Differing dates on election signs Posted at 9:20am Thursday 29th Aug, 2013 | By Andrew Campbell andrew@thesun.co.nz Confusion is growing amongst local body candidates after Tauranga City Council was found to be giving two different dates for when election signs can go out. The candidates’ handbook states candidates can erect signs up to four weeks before the election from September 14, but the City Plan still states election signs can be placed on private property six weeks before the election from September 1. BOP Regional Council candidate Rusty Kane took his complaints about election signage to council this week. The candidates’ handbook came out in two versions. The first one handed out at the ‘meet the candidates’ meeting on July 16 stated six weeks. A reprinted version stated four weeks. The Tauranga City Council website still hosts the original version, which states elections signs on private property come under the City Plan and can be placed six weeks before the election. Councillor Murray Guy says council is giving conflicting advice on the signs. “If the city plan is correct we can’t override that,” says Murray. “We can’t shaft candidates at the election and make it four weeks.” The controversy comes after TCC this week reversed its policy on election signwriting on candidate vehicles. Council decided at Monday’s Strategy and Policy Committee meeting to exclude election signage on vehicles from the “four week election signs restriction period”. Council communications manager Frank Begley earlier said under council bylaw candidates are prohibited from erecting election signs before September 14. Deputy electoral officer Yvonne Tatton says the issue concerns only when election signs can be erected on private property. Most election signs appear on public land. The current council made its decision to change the election sign rules while the city plan was under review. When councillors changed the election signage policy in 2011 it was too late to change the District Plan. “When we are over the elections we will be doing a whole review of the election policy and all the other bylaws and city plan rules that relate to it, and council will determine what it will do. “At the moment the only thing affected is candidates can put signs up on private property from this Saturday, but they can’t put signs up on public property until September 14.” Bay of Plenty Regional Council candidate Rusty Kane attempted to raise the issue with council earlier this week, but was denied a hearing. Rusty turned up at the council meeting on Monday to speak in the public forum about his confusion over the city council’s elections signs rules. Instead of being granted the right at the beginning on the meeting according to usual practice, he was told to return at 2pm when the agenda item was expected to be heard. He did, and after waiting an hour was told by committee chairman David Stewart that he will not be permitted to speak, because he’s a candidate. “At the last minute he (David) had a talk with the CEO and they decided because I was a candidate they deemed it political and I couldn’t speak,” says Rusty today. “I have never heard of that before. It’s unbelievable. I wasn’t talking about me, or campaigning about me. I was concerned about the process, and they wouldn’t allow me to speak because of that.” It’s totally out or order, says Rusty. “The whole thing is wrong. It’s like ‘we make up our own rules as we go, and tough luck’. “They are not adhering to their process and the rights of people to speak.” Rusty’s original concern is about conflicting advice he’s been given on election signs. Regional council allows signs up six weeks before the election, but Rusty was told city council only allows then up to four weeks before voting closes on October 12, a time limit Rusty says is unfair on new candidates. “The point was I had given out flyers for people’s staff rooms, I thought I was breaking the rules, I can’t even give out pamphlets, I just wanted that clarified. “The regional council said I could do it, but the local council said I couldn’t do it.” Murray believes Rusty should have been given the chance to speak, and not told he couldn’t because he hadn’t booked a public forum speech. “Nowhere in standing orders do we say that a candidate cannot talk to council, and nowhere does it say people must go through democracy (to book public forum time) ,” says Murray. David Stewart himself has allowed people in the past to speak in the public forum at a moment’s notice, says Murray. Committee chairman David Stewart says the public forum doesn’t come under standing orders, but it allows people to speak with the chairman’s permission. He says Rusty came in late and missed the public forum at the start of the meeting. The first he knew he was there and wanted to speak was at the afternoon tea break. “I was looking at seeking the guidance of the committee, it had been a long day,” says David. “But before that I sought advice from the CEO.” Because Rusty is a candidate wishing to speak on the particular item of election signs at election time, the council could be seen to be biased if it did not offer the same opportunity to every other candidate to speak. “We couldn’t do that because it was a late item and hadn’t been publicised,” says David. “He couldn’t speak to that item. We don’t just allow people to come along and speak to an item. If Rusty had in the normal course of events asked to speak in the public forum, that would have been quite alright, says David.