Council job losses are not being ruled out in the costs cutting exercise being undertaken by Tauranga City Councillors.
At the second annual plan workshop meeting today, councillors will discuss possible cuts to the city's planned spending as they intend to reduce a $100 million budget by a third.
'The process is not finished yet,” says Mayor Stuart Crosby.
'The councillors are still focused on issues of staffing levels, and that will relate to the workload obviously and any other operational savings that we can make.”
Asked if this would be job losses, he replied: 'It's not an area I want to get into yet. Definitely we size our organisation to the workload.”
'We are definitely making a significant change from what we indicated two years ago, and the reasons for that are twofold.”
There's been a significant drop in growth, and the economic environment that the world and New Zealand finds itself in has also changed.
It means the city is receiving less income from development contributions, and the rating income base is not growing as anticipated.
From three per cent annual growth over the last three years, it has dropped to one per cent, says Stuart.
'We are only budgeting on one per cent, even though it's a little bit more than that.”
The council is working on a number of issues revolving around the annual plan and finances, says Stuart.
'One is a desire to reduce debt through the capital works programme in particular – and that's what yesterday was about – reducing another $30 million off, so there is significant reduction in the debt requirement for the next year which will keep us within our treasury management policy.
'The second issue is that we are in year three of a partial rate-funded debt reduction programme, and we are looking to smooth that year three over a couple of years, so it's not all one big hit this year – so that's another tool that we are using.
'We are also focused on reducing council operating costs, which will also have an impact on the rating requirement.
'In saying that, we are also being advised that we need to have this year still a higher-than-probably-wanted rating requirement, because if we reduce it too much then again that will impact on our overall finances.”
The draft annual plan the council will complete over the next week or so will be audited and the final plan after public consultation will also be audited.



27 comments
More Workers less Pen Pushers
Posted on 28-01-2011 09:50 | By tabatha
It is funny how departments get bigger and bigger, a boss to check the manager, an assistant manager to check the worker who delegates the jobs. Councillors have a real prune out, talk to some of the retired workers they may give you some valuable information. The council is top heavy and jobs not getting passed on to the workers. The old days were better when council had own labourers and the work was done, no need for contractors fleecing the rate payers.
@tabatha
Posted on 28-01-2011 09:54 | By esquire
totally disagree with the contractors doing the fleecing part. That couldn't be further from the truth. The whole contractor model is based on market competitiveness that means the council gets the work done cheaper than if it did it in house. Of course, how the council manages and reviews the work done by contractors - well, that's where you are spot on about excess in managers.
Surprise, Surprise
Posted on 28-01-2011 12:15 | By Jitter
What is happening at TCC ? In the past when the subject of staff reductions (staff audits) has been brought up it has been brushed aside as unneccessary. What a turn around. Shows what not having a CEO with too much power and influence can do. Council can make their own decisionsat last. Contractors - of course they rip the council off. All it is is outsourcing which in the majority of cases costs, in the long run, twice as much as doing the work inhouse. How do I know ? In over 40 years working for corporates I have seen outsourcing of information technology on a number of occaisions. Within two years the outsourcing work is back in house because of the excessive hidden costs which are never included in the origional quote.
outsourcing
Posted on 28-01-2011 12:58 | By morepork
Sometimes outsourcing makes sense; sometimes it doesn't. I too have been involved with corporates who have outsourced IT, sometimes locally, sometimes to the sub-continent. If the in-house management is poor, outsourcing will seldom work. If the in-house management is on-the-ball with clear goals and good communication abilities, it can be very effective. Leaving aside the emotional issue about local jobs, the economics come down to:"What does it cost us to have a permanent employee, as opposed to buying what we need when we need it?" When you factor in the fixed costs of office space, desks, facilities, paid holidays, car parking, sickness, etc. it costs a lot more to employ somebody than just paying their salary. In the case of specialists and consultants (in the true sense: "Someone we consult, in order to get informed advice."), if you employ these people you may only use them occasionally and the rest of the time they are just sitting around trying to look busy... Corporates seek to outsource IT because their in-house IT simply isn't delivering or they believe they can get the same service more cheaply. I have been required to run health checks on IT, and manage projects, in some of the world's biggest corporations and the amount of waste and inefficiency is horrific. (It is improving as Legacy systems get phased out, but IT is still a cash devouring monster for many companies.) Sometimes the value of having local programmers who understand the Business, on site, more than covers the cost of their employment; sometimes it doesn't. (For example, if tailoring a package is required, that can certainly be outsourced successfully, provided clear specifications can be produced.) Outsourcing is not "right" or "wrong". It simply depends on the circumstances and how you manage it.
