Museum vote challenged

Cr Larry Baldock, challenging the museum referendum. Photo: Supplied.

A pro-museum interpretation of the 60/40 museum referendum result is being challenged by the council’s City Transformation Committee chairman and museum advocate, Larry Baldock.

Sixty per cent of eligible voters who took part in the non-binding referendum voted against the museum, but Larry is taking encouragement from the fact the ‘no’ vote represents only 18 per cent of eligible voters.

The majority of the 40 per cent in favour of a new museum, who represent 12.65 per cent of all eligible voters, want it at Cliff Road.

“Regarding the location of a museum, the results are confused because it is clear that 2728 of those who voted ‘no’ to council including a museum in the LTP also voted for either Cliff Road or Willow Street as a location for the museum they do not want,” says Larry.

“When those ‘no’ voters are removed from the location issue, the results of ‘yes’ voters by Cliff Road is 55 per cent, and Willow Street 46 per cent.

“It also appears that there were some voters who so strongly support a museum they ticked both Cliff Road and Willow Street, perhaps in an attempt to send a clear message of ‘I don’t care where, as long as its somewhere’.”

If council decide to proceed with a museum, the one message they can take from the referendum is that Cliff Road will be acceptable to the majority of those in favour of a museum.

There were 4,956 online voters, which is 16.67 per cent of the total votes cast. Predictions and hopes of this having a great effect on voter turnout in the council by-election did not eventuate, as 2064 or 41.65 per cent of online referendum voters did not also vote in the by-election.

“We cannot, of course, know the opinion of the almost 70 per cent of eligible voters who did not take part,” says Larry. 

“If this referendum of only 31 per cent of eligible voters is somewhat representative of the whole population of the city, then we must ask ourselves as we continue in the LTP process, is 41 per cent support enough for us to continue to prepare for a museum in this city?

“We are not elected to only serve the wishes of a majority in the city.

“We are to endeavour to meet the needs and desires of the whole community and it is time we paid attention to aspirations of this patient 40 per cent that have been waiting, in some cases for decades, for this great city to have a place to tell its history, its story and the so many other stories of the wonderful men and women who have lived here.”

Councillors are this week beginning hearing the submission on the Long Term Plan and are required to keep an open mind until they make their final decisions on June 26.


26 Comments

Wow,

Posted on 13-05-2018 08:44 | By Marshal

It is a shame when men with over sized children’s Egos, have to feed them by spending other people’s money..LOL..!!

Council are the museum

Posted on 13-05-2018 07:49 | By Mooga

Unless it’s a museum to rival tepapa its an outdated concept and nothing to do with why people come to the bay. Just put a museum sign on their new building and charge people to come in and view the rellicks

Disgusted

Posted on 12-05-2018 21:55 | By roseh

If the vote said no museum Then that should be it.But you and Mr Bridges must come from the same breed,only see what you want.Roll on the next election for council Thats all I can say

Vote now

Posted on 12-05-2018 21:35 | By Hopeful

Incredible what one will harp on about just to stay relevant. Cr Larry Baldock-NO Museum-NO Referendum-NO Wasting Rates-Yes

Ms P

Posted on 12-05-2018 20:39 | By Pania

We should MARCH against this blatant display of disregard for public vote/voice! Remember the farce of the water meters? And then the referendum... 84% against vs 16% for....What did they do? Passed it in favor of....Then, within a month or two of people being so conservative with their water because they were now paying for it, they announced that "They didn’t anticipate that the public would be so good at conserving water and that they would now have to raise the price per cm2 to compensate for the enormous cost of installation" (Once a billing system in place.....) They will say and do and manipulate % figures to try to baffle inattentive half interested people. Wake up Tauranga! Money for this proposed "Museum" needs to go toward fixing the stupidly ridiculous ever worsening traffic catastrophe!!It’s sickening to me that we are at their disposal.

To slippery Larry Baldock.

Posted on 12-05-2018 17:50 | By Babs

Get the feck off Tauranga City Council. Thank you SunLive, I feel much better now.

Nothing more than a tarnished stirrer!

Posted on 12-05-2018 17:42 | By Bobby2

L Baldock - Are you not interested in working for the majority of voters who pay your salary? We will never improve our city if we cannot move forward in unison. The constant in fighting amongst councillors is costing time and money, both of which are in short supply in Tauranga. If you cannot work with the council team for a better Tauranga, you should resign and let those that are engaged and committed get on with their work, rather than constantly pandering to perspectives of your own manipulations. RATEPAYERS WILL NOT BANKROLL A MUSEUM AT THIS TIME, and especially at either of the flawed locations that were proposed. In the future, we will get a museum, but hopefully you will not be involved in any way.

It's a BIG troll

Posted on 12-05-2018 16:37 | By R1Squid

And give LB more publicity...

Nuf sed

Posted on 12-05-2018 16:25 | By Happyday

No more comment, all said before.

The good news is

Posted on 12-05-2018 10:07 | By waiknot

Larry has well and truly showed his true colours and this will assist voters at the next election.

Typical Bureaucratic Response

Posted on 12-05-2018 09:38 | By The Sage

This is a typical response from someone in bureaucracy. As always, they try and swing the outcome in their favour. Government does it all the time with the figures we hear for unemployed, crime etc. Here’s a thought. If you want another referendum, pay for it out of your own pocket Larry, also don’t take your Councillor’s pay for the amount of time you are wasting on it. Save face and opt out now as people already feel you are making a complete fool of yourself. Have a talk to John Key about his flag referendum. All that did was divide people and waste time and money.

???

Posted on 12-05-2018 09:20 | By BAATS

The location section was to allow those for or against a museum to indicate where they would like it to be if the for a museum group prevailed. In that the museum yes / no failed the location vote is irrelevant. And Larry - please be gone - do you not understand that when the majority who spoke said no NO was the answer - but then you are a politician so what else would one expect except rejection of the view of the majority as all politicians are so ignorant that they know that they know best.

larry

Posted on 12-05-2018 09:18 | By dumbkof2

well i know of at least one councilor that will be looking for another job [ that’ s if anyone will employ him] at the next election

Enough is enough

Posted on 12-05-2018 09:09 | By cdpete

I am so concerned that our rates actually pay an idiot like Larry. I am going to protest against this career sponger by paying my next rates installment in 10cent pieces or the lowest denomination they must accept. If we all did this they would start listening.

Baaaaaaaaaaaaa

Posted on 12-05-2018 09:08 | By Merlin

Bleating like a lost sheep.The vote said no you and Simon should look up democracy in the dictionary.

Larry's luxuries

Posted on 12-05-2018 08:49 | By Calm down

It would be wonderful to have a museum on Cliff road! Some of us just can’t afford a 40% rates hike Larry. I’m sure it’s no problem for you on your big council paycheck.

Councillor - for who ?

Posted on 12-05-2018 08:36 | By Denny G

What part of " NO " do you not understand ?

Foot in mouth, 'at it again Larry'

Posted on 12-05-2018 08:32 | By nerak

Last sentence says Councillors are required to keep an open mind until they make their final decisions. Are you listening to yourself? No, or you would resign. You do not have an open mind, therefore should be barred from decision making. I don’t care where, as long as its somewhere’. Really, might it have more to do with an extremely poorly choice of questions? How much longer will you continue to fudge figures to make them look pretty in your eyes? Youll be very good at it by the time you throw your toys out of the cot after the next election, I just hope we dont hear from you every two minutes then. Stop wasting valuable table time of other Councillors. Desist forthwith comes to mind. More simply, give it a break, permanently.

Larry is correct,

Posted on 12-05-2018 08:24 | By R. Bell

40% in favour of any proposed facility is a resounding endorsement, given the fact that most people believe ratepayers have to fund it all. The dishonest touting of a $55million cost to ratepayers, actual cost capped at $20million spread over 50 yrs is tantamount to a deliberate attempt to destroy democracy, not unusual in this town. Robin Bell.

Resign now Larry before you embarrass yourself

Posted on 12-05-2018 08:00 | By earlybird

anymore than you have already. As I’ve mentioned before you were elected to council by way of a 38% elegible voter turnout. Am I understanding from your comments that you are questioning that result and are preparing to do the decent thing and resign your seat. Sorry Larry but you no longer have any credibility. On ya bike mate.

The most important percentage

Posted on 12-05-2018 07:58 | By backofthequeue

Fortunately for Tauranga residents Mr Baldock is only one of ten councillors and a Mayor thus his opinion equates to just 9 per cent of anything. Bring on the next election so we can show him exactly how the democratic process is meant to work.

Plan B

Posted on 12-05-2018 07:51 | By Captain Sensible

Plan B; Word the referendum badly to confuse voters, then in the event of a ’No’ vote, try to explain that a ’No’ actually means ’Yes’. And I guess this anti democratic time wasting is happening in "work" time, so us mug ratepayers are actually paying Baldock to cheat us. Everyone I spoke to were a bit confused why if voting "NO" they still had to vote on a location as well. A dirty deliberate act to sabotage democracy. Please resign Mr Baldock. Now.

muppet

Posted on 12-05-2018 07:48 | By -rob-

Seriously Larry? Thats the best you can come up with? How about just listen to the will of the voters, if you do you MIGHT get re-elected. I love the way you use some of the statistic to support your view and reject the rest wrong. That takes a special person.

Disgrace

Posted on 12-05-2018 07:41 | By Captain Sensible

Democracy....Baldock style. Hang your head in shame, you are a disgrace.

What a FW

Posted on 12-05-2018 07:41 | By Chookymac

Why does he not go out on the street and start asking the public in general what they want instead of spending more money and trying to get his photo in papers.Who voted for this idiot

Disgrace

Posted on 12-05-2018 07:40 | By Captain Sensible

Democracy....Baldock style. Hang your head in shame, you are a disgrace.

Leave a Comment



Sorry, Sun Media is no longer accepting comments on this article.

Opinion Poll

What is the issue with SH2?

Unsafe drivers
The road needs improving
Trucks not giving way
Not enough opportunities to pass safely
Other

VOTE
VIEW RESULTS