF’s mission is ambitious, but has been broken down into a number of manageable key areas: Land and water, infrastructure, transport, buildings and housing, energy, and economy. Some of the main aims listed under these headings include a transition to regenerative agriculture; upgrading drinking water, wastewater and stormwater infrastructure; investing in low-impact transport systems; using renewable construction materials; building a resilient and sustainable energy system; and strengthening local design, engineering and manufacturing.
“We’ve got little groups working on each one of these,” explained Dr Joy. “And we will be publishing short reports on each one.”
While the BFF core team members have their individual expertise, Dr Joy said all five share the ability to think beyond their specific disciplines – something he believes is crucial in developing the sorts of policies required. “The one thing we have in common is that we are systems thinkers. We totally understand interconnectedness; we can see how everything works together and that things can’t be thought about in silos. That to me is where government always goes wrong.”
From the start, BFF was determined to be fully inclusive, explained Dr Joy, especially of young people and Maori. “Over and above everything we do, we want to have that. It’s a big part of what we’re trying to do.”
One of the youth organisations already contributing to the work is School Strike for Climate, which Dr Joy said was on the same wavelength as the core group. “Young people instinctively put these things together and they’re pretty strong on the social side of things, which is a big part of the picture.”
He believes that being able to visualise things helps to “fire people up” and plans to create a live online map to build up a picture of ideas from around the country. “We’ll have people from the regions putting in their ideas on the map, and people can click on that and find out what the regions are up to.
“We could have the Golden Bay group [Mohua 2040] in there – put together some ideas of what they would like to see for their future and have that sitting on that site. It will be powerful for us to have our first regional group.”
Dr Joy is conscious that some may consider BFF’s mission too radical, but he believes it will lead to a more rational future. “If you want crazy, what we’ve got now is crazy. People never get that because it’s all they’ve ever known. They don’t realise how bizarre the whole thing is.”
And he underlines the importance of utilising the pandemic as a catalyst for change. “This opportunity is too valuable to squander.”
For more information about Better Futures Forum, go to: https://bff.org.nz/
World Economic Forum https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2020/03/a-green-reboot-after-the-pandemic/
Join in the conversation:
Go to: https://gbweekly.co.nz/top-stories/ Go to Top Stories and leave a comment. Tell us what you think, share your ideas. We’ll summarise feedback in next week’s issue.

Article: Jo Richards.

The post Covid crisis a catalyst for change appeared first on The GB Weekly.

Last Saturday morning, Nelson Marlborough Health’s (NMH) clinical director of public health, Dr Stephen Bridgman confirmed that nine of the 48 reported cases of Covid-19 in the Nelson Marlborough region have been based in Golden Bay. Most of these nine cases have now recovered and have been discharged from the public health service.
The number, representing around 20 per cent of all cases in the NMH region, came as a surprise to many, even though Covid-19 has known to be present in Golden Bay for over two weeks (GBW, 3/4). According to Dr Bridgman, all Golden Bay cases were either people who had been overseas or close contacts of people who had returned from overseas.
Providing location data at this level of detail is very unusual; The Ministry of Health (MoH) advises District Health Boards (DHBs) only to release information at Territorial Authority level. By breaking it down for Golden Bay, NMH is one of perhaps only two DHBs to provide community-specific figures.
Dr Bridgman, who personally made this decision in direct response to community demand, stressed that all Golden Bay’s cases cooperated with the strict isolation rules, to ensure they didn’t put others at risk, and he thanked them for their community-mindedness.
The key reason for caution with Covid-19 data is to protect patient privacy, explained a spokeswoman for NMH. “The Ministry of Health report age range, gender and travel details. If we were to confirm a case in Golden Bay alongside that, two and two can be quickly put together, most often, wrongly, and sometimes correctly.”
She provided reassurance that the DHB’s system for dealing with Covid-19 cases is robust. “Contact tracing, isolation and quarantine, and level 4 rules are proven, effective methods to prevent spread and are the main reason that people don’t need to worry about, or know, where a case has been, their movements, or their locations.”
The spokeswoman explained that, in exceptional circumstances, health professionals may appeal to the public for assistance. “If there is any chance of casual contact that contact-tracing can’t help with, such as the Auckland Tool concert [28 February], then a public health alert is issued and media coverage of this is very useful in raising awareness among participants.”
General manager Golden Bay Community Health Linzi Birmingham explained that all positive Covid-19 cases are managed by Public Health which, until recently, was advising primary care and GP practices of negative results, but not informing them about any positive cases. “This notification has now been revised to ensure general practices are advised and can support these patients with their overall care. Public Health has recently released the number of positive cases to GBCH and the community, which provides much more confidence in how the community is tracking.”
Testing times
As part of the nationwide effort to monitor infection and control the spread of Covid-19, Golden Bay’s Community-Based Assessment Centre is hosting drive-through test clinics for those who meet certain criteria. Linzi said the centre, established with support and guidance from NMH and Nelson Bays Primary Health, is fully operational. “The clinics have been running daily, initially for two hours, and now between 10.30am-12pm. Currently we are rostering one doctor and one nurse within the clinic.”
Linzi said threshold for testing had been relaxed recently. “The testing criteria have evolved from the original parameters and further advice regarding these criteria are available on the Ministry of Health Website.”
But she still advises people to call ahead. “The process at GBCH for any patient who believes they need to be tested is to please phone the centre first, they then will be asked several questions by the GP or nurse practitioner, and if eligible for testing they will be given an appointment to attend the drive-through testing centre at GBCH.”
Linzi observed that those driving up to the clinics are complying with the rules. “The community have been great in following the guidance when arriving for a test as this is completed while the individual remains in their car.”
Test results from across the NMDHB’s area show that the last positive Covid-19 test case reported to a NMH medical officer of health had their swab taken on 3 April. Dr Bridgman believes this is a good sign. “There have been hundreds of local negative tests since the last positive case, which suggests there is no current local transmission of Covid-19.”
But he urges everyone to remain vigilant, especially as the country prepares to move to Alert Level 3. “There is, however, no room for complacency. It is very important all local people follow the Government Alert Level Guidelines to ensure the best chance of our region staying Covid-19 free and out of lockdown.”
With little evidence of community transmission, returning travellers currently present the highest risk, according to Dr Bridgman. “The main risk of Covid-19 transmission to people in the Nelson Marlborough region relates to people who have returned from other areas of NZ where cases of Covid-19 continue to rise.”

Article: Jo Richards

Photo: Anita Peters

The post Covid cases in Golden Bay appeared first on The GB Weekly.

Golden Bay’s farmers are doing their bit to feed the country and pump cash into the national coffers by working through the lockdown.
Although it’s not exactly business as usual, the supply chain is working well, according to Federated Farmers Golden Bay president Wayne Langford. The Kotinga dairy farmer says he is used to working in relative isolation and sees the positive side of remaining in his family bubble.
“It’s a lot quieter; I don’t have to rush away to meetings.”
Like most of his fellow farmers during the lockdown, Wayne is only carrying out essential work in order to minimise the need for callouts from service companies such as hydraulic specialists and tyre-fitters. “It reduces the chance of a mechanical breakdown. Suppliers are there for emergencies, but everyone is being extra cautious.”
While Wayne’s farm is essentially a family-run affair and can easily comply with the Government’s rules, he says that larger units are finding it more of a challenge. “Bigger farms in the Bay are struggling to keep in their bubbles; if you have five or six staff it’s not easy.”
Fonterra tankers are still collecting milk every day, and processing plants around the country are running smoothly, but it is a different story in the meat industry, says Wayne. “Fonterra factories run on lean staffing so they are not so much of a problem, but meat processing works are a lot more labour intensive.”
Reduced capacity at meat works, he explains, means that some farmers may be carrying more stock than they would wish into the winter months. “There are a few concerns around [not] sending away surplus animals.” But he points out that the crippling drought farmers suffered during the summer has one upside. “Because we had the dry season, most have already gone early.”
Although the farming industry is coping well with the current crisis, the economic outlook may not be quite so rosy. In a recent press release, the national president of Federated Farmers, Katie Milne, warned of softening prices resulting from the global economic slowdown.
“Meat that was getting $5-something a kilo is now bringing in $3, if we can get it off the farm. The milk returns (per kg of milk solids) had $7 in front of it this year but there are predictions next year it will be $5.”
Farmers have little influence on primary product prices, so Wayne is focusing on the farming calendar and sticking to the immediate tasks in hand. “Farming is all about timing; even a week can make a big difference. Just now, the maize needs to be harvested and paddocks need to be seeded and fertilised.”
As for his three young sons, Wayne says they are also carrying out important duties with the future in mind. “The boys are bringing firewood into the shed and sowing daffodils along the driveway.”

Photo and Article: Jo Richards.

The post Farmers carry on farming appeared first on The GB Weekly.