Letters to the editor: Council milks lessee cash cows

Bravo, Ross Allan; simple observations that hopefully provoke common-sense discussion.
The NCC wisely sought consultation on the leasehold land in their portfolio and the result was, in short, that this was an asset to the NCC and the people of Napier.
This is the kind of wisdom that I expect from the council that I vote in and that holds the mandate for making decisions that affect me and my family and my business and so on.
Unfortunately, that's about where the council's wisdom stops.
They have gone on to treat the lessees as cash cows.
Wahoo, they think - every seven years (or whenever the rent review occurs) I can increase the rent. And they do.
First they take one's goat, then one's pig and then one's cow.
It is here that the astute businessman (referred to by Mr Allan) begins to weigh up his/her options.
The land rent has now become prohibitive.
The lessee has no option but to abandon their efforts to establish themselves further because of a greedy and shortsighted council.
It is only then that the people of Napier complain at the loss of industry and employment in our region because, by now, the effect has trickled down to directly impact their lives.
There are many healthy businesses in Napier that are seriously considering whether to stay or go and this is a direct result of the ever-increasing lease.
I would've thought that a wise council would have foresight, that a wise council would want to look after all of its people and, most especially, that a wise council would want to secure industry and employment in their own region.
Prohibitive land rent is alive and well, people of Napier and, believe me, it will eventually affect your life or the life of someone you know unless we all make decisions based on long-term wisdom.
Claudette O'Brien, Napier
No-shows for Unity
Thank you to the Napier Pilot City Trust for organising the Napier version of this annual event.
It was great to see people of all ages and interest groups attending (including a number of supporters from the Friends of Marineland), despite the rain showers we encountered.
The most disappointing aspect of the walk was the lack of public figures attending. Not one local council member. So what message does this send to the people of Napier? Does it mean that council members oppose a unified community or, as it's not an election year, there is no need to show a public persona? Or was it in the too-hard basket because of the weather?
Irrespective of the reasons, the message sent to the public was one of not caring about the community. This may sound harsh but think about it. Unity is about embracing people regardless of colour, beliefs, gender, orientation or whatever, and being prepared to stand up and say that we care and want to forge a unified community that accepts everyone.
This is not about an "us and them" mentality or about keeping people oppressed, or even to do with Te Tiriti o Waitangi; it is about standing up and showing that you agree with it.
The Unity Walk is possibly the only event on the calendar that is a public display of this.
Maybe next year we will see more people making a stand and being counted along with the 40-odd participants from this year. You never know, we may even be able to rival the huge number that turns out for the New York version of the same event.
Susan Lyford, Napier
Women's Refuge cuts
Government will cut funding to 45 Women's Refuges throughout New Zealand on June 30.
This is devastating news for a vital service that protects women and children who have violence in their homes. How will this affect our community, our whanau, hapu and iwi, our ethnic community?
Henare Keefe gathered the community to march against violence; Ngati Kahungunu Iwi calls for a "violence-free iwi".
Hawke's Bay has three Women's Refuge locations that provide a safe house, community services, education programmes and advocacy for women and children. A cut in their funding will be a cut in the services that they provide to their community.
Text, phone, email, Facebook, Twitter, write or visit our local MPs to tell them this is an injustice to all women and children who have had their lives shattered by family violence.
Ngaikiha Tawhai, Havelock North
Chinese farm buyers
Pete Carver objects to allowing a Chinese company to purchase the Crafar farms.
At least they are paying for it with New Zealand currency. During the 1800s, Great Britain insisted on paying for transactions in China with opium. When China objected, British warships wreaked havoc on many coastal towns.
Why does Carver not object to other foreigners purchasing kiwifruit orchards?
Charlie Lum, Greenmeadows
Market expense
I recently applied for a stall at our local farmers market.
I was accepted, paid my fee and got busy preparing signage etc.
I applied for a stall holder's license through the [Hastings District] council, attached a certificate of compliance (from the registered kitchen I'd be using). The council rang me and said I needed to pay another $400 on top of the $95 I had already been billed ($95 for the stall holder's license) My questions are: Who runs the farmers market - is it the HB Food Group or is it the HDC?
And, why is food cooked in a registered kitchen not suitable at the farmers market anymore?
As I have told the council, I am applying for the local Hastings Farmers Market - not Harrods!
Alice Symes, Hastings
HASTINGS DISTRICT COUNCIL REPLIES:
1) The farmers market is not operated by the Hastings District Council. It is operated by a committee under the auspices of Food Hawke's Bay.
2) The food is not the issue, it's the licensing of the person who prepares the food. He or she requires two licences to sell at the market.
a. A stall holders licence
b. And a licence to prepare food in a registered premises (please see below for legal definition from the Food Hygiene Regulations 1974).
In simple terms, this means that the person who actually prepares the food must also be the holder of the certificate for the premises being used.
In this case we understand that the person preparing the food isn't the holder of the licence for the premises being used.
* No person shall use any premises for the manufacture, preparation, packing, or storage of any food for sale, unless the premises are registered under the Health (Registration of Premises) Regulations 1965 by a local authority and he is the holder of the certificate of registration.
* If the writer would like to discuss this matter further please call me and I will get the appropriate officer to the phone.
Ross Holden, Communications manager