We can only hope...
Posted on 28-01-2011 14:07 | By Chris
Let's hope that someone in this council will have the guts to make the changes we all know are absolutely necessary. Time to start reducing the excessive staffing levels at council and start reigning in spending in a serious way. Consents and applications have fallen off a cliff, but of course staff numbers at council remain unchanged. Every resident of Tauranga is affected by a severe recession, but council books show absolutely no restraint in spending. Let's get it together, cull unnecessary spending and postpone needless capital spending.
Jobs
Posted on 28-01-2011 15:03 | By Socantor
Why does it take five company vehicles, and six men to operate one mower for the verge on Takitimu drive?
TABATHA, SPELL BOUND INDEED
Posted on 29-01-2011 10:14 | By The Master
They are mesmerized by "bigger" is better, the way budgets work in any BOFFIN created budget system is that if you don't spend it this year then you loose it next year, what that creates is an ever growing hungry monster that only wants to consume more for no good reason.
STAFF JITTERS AND SOME
Posted on 29-01-2011 10:20 | By The Master
There is no way Council staff will agree to a "independent staff audit" as they know that if truly objective and truly independent, any look at what they do will mean that it will be viewed as a perverse tsunami running through the place, thereafter whoever remains will then may have to do some work.
TURN TABLES AND SIMILAR THINGS
Posted on 29-01-2011 10:24 | By The Master
In eight months there is a complete about face, like it was obvious then to those who looked. Cr Rick wanted a $2.5 million cost reduction and there was "no way as all was trimmed to the bone ...", what happened in the period since ? All an election smoke screen most likely!
REALITY CHECK NEEDED
Posted on 29-01-2011 10:28 | By The Master
The Mayor seems to be think that they need to change from two years ago, bu truth is the mess has been there and coming for up to eight years, why so long to see what many clearly have already seem ages ago. Like the Council debt, it has been hovering just below the maximum permitted for years, like HELLO!
CAN NOT SEE THE DEBT REDUCTION
Posted on 29-01-2011 10:30 | By The Master
Like when you pay back $10 million and borrow $75 million how does that mean "debt reduction" ? Sound a bit off the track there.
REDUCE OPERATING COSTS MY
Posted on 29-01-2011 10:35 | By The Master
The only way to "reduce operating costs" is to fire some staff, lets say for every staff member fired it is likely that at least twice that will be saved in wages and operating costs as a result. On top of that all the hair brain BOFFIN-CREATED schemes will also have to go west as well, then a HUGE MASSIVE amount will be saved on the scheming and planning side of meaningless silly projects that cost a fortune and only add to our children's debt ridden future.
THE ONLY WAY
Posted on 29-01-2011 10:38 | By The Master
Staff reductions, more staff reductions, Taupo have done it and it seems like when there is no other choice left (everyone else already seen it coming) staff have to go as: - don't need, less work, no silly projects, like they were not "needed" in the first place.
DESTINY
Posted on 29-01-2011 10:42 | By The Master
Only at the moment of falling off the cliff top do they change, like did anyone else see this happening, it is all about "PROVEN LEADERSHIP".
