Transcript of a Letter to the Editor  (Gulf News, 18 Oct 2007)

As the partner of Faye Storer, I would like to thank the sensible intelligent people who have supported her for the last 15 years, on the community board and as the Hauraki Gulf councillor.

During that time she has been involved with every major council project on the island, working up to 80 hours, seven days a week for the last nine years to ensure Waiheke got everything it deserved.

For those who voted for candidates other than Faye, all I can say is you must be very gullible people to be taken in by the glib talk and false promises made by them.
Denise Roche in particular has never attended a council or community board meeting, so hardly has the qualifications to be our representative on council. She will be like a lamb to the slaughter at a Citizens and Ratepayers dominated council table. Her inability to get Waiheke anything will show through in a very short time and the ‘Looney Left’ vocal minority who have fought to get rid of Faye and supported Denise will get what they deserve, which is absolutely nothing. Expect to see major cutbacks in Waiheke’s cut of the cake, and the likely sale of the Matiatia land back to private owners.

My next barrage is for the editor of the Gulf News whose editorial of 11 October showed his true colours. It implied that Faye’s salary of $90,000 was extravagantly high. In reality, working an average of 70 hours a week for 48 weeks of year amounts to just over $26 an hour and, after tax, not quite $17.

Do you expect someone working those sorts of hours to it for nothing?

Faye is actually relieved that she no longer has to deal with those people who don’t have the gumption to stand for the community board or council themselves, but snipe at those who do, and is saddened that Waiheke will now suffer because of the selfishness of a few.

The community board, with three particularly hard working members, will now bear the burden of having an ineffectual councillor. Faye will not provide any advice to anyone but them; and Denise Roche is now wholly responsible for all off island decisions and their outcomes.
John Newton, Oneroa

16 thoughts on “‘GULLIBLE’ VOTERS”

  1. I was sent this little piece of history through the contacts form on the site here.
    Now I was not here when Denise beat Faye in the 2007 elections. So my judgements about Faye have been based entirely on her recent election campaign and actions last week.

    I invite comments as to whether we experienced ‘major cutbacks in Waiheke’s cut of the cake, and the likely sale of the Matiatia land back to private owners.’ or other dramatic failures of this ‘inexperienced’ councillor.

    As to whether this weeks recent events display Utu I’ll let you decide.

  2. It is common knowledge – and as a commoner I say this with absolute certainty – that the words above were not written by John but by herself herself. Vindictive, vitruperative, the words of a sniper viper. My apologies if I have invented words but tis better than inventing a ‘truth’ as Ms Storer is so inclined to do.
    The fact that Storer did not realise that all who knew her and John would know that it was not John’s scribing, as all at Gulf News at the time did, indicates her stupidity.

  3. Only option Ms Storer – withdraw and go away. In your term as councilor I and various others sat through ACC meetings when Waiheke matters were raised and your alacrity for silence or absence for a cuppa or a breath of fresh air was ‘polished’.

  4. And just in case ‘John’ wants to get involved again let’s remember a little case of ….. that scorched a building next to where you had a board in Oneroa. Goes around, comes around Storer.

  5. In case you don’t have the message yet Ms Storer we’re ready to talk about ……………..

  6. What struck me about that 2007 letter is how prescient it was: just replace the Council with the Local Board full of C&R people. Three years of brooding about utu is what the result of Ms Storer’s current actions say to me.
    I’m surprised she actually wanted to run again against her old foe. If Ms Storer had wanted to run on her experience and record as a councillor, she should have stood for Council instead of the local board.
    The strange thing is of course that the current chairman spat was completely unnecessary: the same outcome would have been achieved by Ms Storer at the first Board meeting, without the current community aggravation. Which leads me to question her political nous apart from a naked power grab and seeking to revenge her previous humiliation.

  7. I found myself thinking about this letter all week and was longing to see it again in full. Thanks to whoever posted it!! Did Faye write it? Ofcourse she did, it was never in question and she’s obviously been beating herself up about Denise for the last 3 years, then she somehow got herself elected, saw her chance and went for it! But is she playing the long game?! Does she not realise that if she digs her heels in and sticks to her current position then she’ll have just 3 years left in local politics? Can you see anyone ever voting for Faye (and/or her lapdogs) ever again? I don’t think so!

  8. The whole thing reminds me of the women’s prison drama “Prisoner Cell Block H”. Faye Storer is like B Smith, “top dog” at the jail. Any leadership competition is isolated from the group. Weaker members fall behind the top-dog, only to find that they are easily disposed of when the top dog no longer needs them. I am disappointed that Faye Storer has passed up the chance to try for consensus and co-operation and has instead opted for pack-dominance tactics.

  9. Fayes actions since she was elected show that she isn’t acting for Waiheke, now she is only acting for herself, and furthermore doing it in a way that suggests some lingering emotional disturbance.

  10. I never forgot that letter! How disgraceful. My eyebrows rose everytime I heard someone say they were voting for Faye. Definately not a team player!
    Vindictive wench is the only way to describe!

  11. ….false promises….do you really mean that!??!? Surely you must mean the false promises that Faye made about working for the community, about working with all the board, about working with transparency and clarity, of being a team player….gosh, yes, false promises indeed.

  12. A little surprised someone with such experience did not see this coming. Any astute person knows if you plan to exclude a member from a decision making process and in affect select a chairperson where MONEY is attached to that position you should either be quiet about it until an official meeting or just do what should have been done. Have an informal meeting with ALL present to decide criteria, then put forth your names for consideration. Anyone with a little bit of intelligence should have seen this coming and put in place a democratic and fair process which conformed with all tenants of the election act. TO BE OPEN AND TRANSPARENT springs to mind from the act. Personally I think where any decisions are made which involves public funds (ie) (Chairperson salary) all criteria and or preplanning should be done in proper setting with one member recording minutes. From an outside view stupid decisions were made without considering the community reaction, to not see it was either incompetence or just arrogance. Just my 2 cents

    1. Thanks for giving us this perspective of proper operating protocol when public money is involved. I would like to see your comment published in the papers because the current dialogue in the papers is about this being a personal issue about one person ‘feeling left out’ and not the board’s responsibility to operate in an ethical manner.

    2. Agree with you Incontrol and Uroskin 100% – put this in the Gulf News. Everything done by Faye and others was above board and strictly speaking ‘correct’. Also, given the outcome of the election and given the unpleasant history, then this mess was inevitable. But Faye’s precipitous actions shriek of poor political skill. Faye is a stickler for ‘due process’ – very bureaucratic. This is another example of her understanding of the ‘word of the law’ but lacking insight into the ‘spirit of the law’. Not to have foreseen the public reaction when you snub a popular representative speaks volumes.

  13. God, that letter could have been written by John-Faye just a few days ago…how people have forgotten that letter I do not know….

Comments are closed.