fbpx
星期五, 11 月 15, 2024

Dispute over building’s use continues

A decision is still yet to be made as to how to manage the Howick War Memorial Hall. Times photo Wayne Martin

It appears unlikely an east Auckland community facility will have its full potential utilised any time soon as a standoff over its management drags on.

The Howick War Memorial Hall, which is known to locals as the Howick Information Centre, is situated at 91 Picton Street.

In the first half of 2020, the building closed along with most other Auckland Council-owned facilities when New Zealand went into a Covid-19 lockdown.

Two years on and it’s yet to be reopened full-time.

In September last year the Howick Local Board publicly called for expressions of interest from groups keen to be involved with running it.

A recommendation was put to the board at its December 2021 business meeting advising it to approve the Howick Village Association (HVA) as the “preferred applicant at this stage” to manage the building.

Reasons included the association being well-established and having strong organisational and financial capability to manage the facility, among others.

When the board arrived at that item during the December meeting, member David Collings moved an amendment to give approval to council officers to talk to multiple groups about the prospect of working together “for the overall benefit of the Howick community” and report back to the board in February this year.

Collings’ amendment was passed after receiving support from board members Katrina Bungard, Bo Burns, Bruce Kendall, Mike Turinsky and Bob Wichman.

Board chairperson Adele White, deputy chairman John Spiller, and board member Peter Young opposed it.

Following the meeting, HVA chairman Ken Scott told the Times he was disappointed with Collings’ amendment and the board’s decision to pursue the option of having multiple groups work together to manage the building, which he feared may delay its reopening.

The building’s management was raised again at the board’s April business meeting.

A council report says after the board’s previous decision, council staff facilitated a series of workshops to see how the nine interested applicant groups could collaborate on a collective management approach.

The workshops were constructive and the applicants decided they preferred one of them take over the building’s management while “ensuring broad community access”, the report says.

“They could not identify a preferred group, but the two favoured applicants were Howick Village Association Inc and Uxbridge Community Projects.”

The report says both groups have good organisational and financial capabilities and council staff are confident either would enable broad community access to the facility.

Council staff recommended the board approve a community centre management agreement as the preferred option as it facilitates the board’s aspirations for a community hub model.

Recommended also was to approve the HVA as the preferred applicant to take over the building’s management, subject to finalisation of a satisfactory agreement, and approve a maximum annual budget for its operation of $81,451.

When the board came to vote on the item, Collings moved an alternative to the original recommendation for the board to defer the decision pending a workshop with the prospective applicants.

His recommendation passed by five votes to three with support from himself, Bungard, Burns, Kendall, and Wichman.

Spiller, White, and Young voted against it, while Turinsky was absent.

By clicking to accept for Times Online to be translated into Mandarin, you accept and acknowledge that it has been translated for your convenience using 3 rd party translation software. No automated translation is perfect, nor is it intended to replace human translators and are provided "as is." No warranty of any kind, either expressed or implied, is made as to the accuracy, reliability, or correctness of any translations made from English into Mandarin. Some content (such as images, videos etc.) may not be accurately translated due to the limitations of the translation software. The official text is the English version of the website. Any discrepancies or differences created in the translation are not binding and have no legal effect and should not be relied on by you for any decision-making purposes. If any questions arise related to the accuracy of the information contained in the translated website, refer to the English version of the website which is the official edited version.

点击同意将《时代在线》翻译成中文,即表示您接受并确认,该翻译是使用第三方软件为您方便起见而 提供的。请注意自动翻译并非完美无缺,也不旨在取代人工翻译,只能作为参考而已。对于英文到中文 的任何翻译的准确性、可靠性或正确性,我们不提供任何明示或暗示的保证。由于翻译软件的限制,某 些内容(如图片、视频等)可能无法准确翻译。   英文版本是本网站的官方正式文本。翻译中产生的任何差异或错误均不具有约束力,不具有法律效力, 您不应依赖由自动翻译软件生成的版本做出任何决策。如果对翻译后的网站中包含的信息的准确性有任 何疑问,请参阅本网站的官方编辑英文版本。

- 广告
- 广告

更多信息来自《泰晤士报在线

- 广告

最新

- 广告
- 广告