LESSONS NOT YET LEARNED
Posted on 29-01-2011 11:51 | By The Master
Looks to me like Councillors have been standing in the middle of the road awaiting the arrival of the bus travelling at 100kms/hr. The lesson of course is do you wait for it to hit before you realise standing in the middle of the road was in fact not such a good idea, that of course is "proven leadership" and the sheep all just followed.
waste
Posted on 29-01-2011 14:51 | By Capt_Kaveman
i still see wasted funds on works that are not needed like concrete islands on corners unless on busy intersections the stupid log put in the new sealed carpark at harrisons cut papamoa, this where i thinkcouncil contractors is costing far to much, City needs to stop upgrading and fix current probs like the sewage spills on avg every 6 wks over last year, roundabouts put in at carmicheal rd all a waste of funds
Take a leaf from the Asplin Tree
Posted on 29-01-2011 15:53 | By THE RING MASTER
Perhaps even a branch even two, prune it hard and start at the top
Start at top
Posted on 29-01-2011 17:11 | By monty111
How about starting with Crosby and all the other councillors who rake in a small fortune for very little positive imput!
UNMITIGATED RUBBISH – WHO HAD THE STEERING WHEEL
Posted on 29-01-2011 17:21 | By Ratcatcher
Who got Tauranga into this financial quagmire? It certainly wasn't the Joe Public voter turkeys! It was TCC pointyheads with Captain ‘Titanic' Crosby driving the ship and his band of carefree merry souls who until now, (when the proverbial inevitably hit the fan) have been in complete denial - the TCC financial critics were 100% right all along! TCC administration hierarchy were completely wrong as usual then walked away from the fugly mess. Tauranga residents can't bleat about it - they re-elected the Crosby crew, no doubt as a result of a con job with election promises and assurances that all was sweet in the camp. Enjoy the ride - once this gormless TCC lot have dealt to you, you won't be smiling.
Good on you all for your comments
Posted on 01-02-2011 21:28 | By Lostzone
How about "WE" get together and plan a line of action. Do what we are asking 'them' to do. Stand up and be counted. United we stand - divided we fall. "Citizens Monitoring Council"
INDEED RATCATCHER
Posted on 02-02-2011 17:54 | By The Master
They did, they did and now they profess to be fixing it but that is a joke as all they seem to be doing is to reduce the debt repayments, that is not governance or even a solution it is in fact a cop out from making any hard decisions.
Debt
Posted on 02-02-2011 19:44 | By dogsbody
Debt is not always bad as some of you simplistic souls seem to think. It is a common tool used by councils to ensure that services, which will benefit generations to come, are actually paid for by those generations; not just the present poor sods. Borrowing for capital works that will still be in good working order in 30-40 years is a benefit to people of the future. why shouldnt they pay something toward it, instead of lumbering the whole cost on the current generation. in the right circumstances, it makes perfect sense to me.
MERIT LOSTZONE
Posted on 04-02-2011 10:33 | By The Master
For sure a shadow council perhaps, but of course the information available will be filtered and censored to the max, it will only be with time that informaiton will seep out and be able to be commented upon, usually well after the decisions are made to spend the money. A good example is Baypark where it is still a case three years later that the officials can not seem to agree if they have lost or destroyed important documents from the time of purchase or if in fact they are there and are indeed available to the public to see where and why the $12 million went out the door so easily and for no apparent reason of meaningful value.
Thinking and doing
Posted on 10-02-2011 14:56 | By THE RING MASTER
These two things are different, only the latter actually results in anything useful!
Reduce Capital works ?
Posted on 11-02-2011 18:23 | By TERMITE
Does that mean silly hair brain schemes to wipe out the Strand carparking is not going to happen, Does that mean the Mt Hot Pool redevelopment is history ? on thise alone there is some $28m
Not so unless Mayor mutiny
Posted on 12-02-2011 15:44 | By THE RING MASTER
That cant happen unless TCC staff tell him he is allowed to think that
Council to loose 20% staff
Posted on 13-02-2011 07:31 | By THE RING MASTER
Does that mean 2 or 3 Councillors will also go and from the top?
Leave a Comment
You must be logged in to make a comment